In a surprising shift, Denver Public Schools (DPS) is set to reinstate a controversial closure policy for low-performing schools, a move that has reignited discussions around educational accountability in the district.
For the last seven years, the district had seemed to move away from such drastic measures, with notable decisions made in 2022 to reunify Montbello High School and Superintendent Alex Marrero’s recent public apology to students affected by Manual High School’s closure in 2006.
Even earlier this year, DPS had shuttered schools based on declining enrollment rather than academic performance, signaling a new direction for the district.
However, as Marrero prepares to implement the School Transformation Process this August, the focus has shifted back to student performance metrics as a criterion for school closures.
“It’s deja vu all over again,” remarked Van Schoales, senior policy director at Keystone Policy Center, emphasizing the peculiar nature of reverting to these old practices after previously denouncing them.
The School Transformation Process echoes tactics from previous DPS regimes aimed at improving academic outcomes by restructuring low-performing schools or closing them altogether.
Despite similarities to past strategies, Marrero and the current school board insist this new approach will be different, offering more support and a longer timeframe for schools before any closures are considered.
A significant and unprecedented aspect of Marrero’s plan is its intention to encompass all schools within the DPS framework, including district-run and charter schools.
This would require charter schools to waive their right to appeal closures to the Colorado State Board of Education, indicating a move toward uniform accountability across various school governance models.
Marrero envisions this approach as a method of ensuring accountability for all schools, irrespective of their operational structure.
The superintendent’s stance is clear: he anticipates that implementing the School Transformation Process will avert school closures, equating such outcomes with a failure on his part.
This new policy, presented during a school board meeting on May 15, is intended to proactively address school performance and prevent any state intervention, which could be triggered after a school remains low-rated for five consecutive years.
Currently, DPS has 25 schools facing the Accountability Clock, a system under which schools are rated mainly based on standardized testing outcomes.
Marrero is adamant that it is DPS’s responsibility to intervene when schools fail to perform, rather than leaving this task to the state board.
“What can they offer that we can’t do locally?” Marrero pressed, reinforcing the notion that the district must take ownership of its educational outcomes.
Under the new policy, DPS administrators will intervene before schools hit their fifth year on the Accountability Clock.
The strategies include evaluating whether to renew or reconfigure the struggling schools within their first three years on the clock.
Renewal could lead to changes in programs or staffing, while reconfiguration might involve altering the grade levels that a school offers.
After four years on the clock, the focus may shift to potential closures, though Marrero clarified that closures could be permanent or result in a new operator being brought in for the school.
Existing schools facing low performance will not directly face closure when the policy takes effect in August, but they may undergo operational or staffing adjustments.
All schools on the Accountability Clock could be at risk of closure starting in fall 2026, contingent upon charter school compliance with the new policy.
Abraham Lincoln High School, however, is exempt due to existing state involvement, showcasing the complexity of the accountability landscape.
Two charter schools, Academy 360 and Rocky Mountain Prep Noel, could be the first to face potential closures, as they are already in Year 3 on the Accountability Clock.
To ensure success, Marrero emphasizes the need for collective participation from all schools under the district’s new policy.
He expresses confidence in his leadership’s strategy, believing that there will be no schools reaching Years 4 or 5 on the clock — unless failures occur that mandate closures.
Historically, DPS has been a leader in school closures as part of its educational reform strategy.
In the mid-2000s, Denver gained a reputation for enacting policies that closed low-performing schools, replacing them with new entities aimed at educational improvement.
DPS has established around 65 new schools since 2007 and closed over 30, only to reopen or replace them in a bid to elevate overall academic performance in the district.
Former superintendent Tom Boasberg, who led these reforms from 2009 to 2018, has stated that the district must act quickly to change the trajectory of failing schools, similar to Marrero’s perspective.
Boasberg advocates for a proactive approach: providing additional resources and attracting talented staff to assist struggling schools.
When interventions fail, the option of closing schools and reopening them with new leadership and faculty remains on the table.
Historically, this approach has drawn criticism for the significant displacement it causes, particularly impacting students of color.
Former Manual High students have vocally opposed these closure tactics, citing disenfranchisement and significant dropout rates following school closures.
By 2009, nearly a third of the affected Manual High students had withdrawn from the district, highlighting the lasting impact of DPS’s reform measures.
In light of this history, educators have expressed mixed feelings about Marrero’s new policy.
Rob Gould, president of the Denver Classroom Teachers Association, notes that teachers felt undervalued during previous reform efforts and has trepidation about the potential for punitive actions against underperforming schools instead of offering real support.
While some aspects of Marrero’s approach are promising, the shadow of previous policies looms large, leaving educators concerned about the consequences of repeated actions.
Marrero and other leaders insist that this time, there will be more support allotted to low-performing schools and a longer window for potential improvements before closures are invoked.
Joe Amundsen, executive director of school transformation at DPS, is tasked with overseeing new initiatives aimed at empowering struggling schools instead of punishing them.
The Elevate Schools Network embodies this new direction, focusing on providing comprehensive support to eight underperforming schools in a bid to enhance their operations.
The previous reform strategies, according to school board member Scott Esserman, felt overly punitive toward struggling schools, lacking adequate support mechanisms.
The aim of the new policy is to create a more nurturing environment for improvement while holding schools accountable.
Several board members have historically been against closures based on test scores alone and are cautious about the implications of this new policy.
While Marrero has the authority to implement many aspects of the policy without board approval, any closures he proposes will still require a vote from the board members.
Xóchitl “Sochi” Gaytán, a director on the board, expressed concerns regarding the potential for backlash associated with the implications of the new policy.
President Carrie Olson has articulated “guarded support” for Marrero’s strategy, hoping that the lessons learned from the past will guide the district towards a more supportive approach.
In conclusion, as DPS reignites conversations about school closures based on performance, the focus remains on how the district navigates its accountability measures and community impacts moving forward.
image source from：https://www.denverpost.com/2025/05/27/denver-public-schools-closures-test-scores-alex-marrero/
