Over the course of the pandemic, the number of chronically absent students in Ohio skyrocketed, as it did nationally. In 2018–19, Ohio’s statewide chronic absenteeism rate was just under 17 percent, meaning that one in six students were missing at least 10 percent of instructional time. By 2021–22, the statewide rate had jumped to a whopping 30 percent; it ticked down to 26 percent during the most recent school year. Given the well-known negative impacts of chronic absenteeism, as well as lingering learning loss, it’s a significant problem that over a fourth of Ohio students are missing so much instructional time.

State leaders have floated several ideas aimed at addressing the issue. Last fall, the Ohio Attendance Taskforce released a series of recommendations aimed at bolstering attendance. More recently, a legislative proposal to provide cash incentives to kindergartners and ninth graders for regular school attendance has been making the rounds.

It’s understandable that state leaders are eager for solutions. This is a serious problem that has significant short- and long-term impacts on kids. But state policy alone won’t solve the chronic absenteeism problem. It’s local action and decision-making that will drive change.

Consider the Dayton Early College Academy (DECA), a charter school in Dayton. During the 2021–22 school year, DECA registered a chronic absenteeism rate of 30 percent. Rather than cast blame or shrug off responsibility, DECA staff rolled up their sleeves and got to work. They interviewed students and families to determine barriers for attendance. They hosted spirit days and family events to build positive relationships. And staff educated families on the impact of missed instruction, including that excused absences can be just as problematic as unexcused ones. These efforts paid off. During the 2022–23 school year, the chronic absenteeism rate at DECA dropped to 19 percent. Similar efforts in Columbus City Schools and Delaware City Schools have also proved successful.

These are clear, Ohio-specific examples of how school-led efforts are the most promising way to boost attendance. But that doesn’t mean that state lawmakers are helpless. In fact, the state plays a crucial monitoring role. Accurately tracking attendance and transparently reporting data is critical because, otherwise, we have no way of knowing the size and scope of the problem. For example, last fall, lawmakers in the House proposed prohibiting the department from including absences for which a student has a legitimate excuse in the calculation for the chronic absenteeism indicator on school report cards. But if schools are permitted to forego tracking absences because they are “excused” or “legitimate,” it will only appear that chronic absenteeism rates have improved. Hiding the ball won’t solve the problem. The negative impacts of missing school will remain.

State leaders who are feeling pressure to do more than just hold the line could take a page out of the early literacy playbook. Like chronic absenteeism, early literacy has a huge impact on students’ short- and long-term outcomes. Also, like absenteeism, improving early literacy hinges on local effort. In last year’s state budget, lawmakers figured out a way to leverage state policy to improve reading instruction in schools. These efforts offer a roadmap on how lawmakers can also respond to chronic absenteeism.

For example, during the upcoming school year, public schools will be required to use reading curricula that appear on a state-approved list of high-quality materials. The state already offers schools plenty of guidance on effective attendance intervention strategies. But just like they did with reading curriculum, state leaders could take it a step further and create a simplified, easily-accessible list of state-approved attendance interventions. Districts and schools with chronic absenteeism rates over a certain threshold could be incentivized to implement interventions from this list.

School-based coaching is another possibility. Last year’s budget allocated up to $18 million to pay for literacy coaches, who will be sent into schools with the lowest rates of reading proficiency. During next year’s budget cycle, lawmakers could set aside funding to send trained attendance coaches into districts with the highest rates of chronic absenteeism. These coaches could work with teachers and administrators to revise and improve their absenteeism prevention and intervention efforts.

The upshot? Chronic absenteeism is a problem that schools and local communities must address. But lawmakers aren’t powerless. Holding the line on data tracking and transparency is firmly in their control. So, too, is the power to incentivize schools to implement evidence-based strategies and to broadly share examples of what’s working. As was the case with early literacy, the goal for state policymakers should be to provide schools with the resources and funding they need to improve—and then hold them accountable for doing so.

News stories featured in Gadfly Bites may require a paid subscription to read in full. Just sayin’.

1. Utterly fascinating coverage here of a K-12 education panel recently held in Dayton. Put on by the Dayton Business Journal and dubbed “a table of experts”, the conversation doesn’t read anything like you might expect at first. That is largely because of who isn’t at the table: No charter schools are represented at all, and traditional school districts are represented only by the superintendent of the Montgomery County Educational Service Center. Instead, we have the leaders of three Catholic high schools and one independent, nonsectarian private school all singing from (if you’ll pardon the expression) the same hymnal. Lots of talk of rigorous academics, high expectations, choices for families, strong test scores, and postsecondary opportunities for students. Oh, and lots of love for EdChoice. (Dayton Business Journal, 2/16/24)
   
   

2. And staying with the theme of the day, the biggest news in this piece is that the Greater Dayton School has at last moved operations to its fancy new purpose-built campus after operating in temporary digs for more than a year. While the main topic is a school-based health center co-located in the new building to provide services for students and families (nice), we also are reminded of the very important basics: The innovative private school is intended to serve only low-income students and its model includes an 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. school day, family-style meals with teachers, extracurriculars, and lessons in financial literacy and other life skills. Currently there are 105 students in preschool through fourth grade, with the plan to add a grade level per year through eighth grade. Families pay a nominal fee toward tuition, the rest of which is offset by vouchers and other scholarships. I’m still waiting for details of how the kids are doing (you know, data), but this is great news to me as it stands. (Dayton Daily News, 2/18/24)

Did you know you can have every edition of Gadfly Bites sent directly to your Inbox? Subscribe by clicking here.

Stories featured in Ohio Charter News Weekly may require a paid subscription to read in full.

Charter enrollment speeding ahead

Fordham’s Aaron Churchill continued his commentary on the state of charter schools in Ohio this week, discussing a number of data points indicating that traditional school districts are losing their historical position as a monopoly education provider. Growing parental interest in other options—boosted by their experiences during pandemic disruptions—cannot and should not be ignored any longer.

What’s the message?

The implications of this story are not inspiring for charter supporters, but it’s an important situation to discuss. Dayton City Schools and the state of Ohio reached a settlement this week in the lawsuit over fines levied against the district for failing to adequately transport charter and private school students back in 2022. The district will get its money back and the legal matter will be dropped, but what does that mean for future efforts by the state to get other districts to properly transport choice students? The jury is still out on that question.

Important new tools for schools

InnovateOhio and Lt. Governor Jon Husted yesterday released a comprehensive AI Toolkit for the education sector. Artificial intelligence technology has evolved quickly in recent months and become part of many aspects of our lives. School leaders need to build strong policies around beneficial uses of the new technology, and this toolkit can help. It expertly pulls together a wealth of resources from leading organizations around the world and includes sections tailored specifically for policy makers, teachers, and parents. You can check out Guidance and Resources to Advance AI Readiness in Ohio Schools here.

The view from West Virginia

Virtual charter schools in West Virginia have been given the ability to test some of their students remotely for the first time. The testing waiver, approved by the state Board of Education last week, applies only to full-time virtual students in grades 3-8; relates only to the West Virginia General Summative Assessment; and requires lots of signed agreements from school staff, proctors, parents, and students. Virtual schools are still free to conduct in-person exams if they wish and are able to do so, but the new flexibility takes some pressure off the state’s new-ish virtual charters who may not have had the time or the resources to set up in-person testing thus far.

Great opportunity for history education

In case you didn’t realize it, the 250th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence is around the corner. A new partnership aims to help boost Buckeye State students’ interest in and knowledge of American history and Ohio’s place in it by providing free passes for fourth graders to visit a long list of museums and historical sites all across the state. Sounds like a fantastic opportunity for students, families, and schools. The partnership, called America 250-Ohio, also has numerous grant opportunities available for non-profit, educational, and local governmental organizations to support their own celebratory projects. Check it out!

*****

Did you know you can have every edition of the Ohio Charter News Weekly sent directly to your Inbox? Subscribe by clicking here.

News stories featured in Gadfly Bites may require a paid subscription to read in full. Just sayin’.

1. There’s more questions raised than answers provided by this story, but it’s important so here it is: Dayton City Schools and the state of Ohio reached a settlement in the lawsuit over fines levied against the district for failing to adequately transport charter and private school students back in 2022. Dayton will get its money back, the matter will be dropped, and…that seems to be the end of it. No idea what this might mean for the other ongoing lawsuits on this topic or for future efforts by the state to get other districts to properly transport choice students. (Dayton Daily News, 2/14/24)
   
   

2. The monthly gathering of Knox County school superintendents earlier this month turned into a late-season Festivus, judging from this coverage, since two state reps stopped by to listen in. Among the grievances aired: “I’m all for testing but when we reach proficiency, the state changes the standards and the tests.”; “I would like more local control over graduation requirements. I’m not saying reduce the number of credits. We just need more local flexibility.”; and “The entire education landscape has changed because we have given up more local control.” (Knox Pages, 2/14/24)
   
   

3. Finally this week, here’s a look at the Chesterton Schools Network. It started more than 15 years ago with one Catholic school based on the “classical” philosophy of G.K. Chesterton, located in Minnesota. The whole thing is new to me, despite there being a Chesterton School in Dayton, and I find it pretty interesting and uplifting stuff. But starting this fall, we are told, the network part will really start to blossom, with Chesterton schools opening in a dozen cities across the country, including Columbus. I don’t see any evidence that the Ohio schools accept EdChoice Scholarships, but it also appears to be a lower-tuition model designed to be as affordable as possible for families. Sounds like another good option for local families to check out. (City Journal, 2/14/24)

Did you know you can have every edition of Gadfly Bites sent directly to your Inbox? Subscribe by clicking here.

Today, InnovateOhio, under the leadership of Lt. Governor Husted, released a comprehensive AI Toolkit for education titled: Guidance and Resources to Advance AI Readiness in Ohio Schools.

“Over the past few years, AI has become a part of every aspect of our lives—including education. The explosion of AI has left schools playing catch up to devise strong policies around the new technology,” said Vice President for Ohio Policy Chad Aldis. “For district and school leaders, this new resource couldn't come at a better time.  Innovate Ohio and Lt. Governor Husted deserve tremendous credit for leading on this time-sensitive and critical issue.”

The toolkit expertly pulls together a wealth of resources—from leading organizations around the world--on developing effective AI policy and guidelines. Increasing its utility, the toolkit has sections tailored specifically for policy makers, teachers, and parents.

“School leaders across Ohio are increasingly tasked with developing policy on AI. This toolkit will be a vital resource as they devise policies that take advantage of everything that AI has to offer while protecting student privacy and academic rigor,” Aldis added.

In recent months, teacher housing programs have begun to receive high-profile attention. And with good reason: As living costs have risen, teacher salaries have not kept pace, thereby decreasing many educators’ ability to live near their workplaces. In an ideal world, districts would just raise their salaries—after all, half of teachers say that salary increases that merely cover increases in the cost of living would motivate them to stay in the classroom—but political and resource constraints may limit this option. Add to the mix anxieties surrounding teacher recruitment and retention, and it’s hardly surprising that communities rural, suburban, and urban, from the east coast to Hawaii, have expanded efforts to improve educators’ access to housing.

Such efforts take a variety of forms. There are programs for which only educators qualify, but others also include first responders or those below a certain income threshold. Some assist with home purchases, including contributions to down payments, title fees, and closing costs. Others make rentals more affordable by providing vouchers or more affordable rents. Some rental properties are district-owned, while others operate through partnerships with private owners. Most teacher housing programs are district-level, but some are state-level or even federal. A handful of others are specific to individual charter school networks.

In sum, a variety of teacher housing efforts are underway, and their number seems to be mushrooming. But are they actually a good idea?

In short: We really don’t know.

The anecdotal evidence is encouraging, but there’s a real dearth of research on such incentives for either attracting or retaining teachers. As for what extant research does tell us, we know that compensation was a major factor for 42 percent of teachers who left the profession (although, paradoxically, it was also a reason for 34 percent to stay). But we also know that few teachers—a mere 11 percent—say that housing support, specifically, would make any difference for them.

What’s more, even if housing assistance would have an impact, many programs are painfully inefficient when it comes to timeframes or population served. In Silicon Valley’s Los Gatos, for example, ninety education professionals completed interest forms to become the first residents of the district’s only available teacher housing complex—which offers an underwhelming four units, thereby serving less than 5 percent of interested parties. Austin is planning to repurpose an underutilized site that the district already owns, which might seem efficient, except for the fact that the entire project will take some seven years to complete. Somehow I doubt that telling teachers they might qualify for workforce housing, two presidential administrations from now, is going to persuade many.

And that’s not the extent of the challenges. Many of the housing programs have such low income cutoffs that few teachers even qualify. Only lower-paid district employees ended up qualifying for a Los Angeles housing initiative that had been intended to serve teachers; while bus drivers and cafeteria workers certainly deserve housing support, the initiative was a failure in terms of its original goal. And the pressure for already-overworked superintendents to serve as “property developers” can’t be helping the exceptionally high turnover rate in that profession, either.

Finally, many teacher housing efforts suffer from serious messaging problems. Quite justifiably, given their credentials, teachers want to be treated more like professionals. But recent reports have celebrated solutions like tiny homes constructed by children and Habitat for Humanity charity projects; hailed parking lots as housing “panaceas”; and highlighted opportunities for teachers to collaborate after hours in their building’s laundry room. Even if many teachers end up pursuing these opportunities, surely no one can believe that such narratives will help them feel more respected.

To be sure, there are ways to address some of these problems. The most promising housing-voucher programs could be scaled to serve more teachers, and they could do so immediately, without waiting for construction. Targeting housing programs to teachers in the most understaffed areas, like instruction for English learners, special education, physical science, and foreign language, could better ensure that limited resources are being put to strategic ends. And the rhetoric around these efforts can surely be revised, such that teacher housing sounds less like charity and more like military housing or the forms of relocation assistance that other professional jobs frequently offer.

Above all, policymakers should ensure that their decision-making isn’t guided by the PR appeal of a flashy initiative and an aesthetic digital rendering of what a building might look like in 2027. First, are there sufficient funds that could instead be spent on raising teachers’ salaries—a less logistically challenging and likely more persuasive policy solution—or are the districts cash poor but property rich? If the answer is truly no, then will the proposed housing solution meet the needs of teachers in that community, and when will it do so? And will it bolster broader efforts to make the teaching profession more appealing? Policymakers must carefully evaluate whether proposed housing initiatives actually reflect the best use of their finite resources.

Idaho’s public charter school law turned twenty-five last year. Over that quarter century, the statute has grown warts. It’s also too complicated, burdened by vestigial code and rules, and confusing to schools, authorizers,[1] and state education agencies alike.

The time for an update seems to have come. The “Accelerating Public Charter Schools Act” (a.k.a. HB422) passed out of the House recently on a vote of 66-3-1, passed out of the Senate Education Committee unanimously, and is expected to sail through the Senate in coming days.

Strong support for operational flexibilities

The updated statute seeks a balance between operator flexibility and accountability for performance, while also supporting the continued growth of Idaho’s charter sector, which has seen the addition of about forty new schools in the last eight years.

HB422 seeks to “reward public charter schools that meet their accountability measures with enhanced autonomy and freedom from regulatory burden.” Successful charter schools can earn autonomy. Those that have met all targets and satisfy all requirements over the terms of their contracts can renew for terms of twelve years. Longer terms mean that successful schools can spend less time worrying about renewal and more time educating students. This also saves time for the staff of the Idaho Public Charter School Commission, which authorizes 60-plus schools with a staff of three and a half employees.

Additional flexibility provided in the legislation would allow successful charter networks with multiple school sites to operate as a single local educational agency (LEA). This is common practice in other charter states and will enable Idaho networks to innovate in areas such as the cross-collateralization of debt for school facilities. This can drive down the costs of facility loans.

The bill also provides for “fast-tracked replication.” Schools that successfully complete at least one renewal cycle without conditions can clone an additional school—using the same model and serving some or all of the same grades—with paperwork and approval completing in a speedy forty-five days. This will allow successful schools that want to replicate themselves to spend less time navigating the regulatory process and more time planning their schools and finding teachers, leaders, and facilities. It should also save them some legal fees!

More transparency but light on results-based school accountability

On the accountability front, however, the pending legislation does some compromising, as has been the practice in Idaho, where parent choice and marketplace forces are the primary drivers of school accountability. On the plus side, the bill will allow “Revocation of a Charter.” Specifically, a charter may be terminated by its authorizer if, after fair notice, the school “commits a material and substantial violation of any of the terms, conditions, standards, or procedures required by this chapter or the performance certificate (including academic performance and growth).” This gives authorizers some discretion, but Idaho’s charter law (and charter program) has never been hawkish about closing schools for academic reasons. In fact, only nine charter schools have closed in Idaho since the early 2000s, and all were the result of financial mismanagement, low enrollment, or failure to maintain full accreditation.

Still, the “Accelerating Public Charter Schools Act” will encourage transparency around school performance. It requires authorizers to make school performance certificates—which must include student academic proficiency, student academic growth, and college and career readiness for high school students—available to the public and parents. It also requires an authorizer to “continually monitor the performance and legal compliance of the public charter schools it oversees, including collecting and analyzing data, and may conduct prearranged site visits, if needed, to support ongoing evaluation according to its performance certificate.” In this way, it is hoped that high-flying schools will be separated from struggling ones.

Then there’s the appeals process. If an authorizer does seek to revoke or non-renew a charter, that decision may be appealed to the Office of Administrative Hearings (OAH). This is a change from current law, which requires such appeals to go through the state board of education. The OAH was created in 2022 “to assure fair hearings without the perception of bias.” Whether this is an improvement won’t be known until the first case is brought to the OAH, but it is noteworthy that lawmakers are taking the decision of whether to approve the closure of a public school out of the hands of the state board of education.

HB422 also seeks to balance the role of authorizer as quality control agent with that of school support organization. Under current law, authorizers, especially the Idaho Public Charter School Commission and its seven-member board appointed by the governor, have struggled to balance oversight and school support. The new legislation tasks the state department of education with “enrolling charter schools in need of improvement in support and development programs, including but not limited to the Idaho Building Capacity Program.” The purpose of this program is to support Idaho’s lowest-performing schools in improving their instructional systems and targeting academic achievement. Another way to see it is as a last chance for a charter school to turn itself around or face revocation.

In public testimony, the primary author of HB422, Alex Adams of Governor Little’s office, made it clear that the bill is not perfect. It’s a balancing act. For other states, the parts most worthy of study and possibly embracing involve operational flexibility and the streamlining of the charter approval and renewal processes for high-performing schools. The Idaho approach to school performance has to be termed accountability-lite.

How does HB422 line up with national best practice?

I asked Todd Ziebarth at the National Alliance for Public Charter School what he thought of the changes in HB422 and he summarized it thusly:

HB 422 streamlines Idaho’s charter school law with the goal of balancing charter school autonomy and accountability. The bill largely accomplishes this goal. As a result, charter schools in Idaho will have more flexibility to innovate while still being held accountable for results.

HB 422 moves the Idaho charter school law closer to the National Alliance’s model law in two important ways. First, it requires that the terms of a charter school’s initial contract must be for six years, giving a new school a sufficient amount of time to prove its worth before it faces renewal. Second, it allows a high-performing charter school to have its contract renewed for up to twelve years, allowing the school to spend more time focused on educating students instead of completing bureaucratic paperwork requirements.

While HB 422 represents forward progress for the charter school sector in Idaho, more work remains to be done to provide charter schools even more flexibility to innovate, especially as it relates to teacher policies, and more equitable funding and facilities support—all while holding the line on ensuring that charter schools deliver results for Idaho’s families and taxpayers.

Cheers

• Houston schools will have eight additional instructional days next year. —Houston Landing
• Low test scores can motivate students to work harder and learn more. —Jay Mathews, The Washington Post

Jeers

• A remote learning during a winter storm in New York City was beset with technical issues. —New York Times
• Brookline High School in Massachusetts is considering eliminating English after axing honors socials studies in 2019. —Boston Globe