In late April, the Coalition for Student Achievement released Smart Options: Investing the Recovery Funds for Student Success (see here).This document, developed following a convening of more than 30 K-12 national education leaders, including state and district superintendents, was sponsored by the Bill and Me
In late April, the Coalition for Student Achievement released Smart Options: Investing the Recovery Funds for Student Success (see here).This document, developed following a convening of more than 30 K-12 national education leaders, including state and district superintendents, was sponsored by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and the Eli and Edythe Broad Foundation. The document provides states and districts with five "big ideas" for investing one-time federal recovery funds that can lay "the groundwork for real student improvement for decades to come."
Our chart, below, compares the five recommendations from Smart Options to policies proposed in the House-passed version of House Bill (HB) 1, which incorporates billions in federal stimulus dollars. Using the Smart Options recommendations as a benchmark, we rate the legislative language in HB 1.
This report, issued by the University of Arkansas' School Choice Demonstration Project (see here), examines the taxpayer burden of the Milwaukee Parental Choice Program (MPCP) (see here). A decade older and nearly three times the 7,000 enrolled (in 2007-08) in Ohio's EdChoice Program, the Milwaukee program offers families opportunities to use vouchers across the greater Milwaukee area to send their children to private schools. Professor Costrell estimates that the Milwaukee voucher program saved taxpayers as much as $31.9 million in 2008, which was up from $24.6 million in 2007. The program creates taxpayer savings because it is less expensive to fund a voucher student ($6,501 per pupil in 2007 and $6,607 per pupil in 2008) than a student in a traditional Milwaukee public school ($8,833 per pupil in 2007 and $9,462 per pupil in 2008). Savings increased between 2007 and 2008 because of growing enrollments in the MPCP as well as "a widening gap between per pupil public revenues allocated to the Milwaukee public schools and the MPCP." Still, not all taxpayers in the metropolitan area receive the same benefits. Milwaukee property taxpayers are negatively affected, while Wisconsin property taxpayers outside of Milwaukee reap benefits because of an idiosyncratic funding formula (see here). Regardless, the report offers a solid case that taxpayers receive a net savings, while offering students and families choices to go to private schools. See here for the report.
Politically, everybody got a little something from last Friday's education rally at Ohio State University. Gov. Ted Strickland got media attention and the presence of a national education rock star to boost his education plan. U.S. Education Secretary Arne Duncan-the rock star-got to talk about his education vision without directly endorsing the governor's school reform plan.
The governor's plan needs all the help it can get these days, given the serious drop in the state revenues that are needed to pay for it. The plan is facing a serious bashing in both the Senate and the media (see here). Secretary Duncan, however, refused to play the role of the U.S. cavalry.
Many reporters left the rally perplexed about what their story leads would be. The most interesting news-for education policy wonks-was the governor saying poorly performing public district schools should be closed and that he is thinking about pushing a plan to get several other Midwestern states to band with Ohio to seek collectively some of the $5 billion in special federal education "race to the top" stimulus funds. Ohio needs all the revenue it can get after the Columbus Dispatch reported, Sunday, how difficult it will be to meet the state's education spending projections (see here) to fully phase-in the governor's plan over the next decade.
Dale and Nathan DeRolph, of the infamous DeRolph school-funding case, put in an appearance as one of the rally's warm ups. Dale, the father, is now on the local school board. Nathan, the son, and the focal point of the case as a teenager, now is 33. Nathan said, when he was 15, he had to take an American history test sitting on the floor of his high school classroom because all the desks were already occupied. He looked around and saw conditions were far better in other schools so he decided to sue. They want the governor's school spending plan to become law.
That, however, seems less and less likely. Reacting to the drubbing the education plan is taking publicly and probably perplexed why critics don't believe him when he talks about how great this plan is, Rep. Stephen Dyer (D-Green) gave the crowd of about 1,000 a few hints as to how vituperative the coming days might become. The House-passed measure is now in the Senate where it faces serious resistance from Republicans, who control that chamber by a 21-12 margin. Dyer argued that critics oppose the scientific method (see above), oppose investing in education, oppose funding poor rural districts, and oppose the most effective funding formula the state has ever devised. So much for the caution Amanda Wurst, the governor's press spokeswoman had given the day before, warning of the dangers of rhetoric perpetuating a "toxic environment" (see here).
When his turn finally came, Secretary Duncan called for data-driven student tracking and reporting, identifying what works and what doesn't in the classroom, raising academic standards, rewarding teacher excellence, removing poor teachers and rewarding excellent teachers, turning around failing schools, and investing in and duplicating great schools including effective charters.
But, he did not endorse the governor's plan. Later, in a press conference, when asked, specifically, about an endorsement, Duncan declined to give one. Strickland, diplomatically, said he didn't expect one.
It was clear that Duncan was in Columbus to repay Strickland for helping to deliver the state to President Obama in the 2008 election, to buck up Democrats in a key state, and to promote his and the president's-not Strickland's-educational vision. If some of the president's aura helps Strickland, okay. But Duncan, clearly, was more interested in pushing the president's agenda.
Arizona charter-school operators are moving to cleanse their ranks of weak schools by seeking tougher state charter-school standards based on value-added test scores. The proposal is similar to language proposed in Ohio's current biennial budget and could lead to the closing of weak schools that, as in Ohio, taint the entire charter-school movement.
The Arizona Republic reports that about a dozen charter-school operators have taken over the Arizona Charter Schools Association and are pushing for testing reforms such as tougher state standards and stricter accountability for that state's 475 charter schools.
In a description that would also fit Ohio, reporter Pat Kossan points out that Arizona charter-schools have been tarnished for years by an image of poor performance and shoddy financial practices, even though some charters perform significantly better than district schools (see here).
The solution, some Arizonians now argue, is to purge the state of poor performers. The revamped Arizona charter-school association has created a value-added achievement model to measure how the state's district and charter schools are doing. The achievement data will help the state determine which schools deserve to have their contracts renewed and which should close. Association leaders believe charter schools must shift the movement's goals from growth to quality, an idea that has gained momentum in Ohio over the years. (See Turning the Corner to Quality here.)
Central to the effort in Arizona is the use of value-added achievement data (how much have student's grown in knowledge over the course of the year?). Ohio has been at the forefront in the generation and use of value-added data, and this is a richer a more sophisticated way to track student and school performance. For more information, see here.
In Arizona, Kossen reports, the state is now debating how to use such value-added data to determine which schools should close. Ohio is in the midst of the same debate and HB1, as passed by the House, would ratchet up this state's academic death penalty for charter schools. For schools serving grades K-3 and high school grades they face the death penalty if they have been rated academic emergency for three of the last four years. For schools serving grades 4-8, they face the academic death penalty if they are rated Academic Emergency for 2 of the 3 last years and, for any 2 of those 3 years, showed less than 1 standard year of academic growth in reading or math using the state's value-added indicators.
Ohio is not alone in seeking to purge itself of weak performing charter schools. Arizona's efforts are further evidence that the country's charter school supporters are no longer tolerating weak performing schools that tarnish the image of all charters.
This report, issued by the University of Arkansas' School Choice Demonstration Project (see here), examines the taxpayer burden of the Milwaukee Parental Choice Program (MPCP) (see here). A decade older and nearly three times the 7,000 enrolled (in 2007-08) in Ohio's EdChoice Program, the Milwaukee program offers families opportunities to use vouchers across the greater Milwaukee area to send their children to private schools. Professor Costrell estimates that the Milwaukee voucher program saved taxpayers as much as $31.9 million in 2008, which was up from $24.6 million in 2007. The program creates taxpayer savings because it is less expensive to fund a voucher student ($6,501 per pupil in 2007 and $6,607 per pupil in 2008) than a student in a traditional Milwaukee public school ($8,833 per pupil in 2007 and $9,462 per pupil in 2008). Savings increased between 2007 and 2008 because of growing enrollments in the MPCP as well as "a widening gap between per pupil public revenues allocated to the Milwaukee public schools and the MPCP." Still, not all taxpayers in the metropolitan area receive the same benefits. Milwaukee property taxpayers are negatively affected, while Wisconsin property taxpayers outside of Milwaukee reap benefits because of an idiosyncratic funding formula (see here). Regardless, the report offers a solid case that taxpayers receive a net savings, while offering students and families choices to go to private schools. See here for the report.
In late April, the Coalition for Student Achievement released Smart Options: Investing the Recovery Funds for Student Success (see here).This document, developed following a convening of more than 30 K-12 national education leaders, including state and district superintendents, was sponsored by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and the Eli and Edythe Broad Foundation. The document provides states and districts with five "big ideas" for investing one-time federal recovery funds that can lay "the groundwork for real student improvement for decades to come."
Our chart, below, compares the five recommendations from Smart Options to policies proposed in the House-passed version of House Bill (HB) 1, which incorporates billions in federal stimulus dollars. Using the Smart Options recommendations as a benchmark, we rate the legislative language in HB 1.
