Erasures demonstrate huge sensitivity in ratings

The Dispatch had another speculative piece of reporting on the attendance erasure issue. We'll leave educator Greg Mild at Plunderbund to go over the substance, or lack thereof, of the article itself. We want to concentrate on something else mentioned in the article which stood out.

At the heart of the controversy is this

Though 7 percent [number of deleted records] may not sound like a lot, it could have a big effect: There are students behind those numbers, and some of their standardized test scores were likely discounted when their attendance records were deleted. That means Columbus’ school grades could have been artificially inflated because of records-tampering.

From this, the Department of Education had a remarkable comment

“The math indicates that removing one student could affect the overall rating,” said John Charlton, spokesman for the Ohio Department of Education. “In some districts, it could be one kid. It’s about dropping the right kid.”

Can this be true? Can the ratings of an entire district truly be affected by just a handful of students, or even one? We have an actual true life example, that yes, small numbers of students can indeed cause an entire districts rating to be changed

In Lockland near Cincinnati, removing 36 kids from the rolls — about 5 percent of their student population — lifted the district from a C to a B on the state report card.

Can a school rating system that is so sensitive to just a handful of students truly be measuring the district as a whole? This growing controversy over attendance data is revealing a lot more than people realize.

It’s not about the children

Written by a PA teacher, but it equally might apply to Ohio too.

It’s not about the children.

The education reform movement may be about a lot of things, at least here in Pennsylvania, but it certainly isn’t about our children.

If it were, efforts to bridge the achievement gap and advance opportunities for all children would look a hell of a lot different.

If it were about children, each and every public school would be awash in resources and technology. A licensed school nurse would be in each and every building so that the health and safety of kids were not compromised. All schools would have these necessities, not just “experimental” and privately-managed schools who are flooded these and then labeled a success.

If it were about children, students in the poorest neighborhoods—those most at-risk—would step into vibrant learning environments each morning—schools that met their intellectual, artistic, and athletic needs and inclinations. Schools would not be turned into grim test-prep facilities, with a curriculum narrowed to core, state-tested subjects. Children would be given a reason to be excited about coming to school, aside from making AYP.

It’s not about the children.

If it were about children, we wouldn’t value differentiated instruction, then test children all the same way.

If it were about children, schools would be as safe as the offices of those politicians in Harrisburg who cut funding to public schools, and then hand out EMO contracts to campaign contributors and others once a school has been labeled a “failure.”

If it were about children, those who cut funding for vital family services would realize the inextricable link between childhood poverty and educational outcomes. These same politicians would be as incensed by children in their state having inadequate nourishment, dental, vision, and medical care as they are about whether same-sex partners have a right to be married.

If it were about children, in Philadelphia, a state takeover charged with both improving financial management and educational outcomes would be put to rest as a failed experiment. A district’s management team wouldn’t be able to run a district into insolvency, say they are sorry, and then move on to lucrative consultant positions. Reformists like Michelle Rhee and Arlene Ackerman—who help to cultivate a culture of testing “irregularities”—wouldn’t be allowed to exit with a golden parachute before being held accountable for the results under their leadership.

[readon2 url="https://sites.google.com/site/philwpjournal/springsummer2012/reforming"]Continue reading...[/readon2]

10 most inaccurate ed reform axioms

The Washington post has a list of the 10 most inaccurate and damaging statements that some school reformers toss around.

Here’s the list:

1. High-stakes standardized test data produce the fairest, most reliable, and least expensive evidence of student comprehension as well as teacher ability.

2. High-stakes standardized tests are updated routinely to eliminate confusing and/or culturally biased aspects, and questions on these tests are comprehensible by any child who can read on grade level.

3. Testing anxiety is rare, affects mostly low-achieving students, and has a minimal impact on test results.

4. High-stakes tests do not take an unreasonable amount of time for students to complete and test preparation does not take an unreasonable amount of instructional time throughout the year.

5. We would coddle and ultimately damage kids who receive special accommodations if we taught and/or tested them according to their ability to read and comprehend English. The fairest way to teach and test high-needs kids is in the same classroom, with the same curriculum, and with the same high-stakes tests (in addition to other high-stakes tests) as kids who don’t receive any special accommodations.

6. Poverty and high class size don’t matter when you have high standards.

7. The Common Core State Standards will significantly increase student achievement while saving taxpayer money.

8. Charter schools are more effective at instructing kids than nearby public schools and can do so for less money without putting financial burdens on nearby public school districts.

9. Parents have more decision-making power at charter schools than at public schools and the upcoming feature film, “Won’t Back Down” accurately depicts how parents are empowered to fix failing schools once parent trigger laws are in place.

10. Business leaders should run public schools and school systems because they are usually successful when permitted to apply a corporate model to public education.

August 7th 2012 school levy results

Here are the results of the August 7th 2012 school levy elections, currently reported.

The passage rate is very similar to those of the 2011 August attempts. August ballots are no place for school levies it seems, unless there's significant urgency.

Meanwhile, as school struggle with the ongoing state budget cuts, Ohio should finish fiscal year 2013 with a $408 million surplus.

New renewal	Failed	Passed	Pass %
New	23	5	17.9%
Renewal	1	6	85.7%
Over all	24	11	31.4%

Here's the full list of results.

District	County	For	Against	Result	N/R
Ashtabula Area City	Ashtabula	42.27%	57.73%	Failed	New
Barberton City	Summit	42.93%	57.07%	Failed	New
Bethel Local	Miami	57.00%	43.00%	Passed	Renewal
Bethel Local	Miami	52.00%	48.00%	Passed	New
Brecksville-Broadview	Cuyahoga	73.89%	26.11%	Passed	Renewal
Bryan City	Williams	36.53%	63.47%	Failed	New
Buckeye Local	Medina	62.82%	37.18%	Passed	New
Buckeye Valley Local	Delaware	27.94%	72.06%	Failed	New
Chardon Local	Geauga	39.90%	60.10%	Failed	New
Clear Fork Valley Local	Richland	52.54%	47.46%	Passed	New
Clyde-Green Springs	Sandusky	43.07%	56.93%	Failed	New
Columbiana EV	Columbiana	30.72%	69.28%	Failed	New
Coventry Local	Summit	46.71%	53.29%	Failed	New
Dalton Local	Wayne	55.95%	44.05%	Passed	Renewal
East Holmes Local	Holmes	36.02%	63.98%	Failed	New
Edon Northwest Local	Williams	38.01%	61.99%	Failed	New
Geneva Area City	Ashtabula	39.59%	60.41%	Failed	New
Green Local	Scioto	47.38%	52.62%	Failed	New
Groveport-Madison	Franklin	70.59%	29.41%	Passed	New
Jackson Center Local	Shelby	49.89%	50.11%	Failed	New
Jefferson Area Local	Ashtabula	18.81%	81.19%	Failed	New
Lake Local	Wood	52.39%	47.61%	Passed	New
Louisville City	Stark	39.82%	60.18%	Failed	New
Madison Local	Lake	27.63%	72.37%	Failed	New
Margaretta Local	Erie	53.92%	46.08%	Passed	Renewal
Monroe Local	Butler	48.18%	51.82%	Failed	New
North Fork Local	Licking	28.14%	71.86%	Failed	Renewal
Northmont City	Montgomery	68.18%	31.82%	Passed	Renewal
Osnaburg Local	Stark	14.12%	85.88%	Failed	New
Swanton Local	Fulton	54.17%	45.83%	Passed	Renewal
Tipp City EV	Miami	37.00%	63.00%	Failed	New
Tri-Village Local	Darke	33.88%	66.12%	Failed	New
Vandalia-Butler City	Montgomery	44.21%	55.79%	Failed	New
Woodridge Local	Summit	48.65%	51.35%	Failed	New
Xenia Community City	Greene	26.27%	73.73%	Failed	New

The Long-Run Impact of the Reduction in Classroom teachers

A recent study, by The Hamilton Project, looked at the impacts of cuts to government employment rolls, including educators. Their findings should open a lot of eyes.

One area where there is a sound body of literature to draw upon is the returns to education – specifically, the impact of class-size on student achievement and lifetime earnings. Drawing on this evidence, we quantify the impact of reductions in the number of public school teachers on our country’s future.

In 2011 there were over 220,000 fewer teachers in America’s classrooms than in 2009, a reduction accounting for nearly forty percent of the decrease in public-sector jobs during this period. This decline in the number of teachers increased the student-teacher ratio by 5.9 percent.

To determine the consequences of these reductions, we assumed that class-size increases were applied equally across all grades in K-12 schools. We then drew from recent research that links future earnings with class size to assess the wage impacts for today’s children, when they become working-age adults.1 All of this is explained in more detail here, but the bottom line is that this research suggests that the Great Recession will live on for decades through the lower future wages for our children.

Of course, an important test for the efficiency of government spending is whether the benefits exceed the costs. The savings from these cuts, in terms of teacher salaries and benefits, are $11.8 billion per year nationwide. While a significant figure, it is substantially smaller than the estimated present value in foregone earnings of $49.3 billion dollars for the children, whose education is affected by larger class sizes. To put a fine point on these findings, this translates into a per-student, per-year loss of nearly $1,000 in future earnings. In summary, the foregone benefits are more than four times larger than the current budget savings!

Investing in classroom teachers then, not only improves the economy today, but vastly improves the economy of the future. There's hardly a better return on investment that can be made. Someone ought to tell columbus lawmakers.

Kasich failed leadership test

Leadership isn't deciding if everyone should have cake or ice-cream for dessert, it's making the right decision when the decision is tough, and especially when it needs to be made quickly. John Kasich failed that test.

When the scandal surrounding Stan Heffner, who the Inspector general accused of theft in office, pay to play and perjury, broke, the Governor failed to act.

Heffner had been under fire by some critics to resign, but Ohio Gov. John Kasich wasn't one of them. A spokesman for Gov. Kasich said Heffner should not lose his job. "He is doing a very good job as superintendent, but using official resources the way he did and demonstrating that kind of bad judgment is unacceptable," Kasich spokesman Rob Nichols said in an email to the Cleveland Plain Dealer. "Certainly some action is warranted, but right now it's the governor's own opinion that dismissal seems too far."

The pressure from every other quarter however mounted, culminating in Stan Heffner resigning, Saturday 4th, August. Here's the Governor's response to this news

Kasich referred to the resignation as a "retirement" in a statement on Saturday, and called the decision "the right one." He said Heffner's "mistakes in judgment were unfortunate, but I respect him for always putting Ohio's students above everything else, including his own interests."

The Governor in just a matter of days, switches his position. On the 2nd August, removing Stan Heffner was "too far", just 2 days later it was "the right one".

Failures of leadership don't get easier to see than this.