The growth of private school choice programs in Ohio has clearly struck a nerve with the education bureaucracy. After rapid expansion in the number of schools slated to be deemed “low-performing” in 2020–21, which ballooned the number of students eligible for vouchers, choice opponents pushed for massive changes in Ohio’s EdChoice program.
It’s no secret that Covid-19 has had a massive impact on schools.
Editor’s Note: 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.
As schools across Ohio stagger toward the finish line of a bizarre and difficult school year, educators, parents, and state and local leaders are beginning to turn their attention toward the uncertainties of the future.
Now in its fourth edition and fully updated for 2020, Ohio Education by the Numbers Education is a look at vital statistics about Ohio’s schools and the students they serve. We intend it to be a readily accessible resource that keeps education stats—with cites to original sources—at your fingertips.
The vast majority of voucher program studies have shown positive competitive effects, meaning that students who remain in public schools benefit as their schools are exposed to competition from private-school-choice programs.
“Education is not one-size-fits-all” is a common phrase heard in today’s education debates. There’s a good bit of truth to the mantra. Every child is unique in his or her own way, and policies and practices should reflect those differences. To its credit, Ohio acknowledges the importance of tailoring education to the needs of individual students.
The raucous debate over school choice took yet another turn last week as the Ohio House approved an amendment that would overhaul the EdChoice program.
Politics is sometimes called the “art of compromise.” Under tremendous pressure from school systems, Ohio legislators for the last few weeks have sought to find a compromise on EdChoice—Ohio’s largest voucher program—that addresses district concerns ab
High-quality academic offerings. Distance from home. Campus culture. Student safety and supports. Access to the arts, sports, and cultural opportunities. Price tag.
Sorry we have to tease out the updates on the voucher groucher saga a bit today. That’s the trouble with not posting daily (and don’t you dare suggest doing that either!).
The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 marked a massive federal investment in our schools, with more than $100 billion to shore up school systems in the face of the Great Recession. Along with that largesse came two grant programs meant to encourage reform with all of those resources: Race to the Top and School Improvement Grants (SIGs).
This is the last edition of Gadfly Bites for 2019. Thank you for reading and for subscribing. We’ll be back on January 2 with a 2019 wrap up; back to regular service for 2020 on January 3. Happy New Year to all!
School districts, let’s face it, are the giants in K–12 education. Because states traditionally awarded districts “territorial exclusive franchises”—a gentle way of saying monopolies—they enroll the vast majority of Ohio students.
NOTE: 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.
Note: This is the seventh in a series of blog posts on school funding in Ohio; for the previous
In the United States, there are more than 34,500 private schools. Tuition-charging high schools run the gamut from small religious institutions that serve dual academic and social purposes, to larger schools centered around a certain pedagogy, to elite academies that draw highly-motivated students from far and wide.
Since 2005, Ohio’s Educational Choice Scholarship Program, or EdChoice, has allowed tens of thousands of students to attend private schools via a state-funded scholarship in the form of a voucher.
Note: This is the fourth in a series of posts on school funding in Ohio.
The first two blog posts in my series about school funding lo
About a month ago, Governor DeWine signed Ohio’s general operating budget into law.
In late June, Representatives Robert Cupp and John Patterson introduced legislation that would overhaul the state’s school funding system.
As with most education issues, the research on private school choice is a mixed bag. Some studies indicate positive effects, while others suggest neutral or negative effects. What the vast majority of studies have in common is a focus on short-term outcomes—mostly student test scores.
In the coming weeks, I’ll be working on a blog series that digs into Ohio’s school funding system.
For prosperous families, the universe of K–12 school options is almost limitless. But the possibilities for poor and working-class families are far fewer, especially when it comes to private schools.
Covering a gamut of issues and spanning thousands of pages, the state budget legislation is apt to contain at least a few harebrained policy ideas.
This week, the Ohio Senate introduced its proposals for the biennial state budget, House Bill 166. The Senate retained important features of the executive and House versions of the budget, including substantial school funding increases to enhance student wellness.
All families deserve the opportunity to choose schools, whether public or private, that meet their needs and wants. To its credit, Ohio has been a trailblazing state when it comes to supporting private-school choice via state-funded scholarships, a.k.a.
This spring’s school funding debates have revolved around the needs of poor students. Governor Mike DeWine has proposed a significant bump in state spending targeted at low-income students.
Editor’s Note: Back in September 2018, awaiting the election of our next governor, we at the Fordham Institute began developing a set of policy proposals that we believe can lead to increased achievement and greater opportunities for Ohio students. This is one of those policy proposals.
