To improve student learning in Ohio, and in other states, we need to improve the quality of our teaching force. Statistics don’t lie when it comes to the impact of teachers on children’s learning. Stanford economist Eric Hanushek has observed that “having a high-quality teacher throughout elementary school can substantially offset or even eliminate the disadvantage of low socio-economic background.” Yet, according to a new report by the National Center for Teacher Quality (NCTQ) and US News and World Report too many of our new teachers enter the classroom unprepared.
Over a century ago, Abraham Flexner provided a withering critique of the nation’s medical schools, which led to a transformation of a sub-standard system of doctor preparation into preparation programs that would become models of quality for the rest of the world. NCTQ wants to do the same thing for teacher preparation that Flexner did for medical training back in 1910.
Toward that end, NCTQ and US News and World Report have issued their Teacher Prep Review. The Review provides data on the 1,130 institutions that prepare 99 percent of the nation’s traditionally trained new teachers. Forty-six institutions in Ohio were included in the Review. The findings are not good. In fact, NCTQ warns that the nation’s teacher prep programs “have become an industry of mediocrity, churning out first-year teachers with classroom management skills and content knowledge inadequate to thrive in classrooms with ever-increasing ethnic and socioeconomic student diversity.”
Two recent Dayton Daily News articles cast the spotlight on important education reform discussions. As a sponsor of eight charter schools in Ohio, the Fordham team understands the importance of accountability. This article mentioned financial oversights in some of Ohio’s charter school laws and Terry Ryan, Fordham’s vice president of Ohio programs and policy, said Ohio needs to rewrite charter school law.
The second article focused on retaining Ohio’s graduates. While Ohio had previously experienced a brain drain and lost graduates to other states, a rebounding economy and job opportunities could keep graduates in the state. Ryan said while some larger cities have appeal to graduates, their primary concern is finding employment. Stay tuned for upcoming articles and discussions related to these evolving topics and share your thoughts below!
Ohio has put the welcome mat out for charter schools that provide career technical education. Building on criteria from the federal Carl D. Perkins Act Ohio’s biennial budget (HB59) provides a significant increase in funding for charter schools that provide career technical courses. Table 1, is based on the “Estimated Formula Aid for Community (aka charters) Schools” released by the Senate earlier this month. It shows some of the big winners under the plan.
Table 1: Bumps in Career Technical Funding for Selected Ohio Charter Schools (FY2014 and 2015)
Source: All numbers come from “Comparison of Estimated Formula Aid for Community Schools Under H.B. 59, As Reported by Senate Finance and Actual Aid Under Current Law, FY2012
It is not just charters that benefit from this new emphasis on Career Technical education. The state’s Joint Vocational Education Centers, STEM Schools, and district high schools with career technical programs will see increases in funding comparable to the charters if they meet the Career Technical requirements for Perkins and the Ohio Department of Education.
This increased support for career technical education is not without controversy, especially when it comes to the charters gaining from these new dollars. For example, some of the state’s highest performing charters are likely to see a reduction in state aid, while those charters deemed providers of technical education will see state funding increases of 10, 15 or even 20 percent. Also
Ohio’s cities are rife with people pushing forward education reforms. As education leaders look outwards to new ways to improve education they are also beginning to turn inwards to see what components of the “education machine” are failing the system. In the wake of a very public data scandal, Columbus mayor Michael B. Coleman spurred the creation of the Columbus Education Commission to hold discussions on how to improve the governance of Columbus City Schools and increase the supply of high-quality schools. Amid the discussions, the Commission brought in experts to discuss alternative forms of school leadership which would involve the mayor’s office appointing people to the board or having a hybrid elected and appointed board.
While complete mayoral control of the school board is not likely to come to Columbus, the discussion did open an important policy discussion— what are the impediments to the current structure of school boards in Ohio and how can we work to improve them? In a scathing review of local governance structure in the United States, the president of the National Center on Education and the Economy Marc Tucker states that “it is our system of local control that, more than any other feature of our education system, stands between us and the prospect of matching the performance of the countries with the most successful education systems.”
School boards are a part of the issue in Ohio and elsewhere in the nation, and it
June 5, 2013