The Education Gadfly

Next week the state will release its school-district report cards--although districts are leaking their data already (see here), detailing how well Ohio's public schools are meeting academic standards, including how many high-school students passed the Ohio Graduation Test (OGT) last year. Unfortunately for college-bound students, passing the OGT and getting a high-school diploma are not indicators of college readiness. In fact, more and more evidence shows that many of our state's high-school graduates are neither college-ready nor work-ready. Perhaps we should print those diplomas on sheepskin after all--at least grads could use them as hand warmers while they wait in the unemployment line.

In its annual college-readiness report released last week, testing giant ACT said that only 26 percent of the members of the Ohio graduating class of 2008 who took the ACT scored well enough to be considered ready for college-level coursework (see here). The ACT national readiness average is 22 percent, although this is hardly cause for Buckeye breast beating. Consider the ACT report from the other end--the bitter end. An incredible 74 percent of Ohio high-school graduates taking the ACT are not ready for college. And there's more. The Ohio Board of Regents has found that far too many high-school graduates need remedial coursework when they do arrive at college. According to the Regents, in autumn 2006--the last year for which data are available--39 percent of Ohio students entering an Ohio public college needed a remedial math or English course (see here).

If they're not ready for college, it's little wonder that students taking remedial courses are far less likely than their better-prepared peers to graduate. For students entering Ohio colleges as freshmen in 1998, the six-year bachelor's degree completion rate was 15 percent for remedial students vs. 47 percent for non-remedial students (see here).

Lack-of-readiness is pervasive and does not just lie with urban districts or poor communities. From 2002 to 2006, for Ohio graduates attending an Ohio public college, there were only five (of 614) school districts in which 15 percent or fewer graduates needed remedial work, according to the Regents' data.

Teachers, administrators, and lawmakers ought to be embarrassed and taxpayers ought to be asking what's going on. In the past decade, Ohio has instituted academic standards in English language arts, math, science, social studies, technology, and fine arts. The state administers 18 annual tests in grades three through eight in addition to the OGT. This year, roughly 40 percent of the state's budget was spent on K-12 education. We spend almost $17 billion annually on public education, and we've seen per-pupil expenditures, using inflation-adjusted dollars, rise 25 percent in 10 years (from $7,500 to about $10,000) (see here). So why aren't Ohio's students leaving high school ready for college?

Perhaps it's an unintended consequence of the state's accountability system. Ohio's schools may have beefed up instruction and expectations in tested grades and subjects at the expense of fully preparing students for life after high school. After all, if we only require our schools to get youngsters to a 10th-grade level of proficiency by graduation, it's hard to fault them when that's exactly what they do.

It's also possible that remediation rates are skewed because more students are going to college than probably ought to. A college degree is important, but college isn't for everyone. Ohio's aim to enroll 230,000 more college students by 2017 (see here) may not only be overly ambitious but little more than a pipe-dream based on current trends.

To better equip our students for college, and frankly college readiness and work readiness are the same basic standard, requires a major shift in attitude. All students need to graduate from high school college-ready, whether or not they opt to go on to higher education. Toward that end, Ohio has already taken one big step in the right direction. Starting with the graduating class of 2014--this year's seventh graders--students will be required to complete the Ohio Core Curriculum that includes, among other things: four units of English; three units of math, including Algebra II; three units of lab-based science, including biology and physics or chemistry; and three units of social studies. Admission to the main campus of most state public universities will hinge on completing this coursework. Those students who don't will have to complete classes at a community college or a branch campus before they can attend a main campus.

There are other ideas worth considering. Make the OGT more rigorous and reflect what a 12th grader, not a 10th grader, needs to know. Or maybe Ohio should take seriously the 2007 McKinsey/Achieve report that recommended supplanting the Ohio Graduation Test with end-of-course exams in the Ohio Core subjects (see here). Ohio is taking tentative steps in this direction as one of 14 states administering a common Algebra II end-of-course exam beginning this year. Unfortunately, participation by schools is optional (see here). Maybe, like in Kentucky, the state should administer the ACT to all high school students to gauge college readiness. Or the state could use money as a carrot and base a district's funding, in part, on the college-remediation rates or ACT/SAT scores of its graduates.

What would have the greatest impact, though, is ensuring high-quality, effective teaching in every Ohio classroom. This, of course, is a ubiquitous solution that no one has quite figured out, but we can't let that be an excuse to stop trying.

By Mike Lafferty and Emmy L. Partin

Comment

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

Capital Matters

Commission: We are all responsible for the education of our children

The Public-Private Collaborative Commission delivered this week its report, Supporting Student Success: A New Learning Day in Ohio (see here). Led by Nationwide CEO Jerry Jurgensen and Columbus City Schools Superintendent Gene Harris, the commission recommended how to prepare Ohio's students, families, schools, and communities to meet the raised expectations of the Ohio Core curriculum. The commission's advice: it takes a village and all residents must be involved.

The commission calls for moving responsibility for public education out of schools and into the community. "In our vision, accountability for learning and student success will no longer be fixed only on schools; rather responsibility for accelerating every student's learning will be shared by the community," according to the report.

The commission's call echoes the position of the national initiative "Broader, Bolder Approach to Education" (see here). The ideas of that group have now apparently become the ideas of the commission in Ohio. These ideas are not new to America or to the Buckeye State. Fordham board member Chester E. Finn, Jr. debated fellow Fordham board member Diane Ravitch and the president of the American Federation of Teachers, Randi Weingarten, (see here) on these very issues in recent weeks. Some of what was said is relevant here. According to Finn, the pleas of the "broader, bolder" group downplay "basic academic skills and cognitive growth" and "learning that occurs in formal school settings during the years from kindergarten through high school."

The commission, not surprisingly, envisions an Ohio where out-of-school community-based learning opportunities (think internships, after-school care, and summer programs) are integrated with what is happening in the classroom, where social services connect to children through the school system, and where the transition of services from birth through post-secondary education is seamless. This vision is being pushed by heavy hitters nationally and now it has become the agenda of leaders in Ohio, including the state's superintendent of public instruction and higher education chancellor, the superintendent of the state's largest school district, and the head of one of the state's biggest and most successful companies.

Is this the right agenda for Ohio? Not if it comes at the expense of the policy goal of 'academic excellence' for all children. Yesterday's push for achievement hasn't yet produced the learning gains Ohio needs. But based on recent student achievement gains it may be starting to do so (see here). There is even evidence that the achievement gaps that have plagued this state are starting to close. As noted by Finn in his debate with Ravitch and Weingarten, "The surest way to curb tomorrow's gains is to change the policy focus and ease the pressure." Yet, this is exactly the direction Ohio seems intent on going, and it is a direction taken without much evidence to support it.

By Emmy L. Partin and Terry Ryan

Comment

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

News & Analysis

Autism scholarship program hits 1,000-student milestone

More than 1,000 preschool and K-12 students with Autism are now using an Ohio state-sponsored scholarship program that provides an educational option for parents dissatisfied with the services their child is receiving in a traditional public school.

The Autism Scholarship Program--worth up to $20,000 per student per year--was created by the Ohio General Assembly in 2003. It allows parents to enroll their child with Autism in private-education programs focusing on the social and academic needs of the students, particularly critical, early intervention therapies.

The Autism Scholarship has made a huge difference for Lori Walter's 11-year-old daughter, Chenedi. "Honestly, I don't know where she would be without this scholarship," said Walter, of Elyria. "Because of the scholarship, we have seen a 90- percent turnaround in her behaviors, without medication. For the first time, we believe that she will eventually be able to live on her own and we couldn't be happier."

Rep. Jon Peterson (R-Delaware), who sponsored the legislation creating the scholarships, said this 1,000-scholarship milestone (see chart below) confirms the importance of alternative-education programs. Peterson is also sponsoring legislation expanding the scholarship option to all students with learning disabilities or other special needs. The Senate version of the bill, S.B. 57, has been recommended by the House Education Committee and is awaiting a vote by the full House. But the bill is controversial. Gov. Strickland has promised to veto it in its current form, although supporters are urging a change of heart and an evaluation of the prospective program.

The scholarship's continued growth comes at a time when the governor is traveling the state to hear feedback from Ohioans in his "Conversations on Education" meetings. One of the governor's primary talking points has been the individualization of education. He might consider what this scholarship program has achieved and seriously consider whether the Autism Scholarship and proposed Special Needs Scholarship may offer the personalization and innovation necessary to be an integral part of what Ohio education needs to succeed in the 21st century.

There is no limit on the number of students with Autism who can participate in the program. A list of participating private providers is available here.

By Chad Aldis, School Choice Ohio

Comment

Writing skills lagging for young STEM kids

Writing is the most difficult challenge for students participating in a two-year, pilot, after-school science program being conducted in nine schools in central and north-central Ohio.

According to an interim report, not one teacher in the Young Buckeye STEM Scholars Program said writing went well last year. Overall, activities for the 227 students in the program, fairly evenly divided between boys and girls, were on target. However, communication, specifically in the form of writing summaries of scientific articles or news stories of scientific discoveries, was inadequate.

"All are struggling with writing but that's no surprise to us," said Lynn Elfner, executive director of the Ohio Academy of Science, which organized the program. Elfner noted that participation was not limited to the academically strongest students. In the evaluation prepared for the Ohio General Assembly, one superintendent stressed the value of including at-risk students to create learning chances for kids who would not ordinarily get them. Learn more about the program here.

As part of the $700,000 program, which incorporates hands-on scientific inquiry, technology design, teamwork, communications, and leadership development, students are expected to read, study, and submit 36 reports on research articles and news stories of scientific discoveries over 18 months.

As far as the students are concerned, their top-two activities were working with an oozy, squishy, stretchy polymer called "glubber," which 58 percent rated tops. Activities concerning flight and space-fizzy rockets came in a close second, at 57 percent.

The schools participating in the program are Big Walnut and Buckeye Valley in Delaware County; North Union in Union County; River Valley in Marion County; Teays Valley in Pickaway County; Upper Sandusky in Wyandot County; and Colonial Hills, Brookside, and Slate Hill elementary schools in the Worthington school district in Franklin County.

By Mike Lafferty

Comment

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

Reviews & Analysis

Don't blame unions, blame the legislature

Invisible Ink in Collective Bargaining: Why Key Issues are Not Addressed
National Council on Teacher Quality
July 2008

Who is to blame for the ironclad and sometimes silly rules under which most of our nation's public school teachers work? Not collective-bargaining contracts, says the National Council on Teacher Quality (NCTQ) in "Invisible Ink in Collective Bargaining: Why Key Issues are Not Addressed." The teacher contract "is by no means the monolithic authority that many presume it to be." Instead, NCTQ argues in this new paper, it is the state that dictates much of how the teaching profession is governed.

The NCTQ came to this conclusion during the process of creating its TR3 (Teacher Rules, Roles, and Rights) website, which it launched in 2007 (see here). TR3 houses a searchable database of all state laws and regulations pertaining to teachers and the contract provisions of 100 school districts (including Columbus and Cleveland). Invisible Ink explains what you won't find in these local teacher contracts and why.

The state's role starts with deciding whether teachers may collectively bargain and, if so, what issues are allowed on the table. Terminology is often vague and seemingly all-encompassing. In Ohio, for example, public-sector unions may negotiate "all matters pertaining to wages, hours, or terms and other conditions of employment and the continuation, modification, or deletion of an existing provision of a collective-bargaining agreement..." (see here). Differences in interpretation abound between teacher unions and district leadership and states, again, enter the picture to settle these debates via courts, attorneys general, and labor-relations boards.

The state continues to influence teacher work policies with issue-specific legislation and regulations. NCTQ cites a recent example from New York City where the district wanted to amend the process for awarding teacher tenure to include student-performance data. The union objected but could not file a grievance as New York state law does not include tenure in collective bargaining. Instead, the union sought--and won--a provision in the state budget bill that made it illegal to consider job performance as a factor in the teacher- tenure process. Incredibly, now no public school in the Empire State can take into consideration how well a teacher does his job in deciding whether to give him or her tenure.

State laws, unlike contracts, don't expire and savvy union lobbyists find it more efficient to codify a provision rather than negotiate it with hundreds of local school districts every several years. As a result, state laws and policies governing teacher-employment issues abound. All states dictate the length of time at which teachers are eligible for tenure (Ohio and 32 other states say three years). Most states have rules about how often teachers may be evaluated and just 13 states require annual evaluations of tenured teachers (Ohio isn't one of them). Half of all states mandate a limited class size (25 kids per teacher in the Buckeye State).

The NCTQ makes a strong case that such statewide governance, "removes decision-making from the ground level, increasing the likelihood that students' needs are not sufficiently considered." Read the report here.

By Emmy L. Partin

Comment

Studies provide insights into the concept of longer school days

Expanded Learning Time in Action
Taking Stock of the Fiscal Costs of Expanded Learning Time
Center for American Progress
July 2008

Last month, the Center for American Progress, a Democratic-leaning, political policy research and advocacy organization that supports more time in school, released a pair of reports addressing the benefits of adding at least 30 percent to class time in low-income, high-minority schools as well as the financial challenges confronting school districts introducing the changes.

More class time allows schools to add instruction blocks in key academic areas such as 90-minute periods for reading, math and science, according to the first report, Expanded Learning Time in Action. Good charter schools, like KIPP (see here), add about 360 extra hours of instruction a year. They hire teachers and tell them they are expected to work 50 percent longer than traditional teachers. In return, teachers will receive 20 or 30 percent more in salary. The teachers buy into this because they see higher student achievement. Traditional public schools are also lengthening learning time, but usually by lesser amounts.

The second report, Taking Stock of the Fiscal Costs of Expanded Learning Time, looks at the financial considerations involved in lengthening teaching time. Because most districts have strict salary schedules, paying for a longer day is more complicated than just boosting everyone's paycheck a set percentage. Increasing salaries for experienced, higher-paid teachers, for example, costs more than for lower-paid, new teachers. Also, if retirement benefits depend on total salaries, these increases will mean higher retirement spending in later years.
.
Read the full reports here and here.

By Zach Heck

Comment

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

Announcement

We are seeking a highly motivated and articulate intern

Fordham is seeking a policy and research intern for our Columbus office. Bright, energetic college juniors and seniors, or graduate students, with an interest in education reform and a knack for writing and research can find more details on our paid internship here.

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

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.