School funding in Ohio: Are poor districts getting a fair share?
The first two blog posts in my series about school funding lo
The first two blog posts in my series about school funding lo
In late June, Representatives Robert Cupp and John Patterson introduced legislation that would overhaul the state’s school funding system.
In the coming weeks, I’ll be working on a blog series that digs into Ohio’s school funding system.
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 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.
For the past few years, Ohio policymakers, educators, and advocates have been paying close attention to a “looming crisis” in educational attainment.
Much of the Capitol Square chatter revolves around the school funding plan put forward last month by Representatives Robert Cupp and John Patterson.
NOTE: The Finance Subcommittee on Primary and Secondary Education of the Ohio House of Representatives today heard testimony on HB 166, the state’s biennial budget bill.
Last week, Ohio Representatives Robert Cupp and John Patterson unveiled their much-anticipated school funding plan.
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 belie
"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts." -- Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan. That sentiment has never been more profound and applicable than it is today.
In Ohio and across the nation, policymakers are contemplating sizeable increases to public outlays for early childhood programs, including ex
Education will always be one of Ohio’s highest priorities. It bonds communities together, provides the foundation for the state’s long-term economic success, and—most importantly—helps students across the state to realize their potential and pursue their dreams.
By Jennifer O’Neal Schiess, Max Marchitello, and Juliet Squire
The genesis of vouchers in Ohio stretches back to 1995 and the Cleveland Scholarship and Tutoring program. In 2006, vouchers expanded statewide via the Educational Choice Scholarship (or EdChoice), which aims to assist students assigned to a low-rated public school.
This guidebook offers simple and easy-to-use vital statistics about Ohio’s schools and the students they serve. The facts and figures contained within this report offer an overview of who Ohio’s students are; where they go to school; how they perform on national and state exams; and how many pursue post-secondary education.
Shortly after Ohio lawmakers enacted a new voucher program in 2005, the state budget office wrote in its fiscal analysis, “The Educational Choice Scholarships are not only intended to offer another route for student success, but also to impel the administration and teaching staff of a failing school building to improve upon their students’ academic performance.” Today, the
Roughly 30,000 kids in Ohio take advantage of a publicly funded voucher (or “scholarship”).
The Reynoldsburg City School District, just east of Columbus, is far down the “portfolio management” path – further than probably any suburban school district of its size. This feature article discusses portfolio management and takes readers behind the scenes in Reynoldsburg.
Dr. Paul Hill evaluates Governor John Kasich's education budget proposal.
To what extent have Ohio's leaders met the challenges and opportunities before them in K-12 education? What needs to happen next?
Statewide survey of Ohio school district superintendents (and other education leaders) on the most critical issues facing K-12 education in the Buckeye State, including budgets, school effectiveness, and troublesome laws.
In this policy brief, Fordham gives its advice to Governor-elect Kasich and the incoming leaders of the Ohio House and Senate as it relates to the future of K-12 education policy in the Buckeye State.
Ohio Governor Ted Strickland's education plan calls for modernizing Ohio's K-12 education system, including the state's school-funding system, but the plan's so-called "evidence-based" approach would actually scuttle any modernizing efforts, argues this study issued by the Thomas B. Fordham Institute.
As Gov. Ted Strickland concludes his 12-city "Conversation on Education" tour to gather ideas for reforming public education in Ohio, the Thomas B. Fordham Institute has put forth a report of five recommendations designed to keep improvements in the Buckeye State's public schools on track toward three critical goals: 1) maximizing the talents of every child; 2) producing graduates as good as any in the world; and 3) closing the persistent academic gaps that continue between rich and poor, and black and white and brown.
Despite its long history and prodigious size, all is not well with Ohio's teacher pension system. In this Fordham Institute report, nationally renowned economists Robert Costrell and Mike Podgursky illuminate some of the serious challenges facing STRS.
At the request of Ohio's top government and education leaders, the Thomas B. Fordham Institute, National Association of Charter School Authorizers, and National Alliance for Public Charter Schools have issued a report seeking to strengthen the state's charter school program. Among its 17 recommendations are calls for closing low-performing charter schools while also helping more high-performance schools to open and succeed in Ohio.
This report, prepared for the Thomas B. Fordham Institute by Public Impact, compares charter school funding and district school funding. It finds that charter schools are under-funded compared to their district counterparts, even after accounting for differences in students and grade levels. These findings should be taken seriously by those who argue that charter schools drain funds from district schools.