1. We start today’s epic clips collection with a blast from the past – a legislative hearing in which a bunch of people come together to defend the Common Core. Chad is quoted within, naturally. (Gongwer Ohio, 10/24/17)
    
2. Chad is also quoted in this piece on the fates (currently up in the air) of the charter sponsorship futures of the Cincinnati and Newark school districts. We discussed on Monday Newark’s appeal of its rating of “poor”, but the Cincinnati details are new and interesting. The bottom line: will ODE bend the rules and allow these poor sponsors to continue, leaving all the other sponsors so rated and who quietly relinquished their schools and proceeded to the hereafter asking, “What the fork, man?” (Cleveland Plain Dealer, 10/24/17) Here is a close up version of one of those sponsors – Reynoldsburg City Schools – who recently settled the appeal of their “poor” rating by going out of the sponsorship business entirely. All of their schools are now sponsored by ODE or a higher-rated sponsor. (ThisWeek News, 10/24/17)
    
3. Speaking of “killing” (nice headline, PD), a rural Ohio school district might use eminent domain to eliminate a haunted house attraction – admittedly a very very scary-looking haunted house, judging by the pictures – and replace it with a bus turnaround area. The owners of the haunted house have worked hard to build their beloved business, which happens to be across the street from an elementary school. (Columbus Dispatch, 10/24/17)
    
4. There is apparently no shortage of folks in Cincinnati ready to opine against the value of school report cards. Why yes, this guy is running for school board. Why do you ask? (Cincinnati Enquirer, 10/23/17)
    
5. Speaking of report cards, former Ed Sec (and current Ed Trust CEO) John King dropped a truth bomb on the value of testing, report cards, and accountability in the CLE yesterday. The audience’s collective gasp was heard as far away as Dayton. Anecdotally. (Cleveland Plain Dealer, 10/24/17)
6.  
7. Toledo’s supe says that his district has kept the promises made prior to passage of their last levy (well….) and urged passage of the renewal of that levy on the ballot next week. (Toledo Blade, 10/23/17) As for the future of education in Toledo, the district is literally looking to the earth and the heavens. (Toledo Blade, 10/23/17) Oh, and public service jobs for high schoolers. Can’t be exposed to the joys of union membership soon enough, I guess. (Toledo Blade, 10/24/17)
    
8. Akron City Schools is not on the ballot with a levy this year, thanks to a confluence of what the treasurer calls “good news”. Two of the good news stories involve school choice: Loss of students to charter schools is down and gain of students via open enrollment is up. Interesting. (Akron Beacon Journal, 10/23/17)
    
9. Bill Bush attended ECOT’s board meeting this week, including committee meetings and an executive session (huh?). Why did it take him 440 words to say this and why was it above-the-fold material in the D? Because it’s ECOT and therefore words like “posh” and “Yost” and “locked” and a big screamy placement were required. (Columbus Dispatch, 10/25/17) Speaking of online education (were we?), just below the ECOT piece in the hard copy paper today was a shiny, happy story about sunny, pleasant “Teacher Julia”, a lovely and energetic Clintonville mom who is teaching English as a second language to awesome and eager students all around the world via a very nice computer set-up through a helpful, flexible Uber-like teaching platform. With puppets and tambourines. In fact, the only thing bad about this particular version of online education is the room in which Teacher Julia works: her own crappy C’ville basement (I feel ya, Teach). Honestly, I think this is twisty enough to qualify as a quadruple standard. (Columbus Dispatch, 10/25/17) Yes, I read the hard copy newspaper every day. I’m old.
    
10. Finally today: Another week, another laudatory piece about a Life Skills charter school. This time, it’s the one located in Elyria which appears to be making a huge positive difference in the lives of dozens of non-traditional students who seem determined to get a diploma and a career-related credential. Guess it’s easier if to write such pieces if you never use the words “charter school”. (Northern Ohio Morning Journal, 10/24/17)

NOTE: The House Education and Career Readiness Committee of the Ohio General Assembly is hearing opponent testimony this week on House Bill 176, a proposal that we believe would significantly affect the standards, testing, and accountability infrastructure of K-12 education in Ohio. Below is the written testimony that Chad Aldis gave before the committee today.

Thank you, Chair Brenner, Vice Chair Slaby, Ranking Member Fedor and House Education Committee members for giving me the opportunity today to provide testimony in opposition to House Bill 176.

My name is Chad Aldis, and I am the Vice President for Ohio Policy and Advocacy at the Thomas B. Fordham Institute. The Fordham Institute is an education-focused nonprofit that conducts research, analysis, and policy advocacy with offices in Columbus, Dayton, and Washington, D.C.

We’ve long believed that high standards, rigorous assessments, and a strong accountability framework are key components in a quality educational system. For the most part, Ohio excels in each of those areas. The legislature and this committee in particular deserves much of the credit for that and ensuring that every student in our state has the opportunity to receive an excellent education.

House Bill 176, as introduced, would severely weaken Ohio’s education infrastructure. Here’s how:

Replacing the current standards

HB 176 prohibits the use of the Common Core standards. Because Ohio’s math and English language arts standards were based upon the Common Core, this bill would require the state to adopt a new set of academic standards. This is despite the state having recently completed an extensive revision process—led by local teachers and open to public feedback—that made the standards Ohio-specific. It also ignores the fact that Ohio districts, schools, and educators have been working with these standards for years, starting all the way back in 2011. While a few education leaders may testify for changing the standards, most are likely to argue for consistency and to be left alone to carry on with their job of educating Ohio students.

Even worse, the bill seeks to replace our current, Ohio-specific standards with standards from another state: Massachusetts’s pre-2010 standards. This move suggests a belief that by adopting the Bay State’s old standards, Ohio will place itself on the road to dominating the education sphere just as Massachusetts routinely does. Unfortunately, that’s not likely to happen. Why? It’s true that Massachusetts had very good standards, but its success didn’t happen solely because of its standards. A host of other policies and reforms shaped it into an education powerhouse. These policies included implementing challenging criterion-referenced tests, rigorous graduation requirements (two policies eliminated by this bill), teacher licensure reform, and school funding related changes.

There’s nothing wrong with Ohio policymakers wanting to model the Buckeye State’s K-12 sector on that of Massachusetts. But this bill does not accomplish that. Instead, it takes advantage of Massachusetts’s reputation when it comes to standards while veering far afield from the reforms many experts suggest propelled the state’s stellar performance.

Requiring new assessments

Another significant problem with HB 176 is that it would require the state to adopt an entirely new system of assessments—assessments that were used in Iowa prior to 2010. The first problem with this is that these assessments aren’t aligned to the bill’s proposed standards from Massachusetts—meaning Ohio would administer assessments that aren’t aligned to the standards its teachers would be teaching and students would be learning.

The second problem is that those assessments are norm-referenced. A norm-referenced test determines scores by comparing a student’s performance to the entire pool of test takers. Each student’s test score is compared to other students in order to determine their percentile ranking in the distribution of test takers. A criterion-referenced test, on the other hand, is scored on an absolute scale. Instead of being compared to other students, students are compared against a standard of achievement (i.e., a “proficiency cut score”). Ohio has long used criterion-referenced assessments because they give every student the opportunity to do well and can better gauge what students know.

In education, there’s room (and a need) for both of these types of tests. Do we really want the scores of these tests to be based on what other students know, instead what our students should know? Comparing students is useful, but it doesn’t offer a complete picture. Think of it this way: you could be the richest person in your city, but that doesn’t mean you have enough money to pay your bills. It’s a cold comfort to know that you’re better off than your neighbors if you still can’t buy groceries and pay your electric bill.

Other changes of note

Model Curricula—the bill prohibits ODE from developing model curricula. Ohio law already leaves it up to districts as to whether “to utilize all or any part” of the model curriculum, so there’s no reason to abolish it. Doing so would make implementation much harder for districts as they wouldn’t have anything to build upon

Graduation Requirements—the bill eliminates the requirement for a student to complete a graduation pathway to receive a diploma. It’s fair to debate whether we’ve gotten it exactly right with our current graduation requirements, but getting rid of any requirement is a different matter altogether. At a time when thousands of jobs are sitting vacant because there aren’t enough qualified applicants, more and more young people can’t meet the military’s enlistment requirements, and too few Ohio graduates are prepared to take college level courses without remediation, can we really say no requirements for graduation is in the best interest of our young people?

***

Overall, House Bill 176 makes a number of changes that will weaken the state’s educational system. The proposed changes to standards and assessments are particularly worrisome. Calling for yet another set of standards will force schools, educators, and students into another period of transition and turmoil. Meanwhile, requiring the state to utilize norm-referenced assessments will rob Ohio families of the ability to discern whether their students are truly college and career ready. For these reasons, we stand in opposition of House Bill 176. I’m happy to answer any questions that you may have.

To give some added oomph to excellent teacher preparation, the Council of Chief State School Officers launched the Network for Transforming Educator Preparation (NTEP) in 2013. Its purpose is to identify states with track records of innovative teacher preparation and support them in their efforts to implement aggressive and lasting improvements. The network’s first cohort included seven states: Connecticut, Idaho, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Massachusetts, and Washington. In 2015, they were joined by eight more states: California, Delaware, Missouri, New Hampshire, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Tennessee, and Utah.

A new report examines the progress of those states, mainly in four key areas: stakeholder engagement; licensure reform; preparation program standards, evaluation, and approval; and the use of data to measure success.

In the realm of stakeholder engagement, participating states were required to outline how they would gain the “public and political will to support policy change.” Collaborations between stakeholder groups led several states to recognize the importance of clinical practice for new teachers. For instance, a working group made up of the Louisiana Department of Education, that state’s Board of Elementary and Secondary Education, and the Board of Regents collaborated to create a yearlong classroom residency for new teachers alongside an experienced mentor teacher that is complemented by a competency-based curriculum.

Since states determine their own teacher licensure policies, NTEP focuses on how participating states could ensure that candidates who earn licensure are ready for the rigors of the classroom on their very first day. States have made strides in various ways, including requiring performance-based licensure assessments, setting higher minimum GPA requirements for entry into preparation programs, and requiring programs to extend and improve candidates’ clinical experiences. But difficult challenges remain, including license reciprocity across state lines and establishing effective multi-tiered licensure systems.

Another important reform that NTEP states are pursuing is toughening their approval and reauthorization standards for teacher preparation programs. States like Kentucky made progress in this domain by developing an accountability system that includes information about the selectivity of programs, the performance of candidates on licensure exams, and scores on evaluations of practicing teachers. States also updated the standards used to review and approve programs by transitioning from examining inputs (like faculty qualifications or program resources) to examining how prospective teachers perform while in the program.

As for using data effectively, participating NTEP states recognize the importance of measuring new teachers’ effectiveness. But CCSSO also found that state data systems are woefully underdeveloped, and that in many cases, the quality and relevance of collected data are sorely lacking. NTEP states overcame these obstacles by auditing data that were already being collected in order to ensure that it was shared with other agencies and programs; building and implementing improved data systems; providing data-related training to state and institutional staff; and building data-based rating systems for preparation programs. California, for example, uses its statewide teacher preparation data system to create public dashboards that show how a program’s graduates score on assessments as well as the results of district surveys about newly hired teachers’ performance.   

Finally, although NTEP focused on state policy, several higher education institutions within states made significant changes in order to transform the way they prepare their candidates. Clemson University, for example, plans to offer a combined bachelor’s-master’s degree path with an embedded teacher residency program. Similarly, Missouri State University’s College of Education created an internship program that replaced the traditional twelve weeks of student teaching with a yearlong co-teaching model.

For states that are interested in making advancements with their teacher preparation programs and policies, this report serves as a good jumping off point.

SOURCE: “Transforming Educator Preparation: Lessons Learned from Leading States,” The Council of Chief State School Officers (September 2017). 

As we’ve come to learn more about sleep and how it affects adolescents, school start times (SST) have become part of a national conversation. Several studies published in prestigious outlets such as the American Economic Journal and Journal of Clinical Sleep Medicine indicate that later SST could be beneficial for students, as insufficient sleep is associated with poor academic performance, increased automobile crash mortality, obesity, and depression. And as more benefits of sleep have come to light, several medical organizations, such as the American Medical Association, the American Academy of Pediatrics, and the American Academy of Sleep Medicine, have recommended that middle and high schools shouldn’t start until 8:30 a.m. However, understandable concerns about pushing back SST remain, largely regarding increased transportation costs and whether the shift might negatively affect after-school extracurricular activities and employment opportunities.  

Enter RAND Europe and the RAND Corporation, which conducted a recent study in which they aim to gauge whether the benefits of later SST are worth the costs. Throughout the process, they sought to address two questions: If there were universal shifts in SST to 8:30 a.m.—versus the U.S. average start time of 8:03 a.m.—what would the economic impact be? And would that shift be a cost-effective policy measure?

Based on prior studies, the researchers focused principally on the notion that students would reap academic benefits given the opportunity to gain additional sleep in the morning; this includes increased high school graduation and college-matriculation rates that in turn should generate economic gains. They also assumed benefits in decreased mortality based on fewer automobile accidents tied to sleep deprivation. On the cost side of the ledger, the RAND analysts considered increased transportation expenses to accommodate the later SST and infrastructure costs associated with pushing back extracurricular start times (e.g., installing lights for athletic fields).  

Based on their cost-benefit calculations, the RAND analysts predicted that universally delaying school start times to 8:30 a.m. would be a cost-effective policy. On a national scale, they estimated that after as little as two years, there could be a significant return on investment—an economic gain of about $8.6 billion to the U.S. economy. After ten years, the researchers predicted that the later SST policy would contribute a cumulative $83 billion to the economy. In per-student terms, the analysts predicted a $346 benefit two years after the policy change and $3,309 after ten years. State-by-state estimates were also provided, with RAND forecasting in Ohio a $410 and $3,510 benefit per student after two and ten years, respectively. These net benefits assumed what the RAND analysts consider “normal” costs associated with the policy shift (a $150 per student bump in transportation costs and upfront infrastructure costs of $110,000 per school). However, under higher cost assumptions, RAND analysts estimated diminished returns that don’t actually turn positive for quite some time. For instance, in the higher cost simulations, the payoff of later SST in many states doesn’t turn positive until ten years after the policy change.  

This study suggests that it’s worth it to modestly delay start times. Of course, their findings hinge on assumptions about the aggravation and costs associated with changing school schedules. But in practice, schools across the country and here in Ohio (traditional public and charter alike) are indeed making this shift, likely in the hopes of increasing the odds of students arriving to school safely and improving their readiness to learn from the moment they step through their school’s doors. These schools seem to recognize that the old phrase, “you snooze, you lose” might not be correct after all. We shall see.

SOURCE: Marco Hafner, Martin Stepanek, Wendy M. Troxel, “Later school start times in the U.S.: An economic analysis,” RAND Europe (2017).

1. CEO David Hardy yesterday released a draft of his turnaround plan for the district, dubbed the “Lorain Promise”. Seems a little light on concrete metrics if you ask me – the fluffy story from the MJ seems to support that – and a majority of the metrics that are included appear to be survey-based. (Northern Ohio Morning Journal, 10/22/17) There are some metrics regarding third grade reading, overall math achievement, and eighth grade honors readiness, but they are buried deep in that document and not even commented upon in the Chronicle’s piece. What is notable is that two further public input sessions are scheduled (and online feedback is being actively solicited) prior to a final revised plan being submitted to the Academic Distress Commission. Hopefully someone asks a question about what kids are actually going to be expected to learn and know how to do. (Elyria Chronicle-Telegram, 10/23/17)
    
2. Back in the real world, we told you earlier in the month about Findlay Digital Academy’s report card and the district’s happiness about it. Now, Newark Digital Academy – also a dropout recovery charter school sponsored by a school district – reports happiness with their report card as well, having exceeded standards for the third year in a row. Sadly, the district has been rated “poor” on its charter sponsor evaluation and is in danger of losing its ability to sponsor both NDA and another dropout recovery charter. An appeal is pending with the Ohio Department of Education. Wonder if NDA’s report card will factor in? (Newark Advocate, 10/20/17)
    
3. What do Dayton City Schools, the Ohio Motion Picture Tax Credit program, a charter school, the teachers union, tens of thousands of dollars, and the classic funk band Ohio Players have to do with one another? And why are they all part of a 17-month-long legal battle that has ended up in federal court? You’ll just have to read this trippy little Jeremy Kelley piece to find out. (Dayton Daily News, 10/22/17)
    
4. In my never-ending quest to bring my loyal Gadfly Bites subscribers stories from the most obscure news sources, I give you the news site for the Cleveland Browns football team. You are both welcome. In this piece, there are a number of photos of adorable little kids and the news that the Browns organization is supporting and encouraging Cleveland-area families to participate in something called “the 2,000 Days Pledge” – where families sign their kids up for high-quality pre-K and promise to make the most of their child’s time before kindergarten. Interesting. (Cleveland Browns.com, 10/22/17) In perhaps a more serious story about preschool, a statewide program run out of Nationwide Children’s Hospital in Columbus has been providing remote and on-site support and training for preschool providers. The goal is to help the providers better deal with so-called “problem kids”, those whose behavior would in the past have gotten them expelled. Yes, expelled from daycare. The program seems legit and very helpful in this regard. (Columbus Dispatch, 10/22/17)

The teachers and administrators at Columbus Collegiate Academy-Main Street have a strong track record of supporting their students in closing the achievement gap and putting them on a college prep path. CCA-Main students have consistently out-performed their peers in more affluent schools, and eighth graders regularly gain acceptance to the top high schools in Columbus. The United Schools Network, the school’s operator, and its recently launched School Performance Institute, want to share their recipe for success with you.

On November 30, 2017, USN’s Chief Learning Officer John A. Dues will host a day-long Study the Network™ workshop at the school to observe how its culture has been purposefully designed to get results in a high-poverty context. Participants will also discuss how to apply these ideas in their own schools.

If you are interested in concrete steps you can take to help low-income students achieve and thrive academically, this workshop is for you. Registration includes breakfast, lunch, and all necessary materials.

You can find out more information about workshop details and register to attend by clicking here.

NOTES: The Thomas B. Fordham Institute occasionally publishes guest commentaries on its blogs. The views expressed by guest authors do not necessarily reflect those of Fordham.

Miyea Thompson is a fourth grader at UPrep, a high performing charter school in the United Schools Network in Columbus. On Friday, October 6, USN celebrated its 10th anniversary at its annual gala event. Miyea was a featured speaker at that event and the following is the written version of her speech. For more information on USN schools, we urge you to visit our website and download our recent profile of another student in the network.

Thank you! My name is Miyea Thompson, and I am a 4th-grader at United Preparatory Academy - State Street. Last month, I had the opportunity to write about what it meant to me to be a rising star. Tonight, I’d like to share with you what I wrote.

******

When I think about being a rising star I got started by identifying what type of stars exist. We have famous people that are called stars such as actors, models, singers, and athletes. These people grew up to become stars, and I would love to be in that category!

Then, I looked at the stars in the sky and compared them. Some are big, some are small, some are bright, and some look like diamonds. But the biggest and brightest rising star is the sun. He works everyday by rising up in the east and going down in the west. The sun is responsible for life on our planet. It helps plants to grow and gives life to every living thing. The sun is the one that I want to be!

So now the sun becomes a fourth grade girl named Miyea Thompson. I am the most important star in the sky. I am only nine years old and I have my whole life to be a rising star. And that starts here at USN.

As the new queen star, it’s time to get to work! It’s very hard. Maybe as hard as being the President of the world! If I want to become a sun, then I need a lot of knowledge. As a fourth grade scholar at USN, I will learn everything from my teachers. My teachers teach me math, social studies, science, and ELA, and they will be the carbon, oxygen, and helium that will make me a rising sun.

As the sun, I will be a leader for my sisters, and a role model for my peers so that every rising star in the galaxy can become a sun and light the ignition to become doctors, lawyers, scientists, and engineers. I will become the sun by showing what I learned at USN, like:

1. Grit and never giving up,
2. Always respecting everyone
3. Showing wonder and thinking outside of the box
4. Helping others through teamwork
5. Practicing empathy to understand people’s feelings

I started attending UPrep in the first grade and I already graduated from 3 colleges! If I stay at USN all the way until 12th grade, I will have graduated from 12 colleges!

As I grow older I hope USN stays around for many years, like the sun. I love USN and will try to set the bar high so that every student can become a rising star! Thank you.

It’s frustrating feeling like a broken record, but Stephen Dyer’s comparisons between school districts and charter schools can’t go uncontested. His analyses are reductive, crudely simplifying poor families’ quest for better schools as mere financial transactions that—he claims—unduly harm school districts. Yet he ignores the harm that’s caused when a student attends an unsafe or educationally unsound district school. He overlooks the harm when somebody else’s child is cheated out of beautiful, high-quality learning experiences--the kind that we seek for our own children.

Given Dyer’s long established ties to active charter opponents—Innovation Ohio, the teachers unions, and the Know Your Charter project—it’s not surprising that he routinely places the interests of districts and the adults they employ ahead of families and children simply seeking a quality educational environment that meets their needs. Each blog he writes lays bare the common yet wholly fallacious view that state education dollars are “owned” by districts. Districts receive state funds to ensure that students can receive a publicly funded education in a publicly accountable institution; when a student leaves, so should those dollars.

This edition of “I can’t even, Stephen” has to do with yet another of his common practices: putting the “performance index” scores of giant school districts serving tens of thousands of children up against the scores of individual charter schools. He asserts that this comparison is justified because the performance index (a weighted measure of student proficiency on state exams) dictates charter start-up eligibility: Districts that fall into the bottom five percent on this measure are designated “challenged,” which means they’re places where new charters can locate.

A refresher on why this comparison is misleading: If you contrast Columbus City district, which includes schools in highly educated, wealthy neighborhoods, with schools located in the city’s toughest neighborhoods, the district will come out ahead. That’s generally true whether those schools are district-run or charter. Years of social science research has found that school performance on proficiency-based metrics largely correlates with income.

But let’s talk about the second part of this and how alarming it is. When districts earn scores low enough to trigger eligibility for charters to locate there, charter opponents view this as a sanction for districts. In other words, they view poor families’ ability to access better alternatives for their kids as punishment for districts rather than opportunities for people.  

Imagine treating other family-driven choices—especially when the choosers are mostly black, brown, and poor—as a sanction on the institution from which those families fled.

Now imagine that those leading the complaints most likely have never been trapped in a schooling situation they couldn’t buy or move their way out of.

Okay, now try these on for size:

• I can’t believe that woman left our hospital to seek cancer treatment somewhere else. That is so unfair to us!
• If this region’s hospitals score in the bottom five percent on health outcomes, alternative hospitals can come to town. What a terrible idea; this will steal money from us!
• Alternative daycare providers, separate from the ones to which children are “zoned,” are providing false choices. We deserve to be paid back by the state each time a child elects to leave.
• You should have your baby at the hospital closest to your house. That’s what’s best for the community. We need strong neighborhood hospitals. You are ruining our neighborhood hospital by sending your dollars to a different one.
• I understand that your child needs a specific kind of trauma treatment that our center currently doesn’t have. Nevertheless, you must stay with us. It harms our center and our clients if we lose your health insurance money. 

It’s obvious how self-centered and selfish these statements are and how ridiculous they sound. They place institutional interests above the needs of clients or patients each time. Yet such arguments are made repeatedly in education and largely go unchallenged.

If a family isn’t forced to select the hospital, daycare center, trauma treatment center (or library, grocery, bus stop, etc.) closest to their house, why on earth do we force families to do that with schooling? To suggest that families should have no choices because their neighborhood institutions lose money—be they hospitals, daycares, or schools—is outlandish. In almost no other instance do we give primacy to the effects of private choices on public institutions. We don’t force people to stay in deteriorating urban cities—or even struggling rural areas—simply to ensure that public services are maintained. Rather, we expect these places to reinvent themselves to attract and retain residents and/or “right-size” their budgets in ways that match present realities. The same should apply to school districts.  

Nevertheless, people like Dyer continue to say these things out in the open, in plain daylight, even with pride, about schooling. They fight to enact policies to keep people in their “zones” to ensure that institutional—rather than family and student—needs are met. In this type of system, the primary losers are nearly always the poorest among us. Does this make you angry yet?

1. Ugh. Some days the clips write themselves, and some days are like today. Our own Chad Aldis is quoted in this brief piece from public radio on the possibility that Ohio’s various diplomas may fall afoul of ESSA graduation calculation requirements. I think. (WKSU-FM, Kent, 10/19/17)
    
2. Speaking of graduation, Elyria City Schools seems poised to drop the laudatory valedictorian and salutatorian labels for its top grads starting with the Class of 2019. The main argument seems to be that uneven access to credit bearing college classes and AP/IB options advantages some students over others. Although there is also some discussion of fierce and “distracting” competition among students (starting as early as eighth grade) for the limited number of honors available. Instead, under a new proposal, grads will be able to earn summa cum laude, magna cum laude, and cum laude honors with a wide swath of students likely earning each. (Elyria Chronicle-Telegram, 10/19/17)
    
3. Meanwhile, here’s a look at a day in the life and work of Elyria’s Life Skills dropout recovery charter school. Really interesting piece. More, please. (Elyria Chronicle-Telegram, 10/20/17)
    
4. THE Bill Gates was in Cleveland yesterday, addressing attendees of the Council of the Great City Schools national conference. What did he have to talk about? Mostly how his foundation will spend $1.7 billion on education over the next five years. Yep. That’s it. (Cleveland Plain Dealer, 10/19/17)