Fenwick graduation 2012
Ponitz graduation 2012
Cars and Parts Swap Meet
Ellen Belcher is the Dayton Daily News opinion pages editor. She writes about state government, education, the environment, higher education and all things Dayton.
Martin Gottlieb is an editorial writer and columnist for the Dayton Daily News opinion pages. He focuses on the political process itself and does such national issues as war, the economy, taxes and Social Security, as well as a hodge-podge of local and state issues.Home > Blogs > A Matter of Opinion > Archives > 2009 > February > 02 > Entry
Editorial: Strickland’s school changes would reduce local control
Gov. Ted Strickland has people talking about schools.
When he said last week that he wants to add a month to the school calendar, extend the school day and mandate all-day kindergarten, he was talking about things that parents and even those who don’t have children can relate to.
When he called for a four-year “residency program” for new teachers, likening them to doctors, you can bet that the state’s teachers were reacting, along with all the college students who are in the pipeline to join that profession.
These and other ideas could be good things.
But if the governor gets his way, his changes will come with price tags. One, of course, will be financial. The other will be a loss of local control. The governor, in multiple ways, is proposing to take significantly more ownership of how schools are run.
In exchange for increasing what the state pays toward operating schools — with the goal of reducing how often school districts need to ask for property tax levies — Gov. Strickland is insisting on a bigger role. On average, the state currently pays about 52 percent of the cost of educating a child; the governor, over a decade, would ramp up that figure to 59 percent.
That represents a huge commitment from the state. By suggesting a phased-in approach over 10 years, Gov. Strickland is limiting the spending choices of future governors and legislatures. They would be saddled with the full costs of his ideas, while he would only have to partially fund them. His calculation may be that all good and expensive things take time, but once the ball is rolling, there’s no turning back.
Imagine a candidate for governor in 2016 saying that having kids in school 200 days a year is too expensive, and that Ohio should cut back to the old days of just 180. Could be a big fight.
Gov. Strickland says that, in addition to measuring student achievement through new tests (he would junk the Ohio Graduation Test and the state’s current proficiency tests), districts themselves should be rated on how well they spend people’s money.
Presumably that means schools would be told in more precise ways what to spend on teachers (versus, say, administrators), for employee benefits, books, computers and so on. That will be serious pressure. How, for example, could a district with a “C” rating for its financial stewardship even think of going to voters for a levy?
Possibly Gov. Strickland has come to the conclusion that other countries that have a more centralized educational system are on to something. After two years of listening to briefings about the issue, apparently he has decided that having a more uniform approach to running schools would result in the quicker adoption of best practices, and that some important decisions simply have to come from the top.
If you like what the “top” wants, no problem. If you don’t, well, try fighting Capitol Square and the Ohio Department of Education. It won’t be easy.
Gov. Strickland, who was enthusiastically supported by teachers’ unions, offered up ideas that they will not like. Even if the school year is expanded slowly, it’s still hard to picture them getting a dollar-for-dollar adjustment for all those additional days.
He also complained about how hard it is to fire teachers and said he wants to change that. Coming from somebody who doesn’t take cheap shots at people just because they’re in a union, this criticism had to make teachers pause. How sincere he is about really fixing the situation isn’t clear yet.
Gov. Strickland’s speeches about schools have evolved. Where once he mainly emphasized making sure that schools had enough money, now he says he wants to add some money to the pot — but he wants to change how the vast sums are being spent. Understandably, there are plenty of skeptics about whether his math really adds up.
What is clear is that a debate about big changes for Ohio’s schools and educators has been opened.
Permalink | Comments (1) | Post your comment | Categories: Editorials, Education, Ellen Belcher, State politics
Comments
By Mary
February 4, 2009 7:47 AM | Link to this
It is fine with me if the state takes away some of the so-called local control, especially if they set appropriate education priorities and know what they are doing. I have not been impressed with “local control”. That makes it sound as if the locals are being listened to, and they are not, at least not where I live. So much depends on which locals are in control.