Letting Ohio teachers teach

Earlier this year, the Louisiana Department of Education launched a Let Teachers Teach workgroup. More than two dozen educators were tasked with identifying “common classroom disruptions and unnecessary bureaucracies” and then brainstorming solutions. The workgroup’s efforts produced a report containing eighteen recommendations that cover a wide range of issues.

In a recent blog, Fordham Senior Visiting Fellow Robert Pondiscio argued that the report “deserves to be studied closely in every state and school district if we are serious about improving teacher job satisfaction and effectiveness and raising student achievement.” He’s spot on. Research indicates that working conditions have a strong influence over teachers’ employment decisions. Improving retention and student achievement means addressing day-to-day issues that teachers have identified as sources of frustration, burnout, and disillusionment.

That being said, it’s important to remember that Ohio is not Louisiana. There are aspects of teaching that are universal, but significant differences in state policy can mean different experiences for teachers. In fact, Ohio is already in the midst of tackling several of the problems highlighted by the workgroup.

With these caveats in mind, let’s examine how three sets of leaders—state policymakers, officials at Ohio’s Department of Education and Workforce (DEW), and district and school leaders—can or already are implementing the Louisiana workgroup’s recommendations.

State policymakers

Although state policymakers are far removed from the day-to-day work of schools, they play a crucial role in empowering teachers and ensuring a high-quality education for students. Fortunately for Ohio, several of the recommendations that fall within the purview of state policymakers are already in the works. One example is two closely related recommendations regarding student well-being. First, supporting student mental health challenges through trained professionals. And second, ceasing to “force” teachers to be mental health professionals.

During his first term, Governor DeWine established a first-of-its-kind initiative aimed at helping schools address the non-academic needs of students. Known as the student wellness and success (SWS) fund, it allocated hundreds of millions of dollars to schools to provide things like mental health services and mentorship programs. Although the current version of the fund is different from its predecessor courtesy of some legislative tinkering, public schools still receive funds intended to meet non-academic needs. They are required to spend at least 50 percent of their allotted dollars on physical- or mental-health-based services or a combination of the two. Going forward, lawmakers should ensure this funding remains available and closely monitor spending to ensure it’s being used to support students in effective ways.

The Department of Education and Workforce

As is the case with state policymakers, DEW has already made some progress. For example, the workgroup calls on state officials to “create a repository of high-quality, easy-to-access teacher resources” and “provide scheduling, pacing, and implementation guidance for core content areas.” Over the last several years, Ohio leaders have implemented several initiatives aimed at accomplishing these goals. INFOhio, for example, offers a digital and searchable library of materials that can be used for free by teachers, school staff, parents, and students. INFOhio also powers Open Space, Ohio’s digital platform for open access and open educational resources.^[1]

Unfortunately, it’s unclear how helpful teachers find these resources. And curriculum isn’t the only area where feedback from the Ohio field would go a long way. Professional learning, required training, and student behavior and discipline are all issues cited by the workgroup, and are areas where state leaders should gather Ohio-specific feedback before they make any changes. With this in mind, DEW should take a page out of Louisiana’s playbook and establish an Ohio-specific workgroup composed of teachers who represent various geographic regions and school types. Together, these teachers could offer feedback about efforts that are already underway (like the SWS fund) and pinpoint issues that leaders have yet to address.

District and school leaders

Politicians and state bureaucrats get a lot of flak for getting in the way of teachers who just want to teach. But it’s district and school leaders who are typically the ones with the most power to improve job satisfaction. In fact, many of the workgroup’s recommendations fall under the purview of local leaders, who could immediately implement these ideas if they so desired. Examples include:

• Tailor professional growth plans. This idea calls on schools to eschew “generic or irrelevant” growth plans and instead focus on tailoring them to teachers’ individual needs. Given that recently passed legislation allows Ohio school districts to develop and use their own frameworks for teacher evaluation (rather than the state framework), this is definitely something district administrators could accomplish.


• Ensure ample time for classroom preparation. This recommendation calls on schools to ensure that professional learning days at the beginning of the school year provide teachers with uninterrupted time to prepare their classrooms for the first day of school. Right now, the report notes, these days are filled with meetings that leave teachers with little time to prepare.


• Abolish antiquated lesson planning requirements. The report notes that most high-quality curricula already provide lesson plans for teachers. This eliminates the need for them to create their own and should, in turn, eliminate districts’ requirements.

***

Recruiting talented young people into the teaching profession is more important than ever. But it’s equally important to identify and address problems that could drive away the effective and experienced educators we already have. Louisiana deserves kudos for its efforts. Now it’s time for Ohio leaders—state policymakers, department officials, and district and school leaders—to step up to the plate.