The Education Gadfly

School reform is hard--as those working to improve Dayton's (and other urban centers') schools know all too well. By now, reformers know the challenges: high levels of poverty, children from broken homes, rapid student turnover, stubborn bureaucracies, unsettled leadership, financial challenges, and obdurate teacher unions.

Despite these obstacles, from 2002 to 2006, the Dayton Public Schools made academic progress. In four years, the district pulled itself out of Academic Emergency on the state's rating system to make the Continuous Improvement rating in 2006. Then the wheels fell off. In the past two years, the district's rating has dropped to Academic Watch. Dayton's charter-school performance is only marginally better (see here).

As a group long engaged in school reform efforts in Dayton, the Fordham Institute is deeply disappointed at the downturn, but as with a stumble by a loved one trying to shed an addiction problem, now is no time to give up. Now is the time for the Dayton Public Schools, its supporters, and community leaders to be steadfast--and courageous. We can learn from others and take inspiration from public schools that have successfully undergone what can be painful transformation. Three such examples surfaced in recent weeks. Each idea is, admittedly, too new to have yielded higher test scores or lower dropout rates--and none, alone, is capable of overpowering all the challenges urban schools face. Yet each idea is so obvious, so sensible, and so gutsy as to require any community struggling to improve student achievement to seriously pause and ask itself: "Why can't we do these, too?"

First, grade school performance and reward success. In New York City, Mayor Michael Bloomberg and schools Chancellor Joel Klein are (amid clangorous objections) assigning As through Fs to that vast system's 1,040 public schools, based, primarily, on the achievement gains made by students. The high performers are being rewarded with cash bonuses. The teachers' union is allowing this to happen with a big wink because the money goes to the school not to individual teachers, though the school may then distribute its dollars to staff members however it likes. Principals in high-achieving, low-income schools get salary bonuses of up to $25,000 each. Some 89 elementary and middle schools are sharing in this year's pot of $14 million. This is not big money in Gotham's multi-billion dollar education budget. But, to teachers in expensive New York City, the individual bonuses are not puny and have got to be appreciated. What a good idea--to grade schools as well as students and to reward educators achieving the best results (see here).

Second, give new freedoms to the best while coming down hard on the worst. Denver has a new school-grading scheme based on students' academic growth. Instead of letter grades, it labels schools from "distinguished" at the top to "accredited on probation" at the bottom. The 10 best schools (based on 2007-08 results) are enjoying cash bonuses, too, of up to $24,000 for principals and $12,000 for teachers. Just as important, the successful schools gain greater control over curricula and budgets and are less subject to the whims of the bureaucrats at district headquarters. It's a tough time, however, for the 35 schools at the bottom. They face big changes, such as being forced to adopt a mandatory curriculum, staff changes, and a lot of external expertise--or else they get closed. Five of the 35 are already shut (see here).

Third, outsource troubled schools to teams with strong track records. Los Angeles's big, 2,600-pupil Locke High School, named after an African-American writer, not the English philosopher, has a long history of violence, scandalously low achievement, proliferating dropouts, and mismanagement. The district has been incapable of setting it right so it has asked the "Green Dot" organization to run the school. Green Dot has an exemplary track record operating charter schools in the L.A. area. Its highly regarded leader, Steve Barr, now has enormous freedom to hire and fire principals, redeploy staff, and reorganize the school. He has already turned it into seven mini-schools. Green Dot also has the green light to reallocate resources, including a generous infusion of philanthropic dollars. Barr employs unionized teachers under a so-called "thin contract" that protects good teachers without handcuffing school leaders (see here). Dayton doesn't have a Green Dot-style school turnaround group. But with 76 percent of students attending a school (district or charter) in Academic Watch or Academic Emergency, now seems a propitious time to figure out how to launch such a group to assist troubled district and charter schools.

Dayton is not alone in its struggle to improve student achievement. Looking to others for example and inspiration makes sense and just might do it a world of good.

By Chester E. Finn, Jr. and Terry Ryan

Comment

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Capital Matters

Charter-school foes dealt swift kick in court

It took a year, but common sense prevailed Sept. 25 when a Montgomery County judge dismissed the latest legal shenanigan of charter-school foes in the Buckeye State (see here). In September 2007, then-state Attorney General Marc Dann sued to close three Dayton-area charters alleging that their poor academic performance and mismanagement put them out of compliance with the state's charitable trust laws (see here). He added a fourth case, against a Cincinnati charter, in January 2008.

In the ruling involving the New Choices Community School in Dayton, Common Pleas Judge Michael Tucker disagreed: "This court concludes… that New Choices [charter school] is a political subdivision. Given this conclusion, there is simply no charitable trust role for the Attorney General either by statute or at common law."

The New Choices decision gives hope of a favorable outcome in the remaining two suits since they are also based on the same novel interpretation of Ohio law. Cases remain against Moraine Community School in Montgomery County (see here) and the Harmony Community School in Cincinnati, in Hamilton County (see here). Dann originally filed against four charters, but the fourth school, the Colin Powell Leadership Academy, in Dayton, closed.

As The Gadfly has noted, Dann's lawsuits were never about rescuing kids from bad schools (see here). They were a political maneuver, pure and simple. The Ohio Education Association (OEA), in return for Dann's cooperation in filing the suits, agreed to drop its own flawed legal action against the state for allegedly failing to monitor charter schools properly. E-mails later revealed that Dann's legal strategy was the brainstorm of his cronies at the OEA (see here). With the ruling and the fact that Dann resigned from office amid scandal last spring, the union is sure to be rethinking that decision (see here).

We're no apologists for lousy public schools (district or charter), of which Ohio has too many--especially in the urban centers. Last school year, 51 percent of students in Ohio's eight biggest cities attended a school rated D or F by the state (see here). Fordham, in conjunction with the National Alliance for Public Charter Schools and the National Association of Charter School Authorizers, laid out recommendations in 2006 for addressing underperforming charter schools (see here). And just last month we called on Ohio to be aggressive in closing bad charter schools (see here). We've even provided ideas for how to do this in a way that provides due process, is transparent, and will hold up in court.

The state has until October 27 to appeal Judge Tucker's decision in the New Choices case. It's possible a decision to appeal, or not, won't be made until after the Hamilton County case is decided in a ruling expected later this month. An appeal remains a real possibility since Attorney General Nancy Rogers, appointed after Dann's resignation, decided to press on with the cases and the ongoing expense to state taxpayers.

Ohio's scarce resources shouldn't be spent on law firms and courtrooms, but in classrooms. The legal standing of charters and choice has been consistently supported by both the state and federal courts. Instead of continuing to fight against the mere existence of charter schools, traditional school districts and their allies in the General Assembly and statewide office should be seeking ways to work with, learn from, and support the good ones. There are simply too many children in Ohio attending schools that are not preparing them for success and any school--charter or district--that delivers results should be supported, while those that don't--charter or district--should be put on notice.

By Emmy L. Partin

Comment

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

News & Analysis

Adequate yearly progress, or AYP, in brief

Before the local report cards for Ohio public schools had even been released last summer, districts were crying foul over one particular component, AYP (adequate yearly progress). Simply put, schools must meet annual AYP targets in reading and math proficiency and test participation, graduation rate, and attendance rate for all students and for subgroups of students (see more here). AYP targets increase each year in order to move schools toward the federal No Child Left Behind goal of all children being proficient by 2014. Districts or schools that miss AYP for three consecutive years can be rated no higher than Continuous Improvement, or a C, by the state.

Dublin City Schools feared it would become the latest Columbus suburb to see its rating fall because of AYP and went to the media in July to warn parents and residents that, despite having met 30 of 30 state report card indicators, the district's overall designation might be less than perfect (see here). In the end, however, Dublin's worries--and those of other districts around the state--were for naught. Dublin met its overall AYP targets and was rated Excellent with Distinction--the highest possible rating (see here). So, what happened? The AYP growth model kicked in this year.

Ohio schools previously had three ways to meet AYP: 1) meeting current year achievement targets with current year results, 2) meeting current year targets by combining this year's and last year's results, or 3) meeting "safe harbor" provisions (making a 10 percent or larger reduction in the number of non-proficient students and meeting graduation and attendance goals). This year, Ohio added a fourth way to meet AYP: the growth model. With the growth model, a non-proficient student who is on a path to be proficient within two years counts as proficient during the current year when it comes to AYP. The growth model is based on data from the Ohio Achievement Tests (grades 3 through 8) and so does not apply to traditional high schools that serve grades 9 through 12.

Last year, 30 percent of Ohio school districts met AYP. This year, 51 percent did so. The number of individual buildings meeting AYP rose slightly from 62 percent to 64 percent. In a presentation to the State Board of Education last month, Matt Cohen, executive director of the office of policy and accountability at the Ohio Department of Education, explained that the growth model helped all types of districts and schools across Ohio meet AYP. With the growth model, urban districts saw the biggest jump in the percentage of their subgroups meeting AYP but more suburban districts were able to meet overall AYP.

Ohio is one of several states approved by the federal education department to adopt an AYP growth model (see here). The growth model plans vary from state to state, and early-adopter states saw similar jumps in the number of districts meeting AYP the first year of using the growth model.

By Emmy L. Partin

Comment

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Reviews

Keynote Address by Sir Michael Barber
The Aspen Institute's National Education Summit: An Urgent Call
Washington, D.C.
September 15, 2008

British education consultant (and long-time student and friend of the United States) Sir Michael Barber believes too many Americans still aren't worried enough about the dire state of education in America.

In a recent speech to The Aspen Institute in Washington, D.C., Barber, former chief policy advisor to Prime Minister Tony Blair (see here), emphasized this lack of anxiety and that it needs to end. He drew on his work in Britain and knowledge of other countries' education systems in making several points about American schooling. His observations are highly relevant to Ohio and will resonate with those who have read and appreciated the McKinsey-Achieve report shared with the state's leaders in late 2006. Barber served as the lead author of that report (see here).

Progress is difficult in America as compared to other countries, Barber said, because of our highly decentralized system of government: separated powers between the three federal branches as well as between federal, state, and local levels of government. Barber is hopeful, however, because more Americans are starting to realize that the nation's education systems are failing too many children and are in need of serious reform. In stating something fewer and fewer Americans will say themselves, he is hopeful because of the focus on the achievement gap generated by the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) act. Barber says NCLB, while not perfect (and he notes no law of this kind in any society is) has at least set a high floor for educational performance across the country. A floor, by the way, which gets lower and lower with each year in far too many states as people complain that NCLB expectations are unfair to school districts, schools, teachers, and students and demand they be watered-down further.

What Barber concludes from his survey of American education is that we face one of two pathways going forward. One path would be "comfortable, introverted, input-focused, evidence-light" and continues what we have been doing for much of the past 30 years as our international rating in education falls further and further behind. The other pathway of available to us would be "demanding, outward looking, results-focused, evidence-informed." To follow the second pathway, Ohio needs to take notes on Barber's points and start implementing some of the excellent recommendations shared by McKinsey-Achieve in 2006. Only then will the Buckeye State have a shot at being world-class when it comes to educating our children.

Gov. Strickland and other Ohio policy makers should take heed of this advice as it is some of the best in the world and comes from a political liberal who actually ran one of England's largest teacher unions.

By Suzannah Herrmann and Terry Ryan

Comment

The Seven Outs: Strategic Planning Made Easy for Charter Schools
Brian L. Carpenter
National Charter Schools Institute
2008

The book begins, "Except for global warming, healing your inner child, and achieving financial success in life, I doubt few other topics have been as exhaustively written about as organizational strategic planning." Is the author unfamiliar with love, war, religion, and Paris Hilton? But things improve a bit when author Brian Carpenter spins a tale about fictional Breezy Palms Charter School, the board of which is composed of regular, down-to-earth people with good intentions but no strategic plan. Because its students are not achieving at high academic levels, Breezy Palms almost has its charter revoked. The authorizer decrees that the school may stay open, but only if its board presents a strategic plan that prescribes how the school will improve.

Enter The Seven Outs: figure out, find out, scope out, write out, carry out, measure out, and shout out. By constructing its strategic plan according to The Outs' guidance, the school stays open. The book's second half delves into The Seven Outs and describes how these can be applied to schools. While some of the lessons are basic common sense--preparing for board meetings, planning your weekly/month schedule--we know that lots of charter boards have little idea what they're doing, and so, simple instructions, as this book offers, can be helpful. Value can be found in The Seven Outs for those who have an interest in charter-school governance. The book can be ordered here.

A version of this review previously appeared in the national Education Gadfly (see here).

Comment

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Gadfly Readers Write...

Carl Wick, a member of the Ohio State Board of Education, took issue with a Sept. 24 Capital Matters piece concerning state education budget cuts.

As chair of the Ohio Board of Education's budget committee I must dispute your characterization of the Board's 2010-2011 budget proposal. You stated, "It's hard to imagine other state agencies, whose directors are appointed by the governor, publicly promoting such pie-in-the-sky spending requests in the face of the state's current economic constraints and despite the governor's call for reduced spending."

We submitted three versions of the 2010-2011 budget. They are based on different state revenue scenarios. Two of the budgets, the 95 percent and 90 percent versions, were requested by both the governor and OBM (Office of Budget and Management). Both deal with two scenarios of decreased state revenue.

The third budget, called a flat-plus budget, calls for an increase of 2.2 percent in 2010 and 5.7 percent in 2011. This budget was crafted in accordance with our legislative mandate of identifying the budget necessary to adequately fund the state's portion of public education dollars.

You criticize the State Board for recommending any increase. The truth is that we originally crafted a completely flat budget with virtually no increase. What happened?

The Ohio Department of Taxation notified us that property values across the state will fall significantly. Lower property tax valuations have a major effect on the school funding formula. As valuations are reduced, the state must assume a larger share of school funding. Falling property values are largely a consequence of the recent housing crisis, which includes a high number of home foreclosures in Ohio. After recalculating the original flat-budget proposal to include the impact of falling property tax revenue on the foundation, the flat budget had to be adjusted. This resulted in a 2.2 percent and 5.7 percent budget increase.

There was also a small increase recommended that targeted all-day kindergarten funding and categorical funding such as LEP, special education preschool, and gifted education. The changes in gifted and LEP reflect the school funding subcommittee's work to move these categories to weighted per pupil funding and move gifted away from unit funding and separate LEP from poverty based assistance. Even the majority of increase in categorical funding was due to changes in foundation funding due to changes in valuation, not recommended spending increases.

You also characterized that our flat-plus budget was crafted apart from what the governor requested. This is not true. We had discussions with the governor's office throughout our budget effort. They knew and supported our submission of three budget versions. We were even thanked for our comprehensive approach to the budget recommendations.

If you have a comment for The Ohio Gadfly, e-mail it to Gadfly Editor Mike Lafferty at [email protected]. Mail may be edited for length and clarity.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Announcement

Join us: David Whitman bringing Sweating the Small Stuff to Dayton

The Thomas B. Fordham Institute and University of Dayton, School of Education and Allied Professions are hosting a reception and discussion of the new book Sweating the Small Stuff (see here) by former U.S. News and World Report senior writer David Whitman. Join us Wednesday, October 22, at 5 PM at Dayton Early College Academy to hear remarks from Mr. Whitman and participate in a discussion moderated by Scott Elliott of the Dayton Daily News. This event is free and open to the public. For more details, contact Emmy Partin.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

About Us

The Ohio Education Gadfly is published bi-weekly (ordinarily on Wednesdays, with occasional breaks, and in special editions) by the Thomas B. Fordham Institute. Have something to say? Email the editor at [email protected]. Would you like to be spared from the Gadfly? Email [email protected] with "unsubscribe gadfly" in the text of your message. You are welcome to forward the Gadfly to others, and from our website you can even email individual articles. If you have been forwarded a copy of Gadfly and would like to subscribe, you may email [email protected] with "subscribe gadfly" in the text of the message. To read archived issues, go to our website and click on the Ohio Education Gadfly link. Aching for still more education news and analysis? Check out the original Education Gadfly.

Nationally and in Ohio, the Thomas B. Fordham Institute, along with its sister organization the Thomas B. Fordham Foundation, strives to close America's vexing achievement gaps by raising standards, strengthening accountability, and expanding high-quality education options for parents and families. As a charter-school sponsor in Ohio, the Foundation joins with schools to affirm a relentless commitment to high expectations for all children, accountability for academic results, and transparency and organizational integrity, while freeing the schools to operate with minimal red tape. The Foundation and Institute are neither connected with nor sponsored by Fordham University.