A firestorm has erupted in Ohio on a proposed state board of education administrative rule. The headline on Diane Ravitch’s blog cries, “Ohio Alert! State Board of Education Will Vote on Whether to Eliminate Arts, P.E., Librarians, Nurses at Elementary Schools.” The headline, though sensational, is flat wrong and misleading.
Let’s set the facts straight. The Ohio state board of education is proposing to eliminate the staffing-ratio mandates for non-classroom-teaching staff. (These include counselors, gym teachers, elementary art and music teachers, etc.) The board, then, is not pronouncing a death-sentence on music or art. Local schools may hire as many non-classroom-teaching personnel as they see fit. Rather the proposal aims to give districts more flexibility over how they staff their schools.
Here is the rule in question, as presently written [OAC 3301-35-05 (A)(4)].
A minimum of five full-time equivalent educational service personnel shall be employed district-wide for each one thousand students in the regular student population as defined in section 3317.023 of the Revised Code. Educational service personnel shall be assigned to at least five of the eight following areas: counselor, library media specialist, school nurse, visiting teacher, social worker and elementary art, music and physical education.
In other words, the current regulation requires districts to hire at least five employees per 1,000 students in the eight areas defined under the rule. But this is a rigid human-resource policy, leaving schools with less flexibility in how it delivers educational services. For instance, what if a district had a fantastic partnership with its local library, allowing it to hire fewer media specialists? What if a district wanted to prioritize its resources on exceptional instruction in core subject areas, while allowing community organizations to provide athletic or performing-arts programs? What if a district had willing and able parent volunteers who could teach music during school hours?
Unfortunately, the staffing ratios prescribed in the current rule assume that every district in Ohio has the same needs and wants. While holistic services, including school counselors, nurses, etc., may be sorely needed in some schools, other schools might have different needs. That is why district and school leaders, with parent and taxpayer input, should decide what programs are given budgetary (and staffing) priority. Local communities, not the state board, are in the best position to determine the scope of the services provided by their public schools. Rigid staffing ratios are overly prescriptive and constrain local decision making.
Rightly so, the state board of education is proposing to do away with this staffing-ratio mandate.[1] The board is expected to vote on the language in December. Hopefully, the board won’t allow special-interest groups—and out-of-state bloggers—to drive the debate. Rather, the state board would do well to give districts flexibility in their program and personnel strategies—and not dictate them by decree.
[1] See page 116 in the November Board Book for the amendment; cf. with page 99 for the definition of “educational service personnel.”
