Ohio has been handed a bucket of lemons when it comes to the economy and its impact on the state’s finances. But, state leaders have the opportunity to make lemonade if they work together around education in the coming weeks… Read the full post here.
Ohio has been handed a bucket of lemons when it comes to the economy and its impact on the state’s finances. But, state leaders have the opportunity to make lemonade if they work together around education in the coming weeks… Read the full post here.
Top-notch academic standards will fail without good teachers, academically oriented administrators, and citizens who hold education dear, according to experts who headlined a conference on world-class academic standards in Columbus last week (see video of the conference here).
That last one may be particularly troubling. “We are so busy worrying about the adult comfort level of House Bill 1 [which spells out the state’s new, revamped education program], we’ve got to worry about what this means to kids,” State Superintendent Deborah Delisle told conference attendees. “I have yet to see a sense of urgency across the state about the importance of education.’’
The implication: Better testing, more challenging career- and college-oriented academic standards, better teacher quality and training, and even more money may, in the end, be inadequate if Ohioans don’t care enough about the education of their children.
The conference, “World-Class Academic Standards for Ohio,” was sponsored by the Thomas B. Fordham Institute, the Ohio Grantmakers Forum, KidsOhio.org, the Ohio Business Alliance for Higher Education and the Economy, Ohio Education Matters, and the Ohio Association for Public Charter Schools, with support from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.
The conference was aimed, in part, at helping the Ohio State Board of Education complete revisions to its K-12 education standards by June 2010. Clearly the state must improve dramatically on its current standards according to panelists, and it appears from recent comments that both the state board and the state superintendent are committed to the task (see here).
“The Ohio Core [the coursework required for graduation in Ohio] is a good intermediate step toward world-class standards,” Michael Cohen, president of Achieve, Inc., told the conference. The state’s new standards must, at a minimum, align school curricula 1) with the needs of employers looking for productive workers, and 2) with the academic needs of colleges tired of wasting their time and student dollars teaching first-year students remedial math, science, and reading.
But that’s just the minimum. The higher the state sets its bar, the better for all Ohio students, said David Driscoll, former Massachusetts education commissioner and Fordham board member. “I suggest you set high standards because you will get that many more students improving,” he said. After revamping standards, pushing teachers to higher achievement, transforming principals into educational leaders in their schools, and spending an extra $2 billion on education, Massachusetts vaulted from so-so to the top tier on national and international achievement tests.
What the state school board, however, ought not to do is use the new standards to “order” improvement. “We too often tell (school) districts what to do on a daily basis,” said Gene Wilhoit, executive director of the Council of Chief State School Officers. Once school districts understand what the standards expect, they should be given freedom to get the results, he said.
The state’s plan to vastly expand the number of Ohioans attending college could be in trouble if high school graduates are not actually college ready, said Stan Jones, former Indiana commissioner for higher education. That was Indiana’s experience a few years ago when the state initiated a high-school-to-college push similar to one underway now in Ohio. “The colleges found the high school graduates needed remediation,” he said. Adopting high standards isn’t enough. The state needs standards to define what a graduate needs to know, he said, and it needs assessment testing to ensure that graduates actually know it.
Toward that end, Ohio Board of Regents Chancellor Eric Fingerhut said it is vital for Ohio’s teacher education programs to deliver better teachers. “We need to recruit the best possible teachers,” he said. “Ohio schools have an obligation to produce graduates who can deliver in the classroom.”
A bill sponsored by State Senator Gary Cates (R- Butler County) would lessen the blow to otherwise high-performing districts that fail to make adequate academic progress with a few subgroups of students. Currently, a district that fails to achieve federally mandated “adequate yearly progress” (AYP) for three consecutive years can be rated no higher than Continuous Improvement (or “C”) by the state. In August, Kettering City Schools saw its overall performance improve (the district met 29 of the state’s 30 academic performance indicators last year, up from 28 the year before and 26 two years ago) but was rated Continuous Improvement because it failed to make AYP with English language learners and special education students. Without the AYP provision, Kettering would have ranked four categories higher at Excellent with Distinction, the state’s highest rating (see here). Lebanon City Schools experienced a similar drop in its rating.
Senate Bill 167 specifies that a district’s rating could only be negatively impacted by AYP if the district missed AYP for the same two subgroups of students for three consecutive years, and in that case the district’s rating would only drop one level, not directly to Continuous Improvement (see here). Cates introduced the bill in response to concerns from officials in Kettering, Lebanon, and other communities that such a swift drop in a district’s rating could have a negative impact on the community beyond the schoolhouse walls.
“Businesses, taxpayers, government leaders and parents all put a tremendous emphasis on school district ratings. Many companies look at school ratings when deciding to locate in a particular community. Taxpayers may use performance ratings to determine whether they will vote yes or no an important levy. And, parents use rankings to evaluate the quality of their child’s education and the effectiveness of local teachers and administrators,” explained Cates. “While Ohio’s schools should make every effort to ensure all kids have the opportunity to succeed in the classroom, traditionally high-performing districts should not see their ratings plunge, and their reputation tarnished, because of the performance of a small subgroup of students.”
The bill also addresses the other end of the Continuous Improvement spectrum, those otherwise low-performing districts that see their rating bumped up to a “C” simply for making AYP. Marion City Schools met none of the state’s 30 academic performance indicators this year, but was rated Continuous Improvement due to the AYP provision; meanwhile, Youngstown City Schools met two indicators but saw a rating of Academic Emergency. Under Cates’ proposal, a district would need to make AYP and meet at least 10 indicators to earn the “C” rating. Eighteen districts, including Akron, Cincinnati, Columbus, and Toledo, could lose their Continuous Improvement status if the proposed changes are enacted.
A companion bill is still being packaged in the House and there is hope for bipartisan support for the measure.
Ohio has been handed a bucket of lemons when it comes to the economy and its impact on the state’s finances. But, state leaders have the opportunity to make lemonade if they work together around education in the coming weeks… Read the full post here.
