Future Shock: Early Common Core implementation lessons from Ohio

Emmy L. Partin , Terry Ryan / May 23, 2012

The Thomas B. Fordham Institute has long advocated for high quality academic content standards nationally – and in our home state of Ohio. In fact, the first report ever issued by Fordham, in 1997, was State English Standards and rated English language arts standards across 28 states, including Ohio. Just as we’ve long called for high quality academic standards, the Buckeye State was an early leader in embracing standards-based education.

So it is not surprising that Ohio committed itself in 2010 to adopting more rigorous academic content standards: Ohio is one of 45 states and the District of Columbia that has committed to implementing the Common Core standards in math and English language arts by the start of the 2014-15 school year. In 2011, Ohio joined 23 other states in adopting the Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers (PARCC) assessment consortium. These are significant decisions for the Buckeye State, its schools, and its children because it has committed to elevating big time the expectations and performance of its children in coming years.

Ohio has made an audacious commitment to delivering significantly higher levels of academic performance for all its children. This is absolutely the right course for the Buckeye State to take, but there is a lot of necessary work to accomplish in the next two years if the promise of the Common Core is to be met. This work includes developing new curriculum; revamping

» Continued

Future Shock: Early Common Core implementation lessons from Ohio

Why unionized charters would be a setback for Ohio’s school improvement efforts

Terry Ryan / May 23, 2012

The Ohio Education Association (OEA) voted this month to launch an effort to recruit employees of Ohio’s 350-plus charter schools as union members. According to Ohio Department of Education data the state’s charters employ about 10,500 educators and 5,400 of these are classroom teachers. Currently there are no unionized start-up charter schools in Ohio, but there are some conversion district charter schools that have unionized teachers. Nationally, the Center on Reinventing Public Education reports that “about 12 percent of all charter schools have bargaining agreements.”

It is clear why the OEA and the Ohio Federation of Teachers (OFT) would want to recruit charter teachers to their ranks. Unions define success in large part by the number of members they have and how much they collect in membership dues. Members and money equal influence at the statehouse, and in recent years the OEA has been losing both to charter schools. As far back at 2006, the OEA shared with its members a paper entitled “The Current State of Ohio’s Charter School Program.” In it they declared that “the charter school program in Ohio is nothing more than a thinly veiled attempt to ‘dismantle’ public education.” It noted that “charter schools have reduced union-represented bargaining unit positions…The total number of traditional public school personnel, excluding administrators, lost to charter schools is calculated to be (in 2004) 4,782.”

But, would unionized charter schools be good for students?

Successful charters work because they are flexible and constantly

» Continued

Why unionized charters would be a setback for Ohio’s school improvement efforts

Accountability and perspective needed for drop-out recovery charters

Aaron Churchill / May 23, 2012

Drop-out recovery charter schools annually serve about 20 percent of Ohio’s charter students but have never been held accountable for the performance of their students. Ohio’s Senate Bill 316 (SB 316) would change this by requiring the creation and enforcement of standards for these schools. The legislation empowers Ohio’s Board of Education to set accountability standards but also leaves open what these standards will actually be. Yesterday, however, the House education committee amended the bill so that drop-out recovery schools will not be subject to the state’s automatic closure law for charter schools.

As the House considers the bill this week, lawmakers need to balance the demand for high standards for recovery charters with the unique student composition and testing challenges associated with these schools. Further, lawmakers should understand the benefit of drop-out recovery schools to the graduation rates of traditional public high schools.

First, by definition, drop-out recovery charters primarily serve dropouts or students at risk of dropping out. This fact alone requires a different perspective of what “student achievement” means—and the approaches required for student success. Because dropout recovery charters enroll mostly high-poverty and highly underperforming students, an apple-to-apples comparison of dropout recovery charter performance to traditional high school standards of success seems unreasonable.

Second, legislators should consider how dropout recovery charters actually benefit public school districts. They do this is a couple ways: first, by enrolling students who would have otherwise dropped out of education completely, recovery charters improve public

» Continued

Accountability and perspective needed for drop-out recovery charters

Talking Common Core and human capital in the Gem City

May 23, 2012

It is the aim of the Common Core (see above) that all students will be college- or career-ready by the time they graduate from high school. One organization working to make this goal a reality in Fordham’s hometown of Dayton is Learn to Earn Dayton. Last week the Fordham Institute teamed up with Learn to Earn Dayton to host a community conversation, “What does the Common Core Mean for Dayton and its Human Capital Development Strategies?”

The event brought together leaders from the business and education community to discuss the future of Dayton and the potential impact the Common Core can have on the city. The event featured Stan Heffner, state superintendent of public instruction; Mike Cohen, president of Achieve; Ellen Belcher, author of our recent report on Common Core implementation; and David Ponitz, president emeritus of Sinclair Community College and chairman of the board of the Thomas B. Fordham Institute.

Stan Heffner, state superintendent of public instruction and Mike Cohen, president of Achieve

Superintendent Heffner explained that the Common Core standards will help Ohio move from the minimum toward a path that allows kids to be college and career ready. He acknowledged that the transition will be rough and that it will scare some people but in the end people will rise to the occasion, and kids will be asked to do more and better. Mike Cohen, one

» Continued

Talking Common Core and human capital in the Gem City

Digital Learning: The Future of Schooling?

Aaron Churchill / May 23, 2012

The era of the chalkboard is over. Laptops, SMART boards, Wikis, YouTube, and Gaming are in. Is this progress or just distraction? That was the topic of conversation among nearly 300 educators and policymakers at Fordham’s “Digital Learning: The Future of Schooling?” event last week. (Please check out the video replay here.)

Ohio State Superintendent Stan Heffner opened the event by laying out the problematic mix of technology, education, and kids: “Kids spend their nights in high-tech bedrooms and spend their days in low-tech classrooms.” The remainder of the conversation focused on how to harness kids’ aptitude in technology for effective educational practices.

Fordham – and our event partners, KnowledgeWorks and the Nord Family Foundation –assembled an elite group of digital learning experts and Ohio practitioners to explore best practices and policies. The event’s first panel consisted of four national experts (U.S. Department of Education’s Karen Cator, Public Impact’s Bryan Hassel, iNACOL’s Susan Patrick, and Getting Smart’s Tom Vander Ark), each of whom emphasized the promise and inevitability of digital learning in the classroom.

A few of their recommendations included:

• Colleges of education should equip future teachers to leverage technology in their classrooms.
• Schools should exploit technology to create a multi-faceted student assessment system rather than rely on a single-test assessment.
• Schools should leverage technology to enable excellent teachers to reach more students through video-fed lessons.

The second panel included two Ohio lawmakers (State Senator Peggy Lehner and State Representative

» Continued

Digital Learning: The Future of Schooling?

The Nation’s Report Card: Science 2011

Aaron Churchill / May 23, 2012

Good news and bad news for the Buckeye State. The bad news first: in the recently-released “The Nation’s Report Card” for eighth grade science scores, Ohio fell eight spots in the state rankings. The good news: despite the drop, Ohio continued to outperform the national average in science scores.

Issued by the U.S. Department of Education, the Report Card publishes National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) results and provides inter-state and year-to-year comparisons of student performance. Nationally, the results were encouraging as scores trended upwards and achievement gaps narrowed. (My colleague Daniela Fairchild reviews the national data here.)

Ohio’s 2011 average science test score remained flat compared to 2009, causing the Buckeye State to fall behind states whose test scores improved. However, Ohio still bests the national test average by seven points, and its average test scores also remain near the top among the states—fifteenth out of fifty. Additionally, Ohio continues to outperform the national percentage of students scoring “above proficient” and “above basic.”

These science scores are critical, for they predict our nation’s ability to meet the demands of the future marketplace. Ohio’s future, therefore, rests on how well it equips today’s kids with the scientific tools for tomorrow’s needs. Ohio’s mixed NAEP results—still a national leader in science scores but with a flat-line performance trend—should motivate the Buckeye State to continue its aggressive investment in kids’ science education. By investing in science, Ohio can plant the

» Continued

The Nation’s Report Card: Science 2011

Greenhouse Schools: How Schools Can Build Cultures Where Teachers and Students Thrive

Hanif Abdurraqib / May 23, 2012

The New Teacher Project's (TNTP) Greenhouse Schools considers the link between a school’s instructional culture and both teacher retention and student achievement. TNTP surveyed 4,800 teachers in 250 schools nationwide (including charter schools) to determine what it calls “greenhouse schools”, or schools that nurture a great learning environment. These schools prioritize quality educators above all else, in attempts to foster the best learning environment possible. TNTP found that “greenhouse schools” keep more top teachers and get better results for students compared to schools with weaker instructional culture. The report then looks at what those schools are doing differently.

Based on its study, TNTP suggests that these are the principles for improving schools, using strong instructional culture as a foundation:

• Teachers desire strong instructional culture. It helps to retain quality teachers and fosters a better learning environment where educators share the same vision and goals.
• Schools with better instructional cultures help students learn more efficiently. The report found that greenhouse schools had a 21 percentage point higher math score and a 14 percentage points higher score in reading, compared to schools with weaker instructional culture.
• Schools leaders who hire early and selectively tend to attract the highest quality teachers. Investing more time in the hiring process to acquire talented teachers is the best way to improve instructional culture, the report suggests.
• Improvements in instructional culture are possible in a relatively short time. To change a school’s instructional culture, administrators should assess areas for improvement in

  » Continued

  Ohio Policy / Teachers

  ---

  Greenhouse Schools: How Schools Can Build Cultures Where Teachers and Students Thrive

Major Accountability Themes of Second-Round State Applications for NCLB Waivers

May 23, 2012

In fall 2011, U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan announced the administration’s decision to allow states to apply for waivers to the federal No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) requirements. To receive consideration for these waivers states had to establish “college and career- ready” expectations, develop and implement differentiated accountability systems, and develop teacher and principal evaluations systems. The U.S. Department of Education granted waivers to eleven states during the first-round application process. Another 27 states currently have an application under consideration in the second round.

A recent report by the Center on Education Policy (CEP) takes a look at the major accountability themes proposed by the 27 states in the second round, focusing on common themes among these states.

CEP found that the waiver applications in general are more complex than the current provisions of NCLB. The following are among the major accountability themes detected in the applications:

• Adoption of the Common Core State Standards: All but one state (Virginia) has adopted the Common Core standards in math and English language arts.
• Greater complexity in annual achievement targets: All of the states will continue to have Annual Measureable Objectives (AMOs), but they will become more complex and used to make accountability decisions.
• Multiyear achievement goals: All but one state (Louisiana) will replace the goal of 100 percent proficiency by 2013-14 with a multiyear goal.
• New measures of school and district performance: A majority of the states will replace the Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) concept

  » Continued

  NCLB / Ohio Policy

  ---

  Major Accountability Themes of Second-Round State Applications for NCLB Waivers

Creating a Comprehensive System for Evaluating and Supporting Effective Teaching

May 23, 2012

A report released by the Stanford Center for Opportunity Policy in Education advances the discussion about quality teacher evaluations and professional development within the greater context of a continuous learning system. Creating a Comprehensive System for Evaluating and Supporting Effective Teaching by Linda Darling-Hammond, argues for a high-quality teaching and student learning system that doesn’t simply focus on arbitrary value-added measures; rather, it follows these three objectives: (1) Supports all stages of teaching, (2) Relates seamlessly what teachers do in the classroom and how they are prepared and assessed, and (3) Develops teaching contexts that facilitate good practice in addition to identifying and rewarding effective teachers.

There are seven criteria necessary to achieve these goals:

1. Teacher evaluation should be based on professional teaching standards and support development from beginning teacher to expert teacher,
2. Evaluations should include multi-faceted evidence of teacher practice, student learning, and professional contributions,
3. Evaluators should be knowledgeable about instruction and well trained in the evaluation system,
4. Evaluation should be accompanied by useful feedback, and connected to professional development opportunities,
5. The evaluation system should value and encourage teacher collaboration,
6. Expert teachers should be part of the assistance and review process for new teachers, and
7. Panels of teachers and administrators should oversee the evaluation process to ensure that it is fair, reliable, and of high quality.

These seven criteria create a cyclical system based on constant support and development. The feedback loop develops the best standards and teaching practices, supports administrators to be trained in observation and

» Continued

Creating a Comprehensive System for Evaluating and Supporting Effective Teaching

Put a ring on high achievement

May 23, 2012

According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, higher income and education levels are linked to better health.   Not only for adults (people with a high school degree or less are more likely to smoke than people with a post-secondary degree) but also for children.  When the head of a household has a bachelor’s degree or higher, the obesity rate is 11 percent for boys and 7 percent for girls; when the head of a household has less than a high school degree, the obesity rate is 24 percent for boys and 22 percent for girls. 

Ohio’s Solon High School and Solon Middle School took home first-place in the National Science Olympiad Tournament.  They are waiting to hear if they get the chance to travel to the White House and meet President Obama. 

Here is a slide show of the funniest teacher comments.  Surprisingly, the answer to “Why are there rings on Saturn?” is not “Because God liked it, so he put a ring on it.”

On Friday, the Ohio Department of Education will wrap up two weeks of testing the new technology-based assessments on eighth graders from 260 school districts across the state.  The tests were on social studies and will not be scored.  

» Continued

Put a ring on high achievement

EVENT: Pricing the Common Core

May 23, 2012

Circle May 30 on your calendars because the Fordham Institute is gathering a diverse group of experts to answer a crucial education policy question: How much will smart Common Core implementation cost? Coinciding with the release of a new study on the topic, this panel discussion will weigh what the effort will cost, where we can save, and how to know if the Common Core is worth it. Register today to reserve your seat for “Pricing the Common Core: How Much Will Smart Implementation Cost States and Districts?”

» Continued

EVENT: Pricing the Common Core