|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
|
To: LWVO From: Joan Platz Education Update for April 28, 2008 1) 127th General Assembly: The Ohio House and Senate will hold committee hearings and sessions this week. Last week was a very busy one for the Ohio General Assembly. Lawmakers approved several pieces of legislation, and accepted the resignation of Representative Barrett from the Ohio House 58th District. House Democratic Leader, Representative Joyce Beatty, is expected to announce soon when his replacement will be selected. Action was taken on the following bills: *The Ohio House adopted, and the Senate concurred with on April 24, 2008, SCR18 (Padgett). This resolution approves the Ohio Department of Education's proposed changes to the state's academic accountability system for public schools. *The Ohio House and Senate approved last week the energy bill, SB 221 (Schuler). The Ohio House approved the bill on April 22, 2008, and the Senate concurred with the amendments made by the Ohio House on April 23, 2008. SB 211 revises state energy policy, and allows utilities to choose either an Electric Security Plan (ESP) or a Market-Rate Option (MRO) to set electric service prices, and safeguards Ohio's consumers through the oversight of the Public Utilities Commission of Ohio. The bill also establishes alternative energy benchmarks for electric distribution utilities and electric services companies; provides for the use of renewable energy credits; establishes energy efficiency standards for electric distribution utilities; requires greenhouse gas emission reporting and carbon dioxide control planning for utility-owned generating facilities; authorizes energy price risk management contracts; and authorizes for natural gas utilities revenue decoupling related to energy conservation and efficiency. Governor Strickland is expected to sign this bill into law. *The Ohio Senate approved on April 22, 2008 HB381 (Webster), which increase funds available for Ohio Research Scholars Program, and permits a nonpublic four-year Ohio university to submit a proposal for the Ohio Research Scholars Program. *The Ohio Senate approved Substitute SB270 (Cates) -- Employee Misconduct -- on April 23, 2008. A similar bill, HB 428 (Setzer), is also being considered by the House Education Committee. A substitute bill was accepted and amended by the Senate Education Committee earlier in the week. The substitute bill includes the following changes: -Specifies that an individual who knowingly fails to report misconduct is guilty of a 4th degree misdemeanor. The penalty can be raised to a 1st degree misdemeanor under certain circumstances. -Provides civil immunity to an individual reporting misconduct. -Specifies civil and criminal penalties for individuals who intentionally misreport allegations. -Removes access by the ODE to the Ohio Law Enforcement Gateway (OLEG) to comply with federal standards. -Inactivates a teacher's license when the teacher fails to obtain a background check. The inactive status can be lifted once the background check is initiated. -Clarifies background check procedures for certain persons working in schools, including private contractors and adult education teachers. Provides school superintendents with more discretion over who needs to have a background check. Two amendments were also accepted by the Committee: -Requires the State Board of Education to reconsider the revocation or denial of a teaching license within thirty days after receiving notification from the courts that a plea, finding, or conviction of an individual has been overturned. -States that questions and responses regarding sealed or expunged records of an applicant shall not be a public records under section 149.43 of the Revised Code. 2) This Week at the Statehouse *The Ohio Educator Standards Board will meet on April 28 and 29, 2008 at the Embassy Suites Hotel, 2700 Corporate Exchange Drive, Columbus. *The House Finance and Financial Institutions Committee, chaired by Representative Hottinger, will meet on April 29, 2008 at 1:00 PM in hearing room 313. The Committee will hear testimony on SB273 (Niehaus), which calculates an alternate equity list for fiscal year 2008 for purposes of determining school districts' eligibility for assistance under the Classroom Facilities Assistance Program, and their local shares in fiscal year 2009; HB162 (Luckie), which allows a refundable credit against the income tax for taxpayers who teach in and reside in a big eight school district; and HB216 (Collier), which grants priority for state classroom facilities assistance to school districts that consolidate or make joint use of their facilities. *The Senate Education Committee, chaired by Senator Padgett, will meet on April 29, 2008 at 4:00 PM in the North Hearing Room. The Committee will hear testimony on SB57 (Coughlin), which establishes the Special Education Scholarship Program. A vote on this bill is possible. The Committee will also hear sponsor testimony on SB322 (Wilson), which waives the requirement for certain school districts to make up days schools are closed due to flooding, and declares an emergency. *The House Education Committee, chaired by Representative Setzer, will meet on Tuesday, April 29, 2008 at 4:00 PM in hearing room 116. The Committee will hear testimony on HB428 (Setzer) -- school employee misconduct. The committee received last week a substitute bill that includes the same changes as SB270 (Cates) -- school employee misconduct. SB 270 was approved by the Senate last week. *The House Financial Institutions, Real Estate, and Securities Committee, chaired by Representative Widener, will meet on May 1, 2008 at 8:30 PM in hearing room 313. The Committee will hear testimony on SB267 (Faber), Public Employees Retirement System law enforcement division, and HB270 (Schneider), which prohibits a member of State Retirement System who retires and then returns to public employment in the same position to receive a pension while earning a salary for that employment. 3) Update on Federal Education Initiatives and Legislation: *The U.S. House approved H.R. 5613 on April 23, 2008. This bill places a moratorium on changes in seven Medicaid regulations, including those that affect children in schools. The proposed regulations for the Medicaid program, which are supported by the Bush administration, would have reduced federal funds for a number of services for children with disabilities, including rehabilitative services, Medicaid outreach, and management and transportation services. The U.S. Senate is expected to take up action on H.R. 5613 or a similar bill next week. *U.S. Secretary of Education Margaret Spellings, announced on April 22, 2008 proposed regulatory changes for the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) of 2001 (Title 1 of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act) to clarify and strengthen the law. The proposed rule changes are posted on the Federal Register for public comment until June 23, 2008. Final regulations will be issued in November 2008. Lawmakers in Washington, D.C. have been debating certain changes in the NCLB Act for several months, but have not been successful in reauthorizing the act. The Bush Administration is "jump starting" action on some of the proposed changes by initiating these changes in rules. Some education organizations, such as the National School Boards Association, have voiced opposition to some of these changes. (See http://www.nsba.org/MainMenu/Advocacy/FederalLaws/NCLB/NCLBRegulations.aspx) The following is taken from a summary of the proposed changes in rule submitted by Secretary Spellings. A complete description of the rule changes is available at http://www.ed.gov/policy/elsec/reg/proposal/index.html. SUMMARY OF PROPOSED NCLB RULE CHANGES -Assessments and Multiple Measures: Background: There is a misunderstanding among some in the field that accountability under Title I must be based on a single measure or form of assessment. Proposal: The proposed regulations clarify that measures of student academic achievement may include multiple question formats (e.g., multiple choice, extended response) that range in difficulty within a single assessment, as well as multiple assessments within a subject area (e.g., reading and writing assessments to measure reading/language arts). -Strengthening State Assessment and Accountability Systems Background: Regular access to a group of experts with knowledge in the fields of education standards, assessments, accountability systems, statistics and psychometrics would help ensure that state standards and assessments are of the highest technical quality. Proposal: The proposed regulations require the creation of a National Technical Advisory Council (National TAC) to advise the secretary on key technical issues related to state standards, assessments and accountability systems. -Minimum Subgroup Size and Inclusion of Students in Accountability Background: Currently, there are many students and subgroups of students whose achievement data are excluded from adequate yearly progress (AYP) determinations at the school level. Data are excluded when states establish large minimum subgroup sizes and add other components (e.g., confidence intervals; definitions of "full academic year") to their AYP definitions. Proposal: The proposed regulations require states to explain in their state accountability workbooks how the minimum subgroup size and other components of their AYP definitions (e.g., confidence intervals, indexes, definitions of "full academic year") combine to provide statistically reliable information. States also would be required to ensure that the maximum number of students and subgroups are included in AYP determinations. Additionally, states would be required to include the number and percentage of students and subgroups excluded from school-level accountability determinations in their accountability workbooks. -Inclusion of NAEP Data on State and Local Report Cards Background: More information about how students in a state are performing on state assessments as compared to how those students are performing on the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) would provide greater transparency about state standards and assessments. This information also would provide parents with another tool to assess the education systems in their states. Proposal: The proposed regulations require states and districts to report the most recent available results from the state NAEP reading and mathematics assessments on the same public report card that they use to report the results of state assessments. -Uniform Definition of "Graduation Rate" Background: Current regulations give states latitude in determining how public high school graduation rates are calculated. A uniform and accurate method of calculating graduation rates is needed to raise expectations and to hold schools, districts, and states accountable for increasing the number of students who graduate on time with a regular high school diploma. Proposal: The proposed regulations establish a uniform definition of the graduation rate that is consistent with the definition agreed to by the National Governors Association (NGA). The graduation rate would be defined as the number of students who graduate in a given year within the standard number of years with a regular high school diploma divided by the number of students who entered high school four years earlier (adjusting for transfers in and out). The standard number of years to earn a high school diploma would be four years. States would be able to propose, for approval by the secretary, an alternate definition of "standard number of years" for limited categories of students who, under certain conditions, may take longer to graduate than the standard four years. A state that does not have a system to accurately track students who transfer to another educational program that culminates in the award of a regular high school diploma, which is needed to calculate the NGA graduation rate, would use the averaged freshman graduation rate (AFGR) on a transitional basis. By 2012-13, all states would have to use the more rigorous NGA definition of graduation rate. -Graduation Rates and AYP Background: Under current regulations, in order to make AYP, most states require schools to make only a small amount of improvement from one year to the next or to meet very low graduation rate goals (e.g., 50 percent). Permitting schools and districts with extremely low graduation rates or minimal levels of improvement to make AYP does not provide sufficient accountability for ensuring that students graduate on time. Proposal: States would be required to: 1) Set a graduation rate goal (e.g., 90 percent) that represents the rate they expect all high schools to meet; and 2) Define how schools and districts may demonstrate continuous and substantial improvement from the prior year. To make AYP, a school or district would have to meet the graduation rate goal or demonstrate continuous and substantial improvement from the prior year. -Disaggregation of Graduation Rates Background: Current regulations do not require disaggregated graduation rate data (i.e., data broken down by student subgroups) to be included in AYP determinations. Data show large disparities in the graduation rates of different subgroups. Simply requiring disaggregated data to be reported has not been sufficient to ensure that graduation rates improve for all students. Proposal: The proposed regulations require disaggregated graduation rates to be taken into account in AYP determinations. No later than the 2012-13 academic year (when all states must use the NGA rate), states would be required to disaggregate the data by subgroup at the school and district levels to determine and report AYP. Prior to the 2012-13 school year, states would have to disaggregate the data at the school, LEA, and state levels for reporting purposes, but only at the LEA and State levels for determining AYP. -Including Individual Student Growth in AYP Background: There is general consensus among teachers, administrators, researchers, and advocates that states should be permitted to include measures of individual student growth (i.e., growth models) when determining AYP. By allowing states to include measures of individual student progress in AYP calculations, schools will continue to be held accountable for the achievement of all students. At the same time, states will have the flexibility to use more sophisticated methods of determining AYP. Proposal: The proposed regulations set the criteria that states must meet in order to incorporate individual student academic progress into their definitions of AYP. The proposed regulations build on criteria that are part of the current "growth model" pilot program. -Same Subject-Same Subgroup Identification for Improvement Background: Limiting the identification of schools and districts that are "in need of improvement" to those that do not meet the annual measurable objective (AMO) in the same subject for the same subgroup over consecutive years is inconsistent with the law's accountability provisions. The law requires that every subgroup meet the state's AMO in each subject, each year. Proposal: The proposed regulations codify current Department policy that a district may base improvement status on whether a school missed AYP because it did not meet the AMO in the same subject (or meet the same academic indicator) for two consecutive years. A district may not, however, limit identification for improvement to those schools that missed AYP only because they did not meet the AMO in the same subject (or meet the same academic indicator) for the same subgroup for two consecutive years. Restructuring Background: Based on available data, the Department is concerned that the restructuring requirements are not being implemented effectively, and in some cases, not at all. Proposal: The proposed regulations require the following: 1) Interventions implemented as part of a school's restructuring plan must be significantly more rigorous and comprehensive than the corrective action plan that the school implemented after it was identified as in need of improvement. 2) Districts must implement interventions that address the reasons why a school is in the restructuring phase. 3) In replacing all or most of the school staff, a district may include replacing the principal; however, replacing the principal alone would not be sufficient to constitute restructuring. Supplemental Educational Services (SES) and Public School Choice -Timely and Clear Notification to Parents Background: Too often, parents whose children attend Title I schools that are identified as in need of improvement are not notified until after the start of the schoolyear that they may send their children to better-performing public schools in their districts. Additionally, parents may be unaware of their children's eligibility for SES because the eligibility notice is not clearly distinguishable from the information that districts provide when a school is in improvement status. Proposal: The proposed regulations require timely notification to parents regarding public school choice and SES. Districts must: 1) Notify parents of eligible children that they may elect to participate in public school choice and detail their available options as far in advance as possible, but no later than 14 days before the start of the school year. This requirement will give parents adequate time to exercise their choice option before the school year begins. With more time for parents to evaluate their choice options, the level of public school choice participation across the country should increase. 2) Notify parents of eligible children of the availability of SES and highlight the benefits of SES. This notice must be clear and concise, as well as clearly distinguishable from the other information sent to parents notifying them that their child's school is in improvement status. -Access to Information on District Implementation of Public School Choice and SES Background: Districts currently are not required to make information on public school choice and SES eligibility available to the public. Doing so would make districts' implementation more transparent and make it easier for parents to obtain the information they need. Proposal: The proposed regulations require districts to include on their Web sites the following information: 1) The number of students who were eligible for and who participated in SES and public school choice during prior school years; 2) A list of SES providers approved to serve the district, as well as the locations where services are provided for the current school year; and 3) A list of available schools to which students eligible for public school choice may transfer for the current school year. -State Monitoring of Districts' Implementation of SES Background: Although States have always had to monitor their districts to ensure that the SES requirements were being met, states have not been required to make their monitoring procedures public. Proposal: The proposed regulations require States to develop, implement and publicly report the standards and techniques they use to monitor how districts implement the SES requirements. -SES Provider Approval Process Background: The law currently sets forth the minimum criteria that states must consider in approving SES providers. However, more can be done to ensure that states approve only those providers with programs having evidence of contributing to increased student achievement. Proposal: In approving an SES provider, the regulations require states to consider, at a minimum: 1) evidence from the provider that the instruction it would provide and the content it would use are research-based and aligned with state academic content and student achievement standards; 2) information from the provider on whether it has been removed from any state's approved provider list; 3) parent recommendations or results from parent surveys, if available, regarding the success of the provider's instructional program in increasing student achievement; and 4) any evaluation results demonstrating that the instructional program has improved student achievement. -State Monitoring of SES Provider Effectiveness Background: States are required to evaluate whether providers have contributed to increased student achievement for two consecutive years. However, the law does not specify the evidence a state must consider in making determinations about renewing approval of providers or withdrawing them from the state's approved list. Proposal: To inform the renewal or withdrawal of approval for a provider, the proposed regulations require a state to examine, at a minimum, evidence that the provider's instructional program: 1) is consistent with the instruction provided and content used by the district and state; 2) addresses students' needs as described in their SES plans; 3) has contributed to increasing students' academic proficiency; and 4) is aligned with state academic content and student academic achievement standards. Additionally, states would have to consider, if available, parent recommendations, results from parent surveys or other evaluation results regarding the success of the provider's program in increasing student achievement. -Costs for Parent Outreach Background: Districts must provide parents with the information they need to make the best, most informed decisions regarding their children's education. Currently, districts are not allowed to count the costs of this outreach toward their obligation to spend an amount equal to 20 percent of their Title I, Part A funding on public school choice and SES. Proposal: The proposed regulations permit a district to count the costs associated with providing parent outreach and assistance toward meeting its 20 percent obligation for SES and transportation for public school choice. The amount that could be counted as such would be capped at 0.2 percent of the district's Title I, Part A allocation. A district still would be allowed to spend more than that amount on parental outreach activities. -Use of Funds for Public School Choice and SES Background: Currently, the law does not require that districts meet certain requirements before reallocating funds for public school choice and SES to other purposes. Proposal: The proposed regulations require a district, before reallocating unused funds from choice-related transportation and SES to other purposes, to provide satisfactory evidence to the state that it has demonstrated success in: 1) partnering with community-based organizations to inform students and parents of SES and public school choice options; 2) ensuring that students and their parents have had a genuine opportunity to sign up to transfer to a better-performing school or obtain SES by providing timely, accurate notice to parents; 3) ensuring that sign-up forms are made widely available and accessible and that they have been distributed directly to all eligible students and their parents; 4) allowing eligible students to sign up to receive SES throughout the academic year; and 5) ensuring that SES providers are given access to school facilities on the same terms as are available to other groups that seek to use school facilities. -Highly Qualified Special Education Teachers Background: Current Title I regulations do not include all of the requirements for highly qualified special education teachers that are in the more recent Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) regulations. Proposal: The proposed regulations add a cross-reference to the definition of "highly qualified special education teachers" in the IDEA regulations. This is a technical change. 4) Update on Early Childhood Education Initiatives: *The National Governors Association Center for Best Practices, John Thomasian director, announced last week that Ohio will receive a $10,000 Early Childhood Center Grant to support its Early Childhood Advisory Council. Twelve states were awarded this grant to assist states in meeting the provisions of the Improving the Head Start Act of 2007 to better coordinate early care, education and health services, and improve outcomes for young children in the state so that they are better prepared for elementary schools. *The Partnership for Early Childhood Science and Policy and representatives from 14 states will hold a symposium on state policies to support science-based policies that enhance children's learning, behavior and health called the National Symposium on Early Childhood Science and Policy. The Partnership for Early Childhood Education includes the National Governors Association Center for Best Practices (NGA Center), Harvard University's Center on the Developing Child, and the National Conference of State Legislatures. The symposium will be held on June 26-27, 2008 at Harvard University. Representatives from Ohio, Arkansas, Colorado, Connecticut, Illinois, Kansas, Louisiana, Michigan, Missouri, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Virginia, and Washington will send teams composed of legislators, policy advisors, business and civic leaders to learn about the latest advances in early childhood research and practices. The Partnership has also created a Working Group on Early Childhood Science and Policy, and is convening an Issues Policy Group related to early childhood education. For more information please visit http://www.nga.org/portal/site/nga/menuitem.1f41d49be2d3d33eacdcbeeb501010a0/?vgnextoid=1f9e9eaf704d6110VgnVCM1000001a01010aRCRD *The Foundation for Child Development (FCD) released on April 25, 2008 a new report called "2008 Special Focus Report: Trends in Infancy/Early Childhood and Middle Childhood Well-Being, 1994-2006," Kenneth C. Land, Project Coordinator. This report presents an overview of the status of children ages birth through eleven in the U.S. based on the FCD's Child Well-Being Index. The index includes 25 key national indicators across six quality-of-life domains: Health, Economic Well-being, Educational Attainment, Safety and Behavioral Concerns, Social Relationships, and Community Connectedness. Data sources include the U.S. Census, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Education Statistics, and other vital statistics and sample surveys. The report is available at http://www.fcd-us.org/usr_doc/EarlyChildhoodWell-BeingReport.pdf An analysis of the Child Well-Being Index over time provides the following trend information: -Overall improvements in the well-being index are reflected across all age groups - infant/early childhood, middle childhood and adolescence. Each age group follows very similar positive trends from 1994-2002. -The Health Domain overall is on a dramatic decline, dragged down by rising obesity rates and the number of babies born at low birth weight. However, some areas of the health domain show steady improvement, driven by declining infant and child death rates; declining rates of mothers smoking during pregnancy; declining blood lead poisoning; and increased vaccinations. -More Children are Safer: The rate of children from birth to eleven who are victims of homicide has decreased dramatically. The percentage of 6th grade students who report feeling unsafe or fearful of attack or harm at school or to and from school is also down. -Educational attainment also on the rise: This domain is showing good progress driven by the dramatic increase in the number of children ages 4-6 enrolling in full-day kindergarten. The report also notes that more parents are reading to their children daily and setting rules for TV watching. Performance on standardized math and reading test scores among 9-year-olds has improved over the 12-year period. -Family economic well-being is likely to decline in years ahead. While this indicator has been holding steady, if trends in job loss, the housing finance crisis, and rising inflation that have characterized 2007 to the present day persist, they are likely to drive down this key economic indicator for children of all ages. According to the report, "These findings suggest that it is important to invest in children's well-being from as early as birth to prepare children on the path to success throughout their lives. The report also underscores the critical balance between good policy and good parenting. Effective policymaking includes safety requirements on playgrounds and in lead poisoning control. As the nation examines strategies for reducing childhood obesity, policies that guide school lunch menus and exercise are likely to play an important and influential role in outcomes." 5) Athens Based Forum Releases Report: The Athens, Ohio based Forum for Education and Democracy, George Wood executive director, released on April 23, 2008 a new report called "Democracy at Risk: The Need for a New Federal Role in Education Policy". The report finds that federal education policy is "inconsistent and shortsighted", and public education is more "at risk" now than 25 years ago when the National Commission on Excellence in Education released "A Nation At Risk: The Imperative for Educational Reform" (April 26, 1983). According to a summary of the report, the federal government should "...strengthen our public schools and take up the challenge of preparing all children, regardless of circumstance, for productive citizenship in the 21st century." The Forum recommends the following actions be taken by the federal government: *Pay off the Education Debt: Meet the federal obligation to fund programs for high-need students; Link funding to state progress toward equitable opportunities to learn; and Invest in out-of-school learning supports. *Invest in a New "Marshall Plan" for Teachers and School Leaders: Create incentives for recruiting teachers to high-need fields and locations; Strengthen teacher preparation; Create sustained, practice-based collegial learning opportunities for teachers; Develop teaching careers that reward, develop, and share expertise; and Mount a major initiative to prepare and support expert school leaders. *Support Educational Research and Innovation: Document and disseminate promising practices; Invest in the development of higher-quality standards and assessments for genuine accountability; and Develop data systems, tools, and measures. *Engage and Educate Local Communities: Foster family engagement in school life and school improvement; Provide for genuine community involvement in school improvement processes; and Place schools at the center of community education. According to the conclusion of the report: "The challenge is clear: Improving education and improving democracy go hand in hand. We must ensure that our students acquire the knowledge, the employment and health skills, the appreciation of the arts, and the understanding of human rights and responsibilities that make a truly free citizen. Indeed, if we can think of education in these ways, we will create a stronger fabric of "We, the people" by the next, and much better, generation." (p. 48) The Forum for Education and Democracy is an education think tank dedicated to renewing America's commitment to strong public schools at the national, state, and local levels. This report was prepared by conveners Linda Darling-Hammond and George Wood with contributions from Policy and Outreach Director Beth Glenn and from conveners Carl Glickman, Wendy D. Puriefoy, Sharon Robinson, Judith Browne-Dianis, John Goodlad, Gloria Ladson-Billings, Deborah Meier, Larry Myatt, Pedro Noguera, Nancy Sizer, Ted Sizer, and Angela Valenzuela. The report is available at http://www.forumforeducation.org/upload_files/files/FED_ReportRevised415.pdf 6) Bills Introduced: SB321 (Stivers) Requires criminal records check conducted by the BCII to be completed for each employee of a residential camp, and requires social security number criminal records check for volunteers of residential camp. SB322 (Wilson) Waives the requirement for certain school districts to make up days schools are closed due to flooding, and declares an emergency. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Ohio Fair Schools Campaign, 94 Columbus Road Athens, Ohio 45701 Tel. (740)592-2866 Fax (740)593-5451 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||
