Although backers of Amendment 3 have abandoned active campaigning, the proposal remains dangerously positioned on the November ballot.
Among its provisions, the proposed amendment to the state constitution would tie teacher evaluations to statewide standards that include student performance.
Supporters of the amendment - including Rex Sinquefield, a wealthy political activist - said polling indicates a lack of support for the measure.
We are proponents of quality teaching and the need for basic education, but we are not convinced the amendment advances those goals.
As we have said previously in this forum, education includes two components - teaching and learning. Students may learn from a variety of sources - experience, books, teachers - but only if they are receptive.
Unlike other jobs that produce a product or service, students are people with different abilities, competencies and learning styles.
The best teachers adapt their instruction to reach the greatest number of students.
We fear a statewide standard may not acknowledge and reward that asset and, worse, might discourage teachers from reaching out to the spectrum of students.
In the Saturday and Sunday "Your Opinion" forums, two teachers expressed opinions based on their experiences.
David Ganey, a former Teacher of the Year in the Jefferson City School District, wrote: "Rather than teaching students to be problem solvers and critical thinkers, this poorly conceived amendment will require us to instruct all students to think alike."
And Marcia Ramatowski, who retired after 31 years as an educator, wrote: "Teachers will only have time to teach the material from the state-approved tests. There will be no critical thinking taught, no individualization given, no teachable moments to expand upon because education will now be "one size fits all.'"
The retreat from active campaigning for this ill-conceived amendment is encouraging. But, because it remains on the November ballot, its potential danger has not been eliminated.