Teacher World

Ohio’s application for the phase 1 portion of Race to the Top was soundly rejected and may be again in phase 2 unless the writers are able to make some major changes to the application. Ohio teachers are probably wondering why it was rejected, and what kind of changes need to be made. Well, let me tell you what I have been able to learn.

First of all, each portion of the application received points, which when totaled, determined which states would be the recipients of RttT resources. According to my research, the area in which Ohio scored lowest (second to the lowest of the 16 finalist states) was in the area called “Great Teachers and Leaders”. Apparently, Ohio’s application was too wimpy due to “the state’s inability to ensure equitable distribution of teachers in hard-to-staff subjects, specialty areas, or in high-poverty or high-minority schools”, according to The Ohio Education Gadfly. Reviewers felt that the process it would take to remove ineffective educators was not clearly provided. There was also criticism due to the fact that only half of the local schools who participated in the phase 1 application process agreed to link teacher evaluations to their compensation and promotion. Some of the other areas of concern were its failure to adequately detail how it would close achievement gaps between poor students and wealthier students, and how it would turnaround the lowest-performing schools.

Now what does this mean for Phase 2? Well, first of all, if Ohio has any hope of being considered, it will need to develop stronger guidelines regarding merit pay, tenure, and dismissal of teachers. And you can rest assured that all of these will be linked to a large degree on achievement test scores. One source I read stated that RttT approved heartily of states like Florida, where the legislature approved teacher salaries being tied directly to test scores, and teachers would be offered one year salaries only. (Although, as I have previously blogged, this was later overturned by Florida’s governor.) Clearly, this is indicative of what the judges are looking for.

Secondly, Ohio will have to state more clearly how teachers would be evenly redistributed so as to level the playing field between low income and higher income school districts in order to turnaround lowest-performing schools. In other words, they are looking for stronger language regarding how highly effective teachers could be moved.

Additionally, Ohio’s application lacked teeth when it came to teachers unions. From what I have been able to glean, RttT reviewers are looking for a firm commitment by unions to be willing to make pretty radical changes to teacher salary, licensure, evaluation, tenure, and termination.

These are some of the salient reasons why Ohio’s application was rejected. I will continue to keep you informed and, of course, give my opinions about upcoming information as it becomes available. In the meantime, I hope you take the time to comment about what you have heard or read, and how you feel about Race to the Top, no matter which state you are from.

Changes in Teaching, Educational Reform, Merit Pay for Teachers, Teacher's Unions, Teacher-World's Blog, state achievement tests low income schools, merit pay, Phase One, Race to the Top, teacher licensure, teacher tenure, Teacher's Unions, turnaround schools

Okay, so President Obama is advocating year-round school and extended hours to our school day. And I can’t help but wonder when enough is enough! His argument is that our school calendars are based on an archaic agrarian time schedule which needs revamping. And yet I ask myself, didn’t we turn out okay under this archaic calendar? Is this really about the need to compete with other countries educationally, or is it instead just a smokescreen to provide safe after-school programs for low income areas at the expense of school districts?  The president admitted as much when he announced his plan for schools. This is a bad idea for several reasons.

First, children need to be children and have time to play and spend time with their family. If the school day extends till 5:00 or 6:00, how does that leave any time for family and fun? Family time would revolve around dinner, homework, bathes, and bedtime. Much of a child’s development revolves around family and the normal activities that are part of family time in the evening. Forget that with Obama’s plan. And forget enjoying time with friends or playing outside, both important activities for developing children.

Second, what about extracurricular activities under Obama’s extended day plan? Where would sports fit into this extended schedule? How could coaches schedule practices if kids don’t even get home until early evening? What happens to after-school programs like drama, debate teams, choir, band, etc.? Am I alone in recognizing that fewer students would be able to take advantage of these programs? These are all part of a child’s educational experience, allowing them to expand their interests and become well-rounded, young people. Colleges look for extracurricular involvement in applicants. They recognize that academics are crucial but extracurricular involvement make for a more balanced individual. Involvement in these programs often teaches children about their skills and where their interests lie, which helps them plan for their future. With limited time in the evening, these programs would suffer and so would students who are unable to attend them.

Last, I would also suggest that those who advocate a longer day actually visit schools to observe elementary children for a day and see if they still think this is a great idea. Young students are tired by the afternoon, and it becomes increasingly more difficult to hold their attention as the afternoon progresses. Now, we are thinking of adding at least two more hours to their day? Do you really think that their energy level and attention will last that long? Parents, does your child’s attention level last that long at home? What are we thinking?

Again, should all students have to adjust to a longer day to provide after-school care for students who don’t have it? Not only does this seem unfair, but it seems counterproductive. President Obama and his advocates need to talk to teachers of elementary students and see what we think. It sounds great to say that adding two to three hours onto the school day will create more competitive students, but I don’t believe it will, not if students are exhausted and done by 3:00. And let’s not rule out what students stand to lose with less time in the evening. It’s a bad idea, and it hurts more than it helps!

Changes in Teaching, Educational Reform, Teacher-World's Blog Educational Reform, extended school day, extracurriculars, low income schools, President Obama