Worthington School Board passes resolution opposing HB 136

The Worthington School Board passed a resolution opposing HB 136 earlier this week. Four of the five board members voted in favor of the following resultion

WHEREAS, the Ohio House of Representatives is currently considering legislation that would significantly expand the availability of vouchers for students to attend private or parochial schools; and

WHEREAS, this legislation would entitle any public school student in Ohio to request and to be granted, as a matter of right, a voucher, subject only to a family adjusted gross income of $102,800 or less; and

WHEREAS, the bill provides that students already enrolled in private or parochial schools would be eligible for such vouchers; and

WHEREAS, students receiving vouchers would be able to retain any excess funds when the cost of tuition is less than the value of the voucher for use in any private school or college in Ohio; and

WHEREAS, the operation of the proposed program would take dollars directly from the already financially-beleaguered local public school districts resulting in fewer resources for the education of the remaining students;

NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Worthington Board of Education does hereby express its opposition to this legislation, HB 136 School Choice; and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Treasurer be directed to spread this Resolution upon the minutes of the Board of Education and that copies of the resolution be forwarded to members of the Ohio House of Representatives.

Certainty And Good Policymaking Don’t Mix

Using value-added and other types of growth model estimates in teacher evaluations is probably the most controversial and oft-discussed issue in education policy over the past few years.

Many people (including a large proportion of teachers) are opposed to using student test scores in their evaluations, as they feel that the measures are not valid or reliable, and that they will incentivize perverse behavior, such as cheating or competition between teachers. Advocates, on the other hand, argue that student performance is a vital part of teachers’ performance evaluations, and that the growth model estimates, while imperfect, represent the best available option.

I am sympathetic to both views. In fact, in my opinion, there are only two unsupportable positions in this debate: Certainty that using these measures in evaluations will work; and certainty that it won’t. Unfortunately, that’s often how the debate has proceeded – two deeply-entrenched sides convinced of their absolutist positions, and resolved that any nuance in or compromise of their views will only preclude the success of their efforts. You’re with them or against them. The problem is that it’s the nuance – the details – that determine policy effects.

Let’s be clear about something: I’m not aware of a shred of evidence – not a shred – that the use of growth model estimates in teacher evaluations improves performance of either teachers or students.

[readon2 url="http://shankerblog.org/?p=3529"]Continue reading...[/readon2]

What Does a Teacher Do?

By Bob Sickles, President and Publisher, Eye On Education

As my staff and I began planning a roundtable webcast on teacher evaluation, a fundamental question emerged: What does a teacher do? Examining this question might shed some light on the teacher accountability debate which had been discussed in a recent issue of Education Week.

As the founder and CEO of a profitable education publishing company, I’m all for the entrepreneurial spirit and the push for accountability. Yet I feel uncomfortable when my MBA friend argues that our educational problems would be resolved if only schools would behave more like for-profit companies in the private sector. He wants to tie teacher evaluation to standardized test scores. His sole focus on high stakes tests is grounded in his desire to equate profit growth with test score increases.

[readon2 url="http://larryferlazzo.edublogs.org/2011/08/22/guest-post-what-does-a-teacher-do/"]Continue reading...[/readon2]