A recent Atlantic article by Amy Lueck critical of school choice rightly celebrates the civic purpose of the traditional American public high school, “not only as an academic training ground, but also as a center for community and activity in American cities.” Shared experiences like school dances, football games, pep rallies, and protests, as well as the uniting of families from different backgrounds, can be beneficial for those involved, and high schools facilitate them better than most civic and social institutions.

But she’s wrong in believing that working to give children and parents more options “reflects a distrust of education as a communal goal, not just an individual one.” Lueck erred in accusing school choice of “dismantling” this model. Proponents are not “leaving the public high school for greener pastures,” and the realization of our goals would not be an “abandonment of the American high school” or “the democratic project of the ‘common school’ that helped shape the American city.”

That is because the “common school” that Lueck idealizes—a single public high school for every teenager in a given community—ceased generations ago for many families, and is not a necessary condition for the communal benefits she espouses. Worse, as she acknowledges but downplays, it has long perpetuated inequality, failed to serve families who want or need something different, and produced poor academic outcomes for disadvantaged families.

Most urban districts moved away from neighborhood high schools decades ago. In Washington, D.C., for example, even before charter schools emerged in 1996, a huge percentage of kids were going to high schools outside of their neighborhoods. In New York City, too, where there are some 300 traditional public high schools, eighth graders submit an application listing as many as twelve programs in order of preference. And in the last two decades, Chicago nearly doubled the number of public high schools available to residents. “Major reforms…focused on increasing the number of high-quality public school options, by splitting up large high schools, creating new small high schools by design…[and opening] more selective-enrollment high schools and special programs within high schools,” write Lisa Barrow and Lauren Sartain, a senior economic at the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago and a Senior Research Analyst at the University of Chicago, respectively.

Although it’s true that most suburbs and small towns still do have neighborhood high schools, Lueck overstates their value. Yes, they can build a sense of local community for the families and students that are actively involved: kids who play sports or are in the marching band, families who also see each other at church or the neighborhood swimming pool. But those schools, which tend to be big and impersonal, fail to serve a lot of kids and families who are alienated from all of that. This is why so many people look back on their high school years with disgust. And this is exacerbated by the racial and economic segregation inherent in neighborhood assignments—a major impetus for doing away with them in urban areas.

Nor does Lueck’s preferred version of the traditional public high school have a monopoly on the sort of community building that matters. Research has shown, for example, that some schools of choice develop stronger civic values than traditional public schools do. Earlier this year, my colleague Robert Pondiscio wrote about the positive effects of Democracy Prep, a charter school network in New York City that educates more than 5,000 students. A study conducted by Mathemathica found that “Democracy Prep increases the voter registration rates of its students by about 16 percentage points and increases the voting rates of its students by about 12 percentage points.” And it accomplishes this by having its kids participate in annual voter registration campaigns, requiring graduates to pass the U.S. citizenship test, and encouraging students to volunteer, do food drives, and learn through service. Research also shows that schools choice produces students who hold more progressive views on diversity and are less likely to commit crimes. In communities without assigned neighborhood schools, students still form fond memories of school dances, they still attend pep rallies, and fans and participants of the athletic programs still bond over big wins and hard losses. They also still mourn together in times of tragedy, share enthusiasm for social causes, and celebrate as one in times of triumph and elation.

Despite Lueck’s lamentations, charter schools and vouchers are compatible with all of this. They do not, in other words, have the downside she claims they do. And their upside—the reason why proponents push for them—is that they stand to solve many of the inherent problems of the traditional public high school model.

That model is broken. And its flaws manifest in ugly, harmful ways. Schools regularly grant diplomas to students who aren’t ready for college, career, or adulthood. Teachers and administrators encourage everyone to apply to and attend college, even those who aren’t ready and end up wasting time and money chasing a degree they never earn. Districts ignore promising career and technical education programs that help young people find gainful, secure vocations. And education professionals everywhere go on pretending that a single kind of school can effectively serve the varied needs of each and every child.

Those most hurt by all of this are our most vulnerable: poor and minority children, English language learners, and those from all walks of life for whom the traditional school model isn’t a good fit. Consider, for example, that nationally almost 38 percent of twelfth graders are below the basic level of achievement in math on the National Assessment of Education Progress, as of 2015, the most recent year for which data are available. And basic is a low bar; proficient is the one they’re supposed to clear. For those eligible for free or reduced priced lunch, the number is 54 percent. For black and Hispanic students, it’s 64 and 53 percent, respectively. The trends in reading are comparable.

Then, after they leave high school, just 40 percent of black enrollees at four-year public universities graduate within six years—a figure that is 21 percentage points below their white peers, and 18 percentage points below the nationwide average. It’s even worse for students who must take remedial courses because they aren’t prepared for college classes when they arrive on campus. Fifty percent never complete their remedial education, and less than 25 percent who attend community college earn a degree within eight years. These are not the results of a successful system.

Perhaps these dismal academic outcomes are why some choice opponents have pivoted to other supposed benefits of the traditional high school. Maybe that's what all this talk about its ostensible unique and exclusive communal advantages is about. But there’s nothing singularly special about that model. Instead, it’s like any other design: It works well for some students, and fails others. So instead of being the only public option, young Americans would be better served if it were one among many—at least in places big enough to support meaningful choice. Those high schoolers would still have the quintessential teenage experiences, and communities would benefit. The big difference would be that more children would be getting the education they want and deserve.

There’s been a lot of talk about “blue waves” and “red walls,” but what will November 6 mean for federal and state education policies? Days away from the crescendo, the answer may depend in part on where you get your news. Some argue that education will be a top-tier issue; others are decidedly less sanguine. The media hype and enthusiasm at the national level belies its importance in some states more than others.

In no small measure, the upcoming midterms will be a referendum on the current administration; uniquely so given the president’s willingness to flaunt previously held conventions. Education’s place has been largely limited to the usual suspects (e.g., Arizona, Oklahoma) as key players in red-state teacher unrest. This has led to a record number of teachers running for state office in those states, but based on the campaign mailers I’ve received here in my home state of Colorado, office seekers don't believe education will drive voters to the polls.

My locally elected representatives have killed trees and spilled ink to highlight their local roots and attention to other bread-and-butter issues like taxes and health care. I’ve also seen one-sentence slogans about restoring civility to government, though nothing approaching the importance of civics education or ensuring the citizenry possess rudimentary knowledge of U.S. history. But there are three areas where the outcome of the election could have a big impact on education, and they aren’t what (or how) you might expect.

State and local funding-related ballot questions are the first place to look. In some states, the political winds have brought an increased appetite for more spending on education. Here in Colorado, there is a tax-based constitutional amendment on the ballot that—if approved—would carry significant implications for state education funding. It’s the largest of fifteen funding-related ballot measures that could allot at least $2.6 billion to education in eleven different states. In addition, two of Colorado’s largest districts are asking for nearly $900 million for teacher pay raises, capital improvements, and technology upgrades. While both measures face an uphill battle, local educators should quickly notice the difference if they’re passed.

Second, there are a few policy-related ballot measures that will be worth watching. Notably among them is a contentious and confounding veto referendum in Arizona that aims to expand eligibility for education savings accounts (ESA). Proponents often refer to ESAs as the “purest form” of school choice. In South Carolina, voters there will decide if the state superintendent becomes an appointed position rather than an elected one. The Palmetto State is one of a dwindling number of states that still elects its state chief, but whether they’re elected or appointed, these offices feel less consequential than they did a decade ago.

That’s because state education agencies and their overseers have historically been administrative entities that act as pass-throughs for federal dollars. It was only with the elevation of the role under former U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan—by his using the bully pulpit to encourage state chiefs to be bold—that we began to view these folks as change agents. The current administration’s laissez-faire approach, coupled with a host of other issues, has in my estimation largely returned these positions back to where they once were.

As a result, I’ve been more interested in the thirty-six gubernatorial races, which is the third and final area that promises to have an outsized effect on education. At first glance, the forces of resistance and repeal look to have the upper hand. For example, both candidates in New Mexico appear ready to do a complete one-eighty on the state’s nationally recognized teacher evaluation system. In Wisconsin, birthplace of the nation’s first voucher program, the state superintendent—who is leading in most polls—has promised to roll back the state’s varied school choice offerings. Here in Colorado, the airwaves have been blanketed by ads that focus more on fearmongering and deception rather than substantive education issues.

But these contests carry broad implications for the implementation of state ESSA plans, which for better or for worse are the education roadmaps for states for the foreseeable future. These are the routes states plan on taking to support struggling schools. I recently examined state school improvement plans as part of an independent peer review. Later this month, a final report will share our findings and hopefully provide this new crop of governors—as well as other key stakeholders—useful insights and recommendations to consider as they invariably place their own mark on education policy.

Taken together, education may be flying under-the-radar in this year’s election cycle, but there are a few areas of nontrivial significance. With so many ballot initiatives related to education funding, there could be additional dollars available for a variety of outlays, including teacher pay raises. Policy changes could be on the horizon, both on the ballot and at the hands of a new cohort of state executives. But without some serious work—requiring serious leadership—any progress could be short lived. No one is looking to Washington anymore when it comes to education policy, but it remains to be seen which states will take the lead. What’s for certain is that there will be a lot of new faces influencing our issue come January.

1. Stop me if you’ve heard this before: “This report card is not an accurate depiction of all the work we do as a school district, which is what most superintendents in Ohio would agree (with), including those districts that received A grades.” I would agree with this too, but probably not in the same way as the superintendent of Reynoldsburg City Schools intends it. Nevertheless, Reynoldsburg is said to be working to improve parts of its report card ratings for the future, including test scores and a stubbornly high absenteeism rate. Which is good, no matter the grudging motivation. (ThisWeek News, 10/29/18)
   
   

2. Liberty Local Schools is looking to remain in the black, budget-wise, for the next five years. While this positive projection is predicated on passing a levy next week (when isn’t it, I ask you), the real meat of this story is in the subtext. Liberty gained more than 130 students this year, and of course the state funding that comes with them. It is stated that more than 1/3 of those students have come in to the district via open enrollment and the rest are “district residential students”. Supe says that great new programs are what drew the crowds, but that is likely only a small part of the reason. My loyal Gadfly Bites subscribers (salut to the Savvy Six!) will remember that Liberty Local had to forbid all of its resident students from leaving via open enrollment to go to the desirable nearby Austintown district while maintaining the fully porous borders for incoming students. This maneuver has clearly had the desired but still-unstated effect, as reflected in the treasurer’s report: None of our kids money going to Austintown and plenty of kids money coming in from Youngstown and elsewhere. (Youngstown Vindicator, 10/30/18)

Did you know you can have every edition of Gadfly Bites sent directly to your Inbox (in case your love of subtext-busting leads you to want to sign up for such a thing)? Subscribe by clicking here.

Although 90 percent of American parents believe their children are performing at or above grade level; in reality two-thirds of U.S. teenagers are ill-prepared for college when they leave high school. A major reason for this enormous disconnect is grade inflation.

According to a recent study conducted by American University professor Seth Gershenson and published by the Thomas B. Fordham Institute, grade inflation is for real — and widespread. Analyzing statewide end-of-course exams in algebra from North Carolina, Gershenson found that between 2005 and 2016 many students who received As and Bs from their teachers struggled on the state tests.

This matters immensely, since he also found those exams to be far better predictors of students’ ACT scores and thus their academic preparedness for college.

Further, over the years that he studied, grade inflation occurred in both high- and low-income schools. Like the Tar Heel State, Ohio uses high school end-of-course exams. Last year, just 61 percent of students were proficient on the algebra assessment. Given that algebra is required to receive a diploma, it appears that a large fraction of young Ohioans are passing the course even though they can’t demonstrate proficiency on an objective assessment of algebra knowledge.

This disconnect between course grades and test performance spurred Ohio educators to warn in 2016 that hordes of students would never meet the state’s new and tougher high school graduation requirements, as those are based upon end-of-course exams in math and three other subjects. Fears of low passage rates and, thus, lower graduation rates, led Buckeye lawmakers to approve a temporary — and very weak — set of “alternative pathways” for the class of 2018, which was the first to be affected by the rigorous new requirements. Instead of ever demonstrating competency on an objective measure of skills and knowledge, members of that class could get diplomas via a grab bag of dubious accomplishments like good attendance, a part-time job and senior-year course grades.

Gershenson’s findings should worry Ohio policymakers: If grade inflation makes it easier to pass courses without actually learning the content, then the state risks signaling to parents that their children are ready for college or career when in reality they’re not. This will lead to higher graduation rates, which feel good and make for great headlines, but harm the young men and women who are thrust into the adult world with a false sense of preparedness.

The point isn’t that one should trust tests and mistrust teacher grades. Both have value. High school GPAs, for example, are highly correlated with later academic outcomes. And both measures provide important information because they measure different aspects of student performance and potential.

Going forward, the Ohio State Board of Education has — foolishly, in my view — asked the legislature to extend the easy diploma pathways, and some leaders are unwilling to believe that upcoming classes can meet high expectations. Parents, educators and citizens should push back.

A primary purpose of high school is to prepare students for adulthood and the professional world. A diploma is meant to certify that a student is ready for these challenges. But they can’t do this if diplomas get easier to earn. State exams serve as an important check on course grades.

So let’s please not settle for graduation requirements that rely too much on inflated grades. And let’s keep Ohio’s end-of-course exams, which hold our students to high expectations and help parents know whether the As and Bs they see on their kids’ report cards are consistent with their true level of readiness for what follows.

This piece was first published in the Columbus Dispatch.

Editor’s Note: As Ohioans prepare to elect a new governor this November, and as state leaders look to build upon past education successes, we at the Fordham Institute are developing a set of policy proposals that we believe can lead to increased achievement and greater opportunities for Ohio students. This is the fifth in our series, under the umbrella of ensuring seamless transitions to college or career. You can access all of the entries in the series to date here.

Proposal: Create a tax-credit program that allows employers to reduce their state tax liabilities based on the number of students who complete a state-registered apprenticeship at their worksite.

Background: In contrast to traditional career and technical programs, where training is delivered entirely by K–12 schools, apprenticeships include paid on-the-job training provided by employers or professional associations in addition to formal education. American high school students rarely participate in apprenticeships, though their counterparts in countries like Germany and Switzerland are far more likely to do so. Apprenticeships are slowly gaining traction in other states, including Georgia, Maryland, and Wisconsin, which have devised apprenticeship programs geared toward high school students. In Ohio, students aged sixteen or older can participate in one of the state’s registered apprenticeships (though some programs set eighteen as the minimum age). Although no state data exist on how many high school students participate in apprenticeships—the state should begin tracking this—the number is not likely to be high. One possible barrier is employers’ capacity to provide meaningful training opportunities: though apprenticeships may be a key part of some companies’ HR strategy, others may not see them as a cost-effective way of building their workforce. Employers bear costs that include training and supervision, along with paying wages—all for benefits that may not materialize if apprentices later take positions at another company.

Proposal rationale: Apprenticeships allow students to gain on-the-job training and can improve the fit between employee skills and business needs. However, this training model has long been neglected in the U.S. as a way to build high school students’ work-ready skills. By covering a portion of employers’ apprenticeship costs, a tax-credit program would encourage more Ohio employers to provide on-site training for students seeking apprenticeships.

Cost: This proposal would not require a direct appropriation of state funds; however, it would reduce state revenue. The amount would depend on the nature and value of the tax credit as well as the resulting rate of student completions of apprenticeships. Any credit given should start at a relatively modest amount so that employers still have skin in the game and to ascertain how the market responds.

Resources: For an overview of apprenticeships from an international and economic perspective, see the chapter titled “Apprenticeships” in Handbook of the Economics of Education, Volume 3 (2011), written by Stefan Wolter and Paul Ryan; for discussion on apprenticeships from an employers’ view, see the 2016 report The Benefits and Costs of Apprenticeships: A Business Perspective by Susan Helper, et al., published by Case Western Reserve University/the U.S. Department of Commerce; for more on Wisconsin’s apprenticeship program, see the Wisconsin Department of Education’s “Wisconsin Youth Apprenticeship”; and for a list of registered apprenticeships in Ohio, see the Ohio Department of Job and Family Services’ “Apprenticeship.”

1. It seems like every PD article on the Say Yes to Education program possibly coming to Cleveland starts with the same two paragraphs: a new incremental step, lots to iron out, not ready yet, questions remain, blah blah blah. Hardly interesting in itself anymore, but I couldn’t help wondering this time what the representatives for Say Yes—a high profile and big ticket program geared to getting low income students to and through college–think of Ohio’s ongoing efforts to eliminate standardized testing, to water down and/or obfuscate state report cards, and to remove academic pathways to graduation. A.K.A. – Ohio’s War on Knowing Stuff. Someone should ask them. (Cleveland Plain Dealer, 10/26/18)

2. Speaking of graduation requirements in NEO, here is the story of one senior in Springfield Local Schools and her quest to graduate. Her current difficulty appears mainly to be a time crunch, brought on by some bad advice. The news report here blames the trouble on her inability to access the non-academic diploma pathways given temporarily to the Class of 2018. But if you ask me, the true problem for her lies in the creation of those non-academic pathways in the first place. If she had known from her sophomore year that she would need 18 end-of-course points or an industry credential to go with her WorkKeys test score, she could have spent her junior and senior years working toward one or both of those final pieces. No time crunch. Instead, it seems like she got some bad advice from somewhere that told her the temporary assist of a capstone or attendance or GPA from 2018 would extend to her. And since she is one of 80 students in a class of 180 in Springfield Local who is not currently on track to graduate on time, I have a guess as to where that faulty advice could have come from. (News5, Cleveland, 10/26/18)

3. When I was in graduate school studying city planning more than 20 years ago, the Linden neighborhood of Columbus received regular attention from students and professors looking for ways to help “lift up” a long-suffering area of neglect and poverty. Some things have improved in the intervening time, but Linden is still the center of attention. The Dispatch has joined the parade of interested parties, having launched a series of in-depth articles as to what ails the neighborhood and what might be done to treat those ills. (No, it doesn’t have the word “pathway” in it, why do you ask?) Here is a look at the state of the schools to which Linden students have access. All are underutilized—some by quite a lot—and all are underperforming. Columbus City Schools officials know all of the relevant numbers, including how many Linden residents opt for magnet schools elsewhere in the district, how many students attend charter schools, and even how many families take advantage of vouchers to attend private schools. The key question for me: Why. Weirdly, no one seems to know that answer. (Columbus Dispatch, 10/28/18)

4. We end today where we began: with baby steps. Toledo City Schools last week announced movement toward the creation of “The PreMed High School of Toledo”, an even more robust version of their college and career academy plan. You can guess its focus, I’ll bet. It will still be several years before it is actually open, and several more years after that before it is fully operational as a feeder into ProMedica’s recruitment office. But kudos anyway. I’m sure Toledo’s current elementary school students are thrilled. (Toledo Blade, 10/26/18)

Did you know you can have every edition of Gadfly Bites sent directly to your Inbox (in case you eschew baby steps and want to sign up for such a thing)? Subscribe by clicking here.

Martin Luther King III visits KIPP Columbus

KIPP Columbus students had a special guest last week. Martin Luther King III visited the school, read his children’s book (My Daddy, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.), and told stories. Judging by the student quotes in the Dispatch, it looks like he made quite an impact. Television coverage of the visit can be found here.

A big win for students and families: WA Supreme Court ruling

Washington’s Supreme Court ruled that charter public schools are constitutional, upholding their place in Washington’s public education system and ensuring that current and future charter school students will have access to a high-quality education. You can read the Washington State Charter Schools Association’s press statement here. For some background information on the lawsuit, El Centro de la Raza v. Washington State, see the National Alliance for Public Charter Schools’ release here.

How did MA’s charter schools become the best in the country?

On Wednesday, Education Next released a new podcast episode in which Marty West talks with Cara Stillings Candal, the author of a new book on charter schools in Massachusetts titled, The Fight for the Best Charter Public Schools in the Nation. West and Candal discuss whether Massachusetts really does have the best charter schools in the country and why the charter sector is growing so slowly in the state.

School Performance Institute workshop

Are you a school leader interested in purposefully designing your school for improvement? Then you should check out the School Performance Institute’s upcoming workshop on November 29th. You’ll have an opportunity to visit a high-performing charter school during a school day (to observe how the school has been purposefully designed to get results in a high-poverty context using proven methods) and discuss concrete ways to apply these ideas in your own school. You can register here, if interested, or contact John A. Dues for more information.

Upcoming events

Here’s a look at some upcoming national and Ohio events: The Ohio School Improvement Institute (November 15-16, Columbus), the 2018 National Summit on Education Reform (December 5-7, Washington, D.C.), and the 2019 Ohio Educational Technology Conference (February 12-14, Columbus).

1. My old high school recently got a grant from the State Library of Ohio to purchase a total of 278 non-fiction literature books for its library. No word on which books might have made the list, but the aim is to “better align the library’s resources and materials with the new Ohio Learning Standards for English Language Arts and the ELA Literacy Criteria”. While hardly the most interesting education news of the week, it seems like s a good thing, and it allows me to say something nice about my high school. A rare and pleasant happenstance. (Lancaster Eagle-Gazette, 10/24/18)

2. So what is the most interesting education news of the week? Heck if I know. Some elected board members in Youngstown and Lorain seem Supreme-ly happy about this news. Even Coach Tressel finds “beauty” in it. So maybe that’s it. (Youngstown Vindicator, 10/25/18)

3. Speaking of happiness, though, members and guests of the elected board of Akron City Schools actually broke out in cheers when their treasurer announced that nearly 500 fewer students living in district boundaries were attending charter schools compared to the year before. It is likely that these students are not attending Akron City Schools, though, given the flat student population count this year in the district, so it seems like a Pyrrhic victory at best. Or perhaps it’s just schadenfreude. Whatever it takes to get by up there, I guess. (Akron West Side Leader, 10/25/18)
4. Staying in Akron for a moment, I get an uneasy sense of glibness from this piece in which district eighth graders are purportedly attempting to “decide what to do for the rest of their lives”. What is really happening, as we have discussed previously in these Bites, is that Akron is converting all of their high schools to themed college and career academies starting next year. And rising ninth graders get to choose which one they want to attend based on their interests. It takes an interesting mindset—one very different from my own—to transform the act of choosing from a variety of potentially interesting and beneficial options into locking in a trajectory for life at age 14. Let’s hope that mindset is in the journalist’s head and not in the heads of Akron City Schools leaders. (Akron Beacon Journal, 10/24/18) The conversion of those high schools apparently can’t happen soon enough, because the district says that nearly 100 students in the Class of 2019 in each of the current high schools is not on track to graduate on schedule. The problem? Lack of “alternative pathways” available to this class as they were to the Class of 2018. You know the ones I mean. Following this revelation, members of the Akron City Council for some reason approved a resolution this week expressing support for extending those 2018 requirements to the Class of 2019 and beyond. I don’t know who you’re trying to convince, Your Honors, but I say don’t hold your breath. (Akron West Side Leader, 10/25/18)

5. Speaking of schools with “graduation problems” on the horizon, here is an op-ed from the new-ish superintendent of Marion City Schools. His numbers seem to be even worse than Akron’s: nearly 50 percent of Marion seniors are not on track to graduate this year, he says. What is good here is that supe is not complaining or making excuses or trying to lower the requirements for the whole state, let alone for himself. This piece lays out all the work the district is doing to get kids across the finish line via all the pathways available. Sounds like the right approach to me. Best wishes on this important effort…by which I mean your job. (Marion Star, 10/20/18)

6. In a similar vein, here is a story about what is deemed a successful after school program in Bucyrus City Schools. It offers homework help, one-on-one time with teachers, and test prep along with skill building, character education, and some “fun stuff” like guest speakers and field trips. It even includes a hot meal in the evening and an hour of additional academic support in the mornings. Sounds great. So how is that “success” measured? The article tells us, “Many students have seen improvements in subject areas with the extra help and time to complete assignments. High school students who were credit deficient have earned credits that have allowed them to be eligible for graduation. Students often share that they like the individual attention they receive and like being able to get their homework done before they go home. Some of the students have even shared that they are getting fewer detentions because they are working to be eligible for the various incentives.” Also sounds great, right? Almost like they are doing their job. So why is the district official in charge of the program so quick to downplay the clear and measurable academic benefits of her program and tell us she doesn’t want it “to feel like more school”. Sounds like your school might benefit by being more like your program if you ask me. Because your kids sure are. (Richland Source, 10/24/18)

Did you know you can have every edition of Gadfly Bites sent directly to your Inbox (in case you crave Pyrrhic victories and want to sign up for such a thing)? Subscribe by clicking here.

Academic standards have become the foundation on which much of contemporary U.S. public education rests. They dictate the knowledge and skills that students are expected to master, grade by grade, and communicate those expectations to educators, parents, curriculum writers, and other stakeholders. When they’re inadequate, the entire education edifice is shaky—and student achievement is apt to be uneven and weak.

The truth is that some standards are far better than others and deserve to be celebrated, emulated, and implemented.

We at the Thomas B. Fordham Institute have been reviewing state standards for over twenty years, including for a recent analysis that revisits the Common Core and assesses the math and English language arts (ELA) standards of states that never adopted it, or that have significantly altered it. After completing their reviews, our teams of experts assigned each set of standards one of four ratings: strong, good, weak, or inadequate.

Unfortunately, our reviewers found that most states that changed the Common Core weakened their standards in the process. In contrast, the Common Core itself has weathered well. Both the math and English standards earned a “strong” score, as did Texas’s math standards. That should reassure the dozens of states that still rely on the Common Core (or a close facsimile).

Major strengths of the Common Core’s ELA standards include clear expectations that students read rigorous and grade-appropriate texts, master foundational skills in elementary reading, and gain specialized literacy skills needed in other subjects such as history and science. In math, reviewers praised the Common Core’s strong focus on arithmetic in the early grades, the firm foundation for high school algebra it lays at the middle school level, and its clearly articulated “Standards for Mathematical Practice,” or mathematical habits of mind, which complement the content standards.

Although Texas never adopted the Common Core, our reviewers also found its math standards to be notably “focused, coherent, and rigorous,” as well as admirably specific regarding the learning outcomes expected of students. And several other sets of math standards have praiseworthy elements, earning them a rating of “good.” For example, Indiana’s math standards include additional resources that usefully lay out clarifying examples, key terms, and digital supports. Tennessee’s rigorously develop algebra and geometry at the high school level. And Virginia’s excel in their treatment of fractions in the elementary grades, and in how they organize high school standards into courses.

Similarly, in English language arts, seven states’ standards were rated “good” (Indiana, Kansas, New York, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, and West Virginia). Our reviewers especially commended Indiana. Clearly written and well-organized, the Hoosier State’s standards are particularly strong in “reading foundations” such as print concepts, letters, phonics and fluency. Moreover, its excellent writing standards emphasize academic and public writing, such as essays and arguments, rather than personal writing like diaries or journals.

Most states have come a long way in strengthening their standards in the last decade, owing in no small part to Common Core. Yes, the work continues, as all standards have to be updated periodically to incorporate advances in content and pedagogy, as well as lessons learned during implementation.

But when we’re bombarded everyday with much negativity, it’s nice to report some good news. These best-in-class academic standards—and those who created and must now implement them—deserve applause. They have boosted the odds that students subject to their handiwork will succeed later in life.

Well done.

1. Will Ohio’s report cards change in the near future? That is the ever-present question at the Dayton Daily News. The case for change is kind of sketchy here, if you ask me, but Fordham is namechecked within as part of the wide swath of folks supposedly aligned toward change. Somehow I don’t think our proposed changes match up with many others’. But I could be wrong, and I don’t write for a newspaper either, so what do I know? Another meeting of the workgroup tasked with making recommendations on same is today. (Dayton Daily News, 10/23/18)
2. On the topic of graduation requirements in Ohio, the same dude who was last week attempting to shake down Columbus City Schools for more money is this week attempting to convince the state to extend the achievement-free graduation requirements gifted to the Class of 2018 to the next four graduating classes. To be fair, Columbus City Schools does seem to have more money than it has ability to graduate kids, so maybe dude is on to something. But this change affects everyone; not just your students members. (Gongwer Ohio, 10/23/18)

3. The state supe visited tiny Tecumseh Local Schools in western Clark County this week, eager to see for himself “all the good things” he had heard were happening there. Not sure who was whispering such things in his ear, but please permit your jaded (but humble) clips compiler to break it down for you. Tecumseh’s superintendent told her big boss this week that the district set two main goals at the beginning of the school year—overall academic improvement and creating a positive and caring environment at school where students feel supported. “All schools are working on student learning, maximum economic gain,” said Tecumseh’s supe in this piece. “But not as many schools are putting as much effort as we are into goal two.” Tecumseh Local got a D on their most recent state report card, as also reported in the News-Sun at that time. Tecumseh’s supe had some very different words to say back then (September), asserting that the state’s report card grade doesn’t represent the good education students get at the district. “The district report card released by the state, while important, is not an accurate reflection of the student learning and progress occurring at Tecumseh Local Schools,” she was quoted as saying. “Of course we care about the results and will continue to work toward achieving goals set by the State of Ohio. Still, the report card results are merely one glimpse of the whole Tecumseh Local picture. District assessments indicate our students are making solid academic gains in all grades, and our staff is committed to continuous improvement.” Aside from the mismatch between the stated goal and the measured outcome, I personally was confused as to whose goal academic improvement for kids really is. And again, where the good news is as well. (Springfield News Sun, 10/24/18)
4. So, it looks to me like traditional district schools are all in for getting more tax money while championing lowered rigor and more opaque accountability. Meanwhile, in Stark County, it seems that the Catholic schools are on something of an uptick in enrollment. Wonder if the two things are related? (Canton Repository, 10/18/18)

5. In other alternatives news: COF is DOA. The non-public, non-tax supported school we’ve been following for most of the football season school year had its “school registration” revoked by the Ohio Department of Education last week. While COF officials have 30 days to appeal, I would imagine this scuttles their aggressive freshman football season at least. The moral of the story: If you’re going to try and play with the big dogs, you better have your AKC papers in order. Or something like that. (ThisWeek News, 10/19/18)

6. So, maybe the alternative to traditional schools in Ohio is whatever alternatives those traditional schools themselves offer. To wit: career academies. At least it seemed to be an exciting option for one young man from Akron City Schools, interviewed in this story about a trip to a Ford planet in Michigan. This was a pilot effort to help kids decide which college/career academy pathway they will choose when ACS goes to that model permanently next year. (Akron Beacon Journal, 10/20/18) 
7. Since we’re seemingly mostly left with traditional options, perhaps we should see how those trads are doing in preparing their graduates for college. A project funded by the Ohio Department of Higher Education (and a million other folks with deep pockets, my internet research suggests) is supposed to determine how college students—specifically, those enrolled at Bowling Green State University—are doing once they enroll and to report back to the high schools from which those students graduated. The idea, I think, is to help those high schools make changes to help alleviate any problems detected or indeed to pinpoint what might be working so they can keep on keepin’ on. Interesting. The project began a year or so ago and this piece seems to be the first coverage of any reporting out of data gathered thus far. The results touted here are not particularly clear, but here is the only fact reported: “At BGSU, students were spending $2.9 million on non-credit bearing classes. Either they were not successful, or they were taking courses that were not going to apply to a degree program, but they needed to take before they were ready to the courses for the degree program.” I don’t know which high schools these kids came from, but that sounds pretty darn awful to me. Imma try to keep an eye on this in case any other data accidentally sneaks out and into print. (Bowling Green Sentinel-Tribune, 10/23/18)

Did you know you can have every edition of Gadfly Bites sent directly to your Inbox (in case you are too far down the pathway and want to sign up for such a thing)? Subscribe by clicking here.