Badin vs. Fredericktown
Miamisburg graduation 2012
Valley View vs. Greenville
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.
Scott Elliott is an editorial writer and columnist for the Dayton Daily News opinion pages. He writes about education, city and suburban issues, politics, business, workforce and consumer issues.Home > Blogs > A Matter of Opinion > Archives > 2009 > November > 27
Friday, November 27, 2009
Guest column: Charter, city schools have reasons to work together
This column was written by Terry Ryan, vice president for Ohio Programs & Policy at the Thomas B. Fordham Institute.
In the last decade, the Dayton Public Schools have lost more than 10,000 students, seeing their enrollment decline from 24,916 in 2000 to 14,393 in 2009.
During this same period, Dayton has become one of the country’s leading charter school markets.
Annually since 2006, the National Alliance for Public Charter Schools has reported that Dayton is on its list of top 10 charter communities by market share. In 2009, Dayton is fifth, behind New Orleans, Washington, D.C., Detroit and Kansas City.
Over the years, such numbers and ratings have triggered angst and anger among school officials and their supporters. In 2007, for example, then-board president Yvonne Isaacs captured the feelings of many when she told a gathering of education journalists, “Over the nine years of charter schools in Dayton, the district has lost $283 million that was transferred to charter schools. It would not have cost us nearly that much to educate 6,000 students.”
But, there is more behind these numbers than meets the eye.
Charters have played a role in draining Dayton Public Schools of students, but the city has lost even more children to the suburbs, other states, and private schools. (1,568 children attend private schools in Dayton using a state voucher.)
Consider that in 2000, there were 26,146 Dayton students enrolled in public schools (24,916 in Dayton Public Schools and 1,230 in charters).
In 2009, there were 19,621 Dayton students enrolled in public schools (14,393 in Dayton and 5,228 in charters).
In nine years, the total public-school enrollments shrank by some 6,525 students. But this decline has gone largely unnoticed and unmentioned.
This may be because the pain of losing students has been shared by the charters. Consider two of Dayton’s more established charter schools (both sponsored by the foundation I work for) — the Dayton Academy and the Dayton View Academy. In 2002, their enrollments were 977 and 819 students, respectively. In 2009, their enrollments had declined to 706 and 631 students.
Each school has lost about 25 percent of its students in the last seven years. Further, student enrollment in charters peaked in 2006, when 6,403 Dayton students attended a charter. The number of charter school buildings operating in the city crested at 38 schools in 2005. At the start of this school year, there were only 29. With fewer charter schools in operation, the overall academic performance of those left standing has steadily improved.
Of the 55 Dayton schools (district and charter) to receive academic ratings from the Ohio Department of Education in 2009, 31 got the equivalent of D or F marks (56 percent). Only two — both charter schools — earned an A.
More remarkable, 61 percent of the students in Dayton charters in 2008-9 were in schools rated A, B or C by the state, while 74 percent of Dayton Public Schools students attended schools rated D or F.
What’s surprising to school-choice advocates is that the district results haven’t improved with the charters’. One of the central tenets of school choice is that competition will force all schools to improve. But this simply hasn’t happened in Dayton.
DPS student performance peaked in 2006, when the district was rated a C, and the overall performance of district students was superior to that of charter school students. Since then, charter performance has steadily improved, but the district’s hasn’t. Why?
We don’t know what’s happening. It is possible that, as charter schools have closed, the neediest children (those furthest behind academically) have migrated back to the district. Or, flux within district leadership could be the cause. New school board members have been elected, there’s a new superintendent and leaders at various schools have changed.
The Council of Great City Schools suggests that during recent leadership changes “the administration may have taken its eyes off of the ball and lost its focus.”
Regardless of the reasons for the district’s struggles, Dayton is literally fighting for its survival. On its current trajectory, public education in the city is leading in one direction — to a city devoid of children, families and hope.
The last decade of charter schools and the district fighting each other must be replaced by a new era of “one for all and all for one.” The rallying cry should be quality schools for all, no matter who happens to run them.
Permalink | Comments (2) | Post your comment |
TweetEditorial: Anti-smoking efforts were robbed blind
In the past decade, Ohio has fumbled away a historic opportunity to attack the ills of smoking and get young people not to take up tobacco products.
The really sad part is that there was no excuse. The state had the money, thanks to a legal settlement between major tobacco companies and several states, which brought Ohio $10 billion.
But lawmakers mostly chose to spend it on other things or — most egregiously — to steal back money it had set aside to fight smoking and redirect even that cash to other priorities.
Now the consequences are clear.
Today’s financial crisis, and accompanying drop in state revenue, has public health advocates warning that there probably won’t be money in the future for state-backed anti-tobacco programs, or even enforcement of Ohio’s popular three-year-old ban on smoking in indoor public places.
There is still a way to renew the war on smoking through carefully targeted taxes on existing tobacco products, like cigarettes and chew, and on new candy-like tobacco mints sinfully designed to hook a new generation of kids.
How badly is Ohio falling short? The state is spending $7.3 million this fiscal year on anti-smoking efforts and has plans to cut that amount to $2.8 million next year.
The national advocacy group Tobacco Free Kids recommends a state this size should spend $145 million a year. That means Ohio is spending less than 5 percent of that target.
Not coincidentally, Ohio recently ranked worst in the nation at curbing tobacco sales to kids.
It’s incredible the state could be handed $10 billion from the legal settlement as compensation for the health care ravages tobacco has caused its residents and be spending so little to fight the problem just a decade later.
Not that the state should have spent all the settlement money to combat smoking. But it failed to keep even the modest promises it made in this regard.
The majority of the settlement money was spent on building schools, an undeniably important need for Ohio in 1998. By some measures, Ohio ranked worst in the nation then for the quality of its school facilities. School construction is paying great dividends for schoolchildren.
But at the time, lawmakers pledged to spend a healthy $300 million a year on smoking prevention for kids. Later, state leaders proposed to set aside money in a special fund until it reached $1.2 billion, with the idea that the interest from the fund could be spent on prevention programs.
That, too, has now been junked as lawmakers raided the $230 million fund this summer during the budget crisis.
What Ohio didn’t do then — raise taxes on tobacco products — is the right move now. The higher taxes would discourage some tobacco users, or potential users, from spending their money on these harmful products.
At the same time, a big chunk of the money raised from a new tax could be directed back into prevention programs.
At $1.25 a pack, Ohio’s cigarette tax is below neighboring states. Raising the tax 75 cents — making Ohio even with Michigan — would bring in an estimated half-billion dollars in new tax revenue each year.
Even if just half of that money were spent annually on tobacco prevention and cessation programs, it would make a big difference.
The rest of the money could help the state with its ongoing budget woes.
Even more money could be raised if the tax were extended to new tobacco mints that allegedly are aimed at adults, but that are more than likely to appeal to kids.
A new tax can get Ohio back on the right path after a decade of squandered opportunity.
Permalink | Comments (15) | Post your comment | Categories: Editorials, Education, Health Care, Ohio government, Ohio politics, Scott Elliott
Tweet
