From: Ann Brennan

I am representing OSPA on the Gifted Education Advisory Task Force, we are currently reviewing the draft gifted education rules. Please review the draft, which is also posted on ODE's website, and please send me your concerns or comments. The ODE Task Force will continue meeting monthly through September. The draft rules will be reviewed by the State Board of Education and are expected to be implemented by January, 2014. We meet next on May 21, please send me your comments by the 20th.

LEGISLATIVE UPDATE 

 

1)    Sub. HB 59, Biennial Budget Bill: The House passed budget was approved on April 18, 2013, and the Senate Finance Education Subcommittee is currently  (4-26-13) holding hearings on t he education part of the budget bill. The House Finance Committee made substantive changes to the administration’s introduced version, and made further changes to the substitute bill on April 16.

 

Compared to Governor Kasich’s Executive Budget for FY14-15, the House substitute bill reduces total state funding in the General Revenue Fund from $63.2 billion to $61.4 billion for the biennium.  The reduction is mainly due to the removal of approximately $2.1 billion of federal funds to expand Medicaid.  

 

General Revenue funding for the Ohio Department of Education is also reduced by $55 million in FY14 and $26.9 million in FY15, making total General Revenue funding for the ODE $16.2 billion for the biennium   ($7.976 in FY14 and $8.248 in FY15).  All Funds for the ODE equal $23.2 billion for the biennium, compared to $23.58 billion in the Executive Budget. 

 

The following are some of the other general line-item changes included in the substitute bill:

-Increases Passport provider rates by $6 million.

-Increases funding for food banks by $2 million a year.

-Increases funding for educational services centers (ESCs) by $52.5 million over the biennium.

-Increases funding for higher education by $8.1 million to provide a “bridge fund” during the transition to the new formula.

-Increases funding for Ohio College Opportunity grants for proprietary school students by $2.3 million over the biennium.

-Increases funding to counties for mental health services to $30 million per year and provides an additional $20 million per year for drug treatment.

 

Highlights of HB59 Changes for K-12 Education:  The House Finance and Appropriations Committee’s version of HB59 changes several K-12 education provisions included in Governor Kasich’s budget proposal as introduced, but also retains provisions, such as the expansion of the EdChoice voucher program and funding community schools as a deduction/transfer from school district funds. 

           

According to Chairman Amstutz the House school funding plan ensures that no school district receives less state funding than in FY13.  The substitute bill also reduces the number of school districts on the guarantee from 396 to 175 in FY14, and caps state aid increases at 6 percent.

 

When compared to the Executive Budget, the House substitute bill changes funding levels for the following K-12 education line items:

 

-Provides $505 million in FY14 and $518.5 million in FY15 for transportation, and includes transportation in the school funding formula. This is an increase of $37.6 million in FY14 and $58.3 million in FY15.

-Adds $25.3 million in FY14 and $23.1 million in FY15 to supplement transportation for low wealth/density districts.

-Increases funding for educational service centers by $22.5 million in FY14 and $30 million in FY15.

-Increases funding for Career-Technical Education Enhancements from $8.8 million to $9 million in FY14 and from $8.2 million to $9 million in FY15.

-Increases Line Item 7017 (Lottery Profits) 200612 Foundation Funding by $50 million in FY14 and by $100 million in FY15 to $775 million and $850 million respectively.

 

-Reduces funding for Educator Preparation by $1 million over the biennium.

-Reduces funding for Auxiliary Services from $133.1 million to $130.5 million in FY14, and from $137.1 million to $134.8 million in FY15.  This amount is still higher than the FY13 level of $126 million. 

-Reduces funding for Nonpublic Administrative Cost Reimbursement from $60 million to $58.9 in FY14 and from $61.9 million to $60.9 million in FY15. 

-Reduces Line Item GRF 200550 Foundation Funding by $114.3 million in FY14 and by $99.6 million in FY15.  Total Foundation Funding in this line item is $5.8 billion in FY14 and $6 billion in FY15. 

-Reduces the Straight A Program by $50 million in FY14 and by $100 million in FY15, and moves the program into temporary law, Section 263.325.  

 

The following are highlights of some of the policy changes included in Sub. HB59 (Amstutz):

 

-Removes the proposed changes in the governance structure for educational service centers.

-Removes the expansion of the parent trigger.  

-Maintains the current ratio for school psychologists and speech pathologists.  

-Eliminates College Credit Plus language and changes for dual enrollment programs.  

-Eliminates the ability of a school district to offer a payment in lieu of transportation and instead sends the district’s per pupil transportation amount directly to the student.  

 

School Funding Formula Changes in Sub. HB59:  The substitute bill changes the formula used to determine state aid from an equal yield formula, proposed in the Executive Budget, to a foundation formula. The substitute bill includes a per pupil “formula amount” of $5732 in FY14 and $5789 in FY15.  The formula amount is multiplied by an “annualized average monthly”, average daily membership (ADM), and a “state share index” to adjust for wealth.  Adjustments to that product are made to address student educational needs, including special education, limited English proficiency, poverty, career technical education, etc. 

 

School districts that receive increases in state aid are capped at 6 percent over the previous year. According to information provided by the Ohio School Boards Association, the Buckeye Association of School Administrators, and the Ohio Association of State Business Officials, 364 districts are projected to be capped in FY14, and 312 districts in FY15.

 

Whereas the governor’s proposed formula in HB59 led to 396 school districts on the guarantee, the formula proposed in the substitute bill decreases the number of school districts on the guarantee to 175 in FY14 and 161 in FY15.  And, according to OSBA, BASA, and OASBA, the amount of the guarantee that districts receive is less, so that districts are less dependent on the guarantee. 

 

The substitute bill also retains the Targeted Assistance provision included in the Executive Budget.  This provision distributes additional state aid to schools with low property and income wealth.  A new provision is added to Targeted Assistance in the substitute bill to take into account districts with a high percentage of current agricultural use value (CAUV) property. 

 

The substitute bill also includes adjustments in the formula to address the educational needs of students. The following is an overview of some of the changes in the substitute bill related to student subgroups. 

 

•Accountability/Consistent Progress:  School districts/schools are still required to account for the expenditure of state education funds provided for services to subgroups of students, including students who are gifted, students with special needs, students who are disadvantaged, and students with limited English proficiency.  

 

The provision in the Executive Budget regarding “consistent progress” is changed, however.  The State Board of Education is required to determine measures of “satisfactory achievement and progress” for subgroups of students not later than December 31, 2014.  The ODE is required to use the measures established by the State Board to determine if a district or school has made satisfactory achievement and progress for the subgroups by September 1, 2015, and annually thereafter. 

 

Districts and schools not meeting satisfactory progress for subgroups of students are required to submit an improvement plan to the ODE.  The ODE is permitted to require that the plan include a partnership with another entity for services to that subgroup. 

 

•Gifted Students:  The substitute bill makes significant changes in the funding for gifted education, returning to a unit-funded model.  First, the substitute bill provides $5.00 in FY14 and $5.05 in FY15 for the identification of gifted students, rather than $50 per ADM in the Executive Budget. Next, the bill defines “district gifted unit ADM” as a district’s average daily membership minus community school and STEM school ADM.  One gifted coordinator unit is provided per 3,300 students in a district’s gifted unit ADM with a minimum of 0.5 units and a maximum of 8 units. One gifted intervention specialist unit is provided for every 1,100 students in a district’s gifted unit ADM, with a minimum of .3 units.  Funding for the units is $37,000 in FY14 and $37,370 for FY15.  $3.8 million is also provided for educational service centers to support gifted units.  

 

•Special Education:  The substitute bill provides additional aid for students in addition to the formula amount based on the six special education categories that are unchanged from the governor’s version of HB59.  However, the substitute bill uses a weight for each special education category rather than a specific additional amount, and funds the special education weighted amounts at 90 percent.

 

•Economically Disadvantaged Students: The substitute bill funds economically disadvantaged students through a formula that provides $340 in FY14 and $343 in FY15 times an “economically disadvantaged ADM” times an economically disadvantage index.

 

•Limited English Proficiency (LEP): The substitute bill provides funds equal to the sum of (ADM for each LEP category x an amount for each LEP category) x state share index.  The substitute bill reduces the number of LEP categories to three, and increases the amounts by one percent in FY15.

 

•Career Technical Education:  The substitute bill provides funds to traditional and joint vocational districts for career-technical education through the funding formula, based on the formula amount x the district’s total career-technical education weight x state share index. Sub. HB59 also retains the five categories of weights included in the Executive Budget, and requires the payment of these funds to be reviewed and approved by the lead district of the career-technical planning district (CTPD) to which the district is affiliated.

 

•Joint Vocational School District:  Sub. HB59 replaces the Executive Budget provision with the following formula:  (Formula amount x formula ADM) - (0.0005 x three year average property valuation), where formula amount equals $5,732 in FY14 and $5,789 in FY15.  If the result is negative, then the amount is “0”.

 

•Educational Service Centers:  The substitute bill establishes in temporary law the per pupil state payment for educational service centers at $37.00 per pupil in FY14 and $35 per pupil in FY15.  The bill increases funding for ESCs to $43.5 million in FY14 and $40 million in FY15.

 

Additional education related amendments added to the bill in committee and on the House floor included:

 

Sec. 3314.29 Permits an e-school that serves at least grades one through eight to divide into two schools as long as the sponsor agrees and the division is accomplished in either the 2013 - 2014 or 2014 - 2015 school years.

Sec. 3314.017 Dropout Recovery Schools: Requires the State Board of Education, not later than December 31, 2014, to review the performance levels and 13 benchmarks for report cards issued for dropout recovery 14 community schools.

Sec. 3314.06 Community School Tuition: Permits a community school to charge tuition to a student who is not an Ohio resident.

Sec. 3333.31 Residency Status for State Subsidy and Tuition Purposes: Requires that, if a state institution of higher education issues a student a letter or utility bill to use as proof for voting purposes in Ohio, the student must be granted residency status by rule of the Chancellor of the Board of Regents for the purpose of state subsidy and tuition surcharges.

Sections 263.10 and 263.220 Vocational Agriculture Program: Increases GRF appropriation item 200545, Career-Technical Education Enhancements, by $5,000 in each fiscal year by the same amount, and increases the earmark for the Vocational Agriculture Programs at an at-risk vocational school in the Cincinnati City School District.

Sec. 263 Academic Distress Commission: Allows the Superintendent of Public Instruction to create an academic distress commission for any district found by the State Auditor to have knowingly manipulated student data with the intent to deceive.

Sec. 3314.029 Community School Sponsor Termination: Authorizes the Department of Education to deny an application submitted under the Ohio School Sponsorship Program by an existing community school, if the school's contract with its sponsor was terminated.

Sec. 3313.848 Un-expended Funds Paid to an Educational Service Center: Permits the board of education of a school district, governing authority of a community school, governing body of a STEM school, or governing body of a municipal or other political subdivision (client) to elect, at the end of a fiscal year, to have unexpended funds that were paid to an education service center (ESC) during that fiscal year applied toward any payment owed to the ESC in the next fiscal year.

Sec. 3301.07 Operating Standards - Use of Phonics Operating Standards: Reinserts removed language that requires phonics to be used as a technique for reading teaching standards adopted by the State Board of Education.

Sec. 3301.07 Financial Reporting Standards: Restores current law requiring that the State Board of Education develop financial reporting standards for specified categories to be used by public schools when annually reporting financial information.

Sec. 3314.08 E-Schools Career Tech: Provides that an e-school is eligible to receive career technical education funding in addition to the core opportunity grant and special education funding.0

Section 263 Special Education Funding Community Schools: Provides an amount from GRF appropriation item 200550, Foundation Funding, to certain community schools for students who receive special education services for severe behavior disabilities (SBH). The amount is equal to the difference between the aggregate amount paid in the current fiscal year for special education services for SBH students and the amount that would have been calculated for those students in FY01.

Sec. 3321.01 All Day Kindergarten Tuition: Provides that a school district may charge tuition for a student enrolled in all-day kindergarten as long as the student is counted as less than one full time equivalent student.

Sec. 3365.07 Post-Secondary Enrollment Options Reimbursement - Transfer Modules: Clarifies that the Department of Education may not reimburse a college through the Post-Secondary Enrollment Options (PSEO) Program for courses that are not included in, or equivalent to a course included in, either a transfer module or the transfer assurance guide developed by the Chancellor of the Board of Regents.

Sec. 3317.022 and 3317.051 Gifted Unit Funding: Includes gifted unit funding in the list of core funding components. Requires a school district to use the funding it receives for gifted coordinator services or gifted intervention specialist services only for that purpose. Permits a school district to assign its gifted funding units to another education entity as part of an arrangement to provide gifted services.

Sections 363.10 and 363. Under the Board of Regents creates GRF appropriation 235523, Youth STEM Commercialization and Entrepreneurship Program: Allocates $2.0 million in FY14 and $3.0 million in FY15 for the Youth STEM Commercialization and Entrepreneurship Program. Requires the Program to include regional STEM forums, online high school and collegiate content and courses, and a statewide mentoring network available to Ohio high school students. Requires the Program to conduct a statewide competition, open to all Ohio high school students, which includes awards for students, professional development and participation incentives for teachers, and initiatives to engage minority, rural, and economically disadvantaged students. Requires the Program to collaborate with institutions of higher education, existing STEM and entrepreneurship programs, and STEM professional and trade associations to implement these provisions.

Sec. 263.460 Operating Standards: Removes the requirement for the State Board of Education to revise minimum operating standards.

Sections 263.10 and 263.230 Public Funds for Home-schooled Students: Increases Foundation Funding 200-550 by $250,000 each year and earmarks that amount for home-schooled students to take Post-Secondary Enrollment Options Program courses.

Sec. 3317.013 Category Two Special Education Students: Specifies that students who are preschool children identified as developmentally delayed are category two special education students for purposes of special education funding.

Sec. 5705.192, 5705.217, 5705.218, and 5705.25 656 School District Levies for Permanent Improvements and Current Expenses: Allows a school district that levies an existing combined levy for current expenses and permanent improvements to replace or renew that levy solely for the purpose of funding general permanent improvements. The amendment also allows the district to replace the levy for a term of years different than the term for which the original tax was levied. Under current law, a district may renew or replace such a levy only for the same purposes and the same term for which it was originally levied.

Specifies that new combined current expense and permanent improvement levies may be levied for current expenses and general (not specific) permanent improvements. Current law allows such levies to be used for either general or specific improvements.

Section 263 Study on Funding for Gifted Students: Requires the Department of Education to conduct a study to determine the amounts of funding, method of funding, and the costs of statewide support for gifted students. The study must include costs for effective and appropriate identification, staffing, professional development, technology, materials and supplies at the district level. Requires the Department to issue a report of its findings to the General Assembly not later than March 31, 2014.

Section 263.10 and 263 Ready to Learn: Appropriates $5.0 million in each fiscal year in GRF appropriation item 200468, Ready to Learn. Requires ODE to use this funding to contract with public and private early childhood education providers to fund early childhood education services for 2,200 preschool-aged children whose family income is no more than 200 percent of the federal poverty guidelines. Requires that funding be provided for at least 3 children in each county. Requires that private providers have at least a three star rating in the Department of Job and Family Services "Step Up to Quality" program. Requires programs receiving funding to meet certain teacher qualification and professional development criteria, aligned to ODE's early learning content standards, assess and report on child progress as required by ODE, and participate in the Step Up to Quality program.

Sec. 3313.843 Total Student Count Educational Service Centers: Revises the bill's definition of "total student count" for purposes of calculating any state subsidy to be paid to an educational service center (ESC) to mean the sum of the average daily student enrollments reported on the most recent report cards issued by the Department of Education for all of the school districts with agreements with the ESC.

 

 

Additionally, the language that pertained to sex education curriculum limitations was removed from the bill on the House floor.

Note: This update was written on 4-28-13, the provisions in the budget bill are likely to change as the bill is considered in the Senate, and then the two versions (House and Senate) must be reconciled and agreed to before final enactment, due by the end of June.

 

 

$12)    Sub.SB 21 (Lehner) Revises Third Grade Reading Guarantee Requirements: The Senate passed Sub. SB 21 on 3-27-13 and the bill is now being considered in the House Education Committee. The bill makes the following general changes to the third grade reading guarantee law:

Provides for the retention of a third-grade student who does not attain on the third- grade reading achievement assessment a score in the range prescribed by the State Board of Education (as under current law) or at least the "equivalent level of achievement" as determined by the Department of Education.

 

Exempts from the annual diagnostic assessment students with significant cognitive disabilities or other disabilities as authorized by the Department of Education.

 

Removes the requirement that reading teachers under the third-grade reading guarantee must have been actively engaged in the reading instruction of students for the previous three years.

 

Makes other changes in the criteria for qualifying as a teacher to provide services under the third-grade reading guarantee.

 

Removes the requirement that a waiver from the third-grade reading guarantee teacher qualification criteria for the 2013-2014 school year is subject to approval by the Department of Education.

 

         Declares an emergency.

 

         More on teacher qualifications:

Teacher qualifications for third-grade reading guarantee services

 

         Requirement for at least three years of experience

Under current law, a student who is retained or who has a reading improvement monitoring plan must be assigned a teacher who has been actively engaged in the reading instruction of students for the previous three years and who meets certain other criteria. The bill removes the three-year teaching requirement. However, as described below, the bill also retains, modifies, and adds to some of the other criteria.

 

         "Credential" criterion modified

Under the bill, a teacher must demonstrate evidence of completion of a program (rather than "a credential earned" as required under current law) from a list of scientifically research-based reading instruction programs approved by the Department in order to provide reading guarantee services. Additionally, the bill permits a teacher to provide those services by satisfying this criterion beyond the 2013-2014 school year (rather than only for the 2013-2014 school year as prescribed by current law).

        

         "Above value added" criterion replaced

         The bill prescribes that if a teacher is "an effective reading instructor, as

determined by criteria established by the Department," that teacher may provide reading guarantee services for the 2013-2014 school year and beyond. This provision replaces current law permitting a teacher to provide reading guarantee services for only the 2013-2014 school year if that teacher was rated "above value added," which means most effective in reading, as determined by the Department for the last two school years.

        

         Scientifically research-based reading instruction test criterion

         Under current law, a teacher may provide reading guarantee services if the

teacher has earned a passing score on a rigorous test of principles of scientifically research-based reading instruction. The bill retains this criterion but removes a current requirement that this test be selected through a competitive bidding process and, instead, requires the test to be approved by the State Board.

        

         Criteria unaffected by the bill

Current law also permits a teacher to provide reading guarantee services if the teacher: (1) holds a reading endorsement and has attained a passing score on the corresponding assessment, or (2) has obtained a master's degree with a major in reading. These provisions are not changed by the bill.

         Waiver of criteria for the 2013-2014 school year

         Continuing law prescribes that for the 2013-2014 school year, a district or

community school that cannot furnish the number of teachers needed who satisfy one or more of the criteria (as described above) must develop and submit to the Department a plan, by June 30, 2013, indicating the criteria that will be used to determine those teachers who will teach during that year. The bill relieves the Department of the duty to approve or disapprove the plan by August 15, 2013, causing the plan to be effective upon submission.11 Under continuing law, a district or school that submits a plan must indicate how the school will find teachers who meet one or more of the criteria in the 2014-2015 school year and beyond.

         Effective date

         The bill's provisions take effect on March 22, 2013, which coincides with the

effective date of prior amendments to the third-grade reading guarantee enacted in Am. Sub. H.B. 555 of the 129th General Assembly.

 

 

$13)    HB 83, State Board of Psychology law changes: This bill has passed the House and has recently been referred to the Senate Medicaid Health and Human Services Committee.  The bill summary is as follows:

                  

          BILL SUMMARY

Modifies application and examination requirements for licenses issued by the State Board of Psychology and increases the application fee.

 

         Makes changes regarding who is exempted from licensure.

 

Modifies the license renewal process and increases renewal fees starting on July 1, 2014.

 

Creates a retired license status for license holders who have retired from the practice of psychology or school psychology.

 

Requires the Board to investigate alleged violations of laws and rules governing the practice of psychology in Ohio and permits the Board to examine witnesses, administer oaths, and issue subpoenas as part of its investigations.

 

Creates eight new reasons for which the Board may take disciplinary action against an applicant or a license holder.

 

Permits the Board to require an applicant or a license holder who is subject to disciplinary action to (1) limit or restrict the areas of practice, (2) submit to mental, substance abuse, or physical evaluations, or (3) complete remedial education and training.

 

Permits the Board to use a telephone conference call to conduct an emergency meeting to suspend a license prior to holding a hearing if there is an immediate threat to the public.

 

Requires the Board to establish a case-management schedule for pre-hearing procedures.

 

Permits the Board to require a person seeking restoration of a license to (1) submit to mental, substance abuse, cognitive, or physical evaluations and (2) participate in Board processes designed to expose the applicant to the laws and rules governing the practice of psychology in Ohio.

 

Requires the Board to adopt rules governing the use of telepsychology in Ohio.

 

          Permits the Board to approve or establish a colleague assistance program.

 

Clarifies the distinction between school psychologists licensed by the Board and school psychologists licensed by the State Board of Education.

 

Requires the Board to charge a $40 fee for written verification of license status.

 

SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS

 

Continuing education

Requirements

Currently, as part of the 23 continuing education hours that must be completed

by the end of August of each even-numbered year, a license holder must

complete at least three hours in professional conduct or ethics. The bill increases this requirement to at least four hours and specifies that, in addition to professional conduct and ethics, this portion of the continuing education requirement may include education in the role of culture, ethnic identity, or both in the provision of psychological assessment, consultation, or psychological interventions, or a combination thereof.

 

Practice of school psychology

The bill makes the following changes to the definition of "practice of school

psychology":

--Includes the assessment of behavior directly related to learning problems in the

issues assessed as part of the evaluation, diagnosis, or test interpretation that is

currently offered as a service under the practice of school psychology, and removes a provision specifying that the issues assessed occur in an educational setting;

--Specifies that intervention services that include counseling services, rather than

just counseling services, are offered under the practice of school psychology, and

explains that these services address emotional and behavioral aspects of educationally related learning problems, as well as all other aspects of educationally related learning problems;

--Includes psychological consultation as a service offered under the practice of

school psychology.

 

School psychologist license examination

An applicant for a school psychologist license must earn a score acceptable to the Board on an examination selected by the Board, rather than a score acceptable to a school psychologist licensing committee on an oral or written examination conducted by that committee as currently required. The applicant must follow all necessary procedures and pay all necessary fees for the examination. The bill also authorizes the Board to require an applicant for a school psychologist license to earn a passing score on an examination that covers one or more of the following: (1) provisions of the Revised Code and rules governing the practice of psychology, (2) related provisions of the Revised Code, (3) professional ethics principles, and (4) professional standards of care.13 The Board may establish procedures designed to expose the applicant to the subject matter of these examinations.  

 

The Board may delegate to a school psychology examination committee it

appoints authority to develop this examination and any procedures designed to expose the applicant to the subject matter of the examination. This committee replaces the existing school psychology licensing committee. The membership of the committee created by the bill and terms of that committee's members are the same as those for the existing committee.

 

Application fee

The bill requires an applicant for a license issued by the Board to pay a fee of

$300. Under current law, an applicant is required to pay a fee established by the Board, which must be at least $75 and not more than $150.

 

Persons exempt from licensure

The bill adds all the persons described below to those who are exempt from

licensure by the Board.

Persons supervised by a licensed psychologist or school psychologist

Under the bill, a person who is working under the supervision of a licensed

psychologist or school psychologist is exempt from licensure, provided that the person is registered with the Board. The Board must adopt rules regarding the registration process and the supervisory relationship.17 This exemption replaces two exemptions in current law: (1) an exemption for a supervisory relationship that applies only to persons holding a master's degree or doctoral degree in psychology from a program approved by the Board while working under the supervision of a licensed psychologist and (2) an

exemption for any person working under the supervision of a licensed psychologist or school psychologist who meets specified requirements.

 

Renewal fees

The bill maintains the current renewal fee of $350 through June 30, 2014.  It then

increases the renewal fee as follows:

--From July 1, 2014 through June 30, 2018:  $360;

--Starting on July 1, 2018:  $365.

This fee must be paid to the Board instead of the secretary as required by existing law.

The bill specifies that a person licensed for the first time on or before September

30, rather than August 31, of an even-numbered year is required to register again on or before September 30, rather than August 31, of the next even-numbered year.

 

NOTE: THIS UPDATE WAS WRITTEN ON 4-28-13 : All the bills referred to are still being considered and their provisions may change as they continue through the  legislative process.

 

Resources used for this update, and some excerpts from: OAAE UPDATE and LSC Bill Analysis, SB 21 and HB 83.

 

 

 

 

 

 

•130th Ohio General Assembly:  The Ohio House and Senate will hold sessions and hearings this week.

 

•Primary on May 7, 2013:  Not all Ohio counties will have issues or candidates on the May 7, 2013 Primary/Special Election this year.  According to the Secretary of State’s web site 33 counties will hold special and primary elections; 38 counties will hold special elections; and three counties will hold only primary elections.  There are a total of 351 local issues on the ballot in 71 counties, and 138 of those are school issues.  A list of the school issues on the ballot is available at 

http://www.sos.state.oh.us/sos/elections/Voters/whatsontheballot/whatsOnBallot.aspx.

 

•New Chancellor Appointed:  Governor Kasich appointed on April 24, 2013 former state legislator John Carey as Chancellor of the Ohio Board of Regents.  The position has been temporarily filled by Interim Chancellor Stephanie Davidson after Jim Petro resigned as chancellor in February 2013. The newly appointed chancellor is from Wellston, OH, and is currently an assistant to the president of Shawnee State University. He will take office on April 29, 2013. The appointment must be confirmed by the Ohio Senate.

 

•Credit Transfers Made Easier:  The Ohio Board of Regents announced last week that it had created a web site to provide information to students about transferring credits within the University System of Ohio. The new web site will inform students about how to transfer educational courses/programs credits within the University System of Ohio earned at other institutes, such as high schools, career-tech centers, two-year or four-year colleges or universities, and the military. This initiative is part of an overall campaign called “Transfer to Degree Guarantee” to help traditional and nontraditional students earn degrees from Ohio’s institutions of higher education. The web site is at https://transfercredit.ohio.gov/ap:1:

 

1. The Ohio House and Senate will hold hearings and sessions this week.

 

Tuesday, April 30, 2013 

 

•The Senate Finance Committee Education Subcommittee, chaired by Senator Randy Gardner, will meet at 11:00 AM in the South Hearing Room.  The committee will receive testimony regarding HB59 (Amstutz) Biennial Budget from the Inter-University Council, Ohio Association of Community Colleges, the Ohio Association of Career Colleges and Schools, and the Association of Independent Colleges and Universities 

  

Wednesday, May 1, 2013

 

•The Senate Finance Committee Education Subcommittee, chaired by Senator Randy Gardner, will meet at 10:00 AM in the South Hearing Room.  The committee will receive testimony on HB59 (Amstutz) Biennial Budget from the Ohio Education Association, the Ohio Federation of Teachers, the Ohio Arts Council, the Ohio Educational Service Center Association, and the Ohio Association for Gifted Children. The committee will also receive testimony about College Credit Plus and Dual Enrollment.

 

•The House Education Committee, chaired by Representative Gerald Stebelton, will meet at 4:00 PM in hearing room 121.  The committee will receive testimony on two bills:

 

HB14 (Pelanda) School Records-Abused, Neglected, Dependent Child.  This bill would change the way school districts withhold or transfer to another district or school the records of a child who is alleged or adjudicated an abused, neglected, or dependent child.

 

HB127 (Adams) Career-Technical Education and Skilled Workforce Development Month.  This bill would designate the month of March as “Career-Technical Education and Skilled Workforce Development Month.”  

 

Thursday, May 2, 2013

 

•The Senate Finance Committee Education Subcommittee, chaired by Senator Randy Gardner, will meet at 10:00 AM in the South Hearing Room.  The committee will receive testimony on HB59 (Amstutz) Biennial Budget from Auditor of State Dave Yost regarding school performance audits; the State Library Board; and testimony about unfunded mandates, career technical schools, career and vocational education, community schools, and non-public schools.

 

3) Budget Bill Hearings in the Ohio Senate:  Last week state agencies, departments, and statewide organizations presented testimony to several committees and subcommittees in the Ohio Senate about Sub. HB59 (Amstutz) Biennial Budget, which was approved by the Ohio House on April 18, 2013.  The Senate has scheduled hearings on Sub. HB59 throughout May, with the intent of passing the bill the first week of June.

 

Senate President Keith Faber also announced last week that alternatives for expanding Medicaid would not be included in the biennial budget. According to Senator Faber, the Senate will work with the House to find an acceptable plan that reforms Medicaid in a way that addresses the needs of Ohioans and achieves the goals set by the General Assembly.  Senate President Faber also announced that the Senate will work to reform Ohio’s tax structure, focusing on small businesses, and will probably revise the House-passed formula for funding schools.

 

The Senate Finance Committee Education Subcommittee, chaired by Senator Randy Gardner, received testimony last week from State Superintendent Dick Ross and Assistant Policy Director Barbara Mattei-Smith of the Governor’s Office of 21st Century Education.  They answered questions about Governor Kasich’s proposed budget and policy changes for K-12 education included in the Executive version of HB59 (Amstutz) Biennial Budget, and noted concerns about House changes for the “Straight A Fund”; requiring school districts to report average daily membership each month; and providing parents with state per pupil transportation funds in lieu of transportation provided by school districts.

 

•Education Organizations Testify:  Representatives from the Ohio School Boards Association (OSBA), the Buckeye Association of School Administrators (BASA), and the Ohio Association of School Business Officials (OASBO) also presented combined testimony regarding the policy changes for K-12 education and the school funding formula in the Executive version of HB59 (Amstutz) Biennial Budget compared to the House version of the budget. 

 

According to the testimony, which was presented by Barbara Shaner from OASBO, the education organizations agree with the Kasich administration that more resources above the basic level should be provided to school districts to support Targeted Resources, students in poverty, early childhood education, gifted education, special education, and students with Limited English Proficiency.  The education organizations also support the proposal in the Executive Budget to provide state aid for transportation, supplemental transportation, and career tech education outside of the state school funding formula, so that school districts on the guarantee or subject to a “cap” on increases in state funding, still receive increases in state funds to support these vital components.

 

The organizations also support some of the changes made by the Ohio House to the “Opportunity Aid” formula.  These include implementing a per-pupil base-aid funding component, even though the House per pupil levels in HB59 are $5732 in FY14 and $5839 in FY15, which “date back to FY2009”. The education organizations also urged lawmakers to establish a mechanism to determine the appropriate per pupil amount for the future.  The organizations also raised the following concerns about the House version of the bill:

 

-Expansion of vouchers. The proposed expansion of the EdChoice Scholarship Program based on family  income for students in Kindergarten and first grade, would provide state funds for eligible students to attend eligible private schools, even though the public school of residence could be an excellent school. The program has the potential to expand to 12th grade and could cost the state millions of additional dollars. Although the program will not be funded through transfers from the public school district of residence, the program will still divert millions of public dollars in excess lottery profit funds away from public schools, with no accountability for how the money will be spent.  

-Expansion of vouchers.  Another voucher program created in the bill would allow students in grades K-3 in schools not meeting the standards under the Third Grade Reading Guarantee/K-3 Literacy Component on the local report card to be eligible for a voucher to attend a private school. Concerns were raised about students moving from public schools, which are required to provide instruction to support the Third Grade Reading Guarantee, to private schools, which are not required to conform to the requirements of the Third Grade Reading Guarantee.

-Monthly ADM counts.  This change would increase administration costs and could destabilize funding for school districts and undermine their ability to plan programs and services for students. 

-Six percent cap on state funding increases:  The cap will not allow school districts to benefit fully from the formula or compensate school districts for increases in costs for fuel, supplies, utilities, and staff.

-Charter school deductions:  Increases in state funding for school districts are capped in the new House formula, but funding for charter schools, which is deducted from the state aid that school districts receive, is not capped. This means that charter schools will receive the full increase in state aid, and students who remain in the district will receive less state aid per pupil than students attending charter schools.

-Special Education Catastrophic Aid:  Although the House version of HB59 reinstates the current program for catastrophic special education aid, which reimburses districts for some special education costs in excess of the categorical amounts, only $40 million in each fiscal year is allocated for the program, while the Ohio Department of Education estimates the costs to be in excess of $110 million.

-All School Districts Need State Aid: “With funding reductions to school districts over the past two biennia, including reduction of TPP replacement funds and the loss of federal stimulus funds that had replaced state funding dollars, districts have found their budgets stretched dramatically. We are hopeful that your interest in the development of a new school-funding plan will result in a formula that will be stable and reliable in the future.”

 

•Analyses of School Funding Formula Presented:  Dr. Howard Fleeter of the Education Tax Policy Institute (ETPI) also testified, explaining the history of school funding models used in Ohio over the past 25 years and the specific components of the Executive and House versions of the education budget included in HB59.  

 

He also provided data to show why more lower wealth school districts are on the “guarantee” for a greater amount of state funds under Governor Kasich’s budget proposal, called Opportunity Grants, when compared to the Building Blocks formula under Governor Taft’s administration.  According to Dr. Fleeter, “Because poorer districts receive a greater share of state aid, they are most adversely affected by the switch to a funding formula that is mathematically equivalent to a $732 reduction in the base cost. Similarly, the LSC example also shows that wealthier districts benefit the most from the effective reduction in the chargeoff from 23 to 20 mills.”

 

During his report about the House changes to the school funding formula, Dr. Fleeter states that many of the following features of the Executive Budget proposal in HB59 for education were retained in the House version of the budget, but were amended:

 

-Core Opportunity Aid.  This provision is now based on $5,732 in FY14 and $5839 in FY15 per pupil with a modified state share index based on both district property wealth and median income determining the amount of state aid.

-Targeted Assistance.  This provision uses the same formula as proposed in the Executive Budget, with the only modification being that the target millage rate remains at 6 mills in FY15 (rather than increasing to 7 mills as originally proposed). A second tier of targeted assistance funding based on the percentage of agricultural property in the school district is also added.

-Economically Disadvantaged Student Aid.  This provision is modified.  The per pupil amount is lowered from $500 to $340  in FY14 and $343 in FY15.

-Special Education Funding.  This provision is based on the disability category weights in current law, applied to the per pupil amount, but is funded at 90 percent. The State Share Index is the same as that for Core Opportunity Aid. The 15 percent deduction in the Executive Budget for funding the catastrophic cost fund is eliminated.

-Limited English Proficient Funding.  The House version is the same as the provision proposed by the governor, except that funding for category 4 students is no longer provided.

-Early Childhood Access Funding.  This program is replaced with a new program called K-3 literacy funding. Rather than basing funding on $600 per pupil times the early childhood access index, funding is $300 per pupil in FY14 (increasing to $303 in FY15) for all pupils in grades K-3.

-Gifted Program Funding.  This program is changed to unit funding and $5 per pupil is allocated for the identification of gifted students.

-Career Technical Education Funding.  State funding for career tech is now included as part of the formula through a weighted pupil approach with the state share index used to determine the level of state support for each district.

-Transportation Funding.  State support for transportation is now included as part of the formula. House modifications to the transportation funding formula simplify the calculation and base funding on the greater of per mile or per rider costs for each district. A Transportation supplement for low wealth and low population density districts has been added and is included in the application of the guarantee and cap calculations.

-Guarantees.  Some districts will receive state aid based on FY13 funding, including Transportation and Career Tech funds. The number of districts on the guarantee is cut by more than half and the cost is reduced by 75 percent as compared to the Administration proposal.

-Gain Cap.  Increases in state aid is limited to 6 percent from FY13 funding levels compared to the 25 percent cap in Governor’s budget. The exemption of Core Opportunity Aid from the cap is eliminated. The provision that the Gain cap is also based on 10 percent of district total state and local resources is also eliminated.

 

According to the testimony, an analysis of the Executive school funding formula compared to the House plan shows that the House funding formula provides $1.071 billion more for school districts than the Executive Budget in FY14, prior to the application of the guarantee and the gain cap, and after being adjusted for transportation and career tech education. However, after adjusting for the guarantee and the gain cap, school districts lose overall $48.2 million in FY14 in the House version. In other words, what the House adds to school district state aid through the House formula, is eliminated through the gain cap, also included in the formula.

 

The new State Share Index, which replaces the charge-off, is also discussed in the testimony.  According to Dr. Fleeter the State Share Index is based on a districts’ relative property valuation per pupil and its relative median income level.  This produces a variable millage charge-off for districts ranging from about 7 mills to about 23 mills. The charge-off in the past has ranged from 20 mills to 23 mills under the Taft administration.

 

Testimony from all witnesses is available at 

http://www.ohiosenate.gov/committee/education-finance-subcommittee#

 

4) Support Increases for Addressing the Opportunity to Learn Gap:  Over the past months education stakeholders, policy makers, researchers, and pundits have raised more and more questions about the efficacy of the current education reform movement, which is focused on the Common Core State Standards, standardized testing, the privatization of K-12 education, teacher evaluations based on student test score results, etc. 

 

Will these market-based education reforms really increase student achievement and close the achievement gaps among groups of children who are poor, don’t speak English, have special education needs, are gifted, and come from diverse family and racial backgrounds? Or, have the results of these reforms reached a plateau?

 

Emerging from discussions about the current status of education reform initiatives is more support for addressing the “opportunity gaps” in our schools.  “Opportunity gaps” are the differences in the quality and rigor of the learning experiences available for students of different races, family economic status, and educational needs, compared to the learning experiences available for students in more wealthy communities and schools.  Even though opportunity to learn standards were formulated in the early 1990s in several areas, including the arts, they were passed over by many policy makers, who became focused on student and teacher outputs, and state accountability systems based on student test scores in math and language arts.

 

Last week, on the 30th anniversary of the release of A Nation at Risk (April 1983), David C. Berliner, Regents’ Professor Emeritus at the Mary Lou Fulton Teachers College of Arizona State University, and co-author with Bruce J. Biddle of The Manufactured Crisis: Myths, Fraud, and the Attack on America’s Public Schools, wrote that the public has endured thirty years of lies, half-truths, and myths about the failure of our nation’s public education system. He goes on to say that, “It really is not an achievement gap between the United States and other nations that is our problem. We actually do quite well for a large and a diverse nation. It’s really the opportunity gap, not the achievement gap that could destroy us. If only the wealthy have the opportunity to acquire the knowledge and skills needed for a post-industrial economy we are, indeed, a nation at risk.”

 

Three Decades of Lies by David C. Berliner, Education Week Op Ed on April 23, 2013 at

http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/op_education/2013/04/three_decades_of_lies.html

 

David Berliner is not the only education policy expert talking about “opportunity gaps”.  Last week several prominent education scholars released a new book entitled Closing the Opportunity Gap, What America Must Do to Give Every Child an Even Chance, co-edited by Kevin G. Welner and Prudence Carter. 

 

Twenty-two education experts contributed to the book, including Hank Levin, Linda Darling-Hammond, Gary Orfield, Richard Rothstein, Amy Stuart Wells, Yong Zhao, and more. The book argues that federal and state education reform efforts to close the achievement gap among groups of students have not worked and won’t work until the opportunity gap among students is closed. 

 

According to a press release the authors offer research based policies to address the opportunity gap that exists across the nation.  They point out that supporters of the standards-based reform movement, which includes measuring outcomes through standardized testing and rating and ranking schools and districts, have focused on closing the achievement gap between groups of students based on race, family income level, and educational needs on standardized tests.  However, in doing so these supporters have “...neglected the basic truth that achievement follows from opportunities to learn”.

 

According to a statement by the book's co-editor Prudence Carter from Stanford University, “Quite simply, children learn when they are supported with high expectations, quality teaching and deep engagement, and made to feel that they are entitled to good schooling; the richer those opportunities, the greater the learning. When those opportunities are denied or diminished, lower achievement is the dire and foreseeable result”.

 

The authors describe several policy recommendations to narrow the opportunity gap:  

•Provide high quality early childhood education.

•End segregation in housing, schools, and classrooms.

•Provide crucial funding and resources so that high-need students can achieve outcomes.

•Provide more and better learning time, including summer and after school.

•Focus on childhood health.

•Focus on teacher experience and support.

•Provide access to libraries and the Internet.

•Provide tutoring

•Create safe and well-maintained school environments.

•Improve policies on student discipline.

•Understand student cultures and schooling.

•Change the focus of testing and accountability.  “Instead of continuous batteries of high-stakes tests, the focus should be on low-stakes, informative testing that enables teachers to understand how well their students are learning. The focus should also be on a portfolio of work that expects students to use the full range of critical thinking skills expected of more advantaged children.”

•Address the needs of language minorities

 

The book is available at http://nepc.colorado.edu/book.

 

•Education Stakeholders Launch the Closing the Opportunity Gap Campaign:  Along with the release of the book Closing the Opportunity Gap on the 30th anniversary of the publication of A Nation At Risk, the authors of the book also announced the launch of the Closing the Opportunity Gap Campaign, to build the capacity of stakeholders, communities, and schools to provide all children with rich learning opportunities.  

 

According to the book's co-editor Kevin Welner, any gains in student achievement through current education reform initiatives, including high-stakes, test-centric teaching, have already been made, and now a different approach is needed.  He states, “When we start creating more equitable opportunities and gauging how well states and districts are doing to create those opportunities, we will join our best international competitors in showing strong academic progress.”

 

In addition to a press conference held in Washington, D.C. on April 25, 2013, to publicize the Closing the Opportunity Gap Campaign, leaders of the campaign will address the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association and a meeting of the Education Writers Association next week.  The campaign will also release in September a state by state “Opportunity to Learn” comparison. Model legislation will be available by this fall for advocates at the state level to use to address and remedy the causes of opportunity gaps.

 

Information about the campaign is available at http://nepc.colorado.edu/book

 

•More Support for Closing Opportunity Gaps:  The Closing the Opportunity Gap Campaign is focusing on issues recently identified by The Equity and Excellence Commission and the Leadership Conference Education Fund, which released a report on April 15, 2013. (“Reversing the Rising Tide of Inequality:  Achieving Educational Equity for Each and Every Child”, by Robert Rothman, principal author. An article about this initiative was included in the April 22, 2013 issue of Arts on Line, Education Update.)

 

The purpose of the report is to bolster efforts to achieve both quality and fairness in our nation’s public education system, and implement the recommendations developed by the Equity and Excellence Commission, chaired by Christopher Edley, Jr. The 27-member commission was chartered by Congress to provide advice about “....the disparities in meaningful educational opportunities that give rise to the achievement gap, with a focus on systems of finance, and to recommend ways in which federal policies could address such disparities.”  The commission, which met for over two years, submitted a report to the U.S. Secretary of Education, Arne Duncan in February 2013. The report summarizes “.... how America’s K-12 education system, taken as a whole, fails our nation and too many of our children.”  

 

According to the report, the education reform initiatives of the past sixty years, based on standards and test-based accountability, have made some progress, but not enough.  The report urges members of Congress to conduct hearings on the impact of fiscal inequity on under-served populations and on the nation’s well being, and target federal resources to students and communities most in need.  Congress should reauthorized the Elementary and Secondary Education Act and hold local educational agencies accountable for student outcomes and closing the achievement gaps among groups of students.  The report urges the Obama administration to enforce compliance with federal civil rights laws barring discrimination and inequality, and enforce provisions in the Elementary and Secondary Education Act.

 

The report is available at http://civilrightsdocs.info/pdf/reports/Education-Equity-Report-webversion.pdf.

 

•Current Education Reforms Not Working:  The Broader, Bolder Approach to Education released on April 22, 2013 a report by Elaine Weiss and Don Long that examines the impact of current education reform policies, included in Race to the Top and No Child Left Behind, in Washington, D.C., New York, and Chicago. (Market-Oriented Education Reforms’ Rhetoric Trumps Reality:  The impacts of test-based teacher evaluations, school closures, and increased charter school access on student outcomes in Chicago, New York City, and Washington, D.C. by Elaine Weiss and Don Long, The Broader, Bolder Approach to Education, April 22, 2013.) 

 

The report finds that the market-based reforms used to improve the education systems in these cities, including test-based teacher evaluation, increased school choice, closing failing under-enrolled schools, “...delivered few benefits and in some cases harmed the students they purport to help.  It also identifies a set of largely neglected policies with real promise to weaken the poverty-education link, if they receive some of the attention and resources now targeted to the touted reforms.” 

 

The researchers found the following:

-Test scores increased less, and achievement gaps grew more, in “reform” cities than in other urban districts. 

-Reported successes for targeted students evaporated upon closer examination. 

-Test-based accountability prompted churn that thinned the ranks of experienced teachers, but not necessarily bad teachers. 

-School closures did not send students to better schools or save school districts money. 

-Charter schools further disrupted the districts while providing mixed benefits, particularly for the highest-needs students.

-Emphasis on the widely touted market-oriented reforms drew attention and resources from initiatives with greater promise. 

-Real, sustained change requires strategies that are more realistic, patient, and multi-pronged. 

 

The report also found that in all three cities, “...a narrow focus on market-oriented policies diverted attention from the need to address socio-economic factors that impede learning.”  

 

“Achievement gaps have their root in opportunity gaps. Only by closing the latter can we begin to shrink the former. Effective reform must recognize the huge impact of community factors, leverage the community’s resources, and establish supports to compensate for gaps. Without such supports, gaps in kindergarten readiness, physical and mental health, nutrition, and extracurricular enrichment opportunities will continue to thwart even the most effective reforms that stop at the classroom and school walls.”

 

As a comparison the report describes the successful reform efforts used in Montgomery County, Maryland to increase student achievement among an ethnically diverse student body.  According to the report, Montgomery County has been able to produce some of the highest test scores among minority and low income students, decrease the achievement gaps, and increase high school graduation and college attendance rates, without using student test scores to evaluate teachers or charter schools. Instead the district supports teachers, professional development, and collaboration; small class size; intensive literacy instruction; art, music and physical education teachers in every school; high quality prekindergarten; health clinics; after school enrichment; and other opportunities to ensure that all students have high quality learning opportunities.

 

The report states, “Every school district has unique needs and resources. But providing all students with the enriching experiences that already help high-income students thrive would represent a big step forward, and away from narrow reforms that miss the mark.”

 

The report is available at 

http://www.epi.org/files/2013/bba-rhetoric-trumps-reality.pdf. 

 

FYI ARTS

 

1) Dance Opportunity for Elementary Students Comes to Vern Riffe Center: Momentum engages 800 elementary-aged boys and girls in movement, music, and choreography to develop confidence, self-discipline, focus, and an appreciation for the arts. Classes are held weekly during the school day at nine Columbus City Schools and one Hilliard City School throughout the school year. 

 

Momentum participants will perform Moving Lives: A Year In the Life of a Momentum Dancer in May at the Capitol Theatre in the Riffe Center for the Performing Arts in Columbus, Ohio.  The performances, which will bring the dancers’ year-long Momentum journey to life on the stage,  will be held in Columbus on May 14 and May 17, 2013 at 10:30 AM and 1:00 PM.  Admission is free and reservations are not required.  Seating is general admission.

 

For information please visit 

http://calendar.dailycamera.com/columbus_oh/events/show/313806903-moving-lives-a-year-in-the-life-of-a-momentum-dancer

 

2) NPR Series Highlights the Benefits of Arts Education:  Last week National Public Radio (NPR) broadcast four programs describing the “intersection of education and the arts”.

 

•The Case For the Arts in Overhauling Education by Rachel Martin (Weekend Edition Sunday on April 14, 2013.  In this broadcast Rachel Martin, host of Weekend Edition Sunday, interviews Elizabeth Blair about “...her reporting on the role the arts play in helping low performing schools improve and in nurturing creativity that can help young people in all subjects.”

 

In her research about cuts to school district budgets Ms. Blair found that middle-class/upper-class school systems still have instruction in the arts, but instruction in the arts is less available in poorer neighborhood schools.  

 

The report notes that in a “very small but strategic way” the Obama administration is introducing a rigorous and aggressive arts curriculum in eight low performing schools called the Turnaround Arts Initiative to see if the arts can affect student attendance and overall school environment. The success of the program will be judged on student attendance, behavior, school climate, and, of course, student test score results, including creativity. Ms. Blair explains in the interview that she has observed a disconnect between what schools want to do, help children become creative and innovative thinkers, and what is actually happening in schools, where children are learning that there is only one right answer on a multiple choice test. Instruction in the arts might be a way for students to explore their creativity. 

 

The broadcast is available at 

http://www.npr.org/2013/04/14/177204419/the-case-for-the-arts-in-overhauling-education 

 

•Creative Classes:  An Artful Approach to Improving Performance by Elizabeth Blair (All Things Considered on April 16, 2013). This show describes how low-performing schools serving students from poor families in Denver, Portland, New Orleans, Des Moines, Washington, D.C. and Montana are implementing the Turnaround Arts Initiative, an intensive arts curriculum supported by the President’s Committee on the Arts and the Humanities. 

 

The initiative provides resources for the schools to support instruction in music, dance, drama, and visual arts in the schools, and bolster learning in math and reading as a result.  According to the initiative, integrating the arts in the schools improves the conditions for learning in the school, motivating students to come to school and learn. As part of the initiative, members of the Presidents Committee on the Arts and the Humanities have adopted one of the participating schools.  The members, including Kerry Washington, Forest Whitaker, and Yo-Yo Ma, teach master classes and mentor students. 

 

The program notes, however, that researchers have not found a causal link between teaching the arts and performance on test scores, according to child psychologist Ellen Winner, who was interviewed for the broadcast. Professor Winner, who is chair of psychology at Boston College and co-author of the book Studio Thinking: The Real Benefits of Visual Arts Education, still believes that the Turnaround Arts Initiative can help students, because the arts lead to engagement and attendance and “interesting teachers and engaged teachers”.  

 

The broadcast is available at http://www.npr.org/2013/04/16/176671432/creative-classes-an-artful-approach-to-improving-performance

 

•More than 50 Years of Putting Kids’ Creativity to the Test by Elizabeth Blair (All Things Considered on April 17, 2013.  In part two of the series on arts education, Elizabeth Blair discusses how creativity is being measured and why it is important to find a measure for creativity.

 

Some of the early research about measuring creativity was conducted by E. Paul Torrance, who, as a psychologist, observed that some troublesome children were actually the most creative people.  Teachers often ignored these children, because they were harder to control.  He developed the Torrance Test to measure creativity and to prove that creativity was important to success in every field, not just in the arts. The test is still used today.

 

James Catterall, a psychologist and director of the Centers for Research on Creativity in Los Angeles, is still “field testing” his Next Generation Creativity Survey, but has already found that elementary school children score better on the survey than high school students.  According to the interview he believes that schools have a tendency to “suck the creativity out of kids over time”.

 

The broadcast is available at

http://www.npr.org/2013/04/17/177040995/more-than-50-years-of-putting-kids-creativity-to-the-test

 

•In D.C., Art Program Turns Boys’ Lives Into ‘Masterpieces’ by Elizabeth Blair (All Things Considered April 18, 2013).  This third part of the series about the intersection of education and the arts describes the Life Pieces to Masterpieces arts program, an after-school program that serves the Ward 7 neighborhood in Washington, D.C., and teaches African American boys and young men how to express themselves through painting.  

 

The broadcast explains that Ward 7 is one of the poorest neighborhoods in D.C. with a poverty rate over 40 percent for children and a juvenile detention rate of 23 percent. The Masterpieces program, co-founded by Mary Brown, helps boys, ages 3-25, learn the four Cs:  connect, create, contribute, and celebrate. 

 

Participants learn to express their sometimes horrific life experiences through art, including painting, songs, and poems, and have formed a “brotherhood” where they feel comfortable and safe.  They also learn how to meditate and reflect about what has happened in their lives in order to rejuvenate themselves. Although the program has had some setbacks, an estimated 1000 young men have completed the program since its founding in 1996, and 100 percent of participants have graduated from high school and have either gone on to college or vocational school.

 

The broadcast is available at 

http://www.npr.org/2013/04/18/177608823/in-d-c-art-program-turns-boys-lives-into-masterpieces

 

 

Ohio News House Passes FY14-15 Budget: The Ohio House approved on April 18, 2013 Sub. HB59, the FY14-15 budget introduced by Governor Kasich in February 2013 (Executive Budget). The vote was 61 to 35. The House approved budget includes General Revenue Fund (GRF) totals of $61.45 billion for the biennium, which is $1.7 billion less than the Executive Budget. The House approved All Funds budget is $120.2 billion for the biennium, which is also less than the Executive Budget. After weeks of hearings and debate, a majority of House members agreed on changes to HB59 that removed or reduced funding for some of the Governor's priorities, including Medicaid expansion, increases in the severance tax on oil and gas drilling, a 20 percent reduction in the income tax, reductions in income taxes for small businesses, increases in the state's sales tax, a new school funding formula based on property valuation, and more. But, House leaders also pledged to continue talks about Medicaid and tax reform as the Senate worked on the budget and during the remainder of this session. The substitute version of HB59 included a seven percent across the board reduction in the state's income tax, and members unanimously accepted a floor amendment that states the House's intent to take action on a Medicaid plan through separate legislation in the future. In another floor amendment the House removed a controversial provision (inserted by the House Finance and Appropriations Committee) that further restricted sex education course content and allowed schools to be subject to a $5000 penalty if found guilty of straying from abstinence only pedagogy. The amendment also eliminated a provision that called for the alignment of an Ohio Department of Education expenditure plan to increase broadband capacity for schools with the time line for implementing assessments aligned to the Common Core State Standards. The Ohio Senate has already started hearings on the HB59, receiving testimony last week from representatives of the governor's office, the Office of Budget and Management, and the Legislative Services Commission. The Senate Primary & Secondary Subcommittee, chaired by Senator Randy Gardner, is receiving testimony from state agencies this week, and will receive public testimony on the education budget the week of April 29, 2013. More details about HB59 are included below. Changes Approved for Statehouse Security: The Capitol Square Review and Advisory Board (CSRAB) approved on April 18, 2013 a new security plan for the Statehouse in Columbus, but did not set a time frame for when it will go into effect. The plan includes the following: A reduction in the number of access points to the Statehouse. The Broad Street entrance to the Rotunda will be closed. Law enforcement officers will be placed at the three remaining street-level entrances and at the sliding glass doors in the underground parking garage. Visitors without state-issued identification badges will be subject to security wand searches, and bags and packages will also be subject to inspections. Registered lobbyists will be able to purchase a special entry pass that will grant them access to the building during normal business hours. 25 security cameras and alarms on doors will be installed.
National News Secretary Testifies About President's Education Budget: Secretary of Education Arne Duncan testified on April 17, 2013 before the U.S. Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, and Other Related Agencies, chaired by Senator Tom Harkin, about President Obama's FY14 budget recommendations for education. According to the testimony the President is seeking a funding increase for the U.S. Department of Education (DOE), from $68.1 billion in FY12, before sequestration, to $71.2 billion in FY14. The plan retains allocations of $14.5 billion for Title 1 Grants to Local Educational Agencies and $11.6 billion for the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act Grants to States. It also includes a five percent increase in education funding to compensate for the cuts due to sequestration. The FY14 funding plan would also support the following education initiatives: Preschool for All: One of the major initiatives of the president's budget is "Preschool for All", a new federal-state partnership to provide universal high-quality preschool for 4 year old children from low-and moderate income families up to 200 percent of the poverty level. The program, which will cost $75 billion over the next ten years, would be funded by increases in taxes on cigarettes and tobacco products. States would be required to "match" federal funds, and meet quality benchmarks, such as standards for early learning, qualified staff, and comprehensive assessment and data systems. STEM Innovative Networks: Another major initiative in the president's budget proposal is a government-wide realignment of 114 science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) programs across 13 agencies, and the development of a cohesive national STEM education strategy. To improve K-12 STEM education the budget includes $150 million for STEM Innovative Networks, which would support creating partnerships among school districts, institutions of higher education, research institutions, museums, community partners, and business and industry. These networks would develop comprehensive plans for identifying, developing, testing, and scaling up evidence-based practices to provide STEM learning opportunities in participating local educational agencies (LEAs) and schools. They also would work to leverage better and more effective use of the wide range of STEM education resources available from federal, state, local, and private entities, including federally supported science mission agencies. STEM Teacher Pathways: The budget includes $80 million for STEM Teacher Pathways to recruit, train, and place recent college graduates and mid-career professionals in the STEM fields in high-need schools; and $35 million to establish a new STEM Master Teacher Corps, which would identify STEM teacher leaders, who would take on leadership and mentorship roles in their schools and communities aimed at improving STEM instruction and helping students excel in math and science. Effective Teachers and Leaders: The budget proposal includes $2.5 billion for the Effective Teachers and Leaders State Grants to improve teacher and principal evaluation systems, and $617 million for the DOE to build evidence about how to recruit, prepare, and support effective teachers and school leaders. $400 million is also included for the Teacher and Leader Innovation Fund to improve the effectiveness of teachers in high need LEAs and schools, and another $98 million is requested to support training for principals. School Turnarounds and Data-Based Innovation: The budget plan requests the reauthorization of the School Turnaround Grants (STG) program and $659 million to support the program. The request includes $125 million for competitive awards to improve persistently low-achieving schools, and $25 million to expand the School Turnaround AmeriCorps Initiative. Investing in Innovation: To support research and new education reforms $215 million is being requested to support the Investing in Innovation (i3) program. Up to $64 million would be available for the Advanced Research Projects Agency for Education to improve teaching and learning. $85 million is requested to support statewide longitudinal data systems, including support to develop P-20 reports and tools to inform policy-making. Carl D. Perkins Career and Technical Education (CTE) Program: Included in the president's budget is a $1.1 billion request to reauthorize the Carl D. Perkins Career and Technical Education (CTE) Center to strengthen alignment among secondary and postsecondary CTE programs with business and industry, and create a better accountability system for career tech. The request includes $300 million for a new High School Redesign program to ensure that students graduate with college credit, earned through dual enrollment, Advanced Placement courses, or other postsecondary learning opportunities; and career-related experiences or competencies, obtained through organized internships and mentorships, structured work-based learning, and other related experiences. $42 million is included to fund dual enrollment programs. Affordability and Quality in Postsecondary Education: The President is recommending $1 billion for a new Race to the Top-College Affordability and Completion competition to improve college access, affordability, completion, and quality. To make college more affordable the budget links student load interest rates to market rates; expands repayment options to ensure that loan repayments for all student borrowers do not exceed 10 percent of a borrower's discretionary income; and increases aid available under the Campus-Based Aid programs, including $150 million for Work-Study, and reforms to the Perkins Loans program. Promise Zones Initiative: To address the challenges of concentrated poverty in neighborhood schools, the president's budget proposal includes $300 million for Promise Neighborhoods, a $400 million request for the Department of Housing and Urban Development's Choice Neighborhoods program, and $35 million for the Department of Justice's Byrne Criminal Justice Innovation Grants program, in addition to tax incentives to promote investment and economic growth. According to the testimony, these funds will be used to revitalize high-poverty communities by attracting private investment, increasing affordable housing, improving educational opportunities, and providing tax incentives for hiring workers and investing in the Zones. "This interagency effort will explore opportunities to make better use of all available resources-Federal, State, and local-to address the negative effects of concentrated poverty." Making Schools Safer: The 2014 budget supports new investments to improve school emergency plans, create positive school climates, and counter the effects of pervasive violence on students, including $30 million in one-time emergency management planning grants to States to help their LEAs develop, implement, and improve emergency management plans; $50 million for School Climate Transformation Grants, to create positive school climates; and $25 million for Project Prevent grants to break the cycle of violence in some communities through the provision of mental health services to students suffering from trauma or anxiety (including PTSD), conflict resolution programs, and other school-based strategies to prevent future violence. Secretary Duncan's testimony is available. President Obama's FY14 Budget is available.   This Week at the Statehouse The Ohio House and Senate will hold hearings and sessions this week. Tuesday, April 23, 2013 The House Select Committee on the 98th District Election, chaired by Representative Huffman, will meet on April 23, 2013 at 8:30 AM in hearing room 121. The committee will hear presentations from counsel for the contestor, the contestee, and respondents. The nine-member committee was formed to review the results of the 98th House District election between Representative Al Landis (R-Dover) and former Representative Joshua O'Farrell (D-New Philadelphia). Representative Landis won the election in November by 8 votes, but the election was immediately contested by Josh O'Farrell, who filed a lawsuit in the Ohio Supreme Court. Ohio Supreme Court Chief Justice Maureen O'Connor reviewed the evidence gathered in response to the lawsuit, and directed the case to be settled by the House of Representatives. The complaint alleges that there were irregularities in how some ballots were counted. Once the House committee examines the evidence, it will present its recommendations to the full Ohio House for a final decision. The Senate Education Subcommittee, chaired by Senator Randy Gardner (R-Bowling Green) will meet at 11:00 AM in the South Hearing Room. The committee will receive testimony from the Ohio Higher Education Funding Commission and the Ohio Board of Regents regarding HB59 (Amstutz) Biennial Budget. Wednesday, April 24, 2013 The Senate Education Subcommittee, chaired by Senator Randy Gardner (R-Bowling Green), will meet at 9:30 AM in the South Hearing Room. The committee will receive testimony from the Ohio Department of Education and the Office of 21st Century Education regarding HB59 (Amstutz) Biennial Budget. The House Education Committee, chaired by Representative Gerald Stebelton, will meet at 5:00 PM in hearing room 121. The committee will receive testimony on the following bills:   HB8 (Roeger) School Safety Laws, which would revise the school safety laws. A substitute bill is expected to be introduced.  HB14 (Pelanda) School Records-Abused, Neglected, Dependent Child, which would change the way school districts withhold or transfer to another district or school the records of a child who is alleged or adjudicated an abused, neglected, or dependent child.  SB21 (Lehner) Third Grade Reading Guarantee, which would revise the requirements for reading teachers under the Third-Grade Reading Guarantee. Thursday, April 25, 2013 The Senate Education Subcommittee, chaired by Senator Randy Gardner (R-Bowling Green) will meet at 9:00 AM in the South Hearing Room. The committee will receive testimony from several statewide agencies.       HB59 Omnibus Amendment Approved The House Finance and Appropriations Committee, chaired by Representative Amstutz, made a number of substantive changes in Sub. HB59 (Amstutz) Biennial Budget before approving it on April 16, 2013 and sending it to the full House for consideration. The omnibus amendment increased All Funds Budget totals in FY14 by $61 million and in FY15 by $52.7 million. The General Revenue Fund budget is $61.45 billion for the biennium, which is $1.7 billion less than the Executive Budget. The House approved All Funds budget is $120.2 billion for the biennium, which is also less than the Executive Budget. The following is a summary of the education related amendments that became part of HB59 as approved by the House on April 18, 2013. Sec. 3314.29 Permits an e-school that serves at least grades one through eight to divide into two schools as long as the sponsor agrees and the division is accomplished in either the 2013 - 2014 or 2014 - 2015 school years. Sec. 3314.017 Dropout Recovery Schools: Requires the State Board of Education, not later than December 31, 2014, to review the performance levels and 13 benchmarks for report cards issued for dropout recovery 14 community schools. Sec. 3314.06 Community School Tuition: Permits a community school to charge tuition to a student who is not an Ohio resident. Sec. 3333.31 Residency Status for State Subsidy and Tuition Purposes: Requires that, if a state institution of higher education issues a student a letter or utility bill to use as proof for voting purposes in Ohio, the student must be granted residency status by rule of the Chancellor of the Board of Regents for the purpose of state subsidy and tuition surcharges. Sections 263.10 and 263.220 Vocational Agriculture Program: Increases GRF appropriation item 200545, Career-Technical Education Enhancements, by $5,000 in each fiscal year by the same amount, and increases the earmark for the Vocational Agriculture Programs at an at-risk vocational school in the Cincinnati City School District. Sec. 263 Academic Distress Commission: Allows the Superintendent of Public Instruction to create an academic distress commission for any district found by the State Auditor to have knowingly manipulated student data with the intent to deceive. Sec. 3314.029 Community School Sponsor Termination: Authorizes the Department of Education to deny an application submitted under the Ohio School Sponsorship Program by an existing community school, if the school's contract with its sponsor was terminated. Sec. 3313.848 Un-expended Funds Paid to an Educational Service Center: Permits the board of education of a school district, governing authority of a community school, governing body of a STEM school, or governing body of a municipal or other political subdivision (client) to elect, at the end of a fiscal year, to have unexpended funds that were paid to an education service center (ESC) during that fiscal year applied toward any payment owed to the ESC in the next fiscal year. Sec. 3301.07 Operating Standards - Use of Phonics Operating Standards: Reinserts removed language that requires phonics to be used as a technique for reading teaching standards adopted by the State Board of Education. Sec. 3301.07 Financial Reporting Standards: Restores current law requiring that the State Board of Education develop financial reporting standards for specified categories to be used by public schools when annually reporting financial information. Sec. 3314.08 E-Schools Career Tech: Provides that an e-school is eligible to receive career technical education funding in addition to the core opportunity grant and special education funding.0 Section 263 Special Education Funding Community Schools: Provides an amount from GRF appropriation item 200550, Foundation Funding, to certain community schools for students who receive special education services for severe behavior disabilities (SBH). The amount is equal to the difference between the aggregate amount paid in the current fiscal year for special education services for SBH students and the amount that would have been calculated for those students in FY01. Sec. 3321.01 All Day Kindergarten Tuition: Provides that a school district may charge tuition for a student enrolled in all-day kindergarten as long as the student is counted as less than one full time equivalent student. Sec. 3365.07 Post-Secondary Enrollment Options Reimbursement - Transfer Modules: Clarifies that the Department of Education may not reimburse a college through the Post-Secondary Enrollment Options (PSEO) Program for courses that are not included in, or equivalent to a course included in, either a transfer module or the transfer assurance guide developed by the Chancellor of the Board of Regents. Sec. 3317.022 and 3317.051 Gifted Unit Funding: Includes gifted unit funding in the list of core funding components. Requires a school district to use the funding it receives for gifted coordinator services or gifted intervention specialist services only for that purpose. Permits a school district to assign its gifted funding units to another education entity as part of an arrangement to provide gifted services. Sections 363.10 and 363. Under the Board of Regents creates GRF appropriation 235523, Youth STEM Commercialization and Entrepreneurship Program: Allocates $2.0 million in FY14 and $3.0 million in FY15 for the Youth STEM Commercialization and Entrepreneurship Program. Requires the Program to include regional STEM forums, online high school and collegiate content and courses, and a statewide mentoring network available to Ohio high school students. Requires the Program to conduct a statewide competition, open to all Ohio high school students, which includes awards for students, professional development and participation incentives for teachers, and initiatives to engage minority, rural, and economically disadvantaged students. Requires the Program to collaborate with institutions of higher education, existing STEM and entrepreneurship programs, and STEM professional and trade associations to implement these provisions. Sec. 263.460 Operating Standards: Removes the requirement for the State Board of Education to revise minimum operating standards. Sections 263.10 and 263.230 Public Funds for Home-schooled Students: Increases Foundation Funding 200-550 by $250,000 each year and earmarks that amount for home-schooled students to take Post-Secondary Enrollment Options Program courses. Sec. 3317.013 Category Two Special Education Students: Specifies that students who are preschool children identified as developmentally delayed are category two special education students for purposes of special education funding. Sec. 5705.192, 5705.217, 5705.218, and 5705.25 656 School District Levies for Permanent Improvements and Current Expenses: Allows a school district that levies an existing combined levy for current expenses and permanent improvements to replace or renew that levy solely for the purpose of funding general permanent improvements. The amendment also allows the district to replace the levy for a term of years different than the term for which the original tax was levied. Under current law, a district may renew or replace such a levy only for the same purposes and the same term for which it was originally levied. Specifies that new combined current expense and permanent improvement levies may be levied for current expenses and general (not specific) permanent improvements. Current law allows such levies to be used for either general or specific improvements. Section 263 Study on Funding for Gifted Students: Requires the Department of Education to conduct a study to determine the amounts of funding, method of funding, and the costs of statewide support for gifted students. The study must include costs for effective and appropriate identification, staffing, professional development, technology, materials and supplies at the district level. Requires the Department to issue a report of its findings to the General Assembly not later than March 31, 2014. Section 263.10 and 263 Ready to Learn: Appropriates $5.0 million in each fiscal year in GRF appropriation item 200468, Ready to Learn. Requires ODE to use this funding to contract with public and private early childhood education providers to fund early childhood education services for 2,200 preschool-aged children whose family income is no more than 200 percent of the federal poverty guidelines. Requires that funding be provided for at least 3 children in each county. Requires that private providers have at least a three star rating in the Department of Job and Family Services "Step Up to Quality" program. Requires programs receiving funding to meet certain teacher qualification and professional development criteria, aligned to ODE's early learning content standards, assess and report on child progress as required by ODE, and participate in the Step Up to Quality program. Sec. 3313.843 Total Student Count Educational Service Centers: Revises the bill's definition of "total student count" for purposes of calculating any state subsidy to be paid to an educational service center (ESC) to mean the sum of the average daily student enrollments reported on the most recent report cards issued by the Department of Education for all of the school districts with agreements with the ESC. Sec. 105.41, 125.05, 3313.603, 3314.074, 3317.06, 3317.50, 3317.51, 3319.22, 3319.235, 3353.01, 3353.02, 3353.04, 3353.06, 3353.07, and 3353.09; Sections 263.470, 363.570, and Section 4 of Sub. S.B. 171 of the 129th General Assembly, amended in Sections 610.20 and 610.21 Broadcast Educational Media Commission. Removes the bill's provisions abolishing the eTech Ohio Commission and, instead, renames and reconstitutes the eTech Ohio Commission as the Broadcast Educational Media Commission (BEMC). Transfers all of the state's educational broadcasting services, including educational television, radio, and radio reading services, and the rules associated with these services, from eTech to the BEMC. The House Finance and Appropriations Committee also considered amendments proposed by House Democrats, but all but one were tabled by the committee. Some of the same amendments were presented during the floor debate on HB59 in the House on April 18, 2013, but again, all but one of the amendments was tabled. The Democrat amendments related to education would have addressed the following: created the "Finish Fund" to promote incentives for college juniors and seniors to finish their degrees removed provisions permitting the superintendent of public instruction to create an academic distress commission in any school district found to have manipulated student data  removed provisions expanding the EdChoice voucher program for certain students based on income removed provisions adding career technical education funding for e-schools increased accountability for for-profit charter schools by requiring that they be subject to the same public records/audit requirements as public schools enact a 10 percent targeted middle class tax cut, and appropriate an additional $118 million for schools ($54 million in FY14 and $64 million in FY15) using funds that supported the seven percent income tax cut included in the substitute bill.   Media Report School Funding Decreases/Charter School Increases Last week newspapers and analysts reported that the House approved version of HB59 (Amstutz) Biennial Budget decreases state funding for traditional public schools while increasing funding for charter schools. The reports resulted from analyses of Legislative Service Commission simulations of the amount of state funding that would be allocated for each school districts through the new House school funding formula, which was developed by House Republicans and included in Sub. HB59 (Amstutz) Biennial Budget as passed by the House. When compared to the Executive Budget, the House version of HB59 (Amstutz) changes funding levels for the following K-12 education line items:   Provides $7.9 billion in General Revenue Funds in FY14 and $8.25 billion in FY15. The House version is $349 million more than FY13 estimated levels, and a $272 million increase between FY14 and FY15 levels. Compared to the Executive Budget the House Budget reduces General Revenue Funds for the Ohio Department of Education by $49.5 million in FY14 and by $21 million in FY15, for a total reduction of $70 million.  Provides $11.467 billion in All Fund Groups in FY14 and $11.81 billion in FY15. The House version is $487 million more than FY13 estimated levels, and a $350 million increase between FY14 and FY15 levels. Compared to the Executive Budget the House Budget reduces All Fund Groups for the Ohio Department of Education by $161 million in FY14 and $140 million in FY15, for a total reduction of $301 million.  The following are some of the reports about how the House school funding formula works: Akron Beacon Journal April 13, 2013: On April 13, 2013 Doug Livingston at the Akron Beacon Journal reported that simulations showing how each school district would be affected by changes in the House proposed school funding formula were not comparable with simulations showing funding levels for school districts under the Executive Budget. The simulations were released when the House Finance and Appropriations Committee accepted a substitute bill for HB59 (Amstutz) Biennial Budget on April 9, 2013. At first it seemed that more school districts would receive increases in state aid. But further analyses, by newspapers and researchers, showed that Sub. HB59 provided between $82 and $191 million less for schools compared to the Executive Budget. According to the article, 133 districts could receive less funding in 2014 under the House proposal than they are estimated to receive this year, but it is difficult to tell, because there are so many significant changes in the funding formula and pass-throughs for charter and private schools. The article goes on to explain that an additional $1.3 billion is needed to account for the increases in the per pupil amount from $5000 per pupil in the Executive Budget, to $5,732 in FY14 and $5789 in FY15 in the House version of the budget. However, the new formula is not fully funded, because the six percent "cap" on increases in state aid for school districts under the House version, reduces state aid for 364 school districts by $901 million in FY14. (Not included in the article is additional information prepared by Howard Fleeter, an economist from the Education Tax Policy Institute, who determined that school districts lose another $718 million in FY15 from the cap.) The author writes, "The Beacon Journal's analysis shows that those not getting full funding tend to be among the most needy districts - those with more students living in poverty, lower average property valuations per pupil and slightly larger class sizes. They also tend to have higher percentages of minority children." The article is "Ohio House school funding plan looked good at first, but the numbers show they're cutting education aid" by Doug Livingston, Beacon Journal, April 13, 2013. Innovation Ohio April 16, 2013: When the House Finance and Appropriations Committee introduced on April 9, 2013 a substitute bill for HB59, it was reported that the school funding formula developed to replace Governor Kasich's school funding formula would ensure that no school district received less state aid than current levels. However, on April 16, 2013, Innovation Ohio (IO) reported that an analysis of the House Committee's school funding plan, compared to Governor Kasich's Executive budget, found that 127 school districts would receive less state money in FY14-15. Overall the analysis found that state funding would decrease by $191 million compared to state funding levels proposed by Governor Kasich in the Executive Budget. The IO analysis determined that the House Committee's school funding plan, which included funds for transportation and career technical education in the core opportunity grant, made it look as if more state funds were being provided, but when those line items were separated-out, the House plan decreased overall funding by $191 million. "House Budget Would Cut 127 School Districts" by Dale Butland, April 16, 2013. The Plain Dealer April 17, 2013: On April 17, 2013 Patrick O'Donnell at The Plain Dealer reported that school officials, analysts, and legislators were still struggling to understand the school funding provisions included in HB59 (Amstutz) Biennial Budget, even as lawmakers prepared for a vote on the bill. School funding experts and school officials were trying to determine the "bottom line" for state aid for school districts, but found it difficult, because the House version of HB59 included funding for transportation and career technical education in the formula, while those funds were reported separately in the Executive Budget; the House budget caps increases in state aid for school districts at 6 percent, meaning that many school districts are prevented from receiving the full benefit of the formula; and there was confusing information about the amount of deductions/transfers from school districts to charter schools and private schools participating in the voucher programs. According to the article some lawmakers were frustrated that the House and Executive budget simulations of state funding levels for school districts were not comparable, and that estimates provided by the Legislative Service Commission showed that charter schools would receive $816.5 million under the House version, which is an increase of five percent over FY13 levels, while state aid for some traditional public schools was reduced. "School funding plan from Ohio House headed to a vote with many details still unclear" by Patrick O'Donnell, The Plain Dealer, April 17, 2013. Akron Beacon Journal April 18, 2013: On April 18, 2013 Doug Livingston at the Akron Beacon Journal writes that, "The House version increases overall state funding for education by 1.6 percent, from $8.2 billion in 2012 to $8.8 billion in 2014. In that same time, state funding for charter schools would increase 7.3 percent." Charter schools received $771 million in 2012. Based on 2012 data, the House formula would increase funding to charter schools to $816 million, which works out to a $450 per pupil increase. Charter schools are also receiving an additional $100 per student for facilities, which means charter schools receive another $10.8 million. "Projections show funding increases for charter schools" by Doug Livingston Beacon Journal education writer published: April 18, 2013 - 06:12 PM.      Lawsuit Filed Over Florida's Teacher Evaluation System The National Education Association (NEA) filed a lawsuit on April 16, 2013 in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Florida, Gainesville Division challenging the constitutionality of Florida's teacher evaluation laws and policies. (Cook et. al. v. Tony Bennett, Florida Commissioner of Education, et. al. "Florida Unions Sue Over Test-Score-Based Evaluations" by Stephen Sawchuk, Education Week, April 16, 2013.) The lawsuit was filed on behalf of three NEA affiliates and seven teachers in Florida. The lawsuit alleges that the Florida law, approved in 2011 to change teacher evaluations, infringes on due process and the equal protection rights of teachers in violation of the 14th Amendment. The lawsuit asks the court to end the current evaluation system and void the evaluation results for the 2011-12 and future school years. The new Florida teacher evaluation system rates teachers who teach subjects that don't have a standardized assessment, using a schoolwide growth score, or the results of an assessment that is "only tangentially related to their field." One of the plaintiffs, for example, was evaluated partially on the test scores of 4th and 5th grade students, even though she teaches 1st and 2nd grade. According to the article, the Florida suit is the first legal challenge of the technical properties of a "value added" metric to calculate a teacher's contribution to student learning. The lawsuit contents that the state formula used to measure student growth is "....being stretched far beyond the limited purposes for which it was designed". Teachers in other states are also raising questions about using student test scores to evaluate teacher performance. Recently a panel in Tennessee recommended that the percent of a teacher's evaluation based on student test score results be reduced. The article is available. The lawsuit is available.    Federal Government Should Do More to Improve School Equality The Leadership Conference Education Fund released on April 15, 2013 a report entitled "Reversing the Rising Tide of Inequality: Achieving Educational Equity for Each and Every Child", by Robert Rothman, principal author. The purpose of the report is to bolster efforts to achieve both quality and fairness in our nation's public education system and implement the recommendations developed by the Equity and Excellence Commission chaired by Christopher Edley, Jr., the dean of the law school at the University of California, Berkeley, and Mariano-Florentino "Tino" Cuellar, a law professor at Stanford University, The 27-member commission was chartered by Congress to provide advice about "....the disparities in meaningful educational opportunities that give rise to the achievement gap, with a focus on systems of finance, and to recommend ways in which federal policies could address such disparities." The commission, which met for over two years, submitted a report to the U.S. Secretary of Education, Arne Duncan in February 2013. The report summarizes ".... how America's K-12 education system, taken as a whole, fails our nation and too many of our children." According to the report, the education reform initiatives of the past sixty years, based on standards and test-based accountability, have made some progress, but not enough. The Leadership Conference Education Fund's report recommends that Congress, the president, Executive Branch agencies, state policy makers, civil and human rights organizations, the philanthropic community, and the business community take action on a number of recommendations developed by the Commission. Members of Congress are urged to conduct hearings on the impact of fiscal inequity on under served populations and on the nation's well being, and target federal resources to students and communities most in need. Congress should reauthorized the Elementary and Secondary Education Act and hold local educational agencies accountable for student outcomes and closing the achievement gaps among groups of students. The Obama administration should enforce compliance with federal civil rights laws barring discrimination and inequality, and enforce provisions in the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. The following were the recommendations listed for state policy makers to implement:   Governors and state legislators, state school board members, and chief state school officers, should publicly re-affirm their support for, and intention to, to comply fully with state court orders regarding equitable school financing, and develop strategies to ensure that schools are funded equitably. State and local education officials should determine what it will take to ensure that all public schools have the resources necessary to serve each and every child well, including college and career-ready standards. Public hearings should be conducted to gather information to enable all interested parties to be heard. Those states that do not have a robust right to education in their constitutions should begin deliberations on whether and how to amend their constitutions, or take other legislative action to guarantee the right to public education for all children.  State leaders should use multiple sets of data and other evidence to determine the relative costs to fully educate each and every child in the state (aka "costing out studies") and take legislative action to ensure the state's financing and resource allocation systems are well-aligned with what is required to educate each child. The report also recommends that non-government organizations (NGOs), philanthropy, and business organizations must continue to play a prominent role in supporting public schools and in advocating for equity and justice for students. An education equity communications plan should be created by these NGOs to respond to public opinion and to articulate why education is important to individual growth and happiness, improving our economy, sustaining our international prominence, and maintaining national security and harmony. These entities should take the lead in developing and funding community-based and regional partnerships among the K-12 school system, public and private employers, higher education institutions, labor unions, and representatives of under served communities to facilitate greater collaboration. The report is available.    More Questions Raised About Common Core Standards An article in the Washington Post on April 19, 2013 describes how the Republican National Committee and lawmakers from both parties are questioning the efficacy of the Common Core State Standards (CCSS), and how one lawmaker, Senator Charles Grassley, is working to eliminate $360 million from the U.S. Department of Education's budget to develop standardized tests to assess the Common Core. The Common Core standards were developed by the National Governor's Association and the Council of Chief State School Officers with funding from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. According to the article supporters and opponents of the Common Core are from both the left and right. Critics on the right believe that the federal government has overstepped its authority and is interfering with state and local control of education policy when it promotes the Common Core. Critics the left cite the lack of research and involvement of educators in the development of the standards as reasons to oppose them. Resistance is also growing at the state level. At least 10 state legislatures/education leaders are reconsidering their support for CCSS. Senator Grassley has noted that while federal law states that the U.S. Department of Education may not be involved in setting specific content standards or assessments for states, the criteria for the federal Race to the Top Program require that states adopt "a common set of K-12 standards" and college and career readiness standards. The U.S. DOE is currently using federal funds to support the development of assessments for the Common Core by two consortia, the Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers (PARCC) and the Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium. This could be interpreted as an over-reach by the U.S. DOE of its authority. The article is "Common Core Standards Attacked by Republicans" by Valerie Strauss, Washington Post Answer Sheet blog, April 19, 2013.    ACT Releases Survey Results The results of the ACT National Curriculum Survey 2012 were released on April 17, 2013. The survey, conducted every three to five years by ACT, collects data about what students should know and be able to do to be ready for college-level coursework in English, math, reading, and science. The results are used to inform policy makers and educators and validate ACT's College Readiness Standards and the College Readiness Benchmarks. The most recent survey sampled 9,937 participants including elementary, middle, and high school teachers, and college instructors in English, writing, reading, and science. The document Policy Implications on Preparing for Higher Standards, which ACT prepared based on the survey results, includes the following observations:  There is a large gap between how high school teachers perceive the college readiness of high school graduates and how college instructors perceive the readiness of incoming students. There is support among high school teachers for college and career ready standards. There is a lack of alignment between the K-12 and postsecondary education systems. The lack of alignment might be hampering the efforts of K-12 to prepare students for life after high school. Classrooms might need better and more secure computer technology to administer the Common Core assessments. Potential inequity of access to computers across schools, districts, and states might create reliability issues with assessment results. Teachers at the high school level report differing degrees of familiarity with the improved standards, which will affect students being college and career ready. Based on the results of the survey, the report recommends the following policy changes:  Increase and improve the amount and quality of professional development about college and career-ready standards at the K-12 level. There must be better alignment between K-12 and postsecondary educators to ensure that course curricula and classroom materials reflect the skills needed for college and career readiness. More attention must be paid at the postsecondary level to ensure that students in development college courses leave these courses prepared. Resources should be provided to ensure that students have access to computer technology and are prepared for innovative assessments that are likely to accompany implementation of college and career-ready standards.  The report is available.    FYI Arts Statehouse Art Collection Appraised: Executive Director William Carleton of the Capitol Square Review and Advisory Board (CSRAB) recently reported that the artwork and memorials on the Statehouse grounds in Columbus have been appraised at more than $20 million. The Statehouse art collection has been created to benefit the people of Ohio and tell the story of the state. The art works depict the hopes, dreams, values and aspirations of Ohio - and commemorate the state's accomplishments and struggles. Artworks have been added over the years to preserve the public memory and to create a consensus about what is important to Ohio. The Ohio Alliance for Arts Education, in partnership with the Capitol Square Review and Advisory Board and the Ohio Arts Council, has developed a set of teacher resources for the works of art found in The People's Art Collection at the Ohio Statehouse and on Capitol Square. The resources include individual lessons and integrated lessons for use by educators and parents. Information about The People's Art Collection is available. Latest FAST Survey Results for Arts Education Released: The National Center for Education Statistics at the U.S. Department of Education's Institute of Education Sciences, released on April 2, 2013 the latest national report about the status of arts education for public elementary and secondary schools entitled, Arts Education in Public Elementary and Secondary Schools: 1999-2000 and 2009-10. This is the third study that has been conducted by the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) about the national status of arts education. The first study was conducted in the 1994-95 school year and a second study was conducted during the 1999-2000 school year. The results of the first study are now used as a baseline for comparing recent data. The FAST Survey is a congressionally mandated study on arts education in public K-12 schools, collected through seven Fast Response Survey System (FRSS) surveys during the 2009-2010 school year. Comparisons with data from the 1999-2000 FRSS arts education study are included where applicable. A preliminary report about this data was released in 2011 as A Snapshot of Arts Education in Public Elementary and Secondary Schools: 2009-10. This report provides a broader description of the status of arts education and changes from a decade ago. At the elementary school level, indicators are based on data collected from school principals, music specialists, visual arts specialists, and classroom teachers. Indicators at the secondary level are based on data collected from school principals, music specialists, and visual arts specialists. Summary of Results: According to the latest FAST Survey, ninety four percent of elementary schools reported instruction designated specifically for music and 83 percent specifically for visual art in the 2009-10 school year. Only 3 percent and 4 percent of elementary schools reported instruction designated specifically for dance and drama/theatre, respectively, in the 2009-10 school year. This represents a decrease from 20 percent of elementary schools offering instruction in dance and drama/theatre in the 1999-2000 school year. The survey also found that among elementary schools that offered designated instruction in the arts in the 2009-10 school year, 91 percent employed music specialists and 84 percent employed visual art specialists. Schools with instruction designated specifically for dance or drama/theatre had lower percentages of employed specialists to provide instruction (57 and 42 percent, respectively). When examining the amount of instructional time that schools scheduled for the arts, 93 percent of elementary schools reported that they offered music instruction at least one a week and 85 percent of elementary schools offered instruction in visual art at least once a week during the 2009-10 school year. Schools with instruction designated specifically for dance or drama/theatre had lower percentages offering instruction at least once a week (53 and 58 percent, respectively). In the 2009-10 school year, the survey found that most music specialists in public elementary schools taught the arts subject full time (88 percent), and most visual art specialists taught the arts subject full time (83 percent). On average, full-time music specialists spent 22 hours per week teaching 25 different classes with about 18 students per class. Full-time visual art specialists in public elementary schools had similar teaching loads as their music counterparts, with full-time visual art specialists spending an average of 22 hours per week teaching 24 different classes with about 22 students per class. The survey also found that 88 percent of classroom teachers reported that they include instruction in the arts in their classroom program, including 97 percent who incorporate visual art in other subjects; 92 percent who incorporate music in other subjects; and 87 percent who incorporate drama/theatre in other subjects. Reviewing the survey results for secondary schools, the report found the following:  In the 2008-09 school year, most secondary schools offered instruction designated specifically for music (91 percent) and visual art (89 percent). About 12 percent offered instruction designated specifically for dance and 45 percent offered instruction designated specifically for drama/theatre. None of these percentages represent a significant change from the 1999-2000 school year.  In the 2009-10 school year instruction designated specifically for music and visual art differed by the concentration of poverty in the school, measured by the percent of students eligible for free or reduced-price school lunch. Eighty one percent of secondary schools with the highest poverty levels offered instruction in music, while 96 percent of secondary schools with the lowest poverty concentration offered music instruction. Similar differences by poverty level were observed for visual art instruction (80 percent vs. 95 percent). Fifty seven percent of secondary schools required some arts course-work for graduation in the 2009-10 school year, not measurably different from the percentage of schools with this requirement in the 1999-2000 school year.  Among secondary schools requiring arts coursework for graduation, only about 15 percent required more than 2 credits for graduation in the 2009-10 school year, not measurably different from the percentage that required more than 2 credits for graduation in the 1999-2000 school year.  Eighty nine percent of secondary schools included arts classes in the calculation of students' GPA in the 2009-10 school year, not measurably different from the percent that included arts classes in GPA calculation in the 1999-2000 school year. The report also examines arts education activities outside of the regular school hours and school community partnerships. According to the survey, the most commonly cited curriculum-based activities outside of regular school hours were school performances or presentations in the arts (75 percent) and arts-related field trips (61 percent). Schools also reported activities for choir/band/marching band practice (46 percent), individual or small group music lessons (39 percent), and dance activities, such as lessons or team dance (12 percent). Forty-two percent of elementary schools indicated that they had partnerships with cultural or community organizations. The percentage of schools that reported other types of partnerships or collaborations ranged from 31 percent for individual artists and crafts people to 7 percent for the community school of the arts. The report also includes a section that focuses in on data behind the results for each of the arts disciplines, including how access to instruction in the arts relates to concentration of poverty, and information about professional development, teaching loads, planning time, and student assessment in the arts. The report is available. Arts Education as an Pay-Forward Investment: Doug Herbert, special assistant for arts education at the U.S. DOE Office of Innovation and Improvement, writes that National Arts Education Advocacy Day, which was held on April 9, 2013 in Washington D.C., is a time to rally support for arts education and for identifying ways to help all students retain what Pablo Picasso referred to as the "child artist" within themselves. ("Arts Education and Advocacy: An Investment in Every Child's Future" by Doug Herbert, April 16, 2013.) The arts, which are an integral part of a well-rounded education, provide students with essential skills to succeed in life and earn a livelihood, but according to the latest FAST survey on the status of arts education in our schools "...millions of American students, particularly in high-need schools, have either minimal or no access to instruction in the arts." Herbert goes on to write that this year world-renown cellist and member of the President's Committee on the Arts and the Humanities (PCAH), Yo-Yo-Ma, was the Arts Advocacy Day, Nancy Hanks Lecturer on Arts and Public Policy. His speech before a capacity audience at the Kennedy Center's Concert Hall, focused on the reasons to support arts education as a "smart, pay-forward investment in every child's education and future." Arts education as a strategy for school improvement and an investment in the future is supported by research available through ArtsEdSearch, an online clearinghouse for high-quality research on arts education. The article explains that ArtsEdSearch contains a growing number of valid research studies on the impact of arts education on students' cognitive, emotional, and social development; on professional development outcomes for arts educators and teaching artists; and on academic achievement and other outcomes associated with arts learning in school- and community-based programs. The article is available.    Connect With US on Facebook! Join The Ohio Alliance for Arts Education on Facebook. Click to "like" us but don't stop there - post your support for the OAAE and arts education on your profile, and ask your friends and colleagues to 'like' us too. As a follower of the OAAE, you can find out what's happening around the state with school arts programs and arts education decisions made by local school boards and the State Legislature, and share other relevant arts education related news. It's a quick and easy way to stay connected to us and to share what's happening with arts education in your community and throughout Ohio.
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). Donna S. Collins Executive Director 77 South High Street, 2nd floor Columbus, Ohio 43215-6108 614.224.1060