Van Wert, Ohio — Long-time adversaries U.S. Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos and American Federation of Teachers President Randi Weingarten spent more than four hours touring this rural Ohio district together Thursday. Both were still alive and well by the end of the day.
And so were the deep divisions in this corner of the country over K-12 education and President Donald Trump.
Even as DeVos and Weingarten counted model dinosaurs with preschool students, watched high school students demonstrate their robotics know-how, and chatted with teachers about social-emotional supports, small groups of protestors from both sides of the political divide gathered…
Earlier this week, the Brookings Institution released the fifth annual Education Choice and Competition Index, which ranks school choice in the largest school districts in the U.S.
During her address, Secretary of Education Betsy Devos claimed that “parents are the primary point of accountability.” When asked about policies that ensure that schools of choice are actually improving student performance, she answered that “the policies around empowering parents and moving the decision-making to the hands of parents on behalf of children is really the direction we need to go.” She later repeated the idea that transparency and information, coupled with parental choice, equated to accountability.
While it is indeed important to communicate information on school choice, transparency and information are only part of the accountability puzzle. In addition to these components, states also use accountability to ensure that schools that fail to meet academic or financial standards are improved or closed.
This is of particular importance for public charter schools, who have been given the authority to operate independently of school districts and many state rules or regulations. Accountability rules assure that students are learning and that public funds are spent responsibly.
While the accountability measures used for charter schools to demonstrate quality performance vary from state to state, they do exist, and they include more than just reporting information to parents.
Forty-three states had charter school laws in place when we completed this analysis (not including Kentucky, which passed a bill in March 2017 to allow charter schools). We examined four points of accountability within the charter school policies as recorded by the Education Commission of the States: annual reporting, specifications for termination, performance-thresholds, and technical assistance.
Annual Reporting
Most states require charter schools to submit annual reports as a part of their accountability obligations. Some annual reporting requirements include annual report cards, education progress reports, curriculum development, attendance rates, graduation rates, and college admission test scores. Many states that do not require annual reports still require financial reports, which speaks to the other side of accountability, appropriate usage of funds.
Some states, such as Washington, require charter schools to provide the same annual school performance reports as non-charter schools.
In Ohio, each charter is required to disseminate the state Department of Education’s school report card report to all parents.
North Carolina requires its charter schools to publish their report performance ratings, awarded by the State Board of Education, on the internet. If the rating is D or F, the charter school must send written notice to parents. North Carolina also requires specific data reporting related to student reading.
State Specification for Termination
Forty-two states specify the grounds for terminating a charter school, fostering accountability by establishing standards and consequences of failure to adhere to those standards. Failure to demonstrate academic achievement and failure to increase overall school performance are among the terms cited as grounds of termination among some states.
These state specifications for termination do not only apply to performance levels; they can be applied to a violation of any part of the charter law or agreement, such as fraud, failure to meet audit requirements, or failure to meet standards set for basic operations.
State Threshold
In addition to state specifications for termination, some states have set a threshold marking the lowest point where a school can perform before it is closed. Some states without a clearly communicated low-performance threshold have set other standards which specifically mark the lowest point of acceptable performance.
Setting a minimum threshold for performance for the automatic closure of failing schools may increase charter school accountability, and encourage high performance.
State-Provided Technical Assistance
Technical assistance to charter schools included leadership training or mentoring charter school leaders, or assistance with grant and application writing and other paperwork related to charter school operation.
In addition to holding charter schools accountable for high performance, several states offer technical assistance to ensure that charter school administrators understand how requirements are measured, and can be directed to resources to assist them with achieving performance goals, especially if they are at risk of closure due to failing to meet previously established standards.
These are clear displays of school accountability policies that help to ensure that parents have truly good schools from which to schools. Accountability relies not only on information for parents, but also consequences for schools that fail to educate students or use taxpayer dollars responsibly.
[1] The following states also require annual financial audits with their annual performance reports: Arkansas, Arizona, DC, Georgia, Hawaii, Oregon, Michigan, Texas, Utah
[2]Utah requires the most comprehensive technical assistance offerings, provided by the state charter school board which includes: assistance with the application and approval process for charter school authorization, locating private funding and support sources, and understanding and implementing charter requirements.
Any lingering questions over how aggressively the Trump administration was going to pursue school privatization were answered on March 16 with the release of its FY2018-19 budget proposal. If approved by Congress, federal education programs will be slashed across the board, all to pay for an initial down payment of $1.4 billion this fiscal year on a national expansion of private school voucher programs. The eventual price tag for the program will be $20 billion annually.
It doesn’t matter how their proponents try to disguise them – education savings accounts, tuition tax credits, opportunity scholarships – vouchers are destructive and misguided schemes that use taxpayer dollars to “experiment with our children’s education without any evidence of real, lasting positive results,” says NEA President Lily Eskelsen García,
That was also the consensus of a panel of experts who convened recently at the Center for American Progress (CAP), a progressive think tank based in Washington D.C, to explore the implications of the Trump-DeVos privatization agenda. The discussion focused on three ways school vouchers pose a danger to the nation’s most vulnerable students, which were identified by Senator Patty Murray (D-WA) in a memo to her Senate colleagues and summarized in her keynote remarks.
Vouchers Help Private Schools Skirt Accountability and Transparency
Strong accountability measures help prevent students from falling through the cracks. “We fly blind without the information we need to make sure our students are succeeding,” said Murray. “We strive to make accountability as effective as possible. ‘Unfortunately that system breaks down completely when it comes to public money going to private schools.”
Unlike public schools, private schools have almost complete autonomy with regard to how they operate: who they teach, what they teach, how they teach, how — if at all — they measure student achievement, how they manage their finances, and what they are required to disclose to parents and the public.
In addition to the financial fraud and abuse that some voucher programs have generated, students in these programs often end up doing worse academically. “We’ve seen real negative impacts on achievement,” said Diane Whitmore Schanzenbach of the Brookings Institution. Recent evaluations of voucher programs in Indiana, Louisiana and Ohio found that students attending private schools on a voucher scored worse than their public school counterparts on reading and math assessments.
Vouchers Fund Discrimination
Anna Caudill, a parent of a special needs child in Tennessee, told the CAP audience that vouchers do give students a choice: “You can trade your child’s federally-protected civil rights under the Individual with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) for a one-time monetary amount to pay for private school tuition.”
After her son fell too far behind academically in public school, Caudill looked for another option. Her family was offered an “Individualized Education Account,” the state’s version of a voucher. The Caudills would have received $6,300 – as long as their son waived his rights under IDEA. They also would have had to re-enroll annually with no guarantees they would receive the same amount. And even with the voucher, Caudill’s family still wouldn’t have been able to afford full-time private school instruction.
The best solution is for Congress to fully fund IDEA. Caudill said. “I believe in public schools. I believe that general and special education teachers with support from their districts and their states are the best equipped professionals to address the unique learning needs of students with disabilities.”
Neena Chaudhry, Director of Education and Senior Counsel at the National Women’s Law Center pointed out that vouchers use taxpayer dollars to discriminate against many other vulnerable groups. “We see this regarding LGBT students and students of color especially,” Chaudhry said.
Some voucher-funded, private religious schools in the South, for example, have explicitly anti-gay policies. And a recent study from the Century Foundation found that voucher programs actually increase racial segregation. Some states have expanded eligibility to include more higher-income families, who are more likely to be able to take advantage of the voucher. “Vouchers can be used as tools of white flight,” Chaudhry explained.
Accountability is critical because “allowing private schools to operate in the dark will only exacerbate these problems.” Even under a new national voucher program, states can find ways to skirt federal civil rights protections. In fact, Chaudhry warned, members of Congress may design the legislation to make that easier.
Vouchers Leave Communities and Students Behind
In many remote areas of the country, private schools are simply not an option. An expansion of vouchers nationwide, Senator Murray said, could “devastate rural schools.” She cited the example of the tiny community of Plevna, Montana, where the closest non-boarding private achool is 240 miles away. “If funding is diverted to private schools, not only would the school in Plevna sever, its students wouldn’t even be able to access the private school that are receiving public funds,” Murray explained.
A new CAP analysis on vouchers found that there 9,000 “sparse” school districts (five or fewer schools) that would be decimated by a national voucher program. The ability of an additional 2200 “average” districts (5-8 schools) to serve all its students would be seriously undermined. Together, “sparse” and “average” districts constitute roughly 85% of the nation’s regular school districts.
Cassia County School District in south central Idaho has 17 schools but is still located in a remote area. “Our biggest challenge is funding,” said Superintendent Gaylen Smyer, “We have a hard time finding qualified teachers. and bringing in new opportunities for students so they can compete after they graduate. Vouchers are not going to help. If anything, I think they would just undermine our public schools.”
Is there a demand for vouchers in Idaho? “I’m not seeing it,” Smyer said. “Geographic distances pose a challenge for private schools to be set up and parents aren’t willing to transport their children a long way to a private school. So there’s no demand for vouchers in south central Idaho. Our focus is on improving all schools for all our students.”
Senator Murray calls the Trump-DeVos privatization agenda a “false choice,” because it leaves out the best option for students: strong, well-funded public schools in their own neighborhood. “Public schools by definition are open and inclusionary and many students thrive in their neighborhood schools,” Murray said.
But the federal government must make the proper investments and “ensure that the states are creating strong accountability and improvement mechanisms so that groups of students previously denied access to an equitable education do not fall through the cracks once again.”
Making good on a promise to heed public input, Ohio’s top education official announced last week that he would delay submitting a federally-required education plan.
“The submission of the state’s Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) response should be an event that unites us,” Superintendent of Public Instruction Paolo DeMaria wrote in an open letter explaining the delay. “In recent weeks, we’ve heard from stakeholders who feel their input was not reflected in the ESSA template.”
The announcement was met with a sigh of relief from those who were critical of the state’s plan. In rare bipartisan fashion, state officials, educators and lawmakers from across the political spectrum agreed that a delay was in the state’s best interest. Part of the reason was the state’s unprecedented outreach for public input. And the public didn’t disappoint.
Going “Above and Beyond” for Stakeholder Outreach
In all, more than 15,000 Ohioans provided feedback on the state’s ESSA implementation plan: about 3,100 people participated in webinars; more than 1,500 people attended meetings with Philanthropy Ohio, a statewide charity network; Ohio Department of Education (ODE) staff participated in more than 70 meetings and presentation; and there were more than 11,000 responses to an online survey.
“The [Ohio education] department went above and beyond what they often do in terms of stakeholder engagement,” said Lisa Gray, project director for the Philanthropy Ohio Education Initiative, which directed ten engagement sessions across the state last year. Philanthropy Ohio also published a white paper on that engagement, which was just one part of the state’s outreach plan.
COLUMBUS (AP) — State officials will spend more time reviewing public feedback before sending federal regulators Ohio’s education and accountability plan under the law that replaced No Child Left Behind.
Ohio intended to submit its plan early next month but instead will wait until a September deadline to submit the final plan and, in the meantime, carefully consider the feedback that officials have received, state Superintendent Paolo DeMaria said. He said submission of the plan should be a unifying moment of consensus for education in Ohio, but that it instead has been divisive.
Some educators have raised criticisms about the draft, particularly objecting that it wouldn’t reduce standardized testing of students. Some also have urged Ohio officials to use more specific descriptions to categorize school districts on state report cards and to make it easier to understand those evaluations.
DeMaria rebuffed critics’ claims that Ohio’s draft plan had ignored public feedback on such issues, noting that its development took a year and involved 15,000 Ohioans.
He announced that he will convene an advisory committee to consider the issue of Ohio’s list of tests, which to be altered would require changes in state law. Ohio has 24 tests, more than the 17 required under the 2015 Every Student Succeeds Act, or ESSA, that gives states more control over schools and education policy.
The state announcement Monday about delaying the plan’s submission came the same day that the U.S. Education Department shared new accountability guidance for identifying and assisting struggling schools under ESSA. Education Secretary Betsy DeVos said those new rules give states more flexibility, but some critics complained that the guidance leaves parents and other local stakeholders out of the discussion.
A spokeswoman for the Ohio Department of Education said the new federal guidance didn’t affect the state’s decision to delay submitting its plan.
The delay was applauded by the Ohio Federation of Teachers, as well as members of the state school board and lawmakers who lead education committees in the state Legislature.
Ohio’s plan takes a detailed look at the state’s education system and makes important improvements based on the feedback of our stakeholders and requirements in the law.
Under the new Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA), Ohio is creating a plan for how our local, state and federal programs are aligned to help all of our students be successful. We asked for your participation and input through webinars, regional meetings and online survey, which are now completed.
Thank you to all who participated in providing information and input. Approximately 3,100 individuals participated in the ESSA webinars (see recordings below) and more than 1,500 people attended the 10 regional meetings (see below). There were more than 11,000 responses to the ESSA online survey. Additionally, the Ohio Department of Education attended more than 70 meetings and presentations around the state and collected suggestions and recommendations submitted through email to the Department.
The Ohio Department of Education is committed to comprehensive and collaborative community engagement leading to the development of our state Student Success Plan. A plan that is deeply rooted in the needs of Ohio’s students, educators and communities requires everyone’s input. We expect the draft plan to be ready and open for public comment later this year.
On Dec. 10, 2015, President Obama signed the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA), a long-awaited overhaul of federal education law. Passed with bipartisan support, ESSA represents a shift from broad federal oversight of primary and secondary education to greater flexibility and decision making at the state and local levels. The law replaces the No Child Left Behind Act.
Ohio is committed to involving educators, parents and other stakeholders as we explore new ways to ensure that all our students receive the education they need for bright futures.
ESSA requires that states develop plans that address standards, assessments, school and district accountability, and special help for struggling schools.
The transition plan as outlined in ESSA includes: The 2016-2017 school year will be a transition period with full implementation of new state plans effective with the 2017-2018 school year.
HOW TO SHARE ESSA AND KEEP THE CONVERSATION GOING.
The U.S. Department of Education has extended its submission deadline for states’ Every Student Succeeds Act to April 3rd. Prior to submitting the final State Plan, the Ohio Department of Education intends to post a summary of the draft State Plan by mid-January 2017 and they will post the full draft State Plan for public comment in early February.
Published on Feb 12, 2017
The Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) requires states to develop plans that address standards, assessments, school and district accountability, and special help for struggling schools. After a year of hard work and outreach which engaged more than 15,000 Ohioans, the Ohio Department of Education has released the draft overview and complete technical draft submission of Ohio’s Every Student Succeeds Act state plan, available to view here: http://education.ohio.gov/Topics/Every-Student-Succeeds-Act-ESSA
During this webcast recording from Feb. 10, Department leadership discuss and share details about Ohio’s ESSA plan and discuss what it means for schools, students, educators and families.
Today the Alliance for Excellent Education was recognized for its work to expand quality Linked Learning opportunities for students in California and across the nation at the Linked Learning Convention in Oakland, California. Linked Learning is a comprehensive educational approach that integrates rigorous academics, high-quality career and technical education, work-based learning, and student support to prepare all students, especially those who are traditionally underserved, to graduate from high school with the skills necessary to succeed in college and a career.
“From the most rural to the most urban school settings, Linked Learning is a sterling example of how the combined efforts of school districts, colleges and universities, and employers can make education more engaging for students and more relevant to the twenty-first-century economy,” said Alliance for Excellent Education President Bob Wise, who received the 2017 Linked Learning Policymaker Champion Award. “The Alliance is honored to be partners in this movement and to have communicated the impact of Linked Learning to federal policymakers and education leaders for nearly a decade.”
Originating in California with nine school districts, Linked Learning has expanded to serve more than 65,000 students in California, and many more in Illinois, Michigan, New York, Ohio, Texas, and Wisconsin. The approach is working to reverse the trend of too many students, particularly African American, Latino, and students from low-income families, who are failing to graduate from high school with the skills necessary to succeed.
In conjunction with the convention, the Alliance released a short video demonstrating how Linked Learning is changing lives and improving educational outcomes for students at Los Angeles Unified School District. In the video, Paola—a first-generation college student—shares how her mentorship in high school helped to prepare her for college and a career. Watch the video below or at https://youtu.be/rUbM4wMjvcs.
“Our students are becoming increasingly more diverse and it is clear that our success as a nation is inextricably linked to the achievement of students from low-income families,” said Wise. “Linked Learning has been a successful approach to more positive education results for traditionally underserved students. For example, African American students in Linked Learning pathways are 12.4 percentage points more likely than their peers to enroll in a four-year college.”
“More than 11 million jobs have been created since the Great Recession, and only 1 percent of those jobs went to people with only a high school diploma,” said Wise. “It’s obvious that students need preparation for both postsecondary education and the workforce—not one or the other.”
“Linked Learning makes the critical connection between the classroom, college, and a career while eliminating the disconnect between classroom learning and the real world of the workplace,” said Wise. “This approach enables students to explore their interests while preparing them for the jobs they will be applying for and that the workforce will be seeking.”
Published on Aug 11, 2016
The Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) requires states to look at more than test scores and graduation rates when evaluating school or district success. Under this new law, Ohio must incorporate non-academic factors into our accountability systems. Learn more in this webinar recording about non-academic measures as we work to expand the ways in which we recognize school and district quality.
![[ESSA] State Plan Versions That Have Been Released So Far](https://nnpa.org/essa/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/essa-posts-featured_0060_iStock-460421987-1-1080x600.png)
Any lingering questions over how aggressively the Trump administration was going to pursue school privatization were answered on March 16 with the release of its FY2018-19 budget proposal. If approved by Congress, federal education programs will be slashed across the board, all to pay for an initial down payment of $1.4 billion this fiscal year on a national expansion of private school voucher programs. The eventual price tag for the program will be $20 billion annually.
Strong accountability measures help prevent students from falling through the cracks. “We fly blind without the information we need to make sure our students are succeeding,” said Murray. “We strive to make accountability as effective as possible. ‘Unfortunately that system breaks down completely when it comes to public money going to private schools.”
Anna Caudill, a parent of a special needs child in Tennessee, told the CAP audience that vouchers do give students a choice: “You can trade your child’s federally-protected civil rights under the 
In many remote areas of the country, private schools are simply not an option. An expansion of vouchers nationwide, Senator Murray said, could “devastate rural schools.” She cited the example of the tiny community of Plevna, Montana, where the closest non-boarding private achool is 240 miles away. “If funding is diverted to private schools, not only would the school in Plevna sever, its students wouldn’t even be able to access the private school that are receiving public funds,” Murray explained.
