Article source for : 2006-07 School Report Card
Ohio Department of Education sources of info:
* "Home Page":http://www.ode.state.oh.us/GD/Templates/Pages/ODE/ODEDefaultPage.aspx?page=1
* "Local Report Card Search":http://dnet01.ode.state.oh.us/DistrictRatings/ - for fancy PDF files
* "Building and District Search":http://dnet01.ode.state.oh.us/DistrictRatings/ - for HTML pages
* "State/Local Report Cards and Resources":http://www.ode.state.oh.us/GD/Templates/Pages/ODE/ODEDetail.aspx?page=3&TopicRelationID=1266&ContentID=13147&Content=34856
* "Local Report Card Info":http://www.ode.state.oh.us/GD/Templates/Pages/ODE/ODEPrimary.aspx?page=2&TopicRelationID=1266
* "Guide for Ohio's 2006-2007 Report Card System":http://www.ode.state.oh.us/GD/DocumentManagement/DocumentDownload.aspx?DocumentID=33727 - (.DOC file) - This will or should help explain how to interpret the report card.
* "Expenditure and Revenue data":http://www.ode.state.oh.us/GD/Templates/Pages/ODE/ODEDetail.aspx?page=3&TopicRelationID=1214&ContentID=708&Content=27695
h2. Old report card topics
Past Toledo Talk report card threads:
* "2003":http://www.toledotalk.com/cgi-bin/comments.pl/6/248
* "2004":http://www.toledotalk.com/cgi-bin/comments.pl/6/744
* "2005":http://www.toledotalk.com/cgi-bin/comments.pl/6/1353
* "2006":http://www.toledotalk.com/cgi-bin/comments.pl/6/2891
h2. TPS results
Report cards released in August for the previous school year:
* 2002: report card showed TPS met 5 of 27 academic standards (.18) Academic Emergency
* 2003: 6 of 22 (.27) Academic Emergency
* 2004: 7 of 18 (.39) Continous Improvement
* 2005: 4 of 23 (.17) Continous Improvement
* 2006: 6 of 25 (.24) Continous Improvement
* 2007: 5 of 30 (.17) Academic Watch
h2. TPS 2006-2007 AYP
*Adequate Yearly Progress*
To meet the federal AYP requirements, every student group must be at or above the annual goals or make improvement over last year. Graduation or attendance goals must be met for the district as a whole.
* Reading Participation Goal: Met
* Mathematics Participation Goal: Met
* Reading Proficiency Goal: Not Met
* Mathematics Proficiency Goal: Not Met
* Attendance Goal: Met
* Graduation Goal: Met
* Overall AYP: *Not Met*
h2. TPS 2006-2007 PI
*Performance Index Score*
The Performance Index Score reflects the achievement of every tested student. The score is a weighted average of all tested subjects in grades 3-8 and 10. The most weight is given to the advanced students (1.2), and the weights decrease for each performance level. This creates a scale of 0 to 120 points, with 100 being the goal. Looking at the Performance Index Score over time shows trends in district achievement.
*PI over time :*
* 2006-2007 - 79.1
* 2005-2006 - 80.4
* 2004-2005 - 76.5
h2. TPS Academic Watch???
If only looking at the number of academic standards TPS met, which was 5 of 30, TPS would be rated Academic Emergency. But the state provides a couple of chances for the poor peforming school districts to appear to be doing better than they really are. That would be AYP and PI.
If a school district is Academic Emergency based upon the number of indicators met, but the district meets AYP, the lowest the district can be rated is Continuous Improvement. This is how TPS got the Continuous Improvement rating after the 2004 and 2005 report cards.
If a school district is Academic Emergency based upon the number of indicators met, and the district fails to meet AYP, but the district scores at least an 80.0 on the PI, the lowest the district can be rated is Continous Improvement. This was TPS's situation last year when TPS did not meet AYP but scored 80.4 on the PI. A year ago, TPS was 0.5 away from Academic Watch.
h2. Rating definitions
I have not yet found the rating definitions for the 2006-2007 report card. All I could find on the ODE Web site was 2005-2006 info:
"2005-2006 Ohio School District Rating Definitions":http://www.ode.state.oh.us/GD/Templates/Pages/ODE/ODEDetail.aspx?page=3&TopicRelationID=1266&ContentID=13571&Content=31774
Excerpts:
q.
A school that meets AYP can be rated no lower than Continuous Improvement.
The 2005-2006 designations [ *for districts*] are determined according to the text and list below:
* *Excellent* districts meet 24 or 25 indicators, or 100 or above on the Performance Index (PI).
* *Effective* meet 19 to 23 indicators or score 90 to 99.9 on the PI.
* *Continuous* Improvement meets 13 to 18 indicators or 80 to 89.9 on the PI OR they meet AYP (the lowest a district can be rated if they meet AYP is CI).
* *Academic Watch* districts meet 9 to 12 indicators or score 70 to 79.9 and have missed AYP.
* *Academic Emergency* districts are those that met 8 or fewer indicators, scored less than 70 and missed AYP.
An Academic Watch or Emergency district or school gets to move up one designation by improving the performance index score over time. An improvement of 10 points in two years with at least three points coming in the most recent year moves a school or district up one designation in the current year.
br. *Schools* receive their designations, in part, based on the percentage of indicators that apply to their school (rather than out of 25 as indicated for districts).
* Excellent schools meet 94% or more of applicable indicators or 100 or above on the Performance Index (PI).
* Effective meet 75% to 93.9% of applicable indicators or score 90 to 99.9 on the PI.
* Continuous Improvement meet 50% to 74.9% of applicable indicators or 80 to 89.9 on the PI OR they meet AYP (the lowest a district can be rated if they meet AYP is CI).
* Academic Watch schools meet 31% to 49.9% of applicable indicators or score 70 to 79.9 and have missed AYP. Academic
* Emergency schools are those that met 30.9% or fewer indicators, scored less than a 70 and missed AYP.
q..
h2. More TPS testing info
h3. 3rd Grade
Percentage of Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the 3rd Grade Reading Achievement Test (2006-07) 65.2
Percentage of Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the 3rd Grade Reading Achievement Test (2005-06) 57.7
Percentage of Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the 3rd Grade Reading Achievement Test (2004-05) 66.4
Percentage of Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the 3rd Grade Math Achievement Test (2006-07) 67.8
Percentage of Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the 3rd Grade Math Achievement Test (2005-06) 56.4
Percentage of Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the 3rd Grade Math Achievement Test (2004-05) 47.8
h3. 4th Grade
Percentage of Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the 4th Grade Reading Achievement Test (2006-07) 65.4
Percentage of Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the 4th Grade Reading Achievement Test (2005-06) 60.3
Percentage of Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the 4th Grade Reading Achievement Test (2004-05) 62.9
Percentage of Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the 4th Grade Math Achievement Test (2006-07) 57.9
Percentage of Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the 4th Grade Math Achievement Test (2005-06) 40.2
Percentage of Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the 4th Grade Writing Achievement Test (2006-07) 74.8
Percentage of Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the 4th Grade Writing Achievement Test (2005-06) 74.4
Percentage of Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the 4th Grade Writing Achievement Test (2004-05) 65.5
h3. 5th Grade
Percentage of Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the 5th Grade Reading Achievement Test (2006-07) 64.2
Percentage of Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the 5th Grade Reading Achievement Test (2005-06) 57.4
Percentage of Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the 5th Grade Reading Achievement Test (2004-05) 59.5
Percentage of Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the 5th Grade Math Achievement Test (2006-07) 41.3
Percentage of Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the 5th Grade Math Achievement Test (2005-06) 40.2
Percentage of Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the 5th Grade Social Studies Achievement Test (2006-07) 39.6
Percentage of Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the 5th Grade Science Achievement Test (2006-07) 46.2
h3. 6th Grade
Percentage of Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the 6th Grade Reading Achievement Test (2006-07) 57.0
Percentage of Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the 6th Grade Reading Achievement Test (2005-06) 71.8
Percentage of Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the 6th Grade Math Achievement Test (2006-07) 49.9
Percentage of Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the 6th Grade Math Achievement Test (2005-06) 46.1
h3. 7th Grade
Percentage of Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the 7th Grade Reading Achievement Test (2006-07) 51.5
Percentage of Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the 7th Grade Reading Achievement Test (2005-06) 56.2
Percentage of Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the 7th Grade Math Achievement Test (2006-07) 39.7
Percentage of Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the 7th Grade Math Achievement Test (2005-06) 36.4
Percentage of Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the 7th Grade Math Achievement Test (2004-05) 28.6
Percentage of Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the 7th Grade Writing Achievement Test (2006-07) 63.4
h3. 8th Grade
Percentage of Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the 8th Grade Reading Achievement Test (2006-07) 59.2
Percentage of Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the 8th Grade Reading Achievement Test (2005-06) 53.2
Percentage of Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the 8th Grade Reading Achievement Test (2004-05) 55.8
Percentage of Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the 8th Grade Math Achievement Test (2006-07) 41.1
Percentage of Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the 8th Grade Math Achievement Test (2005-06) 36.0
Percentage of Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the 8th Grade Math Achievement Test (2004-05) 25.8
Percentage of Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the 8th Grade Social Studies Achievement Test (2006-07) 21.8
Percentage of Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the 8th Grade Science Achievement Test (2006-07) 30.9
h3. 10th Grade
Percentage of 10th Grade Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the Social Studies Ohio Graduation Test (2006-07) 63.7
Percentage of 10th Grade Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the Social Studies Ohio Graduation Test (2005-06) 64.6
Percentage of 10th Grade Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the Social Studies Ohio Graduation Test (2004-05) 67.9
Percentage of 10th Grade Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the Math Ohio Graduation Test (2006-07) 64.9
Percentage of 10th Grade Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the Math Ohio Graduation Test (2005-06) 63.4
Percentage of 10th Grade Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the Math Ohio Graduation Test (2004-05) 70.3
Percentage of 10th Grade Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the Reading Ohio Graduation Test (2006-07) 78.6
Percentage of 10th Grade Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the Reading Ohio Graduation Test (2005-06) 80.4
Percentage of 10th Grade Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the Reading Ohio Graduation Test (2004-05) 90.6
Percentage of 10th Grade Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the Writing Ohio Graduation Test (2006-07) 85.2
Percentage of 10th Grade Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the Writing Ohio Graduation Test (2005-06) 79.1
Percentage of 10th Grade Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the Writing Achievement Test (2004-05) 82.7
Percentage of 10th Grade Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the Science Ohio Graduation Test (2006-07) 54.2
Percentage of 10th Grade Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the Science Ohio Graduation Test (2005-06) 50.3
Percentage of 10th Grade Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the Science Ohio Graduation Test (2004-05) 52.9
h3. 11th Grade
Percentage of 11th Grade Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the Social Studies Ohio Graduation Test (2006-07) 80.5
Percentage of 11th Grade Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the Social Studies Ohio Graduation Test (2005-06) 81.8
Percentage of 11th Grade Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the Math Ohio Graduation Test (2006-07) 80.8
Percentage of 11th Grade Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the Math Ohio Graduation Test (2005-06) 86.1
Percentage of 11th Grade Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the Reading Ohio Graduation Test (2006-07) 88.3
Percentage of 11th Grade Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the Reading Ohio Graduation Test (2005-06) 92.6
Percentage of 11th Grade Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the Writing Ohio Graduation Test (2006-07) 89.2
Percentage of 11th Grade Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the Writing Ohio Graduation Test (2005-06) 91.2
Percentage of 11th Grade Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the Science Ohio Graduation Test (2006-07) 70.9
Percentage of 11th Grade Students Who Scored Proficient or Higher on the Science Ohio Graduation Test (2005-06) 74.2
h3. Attendance Rate
Student Attendance Rate (2006-07) 92.3
Student Attendance Rate (2005-06) 93.2
Student Attendance Rate (2004-05) 93.2
h3. Graduation Rate
Student Graduation Rate (2005-06) 90.5
Student Graduation Rate (2004-05) 80.2
Student Graduation Rate (2003-04) 76.6
h3. PI and AYP
District Performance Index Score (2006-07) 79.1
District Performance Index Score (2005-06) 80.4
District Performance Index Score (2004-05) 76.5
District's AYP Determination (2006-07 applied to school year 2007-08) Not Met
h2. Area School Ratings
A school district's 2006-2007 rating and the number of academic indicators met out of a possible 30:
h3. Fulton County
table{width: 500px;}.
|*District Name* |*Rating* |*Standards Met*|*AYP*|*PI Score*|
|Archbold-Area |Excellent|29|Met|103.9|
|Evergreen |Excellent|29|Met|100.1|
|Gorham Fayette |Effective|23|Not Met|96.7|
|Pettisville |Excellent|29|Met|106.2|
|Pike-Delta-York |Effective|26|Met|97.4|
|Swanton |Effective|21|Met|94.1|
|Wauseon |Excellent|28|Not Met|100.5|
h3. Lucas County
table{width: 500px;}.
|*District Name* |*Rating* |*Standards Met*|*AYP Met*|*PI Score*|
|Anthony Wayne|Excellent|29|Met|101.6|
|Maumee|Effective|26|Not Met|98.7|
|Oregon|Effective|24|Met|95.2|
|Ottawa Hills|Excellent|30|Met|108.5|
|Springfield|Effective|25|Met|96.1|
|Sylvania|Excellent|29|Not Met|102.2|
|Toledo|Academic Watch|5|Not Met|79.1|
|Washington Local|Effective|22|Not Met|94.3|
h3. Ottawa County
table{width: 500px;}.
|*District Name* |*Rating* |*Standards Met*|*AYP Met*|*PI Score*|
|Benton Carroll Salem|Effective|26|Not Met|97.1|
|Danbury|Effective|23|Met|94.6|
|Genoa Area|Effective|24|Met|95.6|
|Port Clinton|Continuous Improvement|24|Not Met|95.2|
|Put-In-Bay|Effective|2|Met|98.5|
h3. Wood County
table{width: 500px;}.
|*District Name* |*Rating* |*Standards Met*|*AYP Met*|*PI Score*|
|Bowling Green|Effective|28|Not Met|99|
|Eastwood|Effective|27|Not Met|99.8|
|Elmwood|Effective|25|Not Met|95.7|
|Lake|Effective|20|Met|92|
|North Baltimore|Effective|21|Not Met|92.7|
|Northwood|Effective|28|Not Met|97.8|
|Otsego|Effective|24|Met|95.9|
|Perrysburg|Excellent|29|Not Met|103.1|
|Rossford|Effective|22|Not Met|95.2|
h2. TPS Building Ratings
Aug 14, 2007 Blade "story":http://www.toledoblade.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070814/NEWS04/70814001
q.
As a whole last year, Scott and Libbey high schools each rated “academic watch.” For the first time, the district divided the test data for each of the four “small schools” housed within those two high schools. Scott’s Allied Health school and Libbey’s Cowboy Academy and SMART school reached “continuous improvement.” The other five small schools were either “academic watch” or “academic emergency.”
q..
br.
|*Building Name*|*Rating*|
|Allied Health Academy High School| Continuous Improvement|
|Arlington Elementary| Effective|
|Arts and Media Academy High School| Academic Watch|
|Beverly Elementary| Excellent|
|Birmingham Elementary| Continuous Improvement|
|Bowsher High School| Effective|
|BTI Academy High School| Academic Watch|
|Burroughs Elementary| Continuous Improvement|
|Byrnedale Junior High| Continuous Improvement|
|Chase Elementary| Academic Emergency|
|Cherry Elementary| Continuous Improvement|
|Cowboy Academy of Business High School| Continuous Improvement|
|Crossgates Elementary| Effective|
|Cummings-Zucker High School| Academic Emergency|
|DeVeaux Junior High| Academic Watch|
|East Side Central Elementary| Academic Watch|
|East Toledo Junior High| Continuous Improvement|
|Edgewater Elementary| Continuous Improvement|
|Ella P. Stewart Academy Elementary| Academic Watch|
|Elmhurst Elementary| Effective|
|Fulton Elementary| Academic Watch|
|Garfield Elementary| Continuous Improvement|
|Gateway Academy High School| Academic Watch|
|Glendale-Feilbach Elementary| Continuous Improvement|
|Grove Patterson Academy Elementary| Continuous Improvement|
|Hale Elementary| Academic Emergency|
|Harvard Elementary| Excellent|
|Hawkins Elementary| Continuous Improvement|
|Human Services Academy High School| Academic Emergency|
|Humanities Academy High School| Academic Watch|
|Jones Junior High| Academic Emergency|
|Keyser Elementary| Continuous Improvement|
|Lagrange Elementary| Academic Emergency|
|Larchmont Elementary| Continuous Improvement|
|Leverette Junior High| Academic Emergency|
|Libbey High School| Not Rated|
|Lincoln Academy for Boys Elementary| Academic Watch|
|Longfellow Elementary| Continuous Improvement|
|Marshall Elementary| Academic Watch|
|Mckinley Elementary| Academic Watch|
|McTigue Junior High| Academic Watch|
|Navarre Elementary| Continuous Improvement|
|Newbury Elementary| Academic Watch|
|Oakdale Elementary| Continuous Improvement|
|Old Orchard Elementary| Academic Watch|
|Old West End Academy Elementary| Effective|
|Ottawa River Elementary| Continuous Improvement|
|Pickett Elementary| Academic Emergency|
|Raymer Elementary| Continuous Improvement|
|Reynolds Elementary| Academic Watch|
|Riverside Elementary| Continuous Improvement|
|Robinson Junior High| Academic Emergency|
|Rogers High School| Continuous Improvement|
|Scott High School| Not Rated|
|Sherman Elementary| Academic Emergency|
|SMART Academy High School| Continuous Improvement|
|Start High School| Effective|
|Toledo Technology Academy High School| Excellent|
|Waite High School| Continuous Improvement|
|Walbridge Elementary| Academic Watch|
|Whittier Elementary| Academic Watch|
|Woodward High School| Academic Watch|
*Building Totals*
* Excellent 3
* Effective 6
* Continuous Improvement 23
* Academic Watch 18
* Academic Emergency 10
h2. TPS Levy success
* Nov 2002: new building levy passed
* Nov 2003: renewal levy passed
* Nov 2004: renewal levy passed
* Nov 2005: renewal levy passed
* Nov 2006: no levy on the ballot
h2. School Spending
"FY04 data":http://www.toledotalk.com/cgi-bin/comments.pl/6/1353#7098 posted by historymike.
h3. Per-pupil by district
h4. Fulton County
table{width: 300px;}.
|*District*|*FY05*|*FY06*|
|Archbold-Area |$8,818|$9,800|
|Evergreen |$8,242|$8,436|
|Gorham Fayette |$9,184|$10,246|
|Pettisville |$7,530|$8,390|
|Pike-Delta-York |$8,094|$8,883|
|Swanton |$7,077|$8,135|
|Wauseon |$6,637|$7,234|
h4. Lucas County
table{width: 300px;}.
|*District*|*FY05*|*FY06*|
|Anthony Wayne|$7,923|$8,169|
|Maumee|$10,116|$10,022|
|Oregon|$9,678|$10,979|
|Ottawa Hills|$11,504|$11,639|
|Springfield|$8,977|$8,912|
|Sylvania|$8,980|$9,400|
|Toledo|$10,604|$11,202|
|Washington Local|$9,682|$9,993|
h4. Ottawa County
table{width: 300px;}.
|*District*|*FY05*|*FY06*|
|Benton Carroll Salem|$9,374|$9,900|
|Danbury|$12,417|$12,028|
|Genoa Area|$6,975|$7,933|
|Port Clinton|$10,155|$10,793|
|Put-In-Bay|$23,090|$25,749|
h4. Wood County
table{width: 300px;}.
|*District*|*FY05*|*FY06*|
|Bowling Green|$9,346|$10,180|
|Eastwood|$8,265|$8,414|
|Elmwood|$7,727|$8,560|
|Lake|$6,824|$6,720|
|North Baltimore|$8,319|$8,946|
|Northwood|$9,151|$9,076|
|Otsego|$7,837|$8,123|
|Perrysburg|$8,582|$9,194|
|Rossford|$10,516|$10,816|
"Source":http://www.ode.state.oh.us/GD/DocumentManagement/DocumentDownload.aspx?DocumentID=14704 from the "Expenditure and Revenue data":http://www.ode.state.oh.us/GD/Templates/Pages/ODE/ODEDetail.aspx?page=3&TopicRelationID=1214&ContentID=708&Content=27695 page at the ODE Web site.
br. Tuition at Toledo Central Catholic High School for the 2007-2008 school year is around $7,000.
h2. Teacher Salaries
From a Sep 13, 2004 Toledo Talk posting titled "Teacher's pay":http://www.toledotalk.com/cgi-bin/comments.pl/6/744 that pointed to a Blade Sep 13, 2004 story titled "Teachers' pay varies widely by district":http://www.toledoblade.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20040913/NEWS04/409130360
My comments about the Blade story, which posted its salary info in an image that was in the newspaper but is not on the Web site.
q.
TPS pays a higher starting salary than Ottawa Hills for teachers with a Bachelors degree. But OH has a much higher average salary at $60,621 versus TPS's $45,968. With a Master's degree, the starting salaries between the two are about the same. With just a Bachelors degree and 27 years experience, TPS pays $55,577 and OH pays $53,091. With a Masters degree and 27 years experience, OH pays $70,788 and TPS pays $60,595. From the salary figures, it appears OH as a greater relative percentage of experienced teachers with a Masters degree than TPS. The average salary for Ottawa Hills is tops in northwest Ohio and ninth highest in Ohio.
q..
br. From the Blade story:
q.
Toledo Public Schools, which employs about 2,500 full-time teachers, pays $32,697 annually to a teacher straight out of college. That figure is on the higher end when compared to other school districts in northwest Ohio. Williams County's Bryan City Schools, for example, starts a teacher at $26,205 a year.
There is a stark difference between the starting salaries paid to teachers in public schools versus parochial schools. College graduates who get a job teaching at a Catholic school will earn much less, said Jack Altenburger, superintendent of education for the Toledo Catholic Diocese. Catholic high schools in the metro Toledo area paid an average starting salary of $24,506 last year. On the elementary-school level, the average starting pay was $20,925.
"Overall, our goal has to be 75 to 80 percent of what the local [public] district pays," Mr. Altenburger said. "On average, our schools pay 65 to 70 [percent] of what the public school district pays."
Michigan teachers on average took home nearly $10,000 more than their Ohio counterparts. The average teacher salary in that state was $54,020 for the 2002-03 school year, which was the second-highest in the nation behind California.
q..
h2. What about parents?
From a Jun 29, 2004 Toledo Talk thread titled "More evidence that parents are at fault?":http://www.toledotalk.com/cgi-bin/comments.pl/6/650 that pointed to a Jun 26, 2004 Blade story titled "Bulk of TPS students ignore free test help":http://www.toledoblade.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20040626/NEWS04/406260409/-1/ARCHIVES30
Free test help? I don't think so. Taxpayers paid for the "free" help that went mostly ignored by the students/parents. From the 2004 Blade story:
q.
When the state gave Toledo Public Schools *$380,000* to prepare high school students for the Ohio Graduation Test, administrators were eager to help the students get ready. They scheduled Saturday sessions, before and after-school workshops, and summer programs. *All were free. But just a +handful+ of students turned out for the programs*, school administrators said.
At the East Toledo school, about 15 students are attending a three-week, half-day summer session focusing on all areas of the test. An additional 20 students took advantage of some before and after-school tutoring in March and April, with another 30 students in Saturday sessions during February, said Robin Wheatley, assistant principal of curriculum and instruction. But those 70 students were among *hundreds invited.*
"I was extremely disappointed," Miss Wheatley said. "I sent letters to the parents saying, 'Your student refused to be tutored.'"
Teachers *called parents at all times of the day* to inform them about the free summer session and *sent letters* explaining the test and the extra help students could get.
At Scott High School, about 46 of the roughly 180 invited students attended the summer sessions that focused on mathematics and reading, said Jose Hernandez, the summer program coordinator. "We send out a letter to parents. We call parents. We *talk to parents* at freshman meetings," he said. "We have *incentive packages* - T-shirts and things like that. Right now, we're getting the kids who really want to improve."
q..
h2. Toledo Blade stories
* Aug 15, 2007 "Most suburban schools hold steady on new tests; but 3 local districts fall grade lower":http://toledoblade.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070815/NEWS04/708150390
* Aug 15, 2007 "Charters fare poorly in state report cards":http://toledoblade.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070815/NEWS04/708150410/-1/NEWS
q.
Statewide, there were 182 schools, both traditional and charter, in academic emergency, said Mitchell Chester, senior associate superintendent of policy and accountability for the Ohio Department of Education. Charter schools in Ohio now make up more than 46 percent of the state's failing schools. Mr. Chester said the law has teeth to hold poor-performing charter schools accountable. "A charter school that can't get above a poor level of performance after three years [can] be shut down," he said.
q..
What about applying that same line of thinking to public schools? Why focus only on charters?
* Aug 16, 2007 "Toledo's poorer schools did worse on tests":http://toledoblade.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070816/NEWS04/70816002
q.
The following schools in the Toledo Public system received a grade of F in the state’s report card:
* Chase Elementary
* Hale Elementary
* Lagrange Elementary
* Pickett Elementary
* Sherman Elementary
* Jones Junior High
* Leverette Junior High
* Robinson Junior High
* Mayfair Achievement school
* Human Services Academy at Scott High School.
In addition, 18 schools in the Toledo Public system received a D rating.
q..
These people who want poor-performing charters to shut down, are they also demanding that poor-performing public schools be closed, and the students given vouchers to go elsewhere?
When the anti-education crowd wants a charter to close, they are pretending to care about a child's education. But where is their concern when it comes to poor-performing public schools?
The same anti-education crowd that wants charters to close are also opposed to vouchers. The anti-education crowd would prefer students remain in poor-performing public schools without ever having a chance at a better education. The anti-education crowd opposes school-choice.
Look at the explanation for Toledo's failing public schools:
q.
“I think there is pretty consistent research that shows socio-economic status impacts education in a number of ways,” Mr. Foley said. “The challenge is for schools to provide programs to beat those odds.”
q..
So new programs are needed for the failing public schools, but for charters, the answer is to close them. Some charters are also serving kids from low-income families. And apparently, some charters are serving kids who were ignored by TPS, especially special-needs children.
h2. Jack Ford's IEP idea
From a Jul 10, 2007 Toledo Journal "story":http://toledotalk.com/cgi-bin/tt.pl/article/1921/Hildo_looks_to_unigov_to_solve_Toledos_problems#Ford_running_for_school_board
q.
[Ford] wants to help TPS get a new general operating levy passed, take a lead role in an initiative to reduce the dropout rate among African American boys and help make TPS “the top district around” in developing effective *Individualized Education Plans* (IEP) for students with mental or physical disabilities.
q..
The IEP idea sounds good. My question is, why hasn't TPS been doing this all along? Is the purpose of Ford's IEP idea meant to enable TPS to compete with the charters who are serving the special needs children who are currently ignored by TPS?
h2. School vouchers
Dec 20, 2006 Toledo Talk thread titled "School voucher program expanded":http://www.toledotalk.com/cgi-bin/comments.pl/6/3369 that pointed to a Dec 20, 2006 Blade "story":http://www.toledoblade.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061220/NEWS04/612200467/.
q.
Students in 19 academically struggling Toledo Public Schools buildings, up from five currently, could apply for scholarships of $4,250 through eighth grade and $5,900 for high school toward tuition at the public, private, or religious schools of their choice.
The following school buildings have been in academic emergency or academic watch for two of the last three years, making their students eligible to apply for vouchers:
TOLEDO
Chase Elementary
Cherry Elementary *
Fulton Elementary
Garfield Elementary
Nathan Hale Elementary *
Jones Elementary
Lagrange Elementary
Leverette Elementary
Libbey High
Lincoln Academy for Boys
McTigue Junior High
Newbury Elementary
Pickett Elementary *
Raymer Elementary
Reynolds Elementary
Robinson Junior High
Scott High *
Sherman Elementary
Woodward High *
(*) Currently in program
SOURCE: Ohio Department of Education
[T]hree-quarters of Ohio's 14,000 school vouchers [went] unused in the program's inaugural year.
q..
Instead of attacking the voucher program and attacking charter schools, the anti-education crowd should ask intelligent, common sense questions like:
* Why have so many charter schools opened in recent years in the Toledo area?
* Why are *parents* moving their kids from TPS to a charter?
* Why do TPS schools qualify for vouchers?
You don't have to worry about the voucher program if a school building is not continually failing. You don't have to worry about charter schools if *ALL* TPS students are being educated.
tag=education
