Ohio Alliance for Arts Education

Arts On Line Education Update

November 5, 2012

Joan Platz

 

November 6, 2012 is the General Election.  Ohio voters will cast votes for U.S. President and Vice-President, one U.S. Senator; 16 Representatives to Congress; State Senators from even-numbered Senate Districts; State Representatives from all 99 House Districts; several county offices; seven members of the State Board of Education; three Justices of the Ohio Supreme Court; Judges of the Court of Appeals, Court of Common Pleas, and County Courts; two statewide issues; and local issues, including 194 school issues!   

 

1)  Ohio News

 

•129th Ohio General Assembly:  The Ohio House and Senate are not scheduled to meet this week, but leadership is already planning a lame-duck session starting the week of November 13, 2012 through mid December 2012.  Lawmakers are expected to take action on legislation regarding election laws, ethics laws, taxes on financial institutions (HB510 - Amstutz), and HB555 (Stebelton), an education bill that includes some items that were held over from SB316 (Lehner), the mid-biennium review bill for education, signed into law in June 2012. HB555 is expected to include revisions to Ohio’s system for rating schools and standards for dropout recovery schools. It is possible that some of the legislative recommendations included in the State Auditor’s report regarding irregularities in school district attendance reports could also be included in HB555.

 

2) Election News:  

 

•Stay Granted:  The U.S. Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals granted on October 31, 2012 Secretary of State Jon Husted’s request to stay an order that would have required boards of elections to count provisional ballots cast in the wrong polling location, but within the right county, due to poll worker error.  The order was issued on October 24, 2012 by U.S. District Court Judge Algenon Marbley in Service Employees International Union (SEIU) v. Husted and Northeast Ohio Coalition for the Homeless (NEOCH) v. Husted. Information is available at http://moritzlaw.osu.edu/electionlaw/.

 

•Request to Extend Absentee Voting for Detained Prisoners Denied: Judge Susan Dlott of the U.S. District Court for Southern Ohio denied on November 1, 2012 a request made by advocates for persons detained in jail on election day, but not convicted of a felony, to extend the deadline to vote by absentee ballot. (Fair Elections Ohio, The Amos Project, et al v. Husted) The advocates bringing the request include the Fair Elections Ohio, The AMOS Project, CURE-Ohio, Central Ohio Prisoner Advocates, and Community Re-entry. Judge Dlott cited the “thinnest” of evidence proving that the current law disenfranchises voters and the confusion that could affect the pending election as reasons for denying the request to extend absentee voting at this time. For information please visit http://moritzlaw.osu.edu/electionlaw/litigation/documents/OrderDenyingPlaintiffsTemporaryMotionforRestrainingOrder.pdf

 

3)  News from the ODE

 

•Applications Available for Early Literacy Grants:  The Ohio Department of Education announced last week that it would be accepting applications for its $13 Million Early Literacy/Reading Readiness Grants.  The funds were included in HB487 (Amstutz), signed into law in June 2012 to support implementation of the Third Grade Reading Guarantee (SB316 Lehner), and can be used for early literacy intervention efforts to ensure that students are reading at grade level.  Grants up to $100,000 will be competitively awarded to school districts and community schools, and consortia can compete for awards up to $250,000. The application deadline is December 31, 2012.

Information is available at http://www.education.ohio.gov/GD/Templates/Pages/ODE/ODEDetail.aspx?page=3&TopicRelationID=5&ContentID=129423

 

•Student Growth Measure Updates Available: The Ohio Department of Education (ODE) has posted additional guidance, resources, and materials about Student Learning Objectives (SLOs) on the Student Growth Measures webpage at http://www.ode.state.oh.us/GD/Templates/Pages/ODE/ODEDetail.aspx?page=3&TopicRelationID=1230&ContentID=125742&Content=134805.

 

New as of October 4, 2012 are updates of the Student Learning Objectives Guidebook; Scoring the Individual SLO; and Sample Principal SLOs.  Additional guidance on combining Student Growth Measures (SGMs) will be posted in November.

 

ODE also will be offering regional training focused on implementing SGMs for Ohio’s Teacher and Principal Evaluation Systems by the end of the calendar year. This training is optional and can be used to develop training at the local level. Districts and ESCs that have developed training plans are free to move forward with those trainings and should continue all other work toward implementing a local student growth measures plan. The ODE training, which is free to all participants, will be offered through September 2014.

 

To support the implementation of the Student Growth Measures component of the evaluation systems, ODE is working in collaboration with select regional partner RttT Educational Service Centers to train and deploy SGMs and Alignment Specialists. These SGM Specialists will support LEAs by providing technical assistance and professional development following the regional trainings to district administrators, teachers, and other personnel on the alignment of local systems to the state framework and development and implementation of district and building student growth measures using the SLO process.

 

•Survey Results of Ohio Students/Teachers Posted:  The Ohio Department of Education announced on November 1, 2012 the results of a survey of 53,908 students in grades 6-12 and 2,703 teachers and other staff members in Ohio’s schools in a report entitled My Voice- Ohio Year One Report. 

 

The survey was conducted by the Ohio Department of Education, the Pearson Foundation, and the Quaglia Institute for Student Aspirations (QISA) as part of the Ohio My Voice - Ohio Project “....to track and analyze student engagement and to highlight its connection to progress in academic performance.” This work is supported by a grant from the Pearson Foundation and funding from Ohio’s Race to the Top (RttT) federal grant award. Student responses will be part of the Pearson Foundation’s Million Voice Project, the national public interest campaign intended to gauge students’ perceptions of school across the United States. 

 

The following are the findings of the survey:

 

-A majority of Ohio students experience “Belonging” in some form in their schools, but in other ways a sense of community is lacking.  “A disconnect appears to exist between the genuine best intentions of Ohio schools to create a school environment in which students feel they belong, and the reality that many students report experiencing.”  

 

-Most Ohio young people report that there are teachers who they consider “heros” in their lives, but overall student-teacher relationships need to be improved.  “50% of Ohio students fail to report that they think their teachers would care if they are absent from school. Moreover, levels of respect between students and teachers are generally perceived as relatively low, including only one-third of students who agree that students respect one another.”  

 

-Students report a moderately high rate of “Sense of Accomplishment” in Ohio schools, but there is room for improvement.  “[A]n unacceptable proportion of students (more than 1 in 6) report giving up when schoolwork is difficult, and that nearly one quarter of students do not report exerting their best effort in school is problematic.”  

 

-“[A]bout half of all students in Ohio believe school is boring and about an equal proportion fail to report enjoying being at school.” 

 

-Most indicators of Curiosity & Creativity are moderately high, yet many students in Ohio are uninspired by their schools, and most fail to see its relevance to their everyday lives. “While two thirds of students feel comfortable asking questions in class and that school encourages creativity, the one-third who fail to report these are a cause for some concern.”  

 

-Results for “Spirit of Adventure” were mixed.  Students do not feel that there is support for them if they fail and just under a third of students report that teachers will help them learn from their mistakes.  Six in 10 fail to report students in their school are supportive of each other. 

 

-Some indicators of “Leadership & Responsibility” suggest Ohio students are confident, though most students fail to report their school environments adequately foster this condition.  “Perhaps most troubling, only 44% feel students have a voice in decision-making at their schools.”  

 

-Of all the conditions, “Confidence to Take Action” shows the highest agreement across the survey, suggesting students in general in Ohio are confident in themselves and their futures, are goal-directed, and prepared to work hard. 

 

The results of the survey for staff showed that over three-quarters of staff surveyed enjoy a teaching environment conditioned by “Belonging and Heroes”; about half report being under-appreciated; a majority report personal satisfaction in their work, but not as many feel their schools support an engaging, professional teaching-learning environment.  More staff are confident and ready to lead than believe those energies are drawn upon by their schools.

 

The results of the staff focus groups found that Central Office needs to be more visible and knowledgeable about individual schools; professional development is not relevant to teacher needs; student discipline is not consistently upheld; and the primary goal of the schools is for students to pass the test.

 

According to the demographic data 20.5 percent of students reported that they participated in music, and 4.3 percent in theater in grades 6-12.  

 

My Voice eventually will engage more than one million Ohio students in grades 6-12, and is available at no cost to all schools in Ohio, including non-RttT schools, private and parochial schools.

 

Information about My Voice is available at http://myvoice.pearsonfoundation.org/ohio

 

4) Status of Gifted Education in Ohio’ Schools:  The status of services for gifted children in Ohio schools for 2011-2012 school year is summarized in a new blog focusing on gifted students called “High Ability”.  (“A Ghoulish Gifted Halloween Tale (and It’s all Frighteningly True…)” by anngifted, “High Ability blog, October 31, 2012.)

 

The bottom line?  According to the blog, “Service levels for gifted students have dropped to a new low. In the 2010/2011 school year, Ohio districts served approximately 52,470 gifted students. The figures just released for 2011/2012 show a decrease of almost 5 percent to 49,947 students.” 

 

Since the 2008/2009 school year when 76,440 students were served, service levels have dropped by almost 35 percent. According to the blog, the 2008/2009 school year was also the last year Ohio saw a stable and coherent funding system for gifted students. 

 

The percent of identified gifted students in Ohio has also dropped from 280,720 in 2008/09 school year to 263,688 in 2010/11, even though overall enrollment in schools has increased.  Of those students identified, less than 19 percent are being served. 

 

Putting the data into context, the blog reports that while the number of school districts in Ohio labeled “excellent” has increased to 63 percent (387 out of 611), services provided to gifted students has decreased in 260 school districts in 2011/2012 school year, and 124 school districts don’t provide gifted services to any students.  

 

The blog also includes information about staffing levels for licensed gifted professionals, which have decreased in school districts by 17 percent since the 2008/2009 school year.

 

This article is available on the High Ability blog at https://highability.wordpress.com/.

 

5) Inequities in State School Funding Systems Examined:  The Center for American Progress released in September 2012 a report by Bruce D. Baker and Sean P. Corcoran entitled The Stealth Inequities of School Funding: How State and Local School Finance Systems Perpetuate Inequitable Student Spending. 

 

According to the report, gross funding inequities exist in this country and too often “.. the schools serving students with the greatest needs receive the fewest resources.”The authors examine the sources of school funding inequities and have found that “....even states providing a large share of state aid are not necessarily more equitable in their distribution of school funding.” 

 

Some states, such as Illinois, Texas, New York, Pennsylvania, Missouri, and North Carolina, have regressive school funding distribution systems that redistribute state aid to lower-poverty school districts that don’t need the additional funding. In addition locally raised revenue, including non-property sources of revenue, often increase the disparities in resources between low and high poverty school districts. 

 

The report focuses on these two overall problems with state school funding systems and identifies the policy decisions that have caused the inequities. An examination of these policy decisions is relevant in Ohio as policy makers continue to debate the components of a new system for funding Ohio’s schools.

 

Among the selected state funding systems reviewed, author Bruce D. Baker notes that political decisions often contribute to inequitable funding patterns, because lawmakers need to respond to their constituents, even if it means compromising the equity of the school funding system.  For example, Kansas allows some lower poverty school districts to levy a special local tax to compensate for the higher cost to hire teachers in high-priced neighborhoods.  Arizona’s state school funding system increases aid to all school districts to adjust for the cost of more experienced teachers, who are more likely to teach in lower-poverty school districts. Flat grant programs also contribute to inequities across school districts when they are not adjusted for local capacity.

 

Some states have added “hold harmless” provisions which ensure that school districts receive the same level of state funding regardless of the state aid formula. And, often state school funding systems have multiple formulas working simultaneously to provide state funding for different types of services, such as special education, but not all are adjusted to account for local capacity.  Block grant programs also contribute to inequity, because they are allocated regardless of differences in student populations, regional costs, or local capacity. State aid for property tax reductions is a particular problem in some states, because it duplicates the purpose of state aid, and provides additional funds to lower-poverty higher capacity school districts in addition to state aid. 

 

Reliance on the local property tax to fund schools also contributes greatly to the funding disparities, even in states that use a broader base of local taxes to support schools.  The author Sean P. Corcoran found that taxable property wealth is inversely related to the poverty rate in the selected states reviewed.  Even when states have imposed maximum tax rates on local property, mechanisms have been created to get around the maximum tax, which higher capacity districts are able to raise compared to high-poverty school districts.

 

The authors believe that “States could achieve far more equitable distribution of resources and far more adequate educational opportunities in high-poverty settings if resources were allocated more appropriately.” This could be accomplished through the following:

 

•Eliminate state school funding provisions that counteract the purpose of state equalization aid, such as property tax reimbursements, tax relief, and subsidies for low poverty school districts.  These provisions encourage higher spending and increase inequity.

 

•Distribute as large a share of aid as possible through the general equalization formulas, which are weighted for student needs or relevant costs attached to the particular aid program. Outside-the-formula aid is among the most common drivers of stealth inequity. 

 

•Encourage federal agencies to intervene or create pressure for change in those cases in which states, make little or no attempt to operate a state school-finance formula that follows basic principles of equalization and need-based targeting. The report specifically mentions North Carolina. 

 

•Implement policies that reduce the disproportionate role that property tax revenue has on school funding systems.

 

•Consider strategies to consolidate and reorganize fragmented state systems of schools to encourage more efficiencies and greater equity in local spending. The report specifically mentions the number of school districts in Illinois, Pennsylvania, New York, and to a lesser extend Missouri.

 

The report is available at 

http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/education/report/2012/09/19/38189/the-stealth-inequities-of-school-funding/

 

FYI ARTS

 

1) High School Students Sought to Participate in Arts Day 2013!!  The Ohio Citizens for the Arts Foundation, in partnership with the Ohio Arts Council, is inviting teachers to apply for their students to participate in the Arts Day 2013 Student Advocate Program.  

 

Each year this program provides teams of six high school students representing ten high schools in Ohio the opportunity to meet with local legislators, learn networking and communication skills to become better advocates for the arts and arts education, participate in Arts Day in Columbus on May 15, 2013, and attend the Governor’s Awards for the Arts Luncheon.

 

To apply, teachers interested in this opportunity should send a brief statement by November 19, 2012 expressing their interest in the Student Advocate Program and what they would like their students to achieve through the Student Advocate program.  The statement can be sent via email, fax, or US mail. (Contact information can be found at the close of this message). High school selections will be made by the end of November 2012.

 

More Details: 

 

WHAT: Arts Day 2013 Student Advocate Program 

WHEN: Wednesday, May 15, 2013 9:00 AM - 1:30 PM 

WHERE: Vern Riffe Center for Government and the Arts and the Ohio Statehouse  Columbus, Ohio 

 

ACTIVITIES: 

-Students attend an advocacy briefing

-Students meet with state legislators or their aides to advocate for the arts and arts education 

-Students attend the Governor’s Awards for the Arts and Arts Day Luncheon with members of the state legislature 

-Students tour state buildings 

 

OPPORTUNITIES: 

-Collaborate among academic departments within the high school (ex. arts, government, and language arts)

-Host a member of the Ohio House of Representatives and/or Senate in your school for a pre-Arts Day orientation to discuss the role of a legislator in the school and arts funding process 

-Raise student awareness of the legislative process and citizens’ participation in government 

-Receive positive recognition for your school 

-Make an important contribution to the continuation of state funding for the arts and arts education 

 

REQUIREMENTS: 

-Six (6) students who demonstrate an interest in the arts and the day’s activities

-Advance preparation by students: identify and write their Ohio legislators 

-School-provided release time for: 

a) two-hour in-school legislative visit and advocacy training and 

b) trip to Columbus on Arts Day 

-School-provided transportation to Columbus for students and accompanying adult(s) 

-Teacher and/or school administrator to “advise” the student participation and serve as a liaison with the Arts Day Committee member 

 

CONTACT INFORMATION: 

Janelle Hallett, Member Services Director 

Email: janelle@ohioctizensforthearts.org 

Telephone: 614.221.4064 Fax: 614.241.5329 

Ohio Citizens for the Arts Foundation 77 South High Street, 2nd Floor Columbus, Ohio 43215-6108

 

Please forward this email to anyone you know that may be interested in applying for the student advocates program. 

 

2) More Support for STEAM:  Doug Haller, principal of Haller STEM Education Consulting, writes in an October 31, 2012 ASCD SmartBlog on Education that there is a need to incorporate the arts into STEM education to “.....acknowledge the role of the arts in 21st century learning.” (“Full STEAM Ahead:  Arts, STEM and 21st Century Learning” by Doug Haller, ASCD Smartblog on Education, October 31, 2012.)

 

According to the author the definition of STEM lacks clarity, because for some STEM means the integration of the science, technology, engineering, and math disciplines, while others use STEM to refer to disciplines that use similar cognitive skills. Adding the arts to STEM acknowledges the importance of the creative act and processes, which are more commonly associated with the arts, according to the author.

 

Most scientists already integrate the arts into their work either intentionally or unconsciously, writes the author, because communicating scientific concepts often requires creating visual or sonic  representations.  “Clearly, something about art brings out creativity and innovation in ways different from but complementary to the sciences”, says Mr. Haller.

 

As examples the author notes that researchers at the University of Colorado at Boulder are exploring the “Science of Creativity” to better understand the creative processes used in the arts and sciences, and enhance the pedagogy of STEM through music and the arts. This work will also include neuroscience research that shows how the brain is changed based on the activities of the learner.  

 

Work conducted by David Byrne, shows how music affects certain functions in the brain and the role of music in human evolution.  Other researchers in this area stress the importance of the design process used in the arts as part of the STEM movement.

 

The author also cites New Engines for Growth:  Five Roles for Arts, Culture and Design released by the National Governors Association in May 2012.  This publication examines how “....including the arts in urban (and rural) development plan increases economic prosperity because the creative juices of artists feed innovation in STEM professions.” 

 

The article is available at http://smartblogs.com/education/2012/10/31/full-steam-ahead-arts-stem-21st-century-learning/

 

Ohio Alliance for Arts Education

 

Arts On Line Education Update

October 29, 2012

Joan Platz

 

1)  Ohio News:

 

•129th Ohio General Assembly:  The Ohio House and Senate are not scheduled to meet this week.

 

•Election News:  U.S. District Court Judge Algenon Marbley ordered on October 24, 2012 that provisional ballots cast in the wrong polling place, but in the same county, be counted.  The order extends the ruling in Service Employees International Union (SEIU) v. Husted and Northeast Ohio Coalition for the Homeless (NEOCH) v. Husted, issued in August 2012, and upheld in part by the U.S. Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals. The new order also removes a provision allowing the votes of persons who failed to properly sign an affirmation form, to be counted. This provision was not upheld on appeal by the U.S. Sixth Circuit Court. The order is available at http://electionlawblog.org/wp-content/uploads/SEIU-Opinion.pdf.

 

•PreK-20 Education System Discussed:  Connect Ohio held on October 26, 2012 a panel discussion about a new report entitled Broadband and Education: Enriching Ohio’s Students through Technology. During the discussion Board of Regents Chancellor Jim Petro said the Ohio Board of Regents (BOR) and the Ohio Department of Education (ODE) need to be working together to support a preK-20 education. The Ohio Board of Regents is now moving into the ODE building on Front Street, and as a result, more collaboration among ODE and BOR staff will be possible.  The current ODE building will become the Ohio Education Center. To accomplish a complete merger of ODE and BOR, however, the State Constitution and laws would need to be changed.  The Ohio Constitution calls for a State Board of Education, which appoints the superintendent of public instruction, while the Chancellor of the Board of Regents is required by law.  The Constitutional Review Commission is currently reviewing proposed amendments, and could recommend this change. A video of the panel discussion is available at

https://connectednation.adobeconnect.com/_a1137158966/p7eyicivrr7/?launcher=false&fcsContent=true&pbMode=normal

 

•Boarding School for At-Risk Students Moving Forward:  The Ohio School Facilities Commission (OSFC) approved on October 25, 2012 $16 million to build The SEED School of Cincinnati, a publicly funded boarding school for low income at-risk students, authorized in HB153 the FY12-13 budget. The law requires the school to be set-up as a public-private partnership.  The SEED Foundation, which runs similar boarding schools in Washington, D.C. and Baltimore, is the only nonprofit organization to respond to a request for proposals to operate the school.  The total cost for the school and dormitories is $39.67 million.  The SEED Foundation will contribute over $28 million to the project, and will completely pay for the dorms, while public funds will be used to build the school.  The school is expected to open in 2014-15. More information is available at 

http://www.osfc.ohio.gov/MediaCenter/News/BoardingSchoolFunding.aspx

 

2) Grants for Charter Schools Need Better Oversight:  The Office of Inspector General at the U.S. Department of Education released in September 2012 a final audit report entitled Office of Innovation and Improvement’s Oversight and Monitoring of the Charter Schools Programs’s Planning and Implementation Grants from August 1, 2007 through September 30, 2011. The audit was conducted to determine whether or not the Office of Innovation and Improvement (OII) had effective oversight and monitoring to ensure that recipients of the Charter Schools Program’s State Educational Agency (SEA) Planning and Implementation Grant and the Charter School Program non-SEA Planning and Implementation Grant met certain goals and objectives. During the audit period, the total award amount for the SEA and non-SEA grants was $908,946,593 and $31,284,442, respectively.  

 

The purpose of the grant programs is to create new, high-quality public charter schools; to disseminate information about charter schools with a proven track record; to replicate and expand successful schools; to help charter schools find suitable facilities; and to pay for national activities and initiatives that support charter schools. The largest portion of Charter School Program funds are used to plan and start up new charter schools and disseminate information about existing charters in States with charter school laws.  

 

Three SEAs were selected for the audit:  the California Department of Education (California SEA), the Arizona Department of Education (Arizona SEA), and the Florida Department of Education (Florida SEA).  For the non-SEA grant, all of OII’s files on Arizona charter schools that received the non-SEA grant during the audit period were reviewed.

 

The audit found the following:

 

•The OII did not effectively oversee and monitor grants and did not have an adequate process to ensure SEAs effectively oversaw and monitored their sub grant recipients. “Specifically, OII did not have an adequate corrective action plan process in place to ensure grantees corrected deficiencies noted in annual monitoring reports, did not have a risk-based approach for selecting non-SEA grantees for monitoring, and did not adequately review SEA and non-SEA grantees’ fiscal activities.”

   

•OII did not provide the SEAs with adequate guidance on the monitoring activities they were to conduct in order to comply with applicable Federal laws and regulations. The audit identified internal control deficiencies in the monitoring and oversight of charter schools that received the SEA grant at all three of the SEAs.  For example, none of the three SEAs adequately monitored charter schools receiving the SEA grants, had adequate methodologies to select charter schools for onsite monitoring, or monitored authorizing agencies. 

 

•The Florida SEA did not track how much SEA grant funding charter schools drew down and spent. The California SEA had unqualified reviewers performing onsite monitoring.

 

•The OII did not ensure SEAs developed and implemented adequate monitoring procedures for properly handling charter school closures.  The OII did not ensure that SEAs had procedures to properly account for SEA grant funds spent by closed charter schools and dispose of assets purchased with SEA grant funds in accordance with Federal regulations.

 

The report includes the following recommendations:

The Assistant Deputy Secretary should, 

-develop and implement a risk-based approach for selecting non-SEA grantees for monitoring activities 

-develop and implement policies and procedures for monitoring grantee fiscal activities, specifically for quarterly expenditure review and annual review of Single Audit reports 

-establish and implement requirements for SEAs to develop a detailed monitoring plan explaining the extent of monitoring that will be conducted during an SEA grant cycle 

-provide necessary guidance and training to SEAs for the development and implementation of procedures to ensure SEAs have effective monitoring and fiscal controls for tracking the use of funds, and 

-ensure SEAs have procedures to properly account for SEA grant funds spent by closed charter schools and for the disposal of assets purchased with SEA grant funds in accordance with Federal regulations. 

 

The U. S. Department of Education’s Audit Accountability and Resolution Tracking System will be used to track the implementation of the corrective action plan (CAP), which is to be developed within 30 days of the issuance of this report. The CAP will set forth the specific action items and targeted completion dates necessary to implement the final corrective actions on the findings and recommendations contained in this final audit report. 

 

The report is available at 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oig/auditreports/fy2012/a02l0002.pdf

 

3)  Second Report on Attendance Irregularities Released:  State Auditor Dave Yost released on October 23, 2012 a second preliminary report about an ongoing investigation of school districts for irregularities in their reports about student attendance, enrollment, and withdrawals. (Second Interim Report on Student Attendance Data and Accountability System, October 23, 2012). The report examines the results to date for selected school districts with levies on the November 2012 ballot.  Aside from some errors in coding student withdrawals, the attendance reports of most of the schools examined were in order, and eight schools are still under investigation. 

 

Schools with a levy on the November 2012 ballot were selected for review based on a metric showing the frequency of students who had test results “rolled up” to the state, because of breaks in enrollment.  81 schools from 47 districts fit the criteria out of a total 184 school districts with funding issues on the ballot. Auditors sampled the attendance records of students “rolled” up to the state rather than reviewing all of the student records with enrollment breaks.  This audit also identified another 26 districts which do not fit the criteria, and will be excluded from further investigations.

 

The first interim report issued by the Auditor's Office on October 4, 2012 examined 100 schools in 48 districts and found improper withdrawals of students in five school districts.  A final report about attendance report irregularities is due next year. 

 

The new report is available at http://education.ohio.gov/GD/Templates/Pages/ODE/ODEDetail.aspx?page=3&TopicRelationID=1&ContentID=131230 

 

4) What is the Best School Reform Effort?  A Living Wage!!:  David Berliner, the Regents’ Professor Emeritus in The Mary Lou Fulton Teachers College at Arizona State University writes in the Teachers College Record “....the best way to improve America’s schools is through jobs that provide families living wages. Other programs are noted that offer some help for students from poor families. But in the end, it is inequality in income and the poverty that accompanies such inequality, that matters most for education.” (“Effects of Inequality and Poverty vs. Teachers and Schooling on America’s Youth by David C. Berliner — 2014 Teachers College Record Volume 116 Number 1, 2014, p. - http://www.tcrecord.org ID Number: 16889, Date Accessed: 10/27/2012 3:10:12 PM.)

 

The essay debunks “wrongheaded” education policies and describes how “occasional successes” in education have become the basis for new education reforms and policies based on “myths”, such as an excellent teacher can turn around the lives of failing students; high-stakes testing programs will make “lazy” students, teachers, and administrators work harder to improve student achievement; national standards will improve student learning; retaining students will improve reading; and high-stakes teacher evaluations will improve teaching.   According to the author these "myths" have become drivers of national educational policies, using-up resources (time and money) on programs that “do not work consistently enough for most children and their families, while simultaneously wasting the good will of the public” and “burdening teachers with demands for success that are beyond their capabilities.” 

 

The author believes that these reform efforts mask the real issues that students, families, and schools face:  “Powerful social forces exist to constrain the lives led by the poor, and our nation pays an enormous price for not trying harder to ameliorate these conditions.”

 

The author explains that researchers have determined that the “school effect” accounts for about 20 percent of the variation in achievement test scores (and teachers are only a part of the school effect), while out of school variables (income level, health, food insecurity, mobility, language spoken at home, etc.) account for 60 percent. When examining the results in reading of the Program for International Student Assessment (PISA) researchers found that socio-economic factors explained 17 percent of the variation in scores of students in the U.S., but only 10 percent of the outcomes for students in countries such as Norway, Japan, Finland, and Canada.  The social status of a student in the U.S. has more of an effect on test scores than in other countries, and furthermore, other countries are able to ameliorate the effects of the disadvantaged background of students better than the U.S. 

 

The author also debunks the myth that America’s education system is failing universally. The results of the international study of math and science trends (TIMSS) in 2007 show that American schools with less than 10 percent of children eligible for free and reduced lunch scored the highest in the world, and even students in schools with up to 24.9 percent of students in poverty had scores exceeded by only four nations. In fact over half of the elementary and middle school student population (26 million students) perform well on this international exam.  Approximately nine million students (20 percent), however, attend schools where over 75 percent of the student body is eligible for free and reduced lunch, and the average score for these students is over 100 points lower than students in schools with less than 10 percent poverty. 

 

The author writes, “Instead of facing the issues connected with poverty and housing policy, federal and state education policies are attempting to test more frequently; raise the quality of entering teachers; evaluate teachers on their test scores and fire the ones that have students who perform poorly; use incentives for students and teachers; allow untrained adults with college degrees to enter the profession; break teachers unions, and so forth. Some of these policies may help to improve education, but it is clear that the real issues are around neighborhood, family, and school poverty rates, predominantly associated with the lack of jobs that pay enough for people to live with some dignity.”

 

To improve education outcomes and income equality, the author makes the following recommendations:

-Provide a fair living wage rather than a minimum wage.

-Increase taxes.  “Only two countries pay a lower rate of taxes relative to Gross Domestic Product, while 29 countries pay more in taxes, and countries like Denmark, Finland, France, Italy, Norway, and Sweden, pay about 75% more in taxes than we do to support civic life (Citizens for Tax Justice, 2011).”

-Require all corporations to pay a minimum tax, and examine tax rebates, which in some cases give tax dollars to corporations that pay no taxes.

-Support early childhood education programs.

-Reduce class size for students in the early grades.

-Provide summer educational opportunities that are both academic and cultural.

-Provide tutoring to students before and after school rather than retaining them.

-Reduce teacher mobility so that low-performing schools have experienced, rather than new teachers.

-Support “wrap-around” services for schools serving poor families.

-Make the school part of the community by offering job training, access to technology, health clinics, etc.

-Develop housing policies to support mixed-income neighborhoods.

 

The article is available at http://www.tcrecord.org/content.asp?contentid=16889 

 

5) Expert Summit on Teacher Evaluation Exposes Issues with Using Value-Added Measures:  The Institute of Education Sciences released a summary of a meeting held on August 9, 2012 entitled Learning from Recent Advances in Measuring Teacher Effectiveness.  Participants included researchers in the area of teacher effectiveness, value-added measures (VAMs), and student growth models (SGMs). The purpose of the meeting was to examine different perspectives and interpretations about research that is simultaneously being conducted by economists, statisticians, and educators in VAMs and SGMs, and get a better understanding of areas of common ground and what is actually working.

 

According to the summary, some researchers studying the use of VAMs and SGMs to evaluate teachers believe that there is enough evidence to conclude that VAMs provide real information about teacher effectiveness to support their role in teacher evaluations, particularly when other indicators are also used, while other experts believe that there are “real problems with VAMs; it is not clear how they will function in real-world settings, and so VAMs should only be used with caution.” 

 

Participants discussed and identified a number of questions regarding the use of VAMs and SGMs for teacher evaluations:

-How can evaluators ensure that value-added measures are not biased, and how can unbiased data be collected?

-How can classroom effects be separated from teacher effects?

-Are value-added measures fair, stable, and useful?

-What is the “consequential validity” of introducing VAMs into teacher evaluations? Will there be more emphasis on math and reading at the expense of other subjects?  Will there be more cheating? Will students be sorted and selected by teachers? Will student grades be inflated?

-What is the role of the principal in teacher evaluations and how can principals become better evaluators of teaching?

-Can value-added data validate observational assessment of teaching?

-How do the quality, timing, and the properties of assessments affect value-added results?

-Will better statistical models resolve the inadequacies of using value-added data for teacher evaluations?

-How does student interaction with other teachers affect value-added results?

-What are the strengths and weaknesses of a combination of teacher evaluation measures?

-How can other desirable student outcomes (range of academic subjects, attitudes, and dispositions) be included in teacher evaluations?

-How does student exposure to a particular curriculum affect value-added results?

-Are current state tests an adequate measure of student learning?

-How are value-added results used to diagnose and meet student needs?

-Should local audits be used as a check and balance on the value-added results used to evaluate teachers?

-What communication tools are needed to adequately inform teachers about the results of their evaluation?

-How can teacher observations be improved? Using videos to capture classroom instruction was suggested.

-Will teachers have enough time to adapt to teaching the common core standards before student test results are used to evaluate them?

 

The report is available at http://ies.ed.gov/director/teacher_effectiveness.asp.

 

FYI ARTS

 

1) Integrating the Curriculum to Support Learning:  Kenneth Wesson, a former psychology professor at San José State University in San José, California, writes in an Education Week article that problem solving in the “real world” requires critical and creative thinking to mentally manipulate a broad range of divergent perspectives using science, technology, engineering, mathematics, language, and art (visual and spacial thinking). (From STEM to ST2REAM: Reassembling our disaggregated curriculum” by Kenneth Wesson, Education Week October 24, 2012.)

 

According to the author, the conventional delivery system for learning, subject isolation and memorization, does not support the deepest kinds of learning that make substantive changes to the brain circuitry, physiology, and architecture.  “Learning is hardly a process of acquisition”, he writes, “but instead is the integration of new elements into a complex web of ever-expanding intertwined knowledge that has personal meaning”. Students need a variety of “bridges” to make connections among the subject-area “silos” of our current discipline-based curriculum to increase the number of neural pathways in the brain.

 

Students can better learn and describe what they have learned through models, illustrations, and visual information. According to the author, “Developing visual literacy is an essential ingredient in design and engineering. STEAM adds art to the equation, while reading, writing, listening, and speaking are embedded in the ST2REAM model, in which each of the composing disciplines is intentionally deployed to explain and comprehend its counterparts.” 

Arts On Line
Education Update

Ohio News

129th Ohio General Assembly: The Ohio House and Senate are not scheduled to meet this week. School Levies on the Ballot: According to the Secretary of State's web site, there will be a total of 194 school issues on the November 6, 2012 ballot. This includes 9 bond issues; 19 combined questions; 151 tax levies; and 15 income tax changes. Information about the schools issues is available. Provisional Ballot Decision Upheld: A three judge panel of the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld on October 11, 2012 a decision in Service Employees International Union v. Husted and Northeast Ohio Coalition of the Homeless v. Husted issued by U.S. District Judge Algenon Marbley on August 27, 2012. The Circuit Court ruling directed Secretary of State Husted to instruct boards of elections to count all provisional ballots that are cast in the right polling place, but in the wrong precinct, due to poll worker error. The Court of Appeals panel agreed with Judge Marbley on the issue of provisional ballots cast in the wrong precinct, but overturned his ruling to count provisional ballots not properly signed. The panel said that voters should be able to follow simple instructions to sign the provisional ballot affirmation. The decision is available. Early Voting Decision Appealed: Ohio Secretary of State Jon Husted filed an appeal on October 9, 2012 to the U.S. Supreme Court in Obama for America v. Husted, which allows boards of elections in Ohio to provide early in-person voting on Saturday, Sunday, and Monday before the November 6, 2012 election. The U.S. Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld on October 5, 2012 a preliminary injunction issued by U.S. District Court Judge Peter Economus in the matter. The appeal is available.

National News

Byrd-Bennett Heads Chicago Public Schools: According to the Chicago Tribune, Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel has named Barbara Byrd-Bennett, former CEO of the Cleveland Metropolitan School District, as the new head of the Chicago Public Schools (CPS). She replaces Jean-Claude Brizard, who agreed to resign. Ms. Byrd-Bennett was the Chief Education Advisor in the district. ("Brizard out as CPS chief: 'We agreed it is best'", by John Byrne, Noreen Ahmed-Ullah, and Rosemary R. Sobol, Chicago Tribune 8:39 a.m. CDT, October 12, 2012.) Scholastic Art and Writing Awards Exhibit: U.S. Under Secretary of Education Martha Kanter and Jim Shelton, assistant deputy secretary for innovation and improvement, presented at the opening of an exhibition of artwork by students at the U.S. Department of Education headquarters building in Washington, D.C. on October 12, 2012. The exhibition features the works of 54 artists from among the 2012 winners of the 90-year-old nationwide Scholastic Art and Writing Awards competition, sponsored by the Alliance for Young Artists and Writers.  Also featured was Luisa Banchoff, who read from her works. Ms. Banchoff is a National Student Poet from the southeast region of the United States, and was selected by the President's Committee on the Arts and the Humanities (PCAH), the Institute of Museum and Library Services, and the Alliance for Young Artists and Writers. Ms. Banchoff is a senior at Washington-Lee High School in Arlington, Va. Other speakers at the event were Rachel Goslins, executive director of the President's Committee on the Arts and the Humanities; Deborah Reeve, executive director of the National Art Education Association; and Virginia McEnerney, executive director of the Alliance for Young Artists and Writers, which sponsors the annual competition.

State Board of Education Meeting

The State Board of Education, Debe Terhar president, met on October 7-9, 2012 at the Ohio School for the Deaf. The Board selected Ray & Associates to conduct a search for candidates for the superintendent of public instruction position; continued a discussion about its FY14-15 budget recommendations; approved a resolution to request that the General Assembly give the Ohio Department of Education access to student names aligned to the state student idenifier numbers (SSID); and approved a resolution to release more district report card data, including school and district ratings, the Performance Index, and attendance rates for all Ohio schools and districts. The Ohio Department of Education will not publish the PDF report cards until an investigation by the Auditors Office of attendance data irregularities is completed, or the State Board of Education takes further action. The following are highlights of the 2012 October meeting of the State Board of Education: State Board Budget Recommendations The Legislative and Budget Committee, chaired by C. Todd Jones, continued a discussion from last month's meeting about amending the State Board's budget recommendations for FY14-15 (adopted in September 2012) to include additional funding for four areas: early childhood education, the Ohio Young Farmers program, technical infrastructure investments, and the third-grade reading guarantee. Several members of the committee opposed a proposed resolution submitted by Chairman Jones to proceed with the budget as passed in September without additional funding for the four areas. After agreeing to consider the four items separately, rather than together, the committee ran out of time, and postponed a decision about the increases until the November 2012 meeting. Update on the Attendance Investigation Auditor of State David Yost updated the State Board of Education on October 8, 2012 about a ongoing investigation of irregularities found in student attendance data. The attendance data reports of schools in 48 school districts are currently being reviewed, but the Auditor states that the investigation could be extended to other schools as well.  Auditor Yost began the presentation by explaining to the State Board why the Auditor's Office released an interim report on October 4, 2012. (Interim Report on Student Attendance Data and Accountability System, State Auditor of Ohio, October 4, 2012.) According to Auditor Yost, the report was released to update the public about the findings of the Auditor's investigation so far, because several school districts involved in this first phase of the investigation have funding issues on the November 2012 ballot. The report also provides an opportunity to inform the conversation about the next steps following the conclusion of the investigation. Auditor Yost also said that the investigation does not ascribe a motivation for the irregularities in school district attendance data reports, and the term "data scrubbing" used in the report does not infer that something illegal or wrong was done. The Auditor also asked the State Board to request that the General Assembly change current law so that the Ohio Department of Education (ODE) has direct access to the names and identifying information about students (State Student Idenifier - SSID), and can cross-match the student's name to the data. The ODE currently contracts with IBM to maintain this information separately in order to secure the privacy for students, at a cost of $750,000 a year. The ODE could save $432,000 and still guarantee privacy, if this operation was brought into the department, according to Acting Superintendent Sawyers. Following Auditor Yost's presentation, Board members asked the following questions: Rose Mary Oakar said that the leaders of the Cleveland Metropolitan Schools acknowledge the data irregularities and want to be involved in the solution, but are confused about the additional 14,000 students who are supposedly attending schools in the Cleveland district, according to the Auditor's report. Auditor Yost explained that the additional students are the result of the initial sorting of tested students, and the auditor's staff continues to work with Cleveland officials to clear-up the enrollment numbers.  Ms. Oakar continued, and asked if these students could be charter-school students? Auditor Yost said that charter schools will be included in phase two of the investigation, because the Auditors Office (working with Ohio State University) is using 1999 as a baseline year for this investigation, to flag students who are tested, withdrawn, and rolled-up to the state for the report card. Charter schools opened in 1998, and so another baseline has to be determined for them. Rob Hovis asked how many students have been dropped from enrollment lists. Auditor Yost replied that he could not extrapolate that information at this time, since this was a sample of schools, but that he hopes to know that by the end of the year. Mr. Hovis then asked if ODE staff had given tacit approval to school district officials regarding the attendance practices. Auditor Yost replied that he did not know, because the investigation covers over 10 years and ODE personnel has changed. It is possible that school districts could have been misguided, but the current ODE senior leadership, which is relatively new, has been forthcoming and cooperative. Kristen McKinley asked if the Auditor's Office was looking into how the outcome of this investigation would affect funding for the school districts involved, and if the Auditor was looking at other attendance issues? The Auditor said that there are now conversations with the federal government to determine the consequences of attendance irregularities, and in some cases revenue might have to be returned. He also said that his office is looking at other attendance issues. Debe Terhar asked how the Auditor will involve the ODE and the Office of Professional Conduct in the assessment of motivation when the investigation concludes? The Auditor replied that the final report will be public and the ODE will have access to the report. Referrals could be made to the Office of Professional Conduct, but he was not sure how that would work. In addition, he expects that Local Report Cards will need to be recalculated. In an answer to another question from Ms. Terhar about the cost of the investigation, Auditor Yost explained that he and former Superintendent Heffner had discussed defraying the cost of this investigation using funds from the unappropriated balance in the performance audit account.  Mr. Hovis also asked if the Auditor knew what actions the Board should take regarding school district officials as a result of this investigation? The Auditor responded that he would not presume to suggest what the Board should do, but that there could be a range of culpability at the district level, and each case will have to be determined independently and on its own merits.  The Auditor also stated that his office will release a second interim report on October 24, 2012. This report will include the results of the continuing investigation of schools in the 48 school districts. Expenditure Standards Eric Bode, ODE Executive Director, Office of Quality School Choice & Funding, provided the Capacity Committee, chaired by Tom Gunlock, with an update about expenditure standards, which were approved by the State Board in May, 2012, but are being revised again. Several changes in the standards will need to be made to align them with SB316 (Lehner) the Mid-Biennium Review - Education, which was approved in June 2012. The law now requires the ODE to align the expenditure categories required for reporting classroom and non-classroom instructional operating expenditures with the categories used to report to the U.S. Department of Education under federal law; removes joint vocational schools from the ranking system established for career technical schools; cleans-up language and removes "administrative expenditures" and replaces the term with "non-classroom expenditures"; and resets the deadline for the State Board of Education to adopt a final set of expenditure standards to December 31, 2012. School districts, community schools, and STEM schools are to begin reporting data in accordance with the standards on July 1, 2013. The ODE has been working with stakeholders, including school district treasurers, to revise the standards. One of the issues that must be resolved is how to classify expenditures consistently in all school districts. Mr. Bode said that this is a key issue, and might be solved using technology. The revised standards will be presented to the Capacity Committee in November 2012 for State Board adoption in December 2012. Standards for Waivers of Operating Standards The Capacity Committee, chaired by Tom Gunlock, also reviewed a document entitled, "State Board of Education Standards for Waivers of the Operating Standards for Schools". HB153 (Amstutz), the FY12-13 budget bill, requires that "...the State Board adopt standards for the approval or disapproval of waivers from Operating Standards" (Sec. 3301.07(O) ORC). The law further states that each waiver granted shall specify the period of time that the waiver is in effect, which shall not exceed five years, and that a district board of education may apply to renew a waiver.  The committee was informed that the "standards" in this case are not going to be part of the Ohio Administrative Code, and so they are not rules, but guidelines for the Superintendent of Public Instruction to follow. The proposed standards state the following: "The Superintendent shall work with districts and schools to approve waivers of the Operating Standards where such waivers can be granted to increase the flexibility accorded to a districts or schools without materially detracting from the educational program or affecting student safety. However, a waiver of the Operating Standards cannot be used to waive requirements that are set forth in statute. Statutory requirements may, however, be subject to waiver under statues such as R.C. 3302.05, 3302.063, or 3302.07, and a district or chartered non-public school may combine a waiver of the Operating Standards with another available waiver or exemption for the purpose of receiving a waiver of requirements that are found in the Operating Standards and in statute." "To apply for a waiver of the Operating Standards, a board of education or governing authority shall apply to the Superintendent, and describe the nature of the waiver requested and the time period for which the waiver is requested. No Waiver shall be granted for a period of time to exceed five years. Prior to approving or disapproving the waiver, the Superintendent may request additional information from the district or school. The Superintendent shall consider every application for a waiver, and notify the applicant if the waiver has been approved or disapproved. A board of education or governing authority may apply to renew a waiver granted in accordance with these standards." Early Learning and Development Standards (ELDS) Stephanie Siddons, Director, Office of Early Learning & School Readiness, Ohio Department of Education and Linda Norton Smith, consultant, Office of Early Learning, presented information to the State Board about the revisions for Ohio's Early Learning and Development Standards. A resolution to adopt the standards was also on the State Board's October 2012 agenda. According to the presentation, the ODE was required to expand its Early Learning Standards from birth to Kindergarten to include five domains as part of its Race to the Top Early Learning Challenge Grant. The five domains are Language and Literacy, Cognitive Development, Approaches Toward Learning, Social and Emotional Development, and Physical Well-Being and Motor Development.  The new standards were developed by a cross-agency leadership team, which included the Ohio Department of Education, the Ohio Department of Job and Family Services; the Ohio Department of Health; the Ohio Department of Mental Health; the Ohio Department of Developmental Disabilities; and the Governor's Office of Health Transformation. The standards revision process started in December 2011 and was informed by research and national experts in early learning.  The proposed new early learning standards are aligned to K-12 Common Core, social studies, and science standards, and are developmentally appropriate, and culturally and linguistically appropriate.  Ohio has been awarded almost $70 million for its Race to the Top Early Learning Challenge Grant. The grant will be used to improve the quality of programs that serve high-need children from birth to five years of age, and to measure the results of programs by creating better metrics and coordination among agencies that serve young children.  The plan to revise and expand the domains also includes provisions to collaborate with Maryland to develop a new Early Childhood Comprehensive Assessment System. The new assessment system should be fully integrated into early learning programs in the 2014-15 school year. The ELDS are available. State Board of Education Business Meeting The State Board convened its business meeting on October 8 and 9, 2012. The State Board received public participation on agenda and non-agenda items; received the report of the Acting Superintendent; voted on the report and recommendations of the Acting Superintendent; and adjourned. Public Participation: Valerie Parks Graham, Executive Secretary for Ohio Young Farmers (OYF), explained to the State Board that Ohio Young Farmers is a non-profit public education agriculture program that has been operating in Ohio for the past 64 years. The OYF is affiliated with the National Young Farmers Educational Association. She requested that the State Board include funding ($40,000) for the program in its budget recommendations. Funding has been cut for the past two years. Public Participation Non-Agenda Items: Eric Price presented information to the State Board about the Dayton Exchange Club, which promotes civic education. Mr. Price presented the State Board with a DVD including excerpts of speeches about public participation in government and the celebration of the Gettysburg Address.  Superintendent's Report: Acting Superintendent Michael Sawyers informed the Board that the ODE Chief of Staff position will be filled by Jason Rafled, and that interviews are now being conducted to fill a Senior Executive Director position at the ODE.  Review of Operating Standards: The State Board identified reviewing Operating Standards as one of its priorities for action during their July 2012 Retreat. The purpose of the review is to "... assess and propose revisions to the operating standards to determine what updates, if any, should occur to support Ohio's reform strategy including, but not limited to, providing flexibility to free dollars and seat-time, etc." (September 2012 Board Book 5 p. 12) Acting Superintendent Sawyers presented to the State Board a brief overview of operating standards, Administrative Code 3301-35-01 through 07 and 11, to provide a framework for the Board as it considers the process and timeline that will be used to review operating standards. According to the presentation, the purpose of operating standards is to "assure that all students are provided a general education of high quality". (Section 3301.07 ORC) The standards therefore provide a minimal insurance that all students in Ohio have equal opportunity or access to educational services. Operating standards have a direct impact on the classroom and the success of students. The review will enable the State Board to determine if operating standards are what they need to be to support learning today. Acting Superintendent Sawyers shared a chart with the State Board organizing the operating standards into topics, such as Health and Safety; Staffing; Curriculum; and Other. The chart described the fiscal impact of operating standards for local education agencies; the statutes impacted; the types of schools impacted; and also included some comments about the standards.  A joint subcommittee of the Achievement and Capacity Committee was appointed by State Board President Terhar in September 2012 to review operating standards. The subcommittee includes Mike Collins, Dannie Greene, Angela Thi Bennett, Tom Gunlock, and C. Todd Jones.  Following the presentation Jeff Mims asked Acting Superintendent Sawyers how do you define a "general education of high quality"? Acting Superintendent Sawyers responded that he has asked that question of the ODE legal department as well, and has determined that it means the minimal requirements that should be in place to guarantee that every child has an opportunity to have access to an education that we (the State Board and Department) would then define as of high quality.  Mr. Mims then stated that in the absence of a definition of high quality, test scores are used. But, there is something in addition to test scores that we have to try to use to define quality. Far too often when school districts are short on resources they will focus on reading, math, science, and social studies, and forget about the other components of education that lead to high quality and are important to students. Voting Agenda of the State Board of Education The following are the resolutions that the State Board considered at their October 2012 business meeting: #5 Approved a Resolution of Intent to Amend Rules 3301-13-01,-02,-05, and -06 of the Administrative Code and Rescind Rule 3301-13-08 of the Administrative Code Regarding Statewide Assessments. #6 Approved a Resolution of Intent to Consider the Proposed Transfer of School District Territory from the Buckeye Central Local School District, Seneca County, to the Mohawk Local School District, Seneca County, Pursuant to Section 3311.24 of the Ohio Revised Code. #7 Approved a Resolution to Approve the Negotiated Agreement Between the Petitioners, the Clyde-Green Springs Exempted Village School District and the Bellevue City School District, to Transfer Properties Between the Two Districts. #8 Approved a Resolution to Approve the Negotiated Agreement Between the Petitioners, the Newark City School District, Licking County, and the North Fork Local School District, Licking County to Transfer Properties Between the Two Districts. #18 Approved a Resolution to Adopt the Revised Ohio Teacher Evaluation System to Align with SB316. #19 Approved a Resolution to Adopt Birth to Kindergarten Entry Early Learning and Development Standards and the Successors. #20 Approved NASBE's Public Education Positions. #21 Approved a Resolution to Adopt the Revised Model Anti-harassment, Intimidation, and Bullying Policy. #22 Approved a Resolution to Adopt the Revised State Board of Education Procedures Manual. #23 Postponed to November 2012 considering a Resolution to Adopt an Amendment to the Operator Contract with the SEED Foundation. #24 Postponed to November 2012 considering a Resolution Concerning the October 1, 2012 State Board of Education Biennial Budget Recommendations Submitted to OBM for Fiscal year 2014-15.  President Terhar also shared that she will appoint two task forces, one for early childhood education and the other for the Third Grade Guarantee, to become better informed and better advocates for those issues before the legislature.  #25 Approved a Resolution of Intent to Consider Confirmation of the Clyde-Green Spring Exempted Village School District's Determination of Impractical Transportation of Certain Students Attending Immaculate Conception School, Bellevue, OH. #26 Approved a Resolution of Intent to Consider Confirmation of the Westerville City School District Board of Education's Determination of Impractical Transportation of Certain Students Attending Calumet Christian School in Columbus, Franklin County, OH.  #27 Approved a Resolution to Confirm the Westerville City School District Board of Education's Determination of Impractical Transportation of Certain Students Attending St. Frances De Sales School in Columbus, Franklin County, OH. #28 Approved a Resolution to Confirm the Westerville City School District Board of Education's Determination of Impractical Transportation of Certain Students Attending St. Matthew Catholic School in Gahanna, Franklin County, OH.  #29 Approved a Resolution authorizing the Acting Superintendent of Public Instruction to  recommend to the General Assembly the amendment of ORC 3301.0714 in order to remove the statutory restrictions on reporting certain student information to the Education Information Management System. #30 Approved a Resolution to release the expanded spread-sheet version of the 2011-2012 report card data on or before October 17, 2012. #31 Approved a Motion to Appoint Deborah Cain as a voting delegate to the National School Boards Association. #32 Approved a Motion for the State Board of Education to charge the Department of Administrative Services to offer a contract to conduct the search for a superintendent of pubic instruction to Ray & Associations.   State Auditor David Yost released information on October 4, 2012 about an investigation of schools regarding irregularities found in student attendance data.  (Interim Report on Student Attendance Data and Accountability System, State Auditor of Ohio, October 4, 2012.)

Parent Influence on Student Achievement

An article published in the September 5, 2012 online journal Research in Social Stratification and Mobility reports the findings of researchers regarding the influence of parents in promoting the academic success of their children. ("Does Capital at Home Matter More than Capital at Schools?: Social Capital Effects on Academic Achievement", by Toby Parcel, Mikaela Dufur, and Kelly Troutman, Research in Social Stratification and Mobility, September 5, 2012.) The researchers include Dr. Toby Parcel, professor of sociology at North Carolina State University in Raleigh, N.C; Dr. Mikaela Dufur, of Brigham Young University in Provo, Utah; and Kelly Troutman, a Ph.D. student at the University of California-Irvine. The researchers examined National Education Longitudinal Study data to determine "family social capital" and "school social capital" using information gathered from more than 10,000 students, their parents, teachers, and school administrators. According to the abstract of the article, the researchers found that both family and school capital affect student achievement, but that students with high levels of "family social capital" were able to succeed even in a school with low levels of "school social capital" compared to students with low levels of "family social capital".  The abstract (free) and the article (not free) are available.

Status of Civics Education in States

The Center for Information and Research on Civic Learning and Engagement (CIRCLE) at Tufts University released on October 10, 2012 a Fact Sheet entitled State Civic Education Requirements. The Fact Sheet was prepared through the support of the S. D. Bechtel, Jr. Foundation, and describes state laws, standards, and courses and graduation requirements for K-12 civics education in all 50 states plus the District of Columbia.  According to the press release, the last analysis of state civics requirements by CIRCLE occurred in 2008. This new analysis shows definite policy shifts in states due, in part, to the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB), Race to the Top, and other federal policies. For example, "In 2008, CIRCLE found little change in the amount of time devoted to social studies, but more recent research suggests that states have shifted educational resources away from social studies toward subjects that are included on state-wide assessments. The pendulum may be swinging back as several states are now reforming their requirements for civic education." The following are some of the highlights of the Fact Sheet:   All states have standards for social studies, a broad category that includes civics/government along with other disciplines such as history and geography. The civics theme of power, authority, and government is included in all 51 states' social studies standards (including the District of Columbia's). The theme of civic ideals and practices is found in every state's standard except Missouri's Thirty-nine states require at least one course in American government or civics. In the 2012-13 school year, 21 states require a state-designed social studies test. This is a similar number as in 2006, but a dramatic reduction compared to 2001, when 34 states conducted regular assessments on social studies subjects. Two states, Maryland and Florida, have recently instituted new social studies assessments, not yet required this year. Nine states require students to pass a social studies test in order to graduate from high school: Alabama, Georgia, Mississippi, New Mexico, New York, Ohio, South Carolina, Texas, and Virginia. Georgia's assessment will be phased out but Maryland and Florida will add high-stakes tests. Eight states have statewide, standardized tests specifically in civics/American government: California, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Missouri, Ohio, Virginia, and West Virginia. Of those, Ohio and Virginia are the only ones that require students to pass that test to graduate from high school. Social studies assessments have shifted from a combination of multiple-choice and performance tasks to almost exclusively multiple-choice exams since 2000. More information is available.

What is the State of Public Education?

A commentary by Malbert Smith III, Jason Turner, and Steve Lattanzio in the October 14, 2012 issue of Education Week entitled "Public Schools: Glass Half Full or Half Empty?" examines the reasons for the public to report a "lack of faith in the U.S. public schools system" even though national measures of education achievement have improved. According to a June 7-10, 2012 Gallup survey of "Confidence in Institutions", the percentage of participants who reported that they had a "great deal" or "quite a lot" of confidence in public K-12 education had dropped to the lowest point in the history of the poll, 29 percent. This is also a drop of 29 percentage points from 1973 when Gallup first took the poll.  The authors note, however, that two key indicators of student achievement, the National Assessment of Educational Progress and high school dropout rates, have improved since 1973. NAEP scores for both 4th and 8th grade have been trending upward since the 1970s, and dropout rates have decreased to 7.4 percent in 2010, according to the National Center for Education Statistics. So why has public confidence in public schools decreased? The authors opine that confidence in public education has declined, because Americans have become more cynical overall, and the achievement of American students compared to international measures of educational progress is disappointing. That being said, the authors note that there are encouraging developments to rebuild confidence in America's schools, such as the Common Core Standards; America's institutions of higher education; support for ingenuity and creativity; and American educators who believe that "...all children can learn and that education makes a difference in individual lives and to society as a whole." The authors write, "The accumulation of negative news reports and the labeling of teachers and schools as failures do little to provide a conducive environment for productive change." "The adage that one can choose to see the glass as half empty or half full is undeniably applicable here, and, unfortunately, the public has come to see the education glass as half empty. But while we should continue to have candid conversations about the areas we need to improve, let us also not hesitate to point to our many successes as these green shoots of progress take root." Information about the Gallup Confidence in Institutions survey is available. The article is available.

This update is written weekly by Joan Platz, Research and Knowledge Director for the Ohio Alliance for Arts Education.  The purpose of the update is to keep arts education advocates informed about issues dealing with the arts, education, policy, research, and opportunities.  The distribution of this information is made possible through the generous support of the Ohio Music Education Association (www.omea-ohio.org), Ohio Art Education Association (www.oaea.org), Ohio Educational Theatre Association (www.Ohioedta.org); OhioDance (www.ohiodance.org), and the Ohio Alliance for Arts Education (www.OAAE.net).

Ohio Alliance for Arts Education

Arts On Line Education Update

October 1, 2012

Joan Platz

 

October is National Arts & Humanities Month (NAHM), the largest annual celebration of the arts and humanities in the nation!! 

 

Arts/humanities advocates are finding exciting and creative ways to recognize the contributions that artists, writers, poets, and cultural organizations make in communities and schools during October. 

 

To locate or publicize an NAHM event, please visit the Americans for the Arts website at 

http://www.americansforthearts.org/get_involved/advocacy/nahm/default.asp

 

1) Governor Signs Pension Bills:  Governor Kasich signed into law on September 26, 2012 five pension bills passed by the Ohio and Senate on September 12, 2012: SB340 (Niehaus/Kearney) Ohio Police & Fire Pension Fund; SB341 (Niehaus/Kearney) School Employees Retirement System; SB342 (Niehaus/Kearney) State Teachers Retirement System; SB343 (Niehaus/Kearney) Ohio Public Employees Retirement System; and SB345 Highway Patrol Retirement System. Except for a provision that gives “discretionary board authority” to change pension requirements and benefits, the laws take effect on January 7, 2013.

 

2) Education Issues on the November 2012 Ballot in Other States: The National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL) tracks on its website education issues on the November 2012 ballot by state and topic . This year voters in 10 states will approve or disapprove referendums and initiatives on a variety of education related issues, such as increasing taxes to support schools, charter schools, teacher evaluation, tenure, merit pay, and more. Six of the issues to be decided propose raising taxes and other revenue to support K-12 education!!

 

It is important to know about the education issues voters are considering in other states, because similar issues often appear on subsequent Ohio ballots. The following is a summary of education issues on the November 2012 ballot in nine states as reported on the NCSL website:

 

•Arizona:  Proposition 204 asks voters to approve or not approve The Quality Education and Jobs Act, which renews a one-cent sales tax (created as a temporary tax by Prop. 100 in 2010), and provides dedicated funding for students of all ages, and prevents legislators from cutting K-12 funding. 

 

•California:  

-Proposition 30 is an initiative that would increase the personal income tax on annual earnings over $250,000 for seven years; increase the sales and use tax by ¼ cent for four years; and would allocate temporary tax revenues 89 percent to K-12 schools and 11 percent to community colleges.

 

-Proposition 38 is an initiative that would increase personal income tax rates for annual earnings over $7,316 using a sliding scale, and would end after twelve years. During the first four years, 60 percent of revenues would be allocated to K-12 schools, 30 percent to the state debt, and 10 percent to early childhood programs. Thereafter, 85 percent of revenues would be allocated to K-12 schools, and 15 percent to early childhood programs. The initiative would provide K-12 funds on a school-specific, per-pupil basis, subject to local control, audits, and public input, and would prohibit the state from directing or using new funds.

 

•Georgia:  Amendment 1 authorizes the General Assembly to provide by law for the creation of public state charter schools, which would operate under the terms of charters between the State Board of Education and charter petitioners, while preserving the authority of local boards of education to establish local charter schools.  The amendment would also prohibit the incurrence of bonded indebtedness or the levy of school taxes for the support of special schools without approval of the local board of education and the voters in the affected school system; would authorize the expenditure of state funds for special schools; and would prohibit the deduction of certain state funds from local school districts as a direct result or consequence of the enrollment of students in the state charter schools. The Georgia General Assembly already approved this law, and now is seeking approval from voters to implement it. (2012 HB 797, Act No. 766.)

 

•Idaho: 

-Proposition 1 asks voters to approve or reject legislation limiting negotiated agreements between teachers and local school boards and ending the practice of renewable contracts.

 

-Proposition 2 asks voters to approve or reject legislation providing teacher performance pay based on state-mandates test scores, student performance, hard to fill positions, and leadership.

 

-Proposition 3 asks voters to approve or reject legislation amending school district funding, and requiring provisions for computing devices and online courses for high school graduation.

 

•Missouri:  Proposition B is an initiative to amend Missouri law to create the Health and Education Trust Fund with the proceeds of a tax on cigarettes and other tobacco products.  The fund would be used to reduce and prevent tobacco use and support elementary, secondary, college, and university public schools.

 

•New Mexico:  Question B is a referendum on a law that authorizes the issuance of general obligation bonds to make capital expenditures for academics, public schools, tribal and public library resources acquisitions and construction, and provides for a general property tax imposition and levy for the payment of principal of, interest on, and expenses incurred, in connection with the issuance of the bonds.

 

•Oregon:  Measure 85 is a constitutional amendment to allocate corporate income/excise tax “kicker” refunds to additionally fund K-12 public education.

 

•South Dakota:  

-Initiated Measure 15 would increase state general sales and use taxes (from 4 percent to 5 percent) for additional K-12 public education and medicaid funding. The additional funding cannot replace or reduce state funding levels set for fiscal year 2012 relating to existing Medicaid and K-12 public education programs, including state aid to education.

 

-Referred Law 16 is a referendum to support an education reform act that establishes a teacher scholarship program; creates a program for math and science teacher bonuses; creates a program for teacher merit bonuses; mandates a uniform teacher and principal evaluation system; and eliminates state requirements for teacher tenure.

 

•Washington:  Initiative 1240 would allow a newly-created state commission or approved local school boards to authorize certain nonreligious, nonprofit organizations to operate public charter schools, limited to forty schools over five years. Public charter schools would receive standard per-student public school funding and be open to all students without tuition. Public charter schools would be subject to teacher certification requirements, government oversight, and performance reporting requirements, but would be exempt from certain state laws and school district policies.

 

For more information about these initiatives please visit http://www.ncsl.org/legislatures-elections/elections/ballot-measures-database.aspx

 

3) Results of the SAT Exam Released:  The College Board released on September 24, 2012 The SAT Report on College & Career Readiness.  According to the report, 1.66 million students in private and public schools took the exam last year, which is the highest number of participating students in the history of the exam.  Forty-three percent of the students posted a score of at least 1550 out of 2400, which the College Board defines as college and career-ready, and means that a student has a 65 percent chance of maintaining at least a B-minus as a university freshman.

 

According to the report the mean SAT scores dropped on the reading and writing sections of the exam this year. The mean scores are 496 in reading (a one-point drop from 2011); 488 in writing (a one point drop from 2011); and 514 in math, unchanged since 2007. 

 

The report also noted that more minority students and students with English as their second language are taking the exam.  Forty-five percent of senior students who took the exam in 2012 are members of a minority group, compared to 38 percent in 2008. Twenty-eight percent of students reported that English is not their first language, compared to 24 percent in 2008. 

 

The College Board provides supplemental information about the seniors taking the SAT in a report entitled Total Group Profile Report.  This report includes information about the college and career plans of students, demographic information, and the average SAT scores for students according to the courses that they take in high school.

 

According to the Total Group Profile Report, the average number of years that students reported studying courses in the arts in high school is 2.2.  The mean SAT scores for students taking four years of the arts in high school are 528 in reading; 534 in math; and 520 in writing.  By comparison, the mean SAT scores of students who reported taking four years of math are 506 in reading; 516 in math; and 496 in writing.  This information is available in the Total Group Report at 

http://media.collegeboard.com/digitalServices/pdf/research/TotalGroup-2012.pdf.

   

Nine-teen percent of Ohio students in public and private schools took the SAT exam in 2012. The mean scores for Ohio students are 543 in reading; 552 in math; and 525 in writing, which are all increases over 2011 scores. The average number of years that Ohio students reported taking the arts is 2.5.  The mean SAT scores for students taking four years of the arts in Ohio schools are 563 in reading; 564 in math; and 545 in writing.

This information is available in the Total Group Report for Ohio, available at 

http://media.collegeboard.com/digitalServices/pdf/research/OH_12_03_03_01.pdf

 

To read the full report please visit

http://press.collegeboard.org/releases/2012/sat-report-only-43-percent-2012-college-bound-seniors-college-ready

 

•How are SAT and ACT Scores Used?  An article in Education Week on September 25, 2012 entitled “Weighing SAT and ACT Scores in College Admissions” by Caralee Adams describes the results of a survey of 350 college-admissions officers by Kaplan Test Prep.  The survey found that 18 percent of college admissions officers recommend that students submit both an ACT and SAT score to prospective colleges.  The number of students taking either exam has increased. In 2012 ACT Inc. reported that 1,666,017 took its exam, about the same as the number of students taking the SAT exam (1.66 million). About 85 percent of colleges and universities required applicants to submit an ACT or SAT score, but approximately 850 four-year colleges and universities reported that the scores are optional, according to the National Center for Fair and Open Testing. The article is available at http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/college_bound/2012/09/survey_finds_combo_of_sat_and_act_scores_interest_1_in_5_admissions_officers.html?cmp=ENL-EU-NEWS2 

 

4) State High School Exit Exams Will Become Tougher:  The Center on Education Policy (CEP) released on September 19, 2012 a report entitled, State High School Exit Exams:  A Policy in Transition by Shelby McIntosh.  This is the 11th annual CEP report on high school exit exams, and it shows that states are increasing their expectations for students by “embracing higher standards on their exit exams.” The report includes information about current exit exam policies in 45 states; the future of these policies as states implement the Common Core State Standards and common assessments; and lessons learned from implementing the new exams.

 

According to the report 25 states require high school students to pass an exam to graduate.  Twenty-two of these states have adopted the Common Core State Standards.  Sixteen states expect to replace their current high school exams with common core assessments, and some will also use the results of the exams to make decisions about graduation. Twelve states are also using the results of the exit exams to determine if students are “college and career ready.” 

 

End-of-course exams are also becoming more popular. Nine states currently require students to pass end-of-course exams to graduate; three additional states are phasing in requirements for end-of-course exit exams; and six more states currently require or will soon require students to take, but not necessarily pass, end-of-course exams to graduate.

 

The author of the report suggests that several key questions about exit exams remain unresolved:

 

-Do exit exams raise student achievement?  “Very little (if any) evidence exists to suggest they have. For example, Grodsky et. al (2009) found no relationship between the adoption of an exit exam (or a change from a less rigorous to more rigorous test) and increased student achievement when they analyzed student achievement in states with exit exams using individual-level long term trend data from the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) data from 1971 to 2004.”

 

-What are the effects of exit exams on the student achievement of low-performing vs. high-performing students? Researchers conclude from studies that “....the adoption of high school exit exams is not associated with any achievement gains or losses, and that “the evidence indicates that low-achieving students—those often targeted by these policies—do not experience gains under the more rigorous exams” (p. 487-488).”

 

-Why are exit exams seldom used as a criteria for selecting students/employees by institutions of higher education or employers? 

 

-What will be the impact of exit exams on racial/ethnic minority students, poor students, students with disabilities, and English language learners? “States have not, by and large, supported major research on important effects of these exams, such as their impact on curriculum and achievement, prevalence of students relying on alternate paths, or the relationship between these exams and students choosing to drop out of school. Without funding for research built into states’ plans for these exams, they cannot adequately ensure the success of these policies or understand the impacts on their students.”

 

The report is available at http://www.cep-dc.org/.

 

5) Brief Finds Data on Pre-K Programs Lacking:  The New American Foundation’s Early Education Initiative released on September 19, 2012 an issue brief entitled, Counting Kids and Tracking Funds in Pre-K and Kindergarten:  Falling Short at the Local Level by Lisa Guernsey and Alex Holt.  The brief describes the problems that researchers have finding data at the local level about pre-K programs, and notes that this has also been a major challenge of the New America Foundation’s Federal Education Budget Project, which collects and displays information on federal education funding.

 

According to the report, there is a lack of basic information about publicly funded early childhood education programs which seriously affects the ability of local governments, school leaders, policy-makers, and stakeholders to analyze pre-K and Kindergarten programs to make sure that they are meeting the needs of the children; are accountable to the public; are accessible to all children; and are equitable. The authors add, that “...poor data can lead to poor policies.”

 

The challenges in collecting data about pre-K and Kindergarten programs include the diversity of funding sources, including local, state, federal, and private funding and tuition payments; the differences in governance structures, enrollment requirements, hours/days of operation, and in the ages of enrolled children; and, for Kindergarten, the types of funding (including tuition payments), the length of the school day and school week, and enrollment criteria.

 

The brief recommends that a task-force of experts in early learning data be convened to identify how states can create a more logical, systematized approach to collecting data on early education programs.

 

The authors conclude, “Getting the data right is a critical step toward providing better learning experiences for all young children, laying the groundwork for alignment across the pre-K-3rd grade years, and building a strong foundation for their success in school.”

 

Information about this report is available at http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/early_years/2012/09/school_districts_and_communities_across.html?cmp=ENL-EU-NEWS2

 

FYI ARTS

 

1) Webinar on a New Funding Opportunity:  The National Endowment for the Arts (NEA) and the National Institutes of Health (NIH) will co-host a webinar on Thursday, October 4, 2012, from 3:00 – 4:00 PM EST about a new funding opportunity available to explore the effects of culture on health-related beliefs and practices.

 

The new funding opportunity will support research projects that bring together teams of social and behavioral researchers and arts and cultural experts to gain new insights into the relationships between culture and health. This effort is supported by the NIH Basic Behavioral and Social Science Opportunity Network (OppNet), a trans-NIH initiative that funds activities to build the collective body of knowledge about the nature of behavior and social systems. This is the first-time the NIH has embedded the arts into an OppNet Request for Applications on the social sciences. 

 

According to a press release, the NEA Interagency Task Force on the Arts and Human Development has brought together federal agencies – including the NIH – to promote more and better research on how the arts help people reach their full potential at all stages of life. The NEA and the Interagency Task Force periodically host public webinars to share research, practices, and/or funding opportunities for research in the arts and human development. Task Force members include representatives from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, the National Institutes of Health, the National Science Foundation, the U.S. Department of Education, and other agencies and departments.  More information about the Task Force can be found at http://www.nea.gov/research/convenings.html 

  

For information about the webinar please visit

http://www.nea.gov/news/news12/NEA-NIH-webinar.html

 

An archive of the webinar will be available on Monday, October 8, 2012 at http://www.arts.gov/research/convenings/

 

2) Registration Open for AFA Local Arts Classroom:  Americans for the Arts announced on September 24, 2012 that registration is open for the 2013 Local Arts Classroom, a virtual leadership development series that provides an opportunity for arts leaders with less than 10 years of experience to master foundational concepts and build skills in local arts development. The program will run from January through May 2013, 

 

Participants in the 2013 Local Arts Classroom will be selected via a competitive application and panel process.  A maximum of 40 individuals will be accepted into the program. Selected participants will attend seven 90-minute webinars and seven 60-minute post-webinar discussion calls, each offering opportunities to connect with field leaders.  Participants will also have opportunities to regularly connect with peers around the country, and have access to a Classroom participant only web portal that will include resources to further study in each subject. 

 

The topics that will be covered in the series include,

-Cultural and Community Planning:  Building a Common Agenda for Development

-Space for Art:  Creating Spaces for Arts Production, Presentation, and Community Engagement

-Advocacy:  Making the Case for Arts and Culture

-Stewardship and Resource Development:  Raising Funds, Friends, and Allies

-Activating Community Leadership:  Board and Staff Development

-New in 2013 – Career Development:  Navigating Opportunities in the Local Arts Field

 

For more information please visit

http://www.artsusa.org/networks/emerging_leaders/classroom/003.asp

 

3) Creative Conversations:  Americans for the Arts is partnering again this year with arts and community leaders to host Creative Conversations. Last year, more than 1,800 individuals participated in 52 locally hosted Creative Conversations held throughout the country, and created a grassroots movement to elevate the profile of arts in America during National Arts & Humanities Month every October.

To locate a Creative Conversation in your area, please visit 

http://www.artsusa.org/networks/emerging_leaders/events/creative_conversations/default.asp

 

4) News from VSA:  VSA Ohio’s annual calls for art are now open! Entries for the 2013 touring visual arts exhibition, Accessible Expressions Ohio, and the Young Soloists Awards for musicians are available.  The deadline for both entries is Friday, December 7, 2012 by 5:00 PM.

 

Accessible Expressions Ohio is an adjudicated, statewide exhibition and tour of visual art. The tour is exhibited at an opening ceremony where a second adjudication is conducted to determine awards and cash prizes. The selected works then tour the state for a year travelling to different venues throughout Ohio.

For information and an entry form please visit

http://www.vsao.org/node/111

 

VSA’s Young Soloists Awards program recognizes the talent of young musicians. Finalists are selected by a panel of judges and will be showcased as performers at the Day of Arts for All celebration at the Westerville Community Center on Saturday, March 2, 2013. 

For more information and an entry form please visit 

http://www.vsao.org/node/113

 

For additional information please contact Morgan at mgreen@vsao.org or by phone at 614.241.5325.

 

5) Poetry Out Loud: The Ohio Arts Council (OAC) – in partnership with Thurber House, the Ohioana Library, the National Endowment for the Arts, and the Poetry Foundation – is offering the national recitation contest Poetry Out Loud in 2012-2013. Poetry Out Loud helps students master public speaking skills, build self-confidence, and learn about their literary heritage. Free teacher toolkits, artist workshops, and coaching are available through the Ohio Arts Council. Classroom activities begin in the fall and conclude with school competitions. Winners advance to the Ohio finals in Columbus on March 16, 2013. Cash prizes will be awarded and Ohio’s state champion will win an all-expenses paid trip to Washington, D.C. to compete in the national finals on April 28-30, 2013. For more information please visit

http://www.oac.state.oh.us/events/PoetryOutLoud/

 

6)  Chicago Teachers’ Contract Includes the Arts:  An analysis of the new teachers’ contract for the Chicago Public School District shows that there will be an expansion of the curriculum and the addition of over 600 positions mostly in the arts, music, and PE. The contract also includes the following: requires that teachers be provided a locked cabinet; requires that teachers have access to a printer and other office supplies; requires that students receive textbooks on the first day of school; and allocates additional funding to reduce class size. The document is available at 

http://www.ctunet.com/for-members/strike-central/text/Board-Proposals-Summary-Comparison.pdf