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 > 2010 > October > 13 > Entry
Editorial: Strickland plan for education sets higher bar
2010 Election
John Kasich has spent a lot of time beating up Democratic Gov. Ted Strickland for his education policies. The criticism is particularly unfair considering that Mr. Kasich, a Republican, has told voters little about how he’d change Ohio’s education landscape.
Meanwhile, Mr. Kasich is not backing away from his contention that Ohio, over time, should eliminate its income tax, which provides at least 40 percent of the state budget.
In Ohio, the governor is pivotal in determining how much money colleges, and especially K-12 schools, get.
In four years, Gov. Strickland has done quite a lot to advance education. In fact, improving things — at the elementary, secondary and college levels — is fundamental to his approach to making Ohio more competitive.
For starters, he took a substantive run at solving Ohio’s intractable K-12 school funding woes. Last year he managed to push through a funding plan he calls an “evidence-based model.”
It’s utopian in the assumption that schools should get all the money they need to pay for personnel and programs that research — “the evidence” — suggests will help children succeed. But the approach has focused debate on what is needed if Ohio wants to have exemplary schools.
Though the change would be slow, the governor’s plan is to shift more of the cost of schools to the state and off of local property taxpayers.
He wants to phase in that change over 10 years, which has led to the charge that he’s insisting that those who come after him should raise taxes to pay for things like a longer school year and new personnel that he isn’t personally willing to fund.
In his defense, the governor was counting (too optimistically) on revenue growing over time.
Then came the recession, which has totally crushed that hope.
Gov. Strickland should get credit for at least raising the bar and creating new expectations, some of which are going to be hard to back down from even if they will be difficult to pay for.
Mr. Kaisch says the governor’s plan will be “gone” if he’s elected, but what he’ll replace it with is a mystery.
When it comes to colleges, Gov. Strickland has accomplished even more. He appointed Eric Fingerhut as chancellor of Ohio’s colleges and empowered him to dramatically reshape Ohio’s portfolio of colleges.
Mr. Fingerhut has changed public subsidies to reward those that do the best job of helping their students earn degrees. He has won rave reviews for new tracking systems that measure what’s really happening on campuses, and for insisting that colleges collaborate on research and program offerings.
He has stepped up the connections between universities, community colleges and high schools, allowing students to move easily from one setting to the next.
At the same time, Gov. Strickland made a tremendous commitment to slowing the rising costs of college by insisting on a two-year tuition freeze.
Perhaps most lasting of all his education policies has been the way he has pushed to connect university research with economic development.
Building on the Third Frontier program begun under Republican Gov. Bob Taft, Gov. Strickland has required universities to specialize and concentrate in well-defined areas of research.
The governor has been unabashed in his support of education. The danger that Mr. Kasich might dismantle those efforts is something voters should be worried about.
Permalink | Comments (27) | Post your comment | Categories: Editorials, Education, Higher Ed, Ohio government, Ohio politics, Scott Elliott
Tweet
Comments
By spag
October 13, 2010 6:38 AM | Link to this
People should not just be worried about Kasich’s education plan, they should be frightened! Ohio has less college graduates than 35 other states and education is an economic driver. We need a well educated work force and a governor that focuses on education. Hopefully if the leader focuses then parents and students will focus also on education and demand a strong work ethic from students and teachers.
By spag
October 13, 2010 6:38 AM | Link to this
People should not just be worried about Kasich’s education plan, they should be frightened! Ohio has less college graduates than 35 other states and education is an economic driver. We need a well educated work force and a governor that focuses on education. Hopefully if the leader focuses then parents and students will focus also on education and demand a strong work ethic from students and teachers.
By Jesse
October 13, 2010 8:05 AM | Link to this
Academic achievement has little to do with how much money was spent per pupil. It is more about parental and community involvement, and fiscal responsibility. Throwing money at the problem will more fix the problem, than throwing money has helped unplanned pregnancies, homelessness, single parent households, and poverty.
By joe_mamma
October 13, 2010 8:05 AM | Link to this
Scott Elliott…I would love to read about some examples where increasing the funding share by the state and consequently increased state control over standards and curriculum has caused schools to get better. Spag…you’re barking up the wrong tree. We don’t need a governor focusing on educating our kids. We need parents and our local communities focused on educating our kids. We are supposed to have local PUBLIC schools not GOVERNMENT schools. Parents , teachers and the communities need to take our schools back from the state.
By Yet Again!
October 13, 2010 8:29 AM | Link to this
The DDN always thinks that extracting more money for anything that smells like education must be a good thing. Never seen a levy they don’t endorse, or a failed model they wouldn’t continue. If money was the solution, we fixed it several billions of dollars ago.
By Yet Again!
October 13, 2010 8:29 AM | Link to this
The DDN always thinks that extracting more money for anything that smells like education must be a good thing. Never seen a levy they don’t endorse, or a failed model they wouldn’t continue. If money was the solution, we fixed it several billions of dollars ago.
By Educator
October 13, 2010 8:39 AM | Link to this
Right on target, DDN. The thing that concerns me the most is the “mystery” plan Kasich has. I hear a man trying to tell everyone what they want to hear, and planning to do nothing. We should all be very afraid of this guy. Less government might not be a bad goal, but he is talking about leaving NO government here - and that is just the other end of the pendulum!
By unclejj
October 13, 2010 8:44 AM | Link to this
I love how you’re not putting your names on your editorials at this point in your continued shilling for Ted Strickland. Yes - education in Ohio rocks. Yeah right. Be fair or shut up.
By Retired Sgt
October 13, 2010 9:22 AM | Link to this
Please point to the correlation with the higher amount of money spent per pupil and higher academic achievement? DPS currently spnds 6500/pupil and is one of the worst school systems in teh state. Meanwhile, at parochial schools, students are excelling, yet from grades 1-8 the average cost is 2600 per pupil and at HS the average is 5000/student…It is not the money spent people, it is the involvement of the parents, coupled with the students desire to learn.
By kinnynobo
October 13, 2010 9:37 AM | Link to this
Also, for your information DDN, the Kasick plan (reported in Columbus Dispatch, 9-15-2010) wants Phd’s for all Ohio students starting in 2012. With such a plan, wouldn’t the DDN editorial staff support Kasich ? Get real.
By Chad
October 13, 2010 9:44 AM | Link to this
Let’s be clear—the state reduced funding to schools and levies are still on the ballot this November. The DDN can pretend we’re well on our way to balancing the costs, but we aren’t. The city schools are still being treated like unions in the Obama administration and given special funding and treatment and excuses instead of TOUGH LOVE. ——— When the state starts cutting the costs of the expensive sports programs at the Universities and Sinclair type schools, and STARTS putting all the money into the classroom teachers to benefit the students and learning then I’ll tolerate the BS put out about losing graduates from our state. When Tressel alone makes $3000000 per year and who knows how much the assistants and the special scholarships for all those special students costs for feeding and living costs and buying their books for them on a special account at the University Bookstore…, then I’ll tolerate talk about how Ohio is really trying. - - - - - - As for Kasich not giving specifics, all the DDN and other DEMS would do is nitpick them while giving NO specifics on their own. Haven’t we learned that from the campaign move for 4 years of The Obama? I’m still waiting for transparency and getting rid of lobbyists… grin—and that foreign and funny money that flowed into The Obama’s campaign with prepaid credit cards donated… strange… So his buddy in Ohio is in trouble because part of the people have caught on. Hurry DDN, maybe you can help him…
By Max
October 13, 2010 9:47 AM | Link to this
Strickland’s ‘evidence-based model (PLEASE READ IT) is a semantical rearrangement of the the same property value dependence for local district funding the Supreme Court ordered the legislature to fix. Kasich is absolutely right on this issue. Strickland’s continuance of Taft’s ‘research’ grants for Ohio colleges, by the way, are mostly funded by the US Government and our tax dollars. That’s on top of our local district levies and state income tax. Taft, even during his pre-recession tenure, raised a few eyebrows on that one. While I agree Kasich has not put out a ‘white paper’ on his ideas about education reform, it is clear he has a whole different funding model in mind even in these tough times. Strickland hasn’t and this ‘evidence-based’ model does nothing about the funding burden placed upon local property owners. Kasich’s goal of eliminating the state income tax is an act of courage or folly in these times. But, it is interesting that a Republican is looking at more sweeping reform than the Democrat incumbent. While the personalities and credentials of both candidates are equally unremarkable, I’ll have to go with Kasich unless he gets caught in a personal indiscretion or employs illegal aliens before November. The candidate pool used to be much deeper than this.
By Max
October 13, 2010 10:16 AM | Link to this
@Retired Sgt: You are correct; money is not the sole problem in public education. Many educators today were taught by professors who were products of the Eisenhower education initiative which, rightly or wrongly, evolved into measuring success (grading) via the ‘bell curve’ model. That simply accepts the ideal being there be an equal amount of ‘F’s’ as there are ‘A’s’, with everything else defining the ‘curve.’ Of course, we know the results of that….a solid ‘B’ became elevated to and ‘A’ to satisfy the curve, not the student. Today, we’ve come full circle with NCLB where no student is allowed to fail. This is a complete philosophical move from one extreme to another. You raise the issue of parental involvement which is a valid point. We know through developmental studies and research it is best for children to ‘fail’ - if failure is a given - while living at home and preferably in the PK-3 years. This gives both scools and parents to make adjustments. Even with those efforts, students must be failed when they do not perform to the standards of the school and state. The problem with NCLB is it promises success when success is not a realistic option and also diffuses existing resources to accomodate failure. When are students allowed to fail? When they are in their 30’s with a few kids of their own they are unable to support? Academic failure, I agree, should provide alternatives for students to have reasonable hope to become productive adults. It is not, however, the job of schools to become social instruments for anything but the education of students and their evaluation. We have now become vicious towards teachers who are afraid to fail a student less the teacher be deemed ‘low quality’ for doing the job at hand. So, SGT, there’s more meat on that bone than just money and unions. We have today in Ohio education exactly what we deserve until we develop the will and understand the necessity for reform.
By Max
October 13, 2010 10:24 AM | Link to this
@Chad; You are correct regarding levies and funding. As I have written before, the irony is it would be best for education in Ohio if EVERY levy failed. THEN, maybe, we can get the legislature’s attention that it’s funding model and the local district budgets are not in sync with reality.
By Max
October 13, 2010 10:49 AM | Link to this
Chad made an intriguing observation concerning the salary of Jim Tressel (I’m a Florida ‘Gator and would add Urban Meyer to that as well). There is a prevailing perception that ‘value’ is assigned according to how much a person makes; a coach, a teacher, a Krogers check-out clerk…etc. Tressel means nothing to me while I hand my Krogers card to the clerk. The Krogers clerk means nothing to me while in a student-teacher conference. Neither mean anything to me when I discuss my investments with my portfolio manager. I guess, for me, ‘value’ is in expected performance when needed, not when it isn’t. How people are compensated, I would agree, depends upon the level of performance. $3-million a year for Tressel must be viewed in the context of his performance AND the revenue his performance generates for THE OSU. ‘Just like the Wall St. account managers. We’ve heard stories of CEO’s and such, during hard times, working for $1 annual salary to raise morale. Maybe some should consider that.
By Retired Sgt
October 13, 2010 11:14 AM | Link to this
On an unrelated note: Anyone notice that the DDN newstories no longer allow comments? I am sure there is a direct correlation to the number of outragiously meanspirited comments of some posters who couldnt stay within the DDN guielines for conduct….
By JS
October 13, 2010 11:39 AM | Link to this
The pity here is that while all this arguing goes on over funding, and all this ranting goes on over cost, who suffers? In the short-term, the student. In the long-term, everyone. The education of today’s students is intimately connected with everyone’s future. To think that any meaningful reform will be cheap is foolhardy. Oh, the way funds are created and spent does need addressing, as does the process of actually educating,including finding methods of incentivizing parent involvement, but it won’t be cheap. For instance, let’s say Kasich wins and gets his elimination of the income tax and stops state funding of schools. That burden will shift to another revenue stream. Look at it another way; it’s a good idea for the person changing your IV bag to actually be able to read and understand what’s in the IV bag. Consider it an ivestment. Change, meaningful change of any sort, is never cheap.
By Max
October 13, 2010 11:47 AM | Link to this
Retired Sgt, according to several sources here the comments on news articles have been pulled for reasons you suspect. Apparently, the comments can be made on DDN’s Facebook page. I’m not a member of those types of sites since I am over 14 and have a life….I can understand DDN’s decision given the ‘front page’ is more visible world wide and, well, some of the comments have gone far and beyond acceptable in any public accessible context.
By Mike R
October 13, 2010 2:43 PM | Link to this
Using Jim Tressel’s salary or any other high profile high dollar coach isn’t applicable when it comes to funding higher education. In most cases those sports are highly profitable and generate money for non-revenue sports to use as their funding. At most universities private donations go towards facilities or coaches salaries/bonuses. Look at Butler University and their run to the National Championship game and the subsequent long-term muti million dollar contract Brad Stevens (coach) was rewarded with. His $1 Million + annual salary could easily be applied to BU’s marketing/advertising budget. Out of state applications for incoming Freshmen increased over 40%, In-State is up over 30%, and Graduate apps are up 25%. BU could’ve spent upwards of $15 million with a marketing/advertising campaign and wouldn’t have seen those results.
By Ronald Reagan
October 13, 2010 5:54 PM | Link to this
All he has done is tried to eliminate funding for charter schools so he can cozy up to that teacher’s union money. Only a party lacky would call that raising the bar. Strickland is so out of here!
By spag
October 13, 2010 6:10 PM | Link to this
There is alot of talk that money doesn’t correlate with quality of education. However, the best private schools in the country are always more expensive. Also, if you look at state rankings for education (according to NAEP scores), you will see that four of the top five states spend more per pupil than Ohio. #1 Vermont = per pupil cost $15,107; #2 Massachusetts=$14638; #3 Florida = $10246; #4 New Hampshire = $12292; #5 New York = $17707; #35 Ohio = $12210. Money isn’t the only factor but to deny it is not looking at the whole picture.
By Bill
October 13, 2010 6:50 PM | Link to this
retsgt., the comments were turned off because of complaints by elected officials who were subject to unfettered and unhindered free speech. The immaturity of the DDN for shutting down comments is par for their philisophical position. Liberals want to control the internet to limit free speech, DDN supports this notion. Malicious or libelous comments should be dealt with via a moderator or an abuse mechanism. Stifeling free speech is NOT the option. DDN OPEN BACK UP THE COMMENTS AND LET FREE SPEECH FLOW.
By BKP
October 13, 2010 7:44 PM | Link to this
I love people commenting about education who cannot spell. Did you know 50% of teachers leave in the first 5 years and yes part of it is the money and part of it is being politicized. It is not about the private or public sector. It is about the republicans resenting the fact unions support democrats and knowing private corporations will support them - we call it pay to play!
By irishguy
October 13, 2010 10:49 PM | Link to this
Marty & Ellen are still trying to save Mr Strickland’s job. Doesn’t look like that’s going to happen!
By Disgruntled Ohioan
October 16, 2010 8:08 AM | Link to this
It is no surprise that the Dayton Daily News comes to the aid and support of a Democrat. Things have continue to worsen under the present administration. Yet the DDN supports it. The same is true with Montgomery County politics. More business are leaving Dayton and Montgomery county than ever before. However, the DDN says let’s keep the same people in charge. If something is not working, let’s keep the same people in the same, working the same ideas that is leading to an empty downtown and an emptying county. The only places growing appear to be Miami Township/Miamisburg/Springboro (Warren County) as part of the Austin Boulevard interchange. The other are is near Clayton/Clay Township where much of the party that is in control of Montgomery County live. Coincedence? Shouldn’t the DDN be supporting change this election season, since what is in place is clearly not working?
By DPS Parent
October 16, 2010 1:10 PM | Link to this
Under the Jeff Mims plan, the DPS board just spent $200,000 for travel and $60,000 for lobbyist. Not to mention $20,000 was for DPS Board “enrichment”. The hell with our students, it’s all about the unions, lobbyist and special interest.
By Politically Correct
October 18, 2010 1:07 PM | Link to this
We just hired 15 people due to growth, no college degrees. The specialty jobs pay over $45,000.00 per year. Moral of story, 80% of all new jobs created do not need a college education. Governor Strickland does not get it. Why hire a college graduate that has one question when they come to work… How much training do I get? Four years of college not enough?