2012 senior class photos
2012 West Carrollton graduation
Home of the Week
Ellen Belcher is the Dayton Daily News opinion pages editor. She writes about state government, education, the environment, higher education and all things Dayton.
Martin Gottlieb is an editorial writer and columnist for the Dayton Daily News opinion pages. He focuses on the political process itself and does such national issues as war, the economy, taxes and Social Security, as well as a hodge-podge of local and state issues.Home > Blogs > A Matter of Opinion > Archives > 2010 > April > 12 > Entry
Guest column: 3 things Ohio needs to do to win money for schools
This commentary is written by Terry Ryan, vice president for Ohio programs and policy at the Thomas B. Fordham Foundation.
Ohio’s first-round loss in the Race to the Top federal education sweepstakes has resulted in angst and finger-pointing.
Some blame the teachers’ unions and school districts that didn’t endorse the state’s application. (Only 51 percent of Ohio’s 614 districts signed on.) Others point to the lack of legislative action showing bipartisan support for reform.
Yet, others note that the state’s application wasn’t all that reform-minded to begin with, especially when it came to supporting innovations in measuring teacher effectiveness, using charter schools and placing great educators in the state’s neediest schools.
There is truth in all these criticisms and, taken together, they explain why Ohio lost out. The question now becomes, what can Ohio do better in round two?
Here are three issues to tackle:
Get more buy-in from districts and the teachers’ unions
Gov. Ted Strickland has focused on this weakness of Ohio’s application, using a mixture of cajoling and warning. He told the Columbus Dispatch, “I think there needs to be an explanation from the systems that choose not to do it. … I think they owe their tax-paying constituents in those districts an explanation as to why they wouldn’t choose to participate, quite frankly.”
The governor may not like what he hears back. In January, the president of the Dayton Education Association explained the union’s refusal to participate thusly, “…Now, we see the teachers as being attacked for questioning a federal program that is very vague, offers little that is new and simply provides more high-stakes testing.” Such resistance will not be easily overcome, but it must be.
Show bipartisan support for the state’s application
This will certainly boost Ohio’s odds. Tennessee, which, along with Delaware, won Race to the Top funding in the first round, included in its application a letter of support from all seven Democratic and Republican candidates for governor. Based on recent polls, Strickland is an even bet for re-election in November, and similar odds apply to which party will control the Ohio House of Representatives. To make credible promises about the direction of Ohio’s education reform efforts demands bipartisan support.
The one area in Ohio’s first application that was supported by both Democrats and Republicans —Â the state’s commitment to embracing the “common core” academic standards — was by far the state’s highest-rated portion of its proposal. This is not a coincidence.
Improve the overall quality of Ohio’s proposal This is the most important thing to get right. Too much of the conversation around Race to the Top has been about getting the money, when the real issue is launching sustainable reforms that can make a difference in the lives of children.
The reviewers of Ohio’s application acknowledged the state’s educational gains during the last decade, but they singled out our persistent achievement gaps between rich and poor, whites and minorities. Â One reviewer wrote, “While the state is making overall gains showing progress, those within subgroups are not indicating the same. The application states that these achievement gaps are ‘unacceptable,’ but doesn’t sufficiently explain the connections between the data and actions that have contributed to those outcomes.”
The states that did better than Ohio on this front offered a new definition of “highly effective” teacher. No longer will seniority and credentials be the prime measure of teacher quality. Tennessee committed itself to having at least half of teacher evaluations based on student achievement measures.
Further, dealing with persistently failing schools — Ohio has identified 69 of these — means committing to closing some schools and forcing serious changes in others. President Barack Obama made clear by his strong support for the Rhode Island school board that fired all of the teachers in a long-suffering high school that he expects states to remove educators who aren’t getting the job done.
U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan told a gathering of school reformers in Washington that Race to the Top represents “a once in a lifetime opportunity” to move education reform in America. This is true. But for Ohio to take advantage of this opportunity requires new ways of doing things.
Tennessee and Delaware have risen to the challenge. Can the Buckeye State?
Permalink | Comments (8) | Post your comment |
Comments
By spec ed teacher
April 13, 2010 7:25 AM | Link to this
As long as districts, such as Dayton, don’t come up with an alternative way to deal with the disruptive kids that are only interested in fighting, bullying students, not learning, it is going to be difficult to make the progress. My other issue with this is lack of allowances for spec ed students. My students are on IEPs for a reason, but yet they are expected to take and succeed on a test years above where they are?? Heck no, I don’t want my evaluation tied to how my students do on the test!! Deal with those students who interrupt the educational process, then let’s talk.
By Joe Lacey
April 13, 2010 9:13 AM | Link to this
The Dayton Education Association has signed on to the Race to the Top process since the statement from the union president that Mr. Ryan quotes. Using quotes from a time when the DEA was officially opposed makes it appear that Mr. Ryan is trying to foment the very discord that he points out as a problem.
By Guy Geiger
April 13, 2010 3:28 PM | Link to this
Yes; students on legitimate IEP’s should receive consideration. The rebel rousers that disrupt classes and prevent others from learning should be removed. I still think the re-institution of Children’s Homes might be a good idea. Saw a piece on CNN last night about a ranch in Montana for uncontrollable adopted kids. Why not implement that kind of program for our uncontrollable students? What will school systems do with the Race to the Top money?? I have not seen or heard one credible idea.
By dps teacher
April 13, 2010 7:29 PM | Link to this
With all due respect Mr Lacy - I feel Dayton teachers were bullied into that second vote. A second vote that had totally different people voting the 2nd time than the first time we voted. I was at both meetings - the first one only had approx 200 teachers and the 2nd meeting only had approx 160 teachers out of almost 2000. Granted, both were dismal turnouts. We were told that if we didn’t sign on for Race to the Top, we could possibly jeopardize Title I federal funding..We were told that if we didn’t sign on, then we, as educators, wouldn’t be allowed to be part of “the decision making process”. And that’s not even a given. I am sorry - Race to the Top still doesn’t put money into the classroom, it’s unrealistic in its goals, it still doesn’t address the unruly students, it wants to tie my evaluation to a group of individuals that I can provide the material - present it in the best way that I know how, but if they’re not going to take the test seriously & they’re going to blow it off…My job is tied to that??? I wonder how much better some of the students would do, if the handful of disruptive students were taught in a different setting? While I do believe that education is changing, I don’t feel that anyone is asking the teachers what changes might work. And if we are asked, it doesn’t feel like suggestions are taken seriously. There is nothing to be proud of that 160 out of 2000 over turned the first vote. This teacher felt like votes were going to be taken til someone got the “right result”.
By Joe Lacey
April 14, 2010 10:15 PM | Link to this
I wasn’t part of the union’s decision making process and I’m not sure who you are accusing of being a bully. If there were unfair labor practices, you have avenues of redress. That said, the union’s decision is to participate in Race to the Top and it serves no good purpose for Mr. Ryan to dredge up union leadership statements supporting prior decisions to the contrary.
By guy geiger
April 15, 2010 9:03 PM | Link to this
Thank you DPS teacher. I, like you, have been in classrooms where the students “blow off” tests and assignments, in addition to disrupting other students that are really trying to accomplish their educational goals. I resigned as an academic volunteer because of it. I now volunteer at the Kettering based GED program and Sinclair DEV classes with students that failed their placement tests. If the disruptive students were removed from the classroom then the students really requiring extra help could get it and teachers could accomplish their goals. There are no disruptive students in GED; the serious students do not tolerate it. The DEV classes at Sinclair have no disruptive students since the students have invested $140 in their education. You are right; it is not the teachers, it is not an education problem, it is a social problem. And, how will this money be used? No one has told s how things will change by throwing money at the situation.
By Rick
April 19, 2010 10:52 AM | Link to this
dps teacher, how is discipline now? Has it improved over the past few years? The suspension and expulsion rate of the DPS are extremely low compared to other big city schools. We do have alternative schools.
By guy
April 20, 2010 6:54 PM | Link to this
I disagree with the concept of alternative schools. If a student cannot coexist in a school environment, how do we do that student a favor by placing them in an environment where they only attend school 3 hours or so in the AM or the PM and have no requirement to have a job? They learn from a PC based program rather than a classroom environment. We are paying for GED with our taxes; why should we also pay for these alternative schools. No one ever publishes (to the best of my knowledge) the graduation rate and success rate. At one point I believe CHS was spending over $300,000 per year for their school. The GED classes do not tolerate “trouble makers”; the people there are giving up family time to learn and achieve. Maybe that is the type environment the kids need. I also understand the waiting list to get into “The SOP” is over one hundred. I guess it is advantageous to have the students “graduate” from a district Alt school and ensure they get credit for the student count. Isn’t this a bit like our Congress using earmarks for the special airport construction projects that have recently come to light. How many alternative educational scenarios should we fund?