The Education Gadfly Weekly

In Cleveland, last week we were reminded, horrifically--again--that schools can be very scary places. A 14-year-old gunman, also known as a student, opened fire in a downtown alternative high school, injuring two students and two adults, before shooting and killing himself (see here). The shooting occurred at SuccessTech Academy.

While they grab national headlines, as absolutely horrible as they are, school shootings are, at best, rare in the nation's 119,000 schools. Violent crime in schools dropped by half between 1994 and 2003, according to the University of Virginia (see here). Homicides, which peaked in the early 1990s at more than 40 a year in schools, dropped sharply by 2002.

Federal statistics indicate that, in a recent year, an estimated 6.5 percent of all students carried a weapon to school. A Columbus Public Schools official told The Gadfly that a dozen guns (six loaded) were taken from students in the last year, down from 27 (16 loaded) in the 2005-2006 school year. Statewide, 451 guns and more than 3,000 other weapons were taken from students in Ohio public schools last year, according to the Ohio Department of Education.

The real problem is fighting. The Ohio Department of Education reported 78,296 fights and other acts of violence in the last school year. Charter schools, however, are calmer and safer. According to a report issued earlier this year, charter schools experience far fewer discipline problems than district public schools (see here). Bullying (13,861 times in Ohio schools last year) also is now one of the most-reported school-violence problems. The Ohio General Assembly recognized the bullying problem earlier this year, when it authorized public schools to form bullying prevention task forces and extra training for teachers, parents, school volunteers, and others.

Constant bullying or an otherwise silly juvenile disagreement can spin out of control when fueled by fear, anger, and/or raging hormones. The Cleveland incident was apparently precipitated by a fight earlier in the week and this, as well as the disturbing national data on fights and bullying, ought to have school officials taking a new look at violence-prevention programs.

Unfortunately, federal money for violence-prevention programs has been dropping. In Ohio, the federal allocation for safe and drug-free schools has slipped from about $15 million in 2001, according to a state education department official, to $9.9 million this year. The decline comes as two new studies published in the American Journal of Preventive Medicine say the programs work. Researchers report that after-school prevention programs result in a substantial reduction in violent behavior across the age and socioeconomic spectrum.

A survey of 53 studies of violence-prevention programs focusing on problem solving, conflict resolution, peer mediation, and other ideas found they resulted in a 15 percent reduction in violent behavior for an average of six months after the program was completed. The research, summarized in Science News, was reinforced by a second, larger study (see here) conducted by scientists at Vanderbilt University in Nashville, Tennessee. This analysis of 249 studies of school-violence-prevention programs found even greater drops in violence. The researchers also noted students going through the programs were AWOL from school less often. Combined with other ideas, violence-prevention programs could help produce even larger results and they might keep the lid on a disagreement that could spark a future school shooting spree.

A lot has been written about the fiscal impact of charter schools on traditional districts (see here, here, and here--just to name a few). Sometimes the information is accurate; almost always it is biased based on who's presenting it. Ohio's school-funding formula is complex, and the funding math gets even fuzzier when it comes to how the state funds charter schools. Advocates on both sides of the charter-school funding debate are guilty of glossing over the minutiae. But the truth is that students in charter schools in the Buckeye State are short-changed in education funding compared to their peers in district schools.

Charter schools are public schools serving public school children (the General Assembly said so and the Ohio Supreme Court agreed). But charter schools are only guaranteed the state base amount of funding and are unable to levy any additional local dollars as school districts. Nor do they have access to state school facilities dollars. Consequently, they must operate with substantially less public funding than district schools. This funding disparity is clear when you compare school spending.

Consider two similar high schools in central Ohio. Fort Hayes Arts and Academic High School, a Columbus city school, served 563 students last school year--69.6 percent of students were black, 73.1 percent economically disadvantaged, and 7.7 percent had disabilities. A central Ohio charter high school, Arts and College Preparatory Academy, served 195 students: 50.5 percent black, 50.9 percent economically disadvantaged, and 14.2 percent with disabilities. Both schools were rated effective by the state. Fort Hayes' performance index score was 95.6; Arts and College Prep's was 90.3. But, last school year, Fort Hayes spent $11,337 per pupil and Arts and College Prep spent just $7,108.

Similar disparities exist in the Gem City. Jefferson Montessori I Elementary School served 471 students--96 percent were black, 99.9 percent economically disadvantaged, and 14.1 percent with disabilities. At the Dayton Academy charter school, 99.7 percent of the 752 students were black, while 42.2 percent were economically disadvantaged and 11.9 percent had disabilities. The Dayton Academy was rated on academic watch by the state and achieved a performance index score of 75.8. Jefferson Montessori I, a district school, was rated in academic emergency and had a performance index score of 67.8. But the Dayton Academy spent $7,721 per student while Jefferson Montessori I spent $11,435. (Disclosure: the Fordham Institute's sister organization, the Thomas B. Fordham Foundation, is the charter-school authorizer for the Dayton Academy.)

These funding disparities are the norm, not the exception. They exist regardless of student demographics and are present in schools at all levels of achievement.

There are 78,000+ students in Ohio who aren't getting their fair share of education funding simply because of the type of public school they have chosen to attend. For those who argue about educational equity this is an issue that deserves to be addressed.

Media attention of the Fordham Institute and Northwest Evaluation Association's new report, The Proficiency Illusion, had politicians lecturing and education officials in Washington, D.C. and state capitals wringing their hands and circling the wagons earlier this month. The report, released October 4, criticized the way states measure what our children need to learn in school and highlighted the potpourri of standards for proficiency on state achievement exams.

The Wall Street Journal, Washington Post, and other dailies paid attention (see here and here), as did many Ohio newspapers (see here and here). But the best line may have come from the Journal Times in Wisconsin: "It used to be that even if Wisconsin students didn't score well, parents and people concerned about education could comfort themselves with the notion that at least Wisconsin's performance was above the national average, that even our poorest students were still pretty good.

"That's apparently not the case. Like some twisted version of Garrison Keillor's mythical Lake Woebegone, we have created a Wisconsin where the women may be strong and the men good-looking but all the children are below average."

State education officials in Ohio and elsewhere immediately went on the defensive. These bureaucrats have to navigate between the Scylla and Charybdis of No Child Left Behind--they are tasked with setting high academic standards and are subject to the fallout when those standards aren't met. In Ohio, officials attempted to undermine the report's methodology rather than use it as an impetus for a real conversation about improving the measurement of academic performance.

At the state board of education meeting the week after the report's release, officials discounted the Fordham report and instead highlighted a June report by the U.S. Department of Education that mapped state proficiency standards in reading and math onto the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) scale. Ohio fared slightly better in that analysis but by no means earned bragging rights when it comes to the rigor of our assessments--Fordham's report ranked Ohio near the bottom of the 26 states surveyed while the feds put Ohio in the middle of a 32-state group.

At the same meeting, education department staff presented data about student performance on the Ohio Achievement Test and the NAEP. They were careful to keep results from the two tests on separate slides, likely because the state's passing rates on its own assessments are vastly higher than on the NAEP. Ohio policymakers should have heeded the advice of the federal education department, which, after the release of The Proficiency Illusion called on states to post their scores side-by-side with the NAEP to "paint an accurate picture for parents and the public as to how students are achieving."

In Ohio, that picture would show that while an impressive 80 percent of fourth graders passed the state's reading test last year, only 36 percent passed the NAEP. In fourth-grade math, 76 percent of students passed the Ohio test and only 46 percent passed the NAEP. Ohio's students are making progress, as evidenced by both state and national assessments. But the state's definition of "proficient" is certainly inflated when compared to the "gold standard" NAEP. Parents, educators, and policymakers in the Buckeye State deserve to know this.

Taken together, this information ought to stimulate Ohio education officials and politicians to go beyond talking about the knowledge and skills our children really need and how to attain them. The Achieve recommendations (see here) are a good start, calling for identifying real college- and work-readiness standards for graduation and mapping standards backwards through the lower grades--and setting proficiency cut scores at a level that means something.

There is indication that the General Assembly has the resolve to move this work forward. Last week, Senate education committee members asked tough, thoughtful questions of State Superintendent Susan Tave Zelman about the Achieve report. Democrats and Republicans made it clear that they want to be part of developing the legislative recommendations that come out of this report. Let's hope the State Board of Education keeps pushing the Achieve agenda and that lawmakers join them to improve the state's accountability system.

A lot has been written about the fiscal impact of charter schools on traditional districts (see here, here, and here--just to name a few). Sometimes the information is accurate; almost always it is biased based on who's presenting it. Ohio's school-funding formula is complex, and the funding math gets even fuzzier when it comes to how the state funds charter schools. Advocates on both sides of the charter-school funding debate are guilty of glossing over the minutiae. But the truth is that students in charter schools in the Buckeye State are short-changed in education funding compared to their peers in district schools.

Charter schools are public schools serving public school children (the General Assembly said so and the Ohio Supreme Court agreed). But charter schools are only guaranteed the state base amount of funding and are unable to levy any additional local dollars as school districts. Nor do they have access to state school facilities dollars. Consequently, they must operate with substantially less public funding than district schools. This funding disparity is clear when you compare school spending.

Consider two similar high schools in central Ohio. Fort Hayes Arts and Academic High School, a Columbus city school, served 563 students last school year--69.6 percent of students were black, 73.1 percent economically disadvantaged, and 7.7 percent had disabilities. A central Ohio charter high school, Arts and College Preparatory Academy, served 195 students: 50.5 percent black, 50.9 percent economically disadvantaged, and 14.2 percent with disabilities. Both schools were rated effective by the state. Fort Hayes' performance index score was 95.6; Arts and College Prep's was 90.3. But, last school year, Fort Hayes spent $11,337 per pupil and Arts and College Prep spent just $7,108.

Similar disparities exist in the Gem City. Jefferson Montessori I Elementary School served 471 students--96 percent were black, 99.9 percent economically disadvantaged, and 14.1 percent with disabilities. At the Dayton Academy charter school, 99.7 percent of the 752 students were black, while 42.2 percent were economically disadvantaged and 11.9 percent had disabilities. The Dayton Academy was rated on academic watch by the state and achieved a performance index score of 75.8. Jefferson Montessori I, a district school, was rated in academic emergency and had a performance index score of 67.8. But the Dayton Academy spent $7,721 per student while Jefferson Montessori I spent $11,435. (Disclosure: the Fordham Institute's sister organization, the Thomas B. Fordham Foundation, is the charter-school authorizer for the Dayton Academy.)

These funding disparities are the norm, not the exception. They exist regardless of student demographics and are present in schools at all levels of achievement.

There are 78,000+ students in Ohio who aren't getting their fair share of education funding simply because of the type of public school they have chosen to attend. For those who argue about educational equity this is an issue that deserves to be addressed.

In Cleveland, last week we were reminded, horrifically--again--that schools can be very scary places. A 14-year-old gunman, also known as a student, opened fire in a downtown alternative high school, injuring two students and two adults, before shooting and killing himself (see here). The shooting occurred at SuccessTech Academy.

While they grab national headlines, as absolutely horrible as they are, school shootings are, at best, rare in the nation's 119,000 schools. Violent crime in schools dropped by half between 1994 and 2003, according to the University of Virginia (see here). Homicides, which peaked in the early 1990s at more than 40 a year in schools, dropped sharply by 2002.

Federal statistics indicate that, in a recent year, an estimated 6.5 percent of all students carried a weapon to school. A Columbus Public Schools official told The Gadfly that a dozen guns (six loaded) were taken from students in the last year, down from 27 (16 loaded) in the 2005-2006 school year. Statewide, 451 guns and more than 3,000 other weapons were taken from students in Ohio public schools last year, according to the Ohio Department of Education.

The real problem is fighting. The Ohio Department of Education reported 78,296 fights and other acts of violence in the last school year. Charter schools, however, are calmer and safer. According to a report issued earlier this year, charter schools experience far fewer discipline problems than district public schools (see here). Bullying (13,861 times in Ohio schools last year) also is now one of the most-reported school-violence problems. The Ohio General Assembly recognized the bullying problem earlier this year, when it authorized public schools to form bullying prevention task forces and extra training for teachers, parents, school volunteers, and others.

Constant bullying or an otherwise silly juvenile disagreement can spin out of control when fueled by fear, anger, and/or raging hormones. The Cleveland incident was apparently precipitated by a fight earlier in the week and this, as well as the disturbing national data on fights and bullying, ought to have school officials taking a new look at violence-prevention programs.

Unfortunately, federal money for violence-prevention programs has been dropping. In Ohio, the federal allocation for safe and drug-free schools has slipped from about $15 million in 2001, according to a state education department official, to $9.9 million this year. The decline comes as two new studies published in the American Journal of Preventive Medicine say the programs work. Researchers report that after-school prevention programs result in a substantial reduction in violent behavior across the age and socioeconomic spectrum.

A survey of 53 studies of violence-prevention programs focusing on problem solving, conflict resolution, peer mediation, and other ideas found they resulted in a 15 percent reduction in violent behavior for an average of six months after the program was completed. The research, summarized in Science News, was reinforced by a second, larger study (see here) conducted by scientists at Vanderbilt University in Nashville, Tennessee. This analysis of 249 studies of school-violence-prevention programs found even greater drops in violence. The researchers also noted students going through the programs were AWOL from school less often. Combined with other ideas, violence-prevention programs could help produce even larger results and they might keep the lid on a disagreement that could spark a future school shooting spree.