Ohio Alliance for Arts Education
September 10, 2012
Joan Platz
Arts On Line Education Update
How will your school/district celebrate Arts in Education Week, September 9-15, 2012?
Governor Kasich and Lieutenant Governor Mary Taylor have issued a Proclamation declaring the week of September 9-15, 2012 Arts in Education Week. The Proclamation encourages support for the arts as a core academic subject and as an essential component of a complete and balanced education for all students.
The Ohio Alliance for Arts Education is pleased to announce that supporting the Proclamation are all the major education and arts education organizations in Ohio, including the State Board of Education, the Ohio Department of Education, the Ohio Music Education Association, the Buckeye Association of School Administrators, the Ohio Art Education Association, the Ohio Association of Elementary School Administrators, the Ohio Association for Gifted Children, the Ohio Association of School Business Officials, the Ohio Association of Secondary School Administrators, the Ohio Coalition for Equity and Adequacy of School Funding, OhioDance, the Ohio Education Association, the Ohio Educational Service Center Association, the Ohio Educational Theatre Association, the Ohio Federation of Teachers, the Ohio Congress of Parents and Teachers, the Ohio School Boards Association, and the Ohio School Psychologists Association.
Some of the ways to promote Arts in Education Week include
•Write a letter to the editor for the local newspaper highlighting the significant impact arts education has on students and your community.
•Present at a board of education meeting, and highlight the contributions that arts education programs have made to students, the school district, and the community. Present a copy of the Proclamation to your local board of education and request that they endorse it.
•Ask businesses in your community to display the Proclamation in their windows or information bulletin boards, and encourage them to support the arts in schools.
•Encourage teachers and school administrators to incorporate Arts in Education Week in school activities the week of September 9th. For example, request that an announcement about Arts in Education Week be made prior to the marching band’s halftime show at the football game, and request that information about Arts in Education Week be included on the school/district website, in school announcements, in school newsletters, and on information boards.
•Write to elected officials (school board members, city council, Ohio House and Senate members, etc.) requesting that they support an adequate, fair, and stable school funding system that includes sufficient resources to provide quality arts education programs for all students.
•Invite artists in your community to speak to students about being college and career ready in the arts.
Americans for the Arts will be celebrating Arts in Education Week by hosting a blog salon on ARTSblog. This is a biannual event about arts education topics, and this fall’s theme is the intersection of the arts and the new Common Core State Standards. The blog salon will feature a collection of posts by arts and education leaders, such as Yong Zhao, Richard Kessler, and Amy Johnson. Follow the salon by using the arts education tag on ARTSblog http://blog.artsusa.org/category/arts-education/.
Let the OAAE know how you celebrate Arts in Education Week so that we can share your ideas!
To view a copy of the Arts in Education Week Proclamation, please visit http://oaae.net.
1) 129th Ohio General Assembly: The Ohio House and Senate are scheduled to meet on September 12, 2012 to consider five pension reform bills:
-SB340 (Niehaus) Ohio Police and Fire Pension Funding
-SB341 (Niehaus) School Employees Retirement System
-SB342 (Niehaus) State Teachers Retirement System
-SB343 (Niehaus) Public Employees Retirement System
-SB345 (Niehaus/Kearney) State Highway Patrol Retirement System
On September 5, 2012 the House Health and Aging Retirement and Pensions Subcommittee, chaired by Representative Schuring accepted substitute versions of the bills. The subcommittee is scheduled to meet on September 10, 2012 at 11:00 AM in hearing room 121 and approve the bills, setting up a vote on the bills by the full House Health and Aging Committee, chaired by Representative Wachtmann, on September 10, 2012 at 3:00 PM. The bills will then be considered by the Ohio House and Senate.
2) 2012 Election News:
•Early Voting Update: The U.S. District Court Southern District of Ohio Eastern Division ordered on August 31, 2012 Ohio Secretary of State Jon Husted to restore in-person early voting on the weekend before the November 6, 2012 election. (Obama for America v. Husted)
Last week Secretary Husted issued an order barring county boards of elections from posting in-person voting hours on the weekend before the November 6, 2012 election, pending a decision in an appeal of the ruling. The appeal was filed by Attorney General Mike DeWine with the U.S. Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals on September 4, 2012. By the end of last week, however, Secretary Husted had rescinded that order after U.S. District Court Judge Peter Economus requested that Secretary Husted appear before the Court to explain why he issued an order that contradicted the ruling. Secretary Husted also filed a motion for a stay of the order. For information about this ruling, please visit http://moritzlaw.osu.edu/electionlaw/.
•Update on the Provisional Ballot Ruling: On September 6, 2012 Ohio Secretary of State Jon Husted and Ohio Attorney General Mike DeWine appealed a ruling issued last week by U.S. District Court Judge Algenon Marbley. The ruling ordered Ohio Secretary of State Jon Husted to issue a directive within ten days requiring boards of elections to count provisional ballots that are miscast due to poll worker error or technical mistakes. The appeal was made to the U.S. Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals. (Service Employees International Union v. Husted and Northeast Ohio Coalition of the Homeless v. Husted). For more information please visit http://moritzlaw.osu.edu/electionlaw/.
3) State Board of Education to Meet
The State Board of Education, Debe Terhar president, will meet on September 10-11, 2012 at the Ohio School for the Deaf, 500 Morse Road, Columbus, OH.
Meeting on Monday, September 10, 2012
The Legislative and Budget Committee, chaired by C. Todd Jones will meet at 8:30 AM to discuss the State Board of Education’s FY14-15 Budget and Legislative Recommendations.
The Executive Committee, chaired by Debe Terhar, will meet at 9:30 AM and discuss the superintendent’s search; discuss the State Board’s Policy and Procedures Manual; and select a voting delegate to the NASBE convention.
At 10:00 AM the full Board will discuss changes to the 2011-2012 Local Report Card and the July Retreat.
Following lunch at 1:00 PM the full Board will receive a presentation regarding the FY14-15 State Board of Education Budget and Legislative Recommendations.
The State Board will convene its business meeting at 3:30 PM and move into Executive Session. Following the Executive Session the Achievement, Capacity, and Urban Education committees will meet.
The Achievement Committee, chaired by Angela Thi Bennett, will discuss and approve a Resolution to Adopt a Revised Physical Education and Wellness Report Card Measure; discuss and approve a Resolution of Intent to Adopt Early Learning and Development Standards; discuss proposed amendments to assessment rules and approve a Resolution for Assessments; and discuss the Restraint and Seclusion Policy.
The Capacity Committee, chaired by Tom Gunlock, will discuss standards for Waivers of the Operating Standards pursuant to R.C. 3301.07(O); discuss an update on ORC 3319.228(B)(1) List of States with Inadequate Licensure Standards; and discuss OAC Rule 3301-24-05 Licensure.
The Committee on Urban Education, chaired by Joe Farmer, will discuss planning for future meetings and activities.
Meeting on Tuesday, September 11, 2012
The State Board will continue its meeting on September 11, 2012 at 8:30 AM with a policy review of the Third Grade Reading Guarantee and an overview of setting cut scores for the reading guarantee. The business meeting will follow. The State Board will approve minutes for the July 2012 Retreat and August 20, 2012 Special Meeting; receive public participation on agenda items; receive the report of the Acting Superintendent of Public Instruction; vote on the Report and the Recommendations of the Acting Superintendent of Public Instruction; consider old business and new business; receive public participation on non-agenda items at 1:00 PM; and adjourn.
The following is the Report and Recommendations of the Superintendent of Public Instruction:
#7 Approve a Resolution of Intent to Amend Rule 3301-24-01 of the Administrative Code entitled Glossary/Definitions.
#8 Approve a Resolution of Intent to Amend Rule 3301-24-05 of the Administrative Code entitled Licensure.
#9 Approve a Resolution of Intent to Adopt Birth to Kindergarten Entry Early Learning and Development Standards and their Successors.
#10 Approve a Resolution of Intent to Adopt a Revised Model Anti-Harassment, Intimidation and Bullying (HIB) Policy.
#11 Approve a Resolution to Confirm and Approve the Recommendation of the Hearing Officer and to Approve the Transfer of School District Territory from the Bethel Local School District, Miami County, to the Miami East Local School District, Miami County, pursuant to Section 3311.24 of the Ohio Revised Code.
#12 Approve a Resolution to Confirm and Approve the Recommendation of the Hearing Officer and to Deny the Transfer of School District Territory from the Little Miami Local School District, Warren County, to the Kings Local School District, Warren County, pursuant to Section 3311.24 of the Ohio Revised Code.
#23 Approve a Resolution to Amend Rule 3301-51-08 of the Administrative Code entitled Parentally Placed Nonpublic School Children.
#24 Approve the Willard City School District Board of Education’s Determination of Impractical Transportation of Certain Students Attending St. Paul Elementary and St. Paul High School in Norwalk, OH.
#25 Approve a Resolution to Adopt the State Board of Education’s 2014-2015 Budget Request to the Governor and Members of the General Assembly.
#26 Approve a Motion to Select a State Board of Education Voting Delegate at the NASBE Convention.
#27 Approve a Resolution of Appointment to the Educator Standards Board.
#28 Approve a Resolution to Adopt the Revised Physical Education and Wellness Report Card Measure.
#29 Approve a Resolution to Adopt Cut Scores for the Third Grade Ohio Achievement Assessment in Reading for the Purposes of the Third Grade Reading Guarantee.
#30 Approve a Resolution to Accept the Recommendation of the Hearing Officer and to Revoke the Registration of Rays of Hope as an Autism Scholarship Provider, Pursuant to Section 3310.41 of the Revised Code and Rule 3301-103-06(E) of the Ohio Administrative Code.
4) Republican Platform for Education: The following is a summary of the 2012 Republican Party platform for education. In order to analyze the platform the summary is organized into several capitalized topics, which are not part of the original document.
Republican Platform: Education: A Chance for Every Child
CHOICE
The Platform strongly supports consumer rights in education choice and states that it is “...the most important driving force for renewing our schools.”
The Platform supports, “School choice—whether through charter schools, open enrollment requests, college lab schools, virtual schools, career and technical education programs, vouchers, or tax credits—is important for all children, especially for families with children trapped in failing schools.”
The Platform also supports an expansion of the “D.C. Opportunity Scholarship Program” nationwide.
PARENT INVOLVEMENT
The Platform states that parents are responsible for the education of their children. Parents should be provided broad education choices at the state and local levels. There should be transparency so that “...parents and the public can discover which schools best serve their pupils”.
CURRICULUM
The Platform supports “...family literacy programs, which improve the reading, language, and life skills of both parents and children from low-income families”.
It also supports an “English First approach” and opposes divisive programs that limit “students’ ability to advance in American society.”
According to the Platform, higher expectations for all students and higher academic standards are needed. The types of educational programs that should be provided include “... the development of character and financial literacy; periodic rigorous assessments on the fundamentals, especially math, science, reading, history, and geography; renewed focus on the Constitution and the writings of the Founding Fathers, and an accurate account of American history that celebrates the birth of this great nation”.
The Platform supports replacing “family planning” programs for teens with “...abstinence education which teaches abstinence until marriage as the responsible and respected standard of behavior.”
The Platform opposes “school-based clinics that provide referrals, counseling, and related services for abortion and contraception”, and the use of federal money “..in mandatory or universal mental health, psychiatric, or socio-emotional screening programs.
GOVERNANCE
The Platform mentions that schools need “strong leadership from locally elected school boards” and supports state and local control of schools.
FUNDING
According to the Platform, “More money alone does not necessarily equal better performance.” The Platform supports “...block grants and the repeal of numerous federal regulations which interfere with State and local control of public schools. The bulk of the federal money through Title I for low-income children and through IDEA for disabled youngsters should follow the students to whatever school they choose so that eligible pupils, through open enrollment, can bring their share of the funding with them.”
ACCOUNTABILITY
The Platform supports accountability on the part of “...administrators, parents and teachers.”
EDUCATION REFORM
According to the Platform, schools should be provided the flexibility and freedom to innovate and adapt to the special needs of their students. Teachers and administrators are responsible for student performance.
The Platform supports policies and methods that have proven effective such as, “...building on the basics, especially STEM subjects (science, technology, engineering, and math) and phonics; ending social promotions; merit pay for good teachers; classroom discipline; parental involvement; and strong leadership by principals, superintendents, and locally elected school boards” and the proper implementation of technology.
Other types of reforms that are supported include “home schooling and local innovations like single-sex classes, full-day school hours, and year-round schools.”
CAREER TECHNICAL EDUCATION
The platform supports “...the promotion of local career and technical educational programs and entrepreneurial programs that have been supported by leaders in industry and will retrain and retool the American workforce, which is the best in the world.”
TEACHERS
The Platform states that, “We applaud America’s great teachers, who should be protected against frivolous litigation and should be able to take reasonable actions to maintain discipline and order in the classroom.”
Legislation should be passed to correct the current law defining a “Highly Qualified Teacher” by credentials, rather than results in the classroom. School districts should be able “...to make use of teaching talent in business, STEM fields, and in the military, especially among our returning veterans. Rigid tenure systems based on the “last in, first out” policy should be replaced with a merit-based approach that can attract fresh talent and dedication to the classroom.”
All personnel who interact with school children should pass background checks and be held to the highest standards of personal conduct.
HIGHER EDUCATION
According to the Platform, “Higher education faces its own challenges, many of which stem from the poor preparation of students before they reach college. One consequence has been the multiplying number of remedial courses for freshmen.”
The Platform calls on State officials to “...ensure that our public colleges and universities be places of learning and the exchange of ideas, not zones of intellectual intolerance favoring the Left.”
“New systems of learning are needed to compete with traditional four-year colleges: expanded community colleges and technical institutions, private training schools, online universities, life-long learning, and work-based learning in the private sector.”
According to the Platform, Federal student aid is on an un-sustainable path. “The federal government should not be in the business of originating student loans; however, it should serve as an insurance guarantor for the private sector as they offer loans to students. Private sector participation in student financing should be welcomed. Any regulation that drives tuition costs higher must be reevaluated to balance its worth against its negative impact on students and their parents.”
Source: 2012 Republican Party Platform pp. 35-37. http://www.gop.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/2012GOPPlatform.pdf
5) Democratic Party Platform for Education
The following is a summary of the 2012 Democratic Party platform for education. In order to analyze the platform the summary is organized into several capitalized topics, which are not part of the original document.
Democratic Platform: An Economy that Out-Educates the World and Offers Greater Access to Higher Education and Technical Training.
PUBLIC EDUCATION
The Democratic Platform believes that public education “...is one of our critical democratic institutions” and is committed to ensuring that every child in America has access to a world-class public education. The goal is for the United States to have the world’s highest proportion of college graduates by 2020.
EARLY LEARNING
The Platform identifies the public education system as extending from early learning through post-secondary education. Standards for early learning should be improved, and Head Start extended.
PARENT INVOLVEMENT
The Platform states “We also recognize there is no substitute for a parent’s involvement in their child’s education.”
CHOICE
The Platform supports public school options including magnet schools, charter schools, teacher-led schools, and career academies.
CURRICULUM
According to the Platform all students should have access to high quality opportunities including those in science, technology, engineering, mathematics, etc. The Platform also states that Democrats are proud of their support for arts funding and education, and are committed to continuing the policies and programs that support the creative arts industry and economy. According to the Platform, “Investment in the arts strengthens our communities and contributes to our nation’s rich cultural heritage.” Support will continue for the National Endowment for the Arts, the National Endowment for the Humanities, and for programs providing art and music education in primary and secondary schools.
FUNDING
The Platform states that schools need flexibility and resources to improve elementary and secondary education in a way that works best for students.
EDUCATION REFORM
The Platform supports closing the achievement gap in America’s schools; raising standards so that all students graduate ready for college or careers; turning around low performing schools; and providing public school options for students who are potential dropouts.
TEACHERS
According to the Platform, “...Democrats honor our nation’s teachers, who do a heroic job for their students every day. If we want high-quality education for all our kids, we must listen to the people who are on the front lines.”
The Platform notes how the Obama administration has worked to save teaching jobs through the stimulus package, and has worked to prevent more teacher layoffs while attracting and rewarding great teachers.
The Democratic Party supports raising standards for the programs that prepare teachers; recognizing and rewarding good teaching; retaining good teachers; evaluating teachers; giving struggling teachers a chance to succeed; and protecting due process.
Democrats are committed to preparing math and science teachers and training workers with skills for the future, and doubling funding for key basic research agencies.
HIGHER EDUCATION
The Platform supports reforming the student loan program, by removing the banks acting as middlemen, and direct investments to more students; making college affordable for students by doubling Pell Grant scholarships and creating the American Opportunity Tax Credit worth up to $10,000 over four years of college; creating avenues for students to manage their federal student loans; encouraging colleges to keep their costs down; investing in colleges that keep tuition affordable and provide good value; doubling the number of work-study jobs available to students; continuing to ensure that students have access to federal loans with reasonable interest rates; and investing in Historically Black Colleges and Universities, Hispanic-Serving Institutions, Tribal Colleges and Universities, Alaska, Hawaiian Native Institutions, Asian American and Pacific Islander Institutions, and other Minority Serving Institutions.
The Platform supports investing in community colleges and supporting additional partnerships between businesses and community colleges to train workers, and investing in science to educate the next generation of scientists and engineers.
According to the Platform “...we will work to make it possible for foreign students earning advanced degrees in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics to stay and help create jobs here at home” and allow “deserving young people, who are American in every way but on paper” stay and complete their education.
The Democratic Platform is available at http://assets.dstatic.org/dnc-platform/2012-National-Platform.pdf
6) State Funding for Education Drops: The Center on Budget Policies and Priorities released on September 4, 2012 an analysis of state budget documents for funding primary and secondary education programs in 48 states. (“New School Year Brings More Cuts in State Funding for Schools” by Phil Oliff, Chris Mai, and Michael Leachman, The Center on Budget Policies and Priorities, September 4, 2012.)
According to the analysis, states have made deep cuts in education funding since the start of the recession and those cuts have increased over the last year. “Elementary and high schools are receiving less state funding in the 2012-13 school year than they did last year in 26 states, and in 35 states school funding now stands below 2008 levels — often far below.”
The analysis found that state revenues began to drop in 2007 to the lowest levels in the past 70 years. To balance budgets most states relied on spending cuts rather than a balanced approach using cuts and revenue increases. This strategy led to severe cuts for education programs and local governments.
Currently state funding for schools remains well below pre-recession levels. For example, seventeen states have cut per-student funding by more than 10 percent from 2008 levels. Arizona, Alabama, and Oklahoma have reduced per-pupil funding to K-12 schools by more than 20 percent. The state level of funding in Ohio dropped $152 per student in 2012.
Although the economies of some states are recovering, the report states that “...it will take years before state revenues are able to sustain services like K-12 education at normal levels.” For example, Florida cut the state’s per pupil funding level by $569 over the previous four years, and has only been able to increase per pupil allocations by $273 in 2012.
The analysis did find some states in which education funding increased or remained the same between 2008-2012. Alaska, Montana, North Dakota, and Wyoming have significant oil and gas resources, and did not experience the recession like other states. Maryland, Massachusetts, and Iowa maintained state spending levels for education as a policy decision.
The report also notes the consequences of the steep K-12 spending cuts. School districts with higher concentrations of poverty depend more on state education aid, and lost more state funding when state spending cuts were made.
The spending cuts extended the recession and slowed the recovery, because schools laid-off teachers and administrators, according to federal employment data. The report states, “As of July 2012, local school districts had cut 328,000 jobs nationally compared to 2008.” The job losses have affected the purchasing power of families, thus extending the recession.
The cuts in state spending for education also affected education reform initiatives, such as lengthening the school day; reducing class size; expanding early childhood education; expanding worker training programs, etc.
According to the report, deeper cuts in federal funds for education known as “sequestration” will go into effect if the U.S. Congress and president are not able to agree on a path to reduce the federal budget and lower deficits by January 2013. If sequestration happens state economic conditions will become worse, making it harder for states to restore funding for education.
The report is available at http://www.cbpp.org/cms/index.cfm?fa=view&id=3825
7) Blog Explores the Movement to Privatize Education: Anthony Cody in Education Week’s “Living in the Dialog Blog” writes that the battle lines over education reform have become hardened over the role of the marketplace in pushing forward education improvement and innovation. (The Dialog with the Gates Foundation: What Happens When Profits Drive Reform” by Anthony Cody, Education Week, September 3, 2012.)
This is the last blog in a series of dialogues that Mr. Cody has had with Gates Foundation associates discussing the purpose of K-12 education; how poverty affects student learning; teacher evaluations; etc.
In this blog Mr. Cody provides a history of a movement that he believes is underway to undermine public education in order to promote privately run and often for-profit school alternatives, such as charter schools, virtual schools, vouchers, and the for-profit industry that provides support services for K-12 education, valued at $1.3 trillion. Some of the participants in movement include the leaders of the Thomas B. Fordham Foundation, the Gates Foundation, Pearson Foundation (Connections Education), the American Legislative Exchange Council, K12, Inc., Cities for Education Entrepreneurship Trust, and groups and businesses led by Rupert Murdoch, Jeb Bush (Foundation for Excellence in Education), and Michelle Rhee to name a few.
According to the author, advocates for privatization have pushed for federal legislation such as the No Child Left Behind Act and Race to the Top, and statewide support for the Common Standards, teacher evaluations based on student test scores, and merit-based teacher compensation. State initiatives to test all students, rate schools based on student performance, and collect and disseminate student data are being used to undermine the public confidence in public schools, in order to open the door for “non-government” alternative educational options, such as charter schools and voucher programs.
The author writes, “From my perspective, the drive for profits is problematic as a motive force for school reform. As we see with the virtual charter sector, there are great incentives to create “efficiencies,” and, lacking significant oversight, there are huge problems with quality. The collusion between the profiteering virtual charters, the testing industry, ALEC and the legislative bodies that are being influenced through legalized bribery taints the entire project.”
He describes the role of the Gates Foundation in this movement as “seminal”. The Gates Foundation gave $2 million to publicize the film “Waiting for Superman”; funds Excellence in Education and the Parent Revolution, an organization that supports parent trigger laws, and Media Bullpen, which rates the media based on its support for vouchers and charters.
The author also notes that the Gates Foundation has supported many education efforts not related to privatizing education, but its emphasis on the Common Core; online testing; standardized testing; evaluating teachers based on student test scores is clearly a priority for the foundation.
The author concludes that the purpose of public education is to ensure that all students, not just the lucky few, have access to excellent educational opportunities. Public schools exist “not only to provide opportunity for individual students, but also as a common resource, in which we invest as community members. We bring together children from all races, religions and walks of life under one roof, to learn together.”
The blog is available at http://blogs.edweek.org/teachers/living-in-dialogue/2012/09/the_dialogue_with_the_gates_fo.html?cmp=ENL-EU-VIEWS2
FYI ARTS
1) Update from the Ohio Arts Council (OAC): The September/October 2012 issue of ArtsOhio is available at http://maildogmanager.com/page.html?p=000001XDDtjAo7FbgWdmA0xKImtLCZi84GaPpqVTnDs+Sy.
This issue includes information about how to nominate an individual or organization for the 2013 Governor’s Awards for the Arts in Ohio; information about how to register for Poetry Out Loud; a calendar of arts events in Ohio for September and October; and information about October, which is National Arts and Humanities Month.
October has been recognized as National Arts and Humanities Month (NAHM) since 1993 and many Ohio communities will celebrate NAHM with special events and activities.
The Ohio Arts Council will host several events to celebrate NAHM including performing, literary, and visual arts activities at the Statehouse and the Ohio Arts Council’s Riffe Gallery.
On Thursday, October 11, 2012 at noon the public is invited to readings by notable Ohio poets and a Poetry Out Loud finalist.
Every Wednesday during October from noon to 1:00 PM visitors to the Statehouse can enjoy a special Art Tour highlighting the People’s Art Collection. The tour includes the governors portrait collection, the artwork in the rotunda, and other paintings and sculptures throughout the Capitol Square complex. Leslie Adams, portrait artist and painter, will talk about her portraits of Governors Bob Taft and Ted Strickland on October 24, 2012 at noon.
On Thursday, October 25, 2012 at noon, Inlet Dance Theatre, one of Ohio’s most exciting contemporary dance companies, will perform. Inlet also conducts artist residencies across the state through our Arts Learning Artist in Residence program.
To find other NAHM events in Ohio please visit ArtsinOhio.com.
2) September 2012 Kennedy Center Update: The John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts September 2012 Update includes information about professional development opportunities for arts educators; updates about Any Given Child and other Kennedy Center programs; information about Kennedy Center partners, including the Ohio Alliance for Arts Education; and information about grant opportunities.
The following is information included in this issue of the September Update. For more information please visit http://www.kennedy-center.org/education/nationalpartnerships/newsletter.html.
-The National Endowment for the Arts’ Office of Research & Analysis recently announced that application guidelines are now available for funding through Research: ArtWorks. This program supports research that investigates the value of the U.S. arts ecosystem and the impact of the arts on other domains of American life. The NEA anticipates awarding up to 25 grants in the range of $10,000 to $30,000. The deadline for application submission is November 6, 2012 for projects that can begin as early as May 1, 2013. For information please visit http://arts.gov/grants/apply/Research/index.html.
-Grants for teachers of children who learn differently are available from the P. Buckley Moss Foundation. These education grants support projects that integrate the arts into educational programming and support teachers who wish to establish an effective learning tool using the arts in teaching children with learning disabilities and other special needs. Educators may apply for grants of up to $1,000 to support a new or evolving project. The application deadline is September 30, 2012. Applications are available at http://mossfoundation.org/national-educators-awards-and-grants.
-The September Update also provides information about the recent grants awarded to train arts educators in high poverty schools. The U.S. Department of Education announced the award of more than $1.2 million in grants to school districts in California, Florida, Nevada, and New York under the Arts in Education-Professional Development for Arts Educators program. The funds will support high-quality training programs in elementary and secondary education for music, dance, drama, media arts, or visual arts. The grants are targeted for schools with students from low-income households. For more information please visit http://www2.ed.gov/programs/artsedprofdev/index.html.
FROM: Ann Brennan
FYI: The following excerpt from Gongwer regarding the Actuarial report on the Ohio public employee retirement systems. The House may meet later this summer to move the Senate passed bills.
"Ohio's pension system structure is solid, but legislative efforts to enact system-approved restructuring plans should be enacted this year to improve financial stability, according to an independent report produced for the Ohio Retirement Study Council.
The report by Pension Trustee Advisors/KMS Actuaries supports keeping defined benefit plans for public workers, but also offers other options for future consideration.
The report, which will be discussed at an ORSC meeting Wednesday, is expected to guide the House's consideration of Senate-approved bills (SB 340
, SB 341, SB 342, SB 343 & SB 345) that would revamp the financial structure of Ohio's five public employee retirement systems.
Speaker Bill Batchelder (R-Medina) delayed action on the measures pending the finalization of the report, which refers to the legislation that's based mostly on the boards' own recommendations.
The study says adjustments beyond those included in the Senate-passed bills may be needed for four of the five systems because of lower-than-expected investment returns since the board plans were adopted.
Among other things, the document calls for:
-
Actuarially funding health care benefits
-
Adding a mechanism to allow structural changes based on unexpected actuarial experience.
-
Maintenance of efforts to eliminate inefficiencies in current plan design that could lead to unexpected costs and a perception of unreasonable benefits.
-
Systems to continue to monitor and modify health benefits as necessary.
Referencing the unpredictable nature of investment returns, the study also calls for an "immediate and disciplined" process through which system changes could be made more quickly - likely outside of the legislative arena.
"This mechanism at the very least should include limited pension system board discretion to adjust benefits or contributions as included in several of the Senate bills," it says. "A more rigorous alternative would be a flexible Cost-of-Living-Adjustment based on funded position."
PTA/KMS also said the proposals set forth by the State Teachers Retirement System, School Employees Retirement System, Ohio Police & Fire Pension Fund and Highway Patrol Retirement System may need additional adjustments given lower-than-expected returns since their plans were finalized.
"To avoid likely frequent future benefit changes, consideration should be given to providing greater cuts than currently needed to provide a margin for future adverse experience," authors said. "Alternatively, future favorable experience could be 'reserved' for the same purpose."
The report also said it "strongly" encourages lawmakers to enact changes this year. "Whether these plans are accepted, modified slightly, or another approach is taken, the systems are correct that delay creates additional cost," authors said. "Ohio seems ripe for meaningful pension reform; the systems have made difficult decisions as to potential change; and this study provides an independent confirmation of the strength of the plans. Even if additional changes are required or desired based on the alternatives discussed in this report, the changes proposed now are appropriate and significant. We see no valid reason for delay."
The report also praised Ohio's limits on employer contributions. "Very few pension systems in the U.S. have this rigor in shifting the risk of unfavorable experience to the employees in the form of potentially reduced future retirement or health care benefits and/or increases in employee contributions," it states. "This mechanism utilizes the efficiencies of defined benefit plans without the risk of a blank check to the employers."
The PTA/KMS study urges each system to develop practices through which they can adapt to investment changes. "These are challenging decisions that demand prudent and active policy development and should include consideration of reserves established in the good times to absorb some or all of the unfavorable experience in the bad times that may avoid or lessen the need for benefit reductions. ORSC can assist the systems in developing guidelines for this decision-making," the report states.
And in the case of strong short-term investment returns, system leaders should "shore up" health care and pension benefits before "unwinding" any of the benefit reductions or contribution hikes included in the bills, according to the report.
Authors noted that the systems' actuarial assumptions between 7.75% and 8.25% are reasonable, but also said officials need to consider the potential for lower returns and prepare for that scenario.
While the report said the 30-year funding period is useful, it discouraged using it as an ideal funding guideline. It said boards should have the ability to make other changes to meet the 30-year period, including:
-
Reducing benefit multipliers up to 10%, and reducing cost of living adjustments
-
Boosting member contributions by up to 4% over four years.
-
Increasing final average salary periods up to seven years.
-
Aligning normal retirement age for non-safety forces with the Social Security retirement age.
-
Adjusting early retirement, survivor and disability benefits.
-
Strengthening language blocking salary spiking.
Leaders Respond:
Senate President Tom Niehaus (R-New Richmond) and Senate Minority Leader Eric Kearney (D-Cincinnati), who jointly sponsored the Senate measures, welcomed the actuarial report and called for quick action on the legislation in the lower chamber.
"We are pleased the independent actuarial study agrees with the Senate's unprecedented bipartisan effort to stabilize and strengthen Ohio's pension systems. The study recognizes that the reforms proposed by the pension systems and contained in the Senate sponsored legislation are 'appropriate' and 'significant,'" the lawmakers stated.
"In reference to passing pension reform legislation, the report states 'We see no valid reason for delay.' This study confirms the legislation passed by the Senate '...will put each of the five retirement systems in a much more solid financial position.' It is important to note, the Senate reforms do not require any additional taxpayer dollars.
"We appreciate our colleagues in the Senate for taking a bold stand to ensure all the state pension plans are on solid financial footing to protect the retirement benefits of millions of Ohioans. We encourage our colleagues in the House of Representatives to join us in passing this pension legislation without any further delay."
Speaker Batchelder said House members would review the report and could include details in legislation.
"With the release of this extensive and comprehensive report on Ohio's retirement systems, members of the Ohio House will carefully examine the findings of this report and, if necessary, incorporate these recommendations into legislation," he said in a statement.
"It is of the utmost importance that we use the information collected in this study to further our efforts to make Ohio's pension systems sustainable and cost-effective. I expect that the House will take action sometime this summer on this important issue that affects millions of Ohioans."
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
OSPA LEGISLATIVE UPDATE
6-15-12
The General Assembly wrapped up a busy legislative session with the passage of both the education mid-budget review bill (SB 316) and the Cleveland school reform bills (HB 525/SB 335). All passed the week of June 11, 2012.
Sub. SB 316, Education MBR bill summary:
1) Third grade reading guarantee retention provisions:
* Beginning with students entering third grade in the 2013-2014 school year,
(2) promote the student to fourth generally prohibits school districts and community schools from promoting to fourth grade a student scoring below a cut score determined by the State Board of Education on the third grade reading achievement assessment, but makes several exceptions (see below).
* Requires the State Board of Education to determine the "cut" score, progressively adjusting it upwards until the retention requirements apply to students who do not receive at least a "proficient" score. Prohibits the State Board from designating a level lower than "limited." Not later than December 31, 2013, requires the State Board to submit to the General Assembly recommended changes to the scoring ranges of the state achievement assessments necessary for the successful implementation of the common core curriculum and assessments in the 2014-2015 school year.
*Exempts from retention the following:
(1) Limited English proficient students who have been enrolled in U.S. schools for less than two full school years and have had less than two years of instruction in an English as a second language program;
(2)(a) Special education students whose IEPs exempt them from retention under the third-grade guarantee, and (b) special education students whose IEPs or 504 Plans show that they have received intensive remediation in reading for two school years, and who have previously been retained in any grades K to 3, but who still demonstrate a deficiency in reading.
(3) Students who, as determined by the Department of Education, demonstrate an acceptable level of performance on an alternative standardized reading assessment. Does not include an exception for demonstration of mastery through a student portfolio.
(4) Students who received intensive remediation in reading for two school years but still demonstrate a deficiency in reading, and were previously retained in any of grades K to 3, as long as the student continues to receive intensive reading instruction in fourth grade. That instruction must include an altered instructional day that includes specialized diagnostic information and specific research-based reading strategies that have been successful in improving reading among low- performing readers.
* Requires school districts and community schools to provide all retained third-graders with instruction in a specific academic field that is commensurate with student
achievement levels.
2) Third grade reading guarantee assessment and interventions provisions:
* Requires each district and community school beginning in the 2012-2013 school year to assess the reading skills of each student in grades K to 3 by September 30 of each school year and identify students reading below grade level. Requires that they administer the state-developed diagnostic assessments in English language arts, or a comparable tool approved by the Department of Education, to all students.
* Maintains current law requiring the district or community school to notify the parent or guardian of each student identified as reading below grade level.
Specifies that the notice must inform the parent or guardian that the student has been identified as having a substantial reading deficiency, describe the current services provided to the student, describe the proposed supplemental services and supports to be provided, and explain that the student may be retained in third grade if the student scores below the State Board's cut score on the third grade
reading achievement assessment.
* Maintains current law requiring school districts and community schools to provide intervention services to each student reading below grade level, Specifies that intensive reading instruction must be provided immediately following identification of a reading deficiency, and must include (1) "intensive, explicit, and systematic instruction," (2) research- based reading strategies that have been shown to be successful in improving reading among low- performing readers, and (3) instruction targeted at the student's identified reading deficiencies.
* Requires the district or community school to develop a reading improvement and monitoring plan for each student identified as reading below grade level. The plan must (1) identify the student's specific reading deficiencies, (2) describe the additional instructional services and support that will be provided to remediate the student's deficiencies, (3) include opportunities for parental involvement in those services and support, (4) specify a process for monitoring the student's receipt of the services and support, and (5) state that the student may be retained in third grade for failure to pass the third-grade reading achievement assessment. Requires each plan to provide a reading curriculum during regular school hours that a)provides scientifically based and reliable assessment, and (b) provides initial and ongoing analysis of each student's reading progress.
* Requires the district or community school to report to the Department of Education any information requested by the Department about the reading improvement and monitoring plans.
* Requires the district or community school to assign each student who has a reading improvement and monitoring plan, and who enters third grade in the 2013-2014 school year or later, to a teacher who either (1) has received a passing score on a rigorous test of principles of scientifically based reading instruction or (2) has a reading endorsement on the teacher's license.
* For each student retained in third grade, requires each district or community school, to do the following:
(1) Provide intense remediation services until the student is able to read at grade level. Specifies that the services must include intensive interventions in reading that address the areas of deficiencies, including not less than 90 minutes of reading daily, and optional strategies such as uninterrupted, research-based reading instruction and other strategies such as small group instruction, reduced student-teacher ratios, or extended school day, week, or year;
(2) Provide a high-performing teacher, as determined by the teacher's student performance data, only when it is available, and performance reviews.
(3) Offer the option to receive services from one or more providers other than the district or community schools. Requires the district, community school, or Department to screen any other service provider.
(4) Establish a policy for mid-year promotion if the student demonstrates that the student is reading at or above grade level, and promote the student to fourth grade if the student demonstrates reading proficiency in accordance with standards adopted by the Department.
* Includes summer reading camps as an option for services offered to retained third-graders. Does not mandate summer services, but likewise eliminates the requirement of current law that summer remediation be provided in a school or community center and not on an at-home basis.
* Repeals the general prohibition against requiring school districts and community schools to report students' results on diagnostic assessments to the Department or State Board of Education or making the results available to the public. Requires districts to submit the results of the K-3 diagnostic assessments in English language arts and math to the Department. Allows the Department to issue a report on the data collected.
* Reverses current law by specifying that blank copies of diagnostic assessments are not public records.
* Requires each district and community school annually to report to the Department on its implementation of and compliance with the bill's third- grade guarantee requirements.
*Requires the Superintendent of Public Instruction annually to report to the Governor and General Assembly the number and percentage of students in grades K-4 reading below grade level, types of intervention service provided, and an evaluation, if available, on the efficacy of those services, all aggregated by school building as well as by school district.
3) Third grade reading guarantee report on federal funding provision:
* Requires the Superintendent of Public Instruction and the Governor's Director of 21st Century Education to report to the Governor and the General Assembly, by December 31, 2012, on the ability of the Department of Education to reprioritize state and federal funds, in order to identify additional funds that may be used to support the assessments and interventions associated with the third-grade reading guarantee. The Superintendent and Director must examine all available sources of funding, including Title I federal funds for disadvantaged students, Title II(D) federal funds for educational technology, and Title III federal funds for limited English proficient students.
4) Legislative recommendations regarding reading readiness provision:
Requires the State Board of Education and the Early Childhood Advisory Council jointly to develop legislative recommendations on the state's policies on literacy education of children from birth to third grade. The joint recommendations are due to the Governor and members of the General Assembly not later than February 28, 2013.
5) District and building academic performance ratings ; The provisions were removed from the final version, the Governor and the House and Senate Republican leadership stated that this issue will be introduced in a separate bill later this year.
6) Joint vocational school district rankings and report cards provision:
Requires the State Board of Education, in consultation with the Chancellor of the Board of Regents and the Governor's Office of Workforce Development and the Ohio Association of Career and Technical Education and the Ohio Association of Career and Technical Superintendents Ohio Association of City-Career Technical Schools to develop a report card for joint vocational school districts and for career-technical planning districts separate from those for city, exempted village, and local school districts, and to begin issuing the report card for the 2012-2013 school year.
7) School report cards during admissions process:
Requires the Department of Education to present to the State Board of Education standards for determining and comparing district and school operating expenditures for classroom instructional purposes with those for nonclassroom purposes. The State Board of Education must adopt the standards by December 31, 2012. They must be aligned with the expenditure categories required for reporting to the USDOE, under federal law.
8) Legislative presentation of academic standards and model curricula:
Requires the Superintendent of Public Instruction to present updated academic standards and model curricula in English language arts, math, science, and social studies to the House and Senate education committees at least 45 days before their adoption by the State Board of Education.
9) Teacher evaluations provisions:
* Specifies that the public school teachers who are subject to the requirement of current law to undergo evaluation by their employers are those who are employed under a teacher license and spend at least 50% of their time employed providing student instruction. Exempts substitute teachers from the evaluation requirement.
* When calculating student academic growth for the purpose of teacher evaluations, excludes students with 60 or more unexcused absences for the school year .
* Authorizes to conduct teacher evaluations (1) persons designated by an agreement entered into by the teacher's employer and (2) persons employed by an entity hired by the employer to conduct evaluations and who are licensed as a superintendent, assistant superintendent, principal, vocational director, or supervisor and (3) administrative specialists if they work for t he teachers employer or for a third party hired by the employer to conduct evaluations and (4) qualified persons who are not licensed as a superintendent, assistant superintendent, principal, vocational director, administrative specialist, or supervisor, if they work for a third party hired by the district to conduct evaluations. Teacher evaluations may also be conducted by persons designated in a peer review agreement entered into by an employer and its teachers.
* Requires all authorized evaluators to obtain a credential established by the Department of Education before doing teacher evaluations.
* Requires only one annual evaluation of teachers on limited or extended limited contracts. (Under current law, employers must conduct two evaluations of those teachers in any year the employer is considering not rehiring the teacher.)
*Requires at least three classroom observations (instead of two, as currently required) of teachers on limited or extended limited contracts and who are under consideration for nonrenewal, as part of the evaluation process.
* Permits an employer to require only one classroom observation (instead of two, as currently required) of a teacher rated as "accomplished" on the teacher's most recent evaluation, if the teacher completes a project approved by the employer to demonstrate continued growth and practice at the accomplished level.
* Extends from April 1 to May 1 the deadline for employers to completeteacher evaluations.
* Specifies that the statutory requirements regarding teacher evaluations prevail over collective bargaining agreements entered into on or after the bill's effective date.
* Specifically authorizes the State Board of Education to periodically Update through a resolution its state framework for evaluating public school teachers.
* Directs the State Board to develop, by June 30, 2013, a standards-based teacher evaluation framework for state agencies, and requires each state agency that employs teachers to adopt a teacher evaluation policy that conforms to the framework.
10) Assistant principal evaluations
Requires each school district's evaluation procedures for assistant principals (required under continuing law) to be based on principles comparable to the district's teacher
evaluation policy, but tailored to the duties and responsibilities of assistant principals.
11) Testing teachers
* Beginning in the 2015-2016 school year revises the circumstances triggering the requirement that teachers of core subject areas take exams to prove their knowledge, so that it applies to teachers employed by school districts and joint vocational districts when the teacher has been rated "ineffective" on evaluations for two of the three most recent years. (Retains the law applying the requirement to teachers employed by community schools and STEM schools when the teacher's building is ranked by performance index score in the lowest 10% of all public schools.)
* If a teacher employed by a school district passes the required exams, the teacher, at the teacher's own expense, must complete professional development targeted at the deficiencies identified in the teacher's evaluations. The district may terminate the teacher if the teacher (a) does not complete the professional development or (b)
receives an "ineffective" rating on the teacher's next evaluation after the professional development.
*Applies the exam requirement to teachers who are currently teaching a core subject when they become subject to the provision.
*Specifies that the exams the teachers must take are content knowledge exams selected by the Department of Education to determine expertise to teach the teacher's subject area and grade level (rather than content knowledge and pedagogy exams needed for licensure in that subject area and grade level, as in current law).
12) Teacher evaluation data:
* Requires the Chancellor of the Board of Regents annually, beginning in December 31, 2014,to report the number and percentage of graduates of each Ohio teacher preparation program who were rated at each of the four performance levels on evaluations conducted by their employers in the previous school year.
* Requires that districts and schools report the number of teachers receiving each evaluation rating, aggregated by the teacher preparation programs from which the
teachers graduated and graduation year. Requires the Department of Education to establish Education Management Information System (EMIS) guidelines for this report, and prohibits the guidelines from permitting or requiring the reporting of teachers' names or other personally identifiable information.
13) Nonrenewal of teacher and administrator contracts:
* Extends the deadlines for a school district or educational service center (ESC) to notify a teacher or administrator that the person's contract will not be renewed for the
following school year, as follows:
(1) From April 30 to June 1, in the case of teachers; and
(2) From March 31 to June 1, in the case of assistant superintendents, principals, assistant principals, business managers, supervisors, or other administrators. (To correspond with these changes, the amendment also extends from April 30 to June 1 the deadline by which a school district employee must be notified of nonrenewal in order for the employee to qualify for unemployment benefits. The amendment does not affect the date for notice of nonrenewal for superintendents and treasurers, which under continuing law is March 1.)
* Extends from June 1 to June 15 the deadline for a teacher or administrator to notify a school district or ESC that the person is declining reemployment, in cases where the person is automatically reemployed due to the district's or ESC's failure to comply with the statutory nonrenewal procedures.
14) Gifted educator coordinators
Retained current law allowing for principals or other employees assigned to a school district to also serve as the school districts gifted education coordinator, if qualified to do so under the State Board of Education's rules.
15) Regional charter schools serving gifted students: The provision authorizing 16 regional charter schools to serve gifted students was removed for the final version of the bill.
16) Ed Choice eligibility
*Specifies that, in the case of a child placed in the custody of either a government agency or a person other than the child's parent, the school district that includes the child in its average daily membership, for funding purposes, is the district from which Ed Choice scholarship payments must be deducted.
* Requires the State Board of Education to adopt rules establishing procedures for awarding Ed Choice scholarships to students already attending a nonpublic school when
the school receives its charter. The scholarships must be awarded to eligible students beginning in the following school year after the school is chartered. The State Board's
procedures must provide special application periods for students enrolled at the time the school's charter is granted, if necessary, and provide notice to the students' resident school districts. A student who is already enrolled in the nonpublic school when it receives its charter qualifies for a scholarship if either:
(1) The student currently would be assigned to a school district building whose students qualify for Ed Choice, provided that the student either (a) has always been enrolled in
that particular nonpublic school, or (b) was enrolled in a school operated by the student's resident district or in a community school prior to enrolling in the nonpublic school; or
(2) At the end of the last school year before the student enrolled in the nonpublic school, the student either (a) was enrolled in a school district building whose students qualified for Ed Choice or (b) was enrolled in a community school but otherwise would have been assigned to such a school district building.
*Requires the Department of Education to open a second application period for the 2012-2013 school year for eligible students who attended a nonpublic school in 2011-
2012 when the school received its charter.
17) Achievement assessment scores for 2012-2013:
* For the 2012-2013 school year, extends from 60 to 75 days after administration of the state achievement assessments the deadline to report individual scores to school districts. However, retains current law's ultimate deadline of June 15 by specifying that scores may not be reported later than June 15, 2013.
18) Assessment data for scholarship students:
*Requires the Department of Education, when publishing achievement assessment data for students participating in the Ed Choice or Cleveland scholarship program, to disaggregate that data by grade (instead of by age, under current law).
19) Autism scholarship and Jon Peterson Special Needs scholarship programs:
* Requires that, each time a school district completes an evaluation for a child with a disability or undertakes the development, review, or revision of the child's individualized education program (IEP), the district send by letter or electronic means a notice to the child's parent about the scholarship programs. The notice must include a prescribed statement indicating that the child might be eligible for a scholarship to attend a special education program operated by an alternative public provider or a registered private provider instead of that operated by the district. The notice must include the telephone
number of the office of the Department of Education responsible for administering the scholarship programs and the location of scholarship information on the Department's web site.
20) Eye exams for disabled students
*Requires the Department of Education, by December 31, 2013, to issue a report to the Governor and General Assembly on the compliance of school districts and community
schools with the requirement of current law to have students with disabilities undergo a comprehensive eye exam within three months after beginning to receive special
education and related services.
Specifies that the report must include data from the 2012-2013 school year, and that data must be collected annually thereafter.
Requires the Department annually to notify each school district and community school of the requirement of current law to have students with disabilities undergo a comprehensive eye exam.
21) Educational service center agreements:
* Eliminates the annual July 1 deadline by which a fee-for-service agreement between an educational service center and a school district must be filed with the Department of Education.
* Beginning with the 2012-2013 school year, permits a school district with more than 16,000 students that enters into an agreement with an educational service center for services for which the state provides per-pupil funding, to opt out of receiving supervisory services (such as supervisors for the district's teachers). If a district opts out of those services, it is not required to pay for them through the deduction of supervisory units from the district's state aid account
*Permits an educational service center providing services for a child in the custody of a county or district juvenile detention facility to submit the bill directly to the school district responsible for paying the cost of educating that child (generally the district where the child's parent resides), instead of first billing the district in which the facility is located.
*Requires the district responsible for paying the cost of educating the child to include the child in its "average daily membership" (student count for state operating funding) and prohibits any other district from including the child in that count.
22) Early admission to kindergarten or first grade:
* Permits a school district or community school to admit to kindergarten or first grade a child who is not yet the required age, if the child is recommended for early admission in accordance with the district's or school's acceleration policy. (Generally, under current law, a child must be five years old to enter kindergarten, or six years old to enter first grade, by September 30 of the school year of admission. However, a school district or community school may adopt August 1 as the date by which the child must have attained the required age.)
Requires a school district to evaluate a child for early admission upon referral by (1) an educator employed by the district or school, (2) a preschool educator who knows the child, (3) a pediatrician or
psychologist who knows the child or (4) the parent of the child.
Repeals provisions of current law that:
(1) Require a child to be issued a waiver by a pupil personnel services committee in order to be admitted to first grade without completing kindergarten; and
(2) Authorize early admission for children who meet established standards on standardized tests. (However, meeting testing standards still could be part of a district's or school's acceleration policy.)
*Specifies that a community school may admit a child younger than age five in accordance with these procedures.
* Prohibits a school district from denying a transferring student admission, based on the student's age, if the student had been admitted to kindergarten by another school district or a chartered nonpublic
school.
23) Body mass index screening program provisions:
* Removes the bill's acknowledgement of the Governor's veto of the repeal of the body mass index screening program. Instead, makes schools' (district schools, community schools, STEM schools, and chartered nonpublic schools) implementation of the body mass index (BMI) screenings optional, thereby eliminating the need to obtain a state waiver.
24) Sale of beverages in schools
*Repeals the requirement that at least 50% of beverages available for sale from school food service programs, vending machines, or school stores consist of water or other beverages .
25) Employment of persons with developmental disabilities:
* Declares it to be the state's policy that employment services for individuals with developmental disabilities be directed at placement in the community in positions in which these individuals are integrated with other workers.
*Requires state agencies that provide employment services to individuals with developmental disabilities to implement the employment policy and the Department of Developmental Disabilities to coordinate implementation.
*Requires that starting at age 14, the individualized education program (IEP) for a child with a disability include goals related to employment in a competitive environment in which workers are integrated regardless of disability.
Other provisions such as those addressing community school issues, preschool and child day care provisions can be viewed at this link:
http://www.lsc.state.oh.us/analyses129/s0316-rrh-129.pdf
HB 525 Cleveland School Plan Summary
After weeks of negotiations between the legislative leadership , charter school groups and Cleveland city leaders, a final bill was agreed to. The bill allows the Cleveland Municipal School District to manage their educational reform initiatives based on recommendations from the Cleveland city leadership partnership. These areas encompass significant changes to current law in several areas including teacher contracts, evaluations, teacher building assignments, and school improvement initiatives. The following general summary comes from the Legislative Service Commission (LSC) Analysis, to view the entire analysis for the details of the proposal go to: http://www.lsc.state.oh.us/analyses129/h0525-rh-129.pdf
BILL SUMMARY
Teacher contracts
Requires a teacher who is employed by a municipal school district and who meets the tenure requirements in current law to provide notice of the teacher's eligibility by September 15 of the year the teacher becomes eligible.
Lowers from five years to two years the maximum length of an initial limited contract for employment entered into between a municipal school district and a teacher on or after the bill's effective date.
Revises the procedures for a municipal school district to grant an extended limited contract to a teacher who is eligible for tenure.
Exempts municipal school districts from the requirement to enter into supplemental contracts with teachers who teach courses for high school credit outside the normal school day.
Assigning teachers to school buildings
Prescribes procedures for assigning teachers to school buildings of a municipal school district, whereby the decisions of the district CEO or designee are guided by the recommendations of building-level interview teams.
Prescribes credential factors that a building-level interview team must consider in making its recommendations to the CEO or designee.
Teacher evaluations
Requires a municipal school district to include review of a teacher's work samples as part of the teacher evaluations mandated by current law and specifies that (1) the required observations may be announced or unannounced and (2) "multiple measures" must be used in determining student academic growth.
Requires a municipal school district to conduct one annual evaluation (instead of two, as in current law) for a teacher whom the district is considering not reemploying.
Changes the deadline for a municipal school district to complete teacher evaluations from April 1 to June 1.
Requires evaluators in a municipal school district to be trained in accordance with criteria developed by the district CEO and teachers' union.
Requires a municipal school district to use evaluations in decisions about compensation and layoffs (in addition to promotion and retention decisions, as in current law).
Specifies that teachers in a municipal school district may use the collective bargaining agreement's grievance procedure to challenge violations of the evaluation procedures, but limits the violations that may be corrected to those that cause "substantive harm" to the teacher.
Teacher salaries
Requires a municipal school district to adopt a performance-based salary schedule for teachers, in the same manner required by current law for school districts that receive federal Race to the Top funds.
Requires a municipal school district to place newly hired teachers on the salary schedule based on years of experience, area of licensure, and other factors determined by the district.
Requires a municipal school district to initially place veteran teachers on the salary schedule so that their salary is comparable to their pay under the previous salary schedule.
Requires a municipal school district to consider specialized training and experience in the assigned position (in addition to the performance metrics in current law) when measuring a teacher's performance.
Adds teaching in a school with an extended school day or school year to the duties for which a municipal school district may provide additional compensation.
Allows a municipal school district to decrease a teacher's salary during the term of the employment contract if the teacher will perform fewer or different duties.
Nonrenewal of teacher contracts
Extends from April 30 to June 1 the deadline for a municipal school district to notify teachers that their contracts will not be renewed for the following school year.
Revises the procedures for holding a hearing on the nonrenewal of a teacher's contract in a municipal school district.
Exempts a municipal school district from most provisions requiring the automatic reemployment of a teacher when the district fails to comply with nonrenewal procedures.
Specifies that the decision of a municipal school district to not renew a teacher's contract is not subject to appeal.
Exempts a municipal school district from the requirement to notify employees by April 30 that their contracts will not be renewed in order for the employees to qualify for unemployment benefits.
Teacher terminations and disciplinary suspensions
Permits a municipal school district to place a teacher on an unpaid disciplinary suspension for a definite period of time for "good and just cause."
Specifies that "good and just cause" for a municipal school district to terminate a teacher's contract includes receiving an evaluation rating of "ineffective" for two consecutive years.
Establishes new due process procedures, including a fact-finding hearing, for teacher terminations and disciplinary suspensions in municipal school districts.
Prohibits an arbitrator from overturning the termination or disciplinary suspension of a teacher by a municipal school district for failure of the district to comply with the procedures of the bill or a collective bargaining agreement, unless the failure results in "substantive harm" to the teacher.
Teacher layoffs
Modifies the reasons for which a municipal school district may lay off teachers by (1) omitting suspension of schools as a reason and (2) allowing layoffs for academic reasons resulting in the consolidation of teaching positions, duties, or functions or in changes in educational programs.
Requires a municipal school district to lay off teachers in order of their evaluation ratings, starting with teachers with the lowest rating, and to lay off nontenured teachers before tenured teachers within each group of teachers with the same rating.
Requires a municipal school district to make decisions regarding the recall of laid-off teachers in the reverse order of the tenure status and composite evaluation rating categories used in the layoff decisions.
Specifies that the municipal district board and the teachers' union "shall negotiate" how specialized training and experience will be factored into layoff and recall decisions.
Specifies that laid-off tenured and nontenured teachers of a municipal school district have the right of restoration only to positions for which they qualify within three years after the date their contracts were suspended.
Requires a municipal school district to give teachers preference in contract renewals, layoffs, or rehiring based on seniority or tenure, only when deciding between teachers with the same evaluation rating and tenure status.
Collective bargaining
Specifies that the bill's requirements regarding teacher employment in municipal school districts, including requirements related to (1) contracts, (2) building assignments, (3) evaluations, (4) salaries, (5) contract nonrenewals, (6) terminations and disciplinary suspensions, and (7) layoffs, generally prevail over collective bargaining agreements entered into on or after the bill's effective date.
Employment of principals
Requires a municipal school district to pay principals based on performance, generally in the same manner required by the bill for the district's teachers.
Makes procedural changes to the requirement for a municipal school district to notify a principal before taking action to renew or not renew the principal's contract.
Exempts a municipal school district from the requirement to automatically reemploy a principal for a specified period of time when the district fails to comply with nonrenewal procedures.
Specifies that, in a municipal school district, the failure of a principal's building to meet academic performance standards established by the district CEO is grounds for termination.
Requires the CEO of a municipal school district to give a principal a copy of the principal's evaluation at least five days before the CEO recommends the principal's termination to the school board.
Academic performance plan
Requires that the district CEO's academic performance plan include provisions requiring parents or guardians of students in the district's schools to attend, prior to December 15 each year, at least one parent-teacher conference or similar event.
Adds adjustment of the length of the school year or school day to the items that may be included in the corrective actions specified in the plan.
Prescribes procedures for development of the CEO's "corrective plan" for a particular school, whereby the CEO and labor union presiding officer must appoint corrective action teams to make recommendations regarding implementation of the plan.
Specifies that the content and implementation of a corrective plan and any actions taken to implement the plan prevail over collective bargaining agreements entered into on or after the bill's effective date.
Additional accountability measures
Requires the board of education of an existing municipal school district to develop, subject to approval by the Superintendent of Public Instruction, an array of measures to evaluate the academic performance of the district, and to use those measures to report annually to the General Assembly, Governor, and state Superintendent.
Requires the state Superintendent, by November 15, 2017, to evaluate the district's performance based on the district board's approved array of measures and to issue a report to the General Assembly and Governor.
Student advisory committees
Requires a municipal school district and each of its partnering community schools to establish a student advisory committee at each of their schools offering grades 9 to 12 to make regular (at least semiannual) recommendations for improving the academic performance of the school.
School calendars
Declares that the board of a municipal school district "has final authority" to establish a school calendar for the district's school buildings that provides for additional student days or hours beyond the state minimum.
Specifies that the school calendar adopted by the board prevails over collective bargaining agreements entered into on or after the bill's effective date, but requires the board and the teachers' union to negotiate regarding any additionalcompensation for working an extended school day or school year.
Municipal School District Transformation Alliance
Allows the mayor of the city containing the greatest portion of a municipal school district to initiate the establishment of and appoint the board of directors of a Municipal School District Transformation Alliance as a nonprofit corporation under R.C. Chapter 1702.
Requires the Alliance, if created, to (1) confirm and monitor a "transformation alliance education plan" prepared by the mayor, (2) suggest national education models for and provide input in the development of new district schools and partnering community schools, (3) report annually on the performance of all municipal school district schools and all community schools located in the district, and (4) make recommendations to the Department on the approval of sponsors of new community schools located in the district.
Sunsets the authority to create an Alliance on January 1, 2018, and terminates any Alliance created under the bill on that date.
Exempts the Alliance and its directors, officers, and employees, from the state Public Ethics Law, Open Meetings Act, Public Records Law, Civil Service Law, Public Employees Retirement System Law, and Public Employee Collective Bargaining Law, but stipulates that board meetings must be open to the public, that records must be maintained as though they were public records, and that the board must establish a conflicts of interest policy.
Specifies that membership on the Alliance board does not constitute an incompatible holding of public office.
Expands the offense of bribery, a third degree felony, to include (1) promising, offering, or giving any valuable thing or valuable benefit, with purpose to corrupt or improperly influence, to a director, officer, or employee of the Alliance, or (2) knowingly soliciting or accepting for self or another, by a director, officer, or employee of the Alliance, any valuable thing or valuable benefit to corrupt or improperly influence the discharge of duties.
Framework to assess district and community schools
Requires the Department of Education, the Transformation Alliance, if created, and a statewide nonprofit community school sponsor organization, by April 30, 2013, jointly to establish a framework to assess the efficacy of district schools and community schools located in the municipal school district.
Criteria for community school sponsorship in a municipal school district
Requires the Department of Education, the Transformation Alliance, if created, and a statewide nonprofit community school sponsor organization, by December 31, 2012, jointly to establish criteria for both (1) sponsors to use to determine if they will sponsor new community schools in the municipal school district, and (2) the Department and the Alliance to use in assessing the ability of a sponsor to successfully sponsor schools in the district.
Use of standards by community school sponsors
Beginning with any community school that opens after July 1, 2013, requires each sponsor to use the criteria developed jointly by the Alliance, Department, and statewide sponsor organization to determine whether it will sponsor a new community school in the municipal school district.
Combining community school and district report card data
Authorizes a municipal school district, with the approval of the community school governing authority, to elect to have the student performance data of a community school located in the district combined with the district's data on the district's annual state report card, if the district either sponsors the community school or has entered into an agreement with the school to endorse each other's programs.
Authorizes a municipal school district, at its own discretion, to elect to have the number of students enrolled in a community school located in the district noted separately on the district's report card, if the district either sponsors the community school or has entered into an agreement with the school to endorse each other's programs.
Requires the district, by October 1 each year, to submit documentation to the Department of Education indicating eligibility for the election to include a community school's data on its report card.
Deposit of proceeds from the sale of real property
Permits a municipal school district that sells any parcel of real property to deposit the proceeds into the district's general fund, as long as (1) the district has owned property for at least ten years, (2) any securities or other obligations issued to pay for the real property or improvements to it are no longer outstanding at the time of the sale, and (3) the deposit is not prohibited by any agreements the district has with the School Facilities Commission (rather than deposit those proceeds into the sinking fund, the bond retirement fund, or a special fund for the construction or acquisition of permanent improvements as otherwise required under current law).
Tax levy
Authorizes the school board of a municipal school district to propose a levy for current operating expenses, a portion of which would be allocated to "partnering" community schools and distributed among those schools on a per-pupil basis.
Other
Specifically authorizes the board of education of a municipal school district to request exemptions from education-related statutes and administrative rules through an existing law that permits any district to request such exemptions for an innovative education pilot program.
