The Future of Cleveland Schools: Transformation and Response

Good morning Dan and colleagues.  Thank you for joining the conversation!  I am energized by so many components of this plan and will list a few briefly.

First, I am excited by the formation of the Transformation Alliance, which if constructed carefully, will create a city-wide ownership of education for all!  So often we think of "schooling" as one person's or one organization's job.  The Alliance, instead, connects traditional public schools, community or charter schools, business, philanthropy, citizens and activists, parents and students in a single mission of educating all children in our community.  This group can attact national philanthropy dollars in support of Cleveland, can better help families identify the right choices for their children, and can help drive the conversation about schools around quality!  Very exciting!

I'm also excited about the great work of the CTU in leading reforms to work rules that will focus on quality as well.  The District and Teachers Union is already doing tremendous work on a new Teacher Development and Evaluation System, and I'm excited that this rigorous evaluation will begin to inform how teachers are assigned, paid, and, when necessary, released from service.  I'm particularly excited that school based teams will be able to interview staff members to ensure we have great fits in our schools and that we will be able to keep teachers with specialized skills (like bilingual teachers, teachers trained in Montessori methodology, etc.) and who are highest performers, even in times when we must reduce our workforce.

Finally, I'm excited about efforts to build collaborations with charter schools.  While I suspect there will always be a level of competition, and that the competition may help push all of us, I would argue that 15 years of debating about who "owns" schools and children have distracted us from the real question of whether those schools are really meeting our kids' needs.  We have a great opportunity to reinvent the conversation about district and charter schools in Cleveland.

I look forward to the dialogue.  More to come!

Eric

Posted May 21, 2012

Good Morning Dan and everyone.  Thanks for hosting this important conversation. 

The Mayors Transformation Plan while presenting challenges for the Cleveland Teachers Union also presents an incredible opportunity.  An opportunity, that for one of the first times in my career, is pulling all of the stakeholders together around improving the quality of public education in Cleveland.

Eric highlighted some of the work the CTU and the District are currently engaged in but I am very anxious to begin work on intervention on low performing schools.  I think a collaborative effort that involves the entrie community will really have an impact on our neighborhood schools and allow our communities to reconnect with their public schools as the center of the community.  Through the AFT, we have  great resources and support to see this suceed.

Once again, thanks for sponsoring this conversation and I hope to be engaged throughout the next few days. 

Posted May 21, 2012

What's exciting to me is that the number of students in high performing schools throughout Cleveland will TRIPLE by 2020.  In addition, more emphasis will be placed on phasing out low quality schools and increasing high quality schools.  I'm delighted that a small portion of the new levy, if passed, will be shared with high performing charters like Breakthrough.  Since schools like ours receive only 2/3 of the funding that district schools receive, this is a necessary move to ensure our future sustainability and growth. 

Thanks for doing this Dan!

JZ

Posted May 21, 2012

Hi all, in terms of educational outcomes, I agree with David that the low-performing school elements are the most interesting and exciting.  The plan envisions local teams of administrators, teachers and community coming together and brainstorming creative and local approaches to figuring out how best to raise standards and outcomes in specific schools. It seems like common sense that this should occur, but I don't think there has ever been an organized vehicle for something like this to happen. The legislationcreates this vehicle.

I signed on as a co-sponsor to the legislation in the House. I have concerns about levy money going to charter schools, and the non-profit transformation alliance making decisions that I believe should be reserved for the school board in terms of vetting new charter schools, but I can live with the trade off that there will now be at least some filtering and accountability for bad charter schools in Cleveland as opposed to the wild, wild west that currently exists. And ultimately, we need to make an argument for a successful levy campaign this fall. My big worry is that absent a sea change in the politics at the state level, Cleveland is going to have to make up for the $59 million in cuts from state funding locally, and we have to pass a levy. If we don't pass a levy, I have serious concerns for the future of the district.

Despite its great flaws, I have tremendous affection for the CMSD. All four of my children attended school in the district. About half of the kids in my immediate neighborhood attend CMSD schools. Almost every street in my neighborhood has a teacher or retired teacher from CMSD.  It has somehow survived white flight, busing, deindustrialization, property tax abatements, vouchers and some incredibly bad Charter schools stealing kids from it. I am worried however, that it is at the end of its rope, absent some dramatic changes.

Mike Foley, State Representative, 14th HD, Cleveland

Posted May 21, 2012

This is one of the most critical issues to the future of our city and our region.

I'm very excited about the focus on providing Cleveland's families with high-quality options.  For decades, if you didn't live in a neighborhood served by one of the district's high-performing schools, or couldn’t get into one of their excellent magnet schools, the only option for a free, high-quality education was to leave the city for the suburbs.  And families have been, in droves.

High-performing charter schools like Citizens Academy, The Intergenerational School, E Prep, Menlo Park Academy, and some of the Constellation Schools and Horizon Science Academies have helped provide more options, as have the districts New and Innovative Schools.  Since 2007, the number of children in high-performing schools has nearly tripled.  But while 11,400 children are in good schools, 31,000 children in the city are attending failing schools, district and charter.

The mayor rightly recognizes that the future is pretty bleak for a city with a majority of its children in failing schools.  Cleveland won’t be able to attract and retain talented professionals today, without providing great schools for their children, and it will not develop the workforce of tomorrow.  The mayor’s plan employs a simple, but powerful strategy: do more of what’s working and less of what isn’t.  By replicating the proven, successful, urban education models -- district and charter -- the mayor’s plan goes beyond the divisive and unproductive district versus charter debate and focuses on the core issue: how do we build more great schools.

Posted May 21, 2012

As a downtown resident 5-10 years away from having a kid, I'm simply excited to see something being done. Friends and family in the suburbs have finally accepted my car-free lifestyle downtown, but still fail to see how I can stay in a city with such a struggling school system. Needless to say, I have zero intention of moving further than Ohio City from the city-center in my lifetime, so the strength of Cleveland's schools ranks highly with me. While I don't know the specifics by heart, I do get a sense that a "happy medium" is being fought for - that is, legislation that will benefit both charter and public schools.

Cleveland has already seen its fair share of boomerangs return and I suspect they'll continue to return. But the success of our school system will assist in ensuring those boomerangs stick around to raise a family within the city-limits, instead of retreating to the suburbs.

Kudos to all involved.

Posted May 21, 2012

Dan,

Hello to all Cleveland education enthusiasts. Dan, thank you for setting up this online conversation and for your question. I am most excited about the implementation of the portfolio district model of education. I believe this innovative approach to education can and will put Cleveland on the map as a city that has demonstrated collaboration around quality education for all of its children. I like the fact that district and charter schools will become stronger allies for the long term.

My concern is that education remains the focal point for Cleveland's continued renaissance after the legislative and levy seasons. The success of this plan, in my opinion, depends on the consistent and zealous commitment to quality education for the long term. There are so many exciting things happening in Cleveland yet education is, and has to be, the driving force to Cleveland being a Championship City.

Posted May 21, 2012

Senator Turner, one of the most energizing aspects of this plan is the support it has garnered across unlikely allies: Democrats and Republicans, district and charter school leaders, the Cleveland Teachers Union, foundations, businesses, community organizations and many, many teachers, principals, students and families across the city. One of the comments I keep hearing is how perplexed folks are about this plan. Why? Because it doesn’t fit neatly into anyone’s rigid ideology. It demands compromise; it demands trust; it demands movement from long-held positions. And the result? Rather than a take-no-prisoners “win” for one side or the other, the plan is defensible and eminently fair, with a focus squarely and unapologetically on getting our children into the best schools we have and that we can create. This kind of work is rare in this political climate, and a remarkable achievement for Cleveland and Ohio.

Posted May 21, 2012

Hello Senator, and all participants in this forum, 

I am the parent of a child in the Cleveland Public Schools. My second grader attends the public elementary school that CMSD created two years ago in partnership with Cleveland State University. It is unique, being the only school in the Cleveland district established as an International Baccalaureate school. Renowned globally, IB schools are often private because of the quality of the curriculum.

While I strongly support public schools and public education, if we hadn't had the choice of Campus International School, we might have considered another option. We have been overjoyed at the teaching instruction and many other aspects.

I agree with the several commenters who want quality education for all students in Cleveland, regardless of the label (public, charter, etc.)

And I completely support the Mayor's Transformation Plan because I have seen what giving the school's principal and teachers more autonomy yields: sensible, child-centered decisions and instruction. I will continue to advocate for the plan, and truly applaud all of the diverse partners pulling together to make this happen.

However, my concern is what happens in the meantime -- before legislation gets a chance to pass and before voters get an opportunity to support a levy that would help support the changes.

At CIS -- a stellar example of the innovation schools created in Cleveland -- the drastic cuts already scheduled to take affect, as part of the district's budget plan, will seriously jeopardize this school.

Here's why: Because this school was created to be an International Baccalaureate school, it must comply with many rules to keep that designation. And it must continue to offer the rigorous, internationally recognized curriculum that characterizes an IB school. This includes language instruction and other elements, such as special teacher training. If those are missing, the school cannot get, or will lose, that certification. Under the cuts, as scheduled, several aspects crucial to the IB curriculum, such as language, arts, among others, will not exist.

As such, the cuts this school will face next year imperil its IB designation -- the very reason it was created.

Partners, including the foundations and CSU and the District have invested millions of dollars into this school. Parents have transferred their children from outside the district to support it (and with their children’s enrollment, state funds flowed into Cleveland that the district wouldn’t have otherwise received.)

We must not allow to fail this amazing example of the same nimble, smart innovation the Mayor's plan would usher in, district wide. Spare it the cuts so it remains IB.

Yes, we need to press for better funding from the state and to make the Mayor’s reform plan reality. But as that work unfolds, CIS cannot become an expendable sacrifice. As of today, that is likely.

Thank you.

Posted May 21, 2012

Ann I agree with your observation of the bi-partisan support. From the beginning, the four dual sponsors worked hard to create a "true" bipartisan foot print. As everyone knows this is quite challenging in Columbus, unfortunately. So, yes, I too am very proud of that.

It is my hope (and I am continuing the work necessary to push my hope) that the GA will respect the hard work and alliances we have built on this Plan and pass it this week without amendments that do not keep with the spirit of the plan. 

Posted May 22, 2012

Piet is correct. The school funding is such a key component. It would seem to me that the time is perfect for making a push to the Legislators. The coalition of groups that came together (a little later for some) to work on the Mayor's plan proves that with the right kind of collaboration the redsigning of school funding can be acheived. - Michael Kulcsar

Posted May 21, 2012

This is my concern too, Piet. Cleveland can pass a levy but with all the school funding cuts in the pipeline, that will barely help tread water. There's a whole list of wonderful things in this "transformation" plan, but how will they be funded? I did not see the governor and leadership in the legislature, when they embraced this plan, eagerly rush to assure the Cleveland schools that state funding would be restored so all these things could happen. Are we going to go through the same thing every year that we went through last fall where we'll hear "The sky is falling - we have to eliminate Pre-K" and then the teachers will be vilified if they don't accept more cuts each year?

Posted May 21, 2012

To be honest Piet, I'm still not sure where all of the shortfall is coming from.  Some of it is due to loss of students (and therefore the state per-pupil dollars), some due to reductions in property values, and some due to other reductions in state aid.  Some of it is increased costs.  The loss of students alone doesn't come close to explaining it, though.

The second question that needs to be answered more clearly is where the money is going now.  The district spends ~$15,000 per student per year.  For a classroom of 20 students, that is $300,000/yr.  For a classroom of 40 students (which is permitted in CMSD), that is $600,000/yr.  Certainly CMSD has more expenses than some districts, but I'd still like to know better where that money is being spent.  

Posted May 21, 2012

Piet,

The funding issue is critical and I agree with CTU and Mr. Kilo that we have demonstrated the power of a coalition which can be an advantage on future funding issues too.  In addition to this work on The Cleveland Plan, CMSD and CTU are members of the Ohio Eight urban school districts and we, collectively, are working hard in Columbus on other education issues and are prepared to work hard to ensure a fair funding system for urban centers when the state does take up the funding of schools again next year.

The plan itself is not a funding plan, but is a critical element in a couple of key ways.  First, we are seeking some flexibilities that allow us to use our limited resources more effectively.  This is primarily in the use of dollars generated from the sale of properties.  These are obviously one time funds and certainly don't solve long term problems, but do give the Board and community more authority about how our resources are used.  Also, the plan does depend upon a November operating issue passing.  School districts across the state are seeking support from their communities and CMSD will need to do so also.  However, it was very important to us that we demonstrate an ability to do our work much more effectively before asking voters to support it.

Certainly not the whole answer - there are many other factors at work.  For example, Cuyahoga County's current collection rate for school taxes in the CMSD is only 78.87%.  As our new county government works to increase tax collection, that can help the district as well. 

There is still a great deal to be done on the funding front.

Posted May 22, 2012

I think this is a great question, Dan. There's evidence locally that some of the higher-performing schools in Cleveland, both charter and district, are doing well, but as a whole they educate a different population of students -- generally lower percentages of low-income and special ed.

The question you're asking -- what's going to be done differently at low-performing schools, and who's going to do it -- is key.

One thing that's not being talked about enough in Cleveland is creating more community-oriented schools, along the lines of the community learning centers that have achieved some success in Cincinnati. These schools do a better job of taking a more holistic approach, providing services needed in that community, educating not just school children, becoming resources for the surrounding neighborhoods.

Posted May 21, 2012

We should look at other Community Wrap-Around Models that have been successful in other district's similar to Cleveland.  The work being done in Cincinnati in the areas of Community Learning Centers and perhaps the turn-around model should be looked at more closely to see if Cleveland can incorporate some of the practices that are working. They seem to have really strong partnerships with community organizations and businesses that are aimed at helping schools to help children be more successful.  Each of their building designs were done with input from teachers, parents, and the community and they try to focus on ensuring that teachers have what they need to  be successful.

Wendi Kral

Posted May 21, 2012

With enough high performing options low performing schools become obsolete.  I think instead of focusing on low performing schools we need to take a student focus.  How do we reach students that are not living up to their potential? There was a study just published that reported Ohio has the second highest state  increase of students who dropped out between 2002-2009.  

Early intervention is a great focus but we also have to look at students who are already over age and under credit.  The NYC schools has an office of multiple pathways to address these at risk students.  Transfer schools are one option that give students work skills, high standards, and focus not only on getting the student to graduate but also to higher education. We need to study high performing school models and replicate success. 

Posted May 21, 2012

I’m just an interested citizen of the metropolitan area.  I wish I could say “of the Greater Cleveland Community,”  but I think that might be stretching the term community a bit.  

In any event, my questions relate more to the purpose and goals of public education than to the specifics of this particular plan.  I know many recent college graduates, including several with advanced degrees, who have been unable to find jobs.  If all we’re trying to do is prepare our kids for college, we may be shooting ourselves in the foot.
Here’s a link http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,2113794,00.html?goback=.gde_1882649_member_116987841 to an article about education that works, that prepares students both for gainful employment, and for further, higher education.  

Let me be clear: I am myself a college graduate with a fair amount of post-grad education as well.  I wouldn’t trade my rigorous classical education for anything, but I do know that it’s not for everyone.  I also know as an automobile service technician that my industry is in need of well-educated young technicians to take over from us old fogeys who are getting close to retirement.  Most of the skills (mechanical, electrical, electronic, and programming) these new technicians will need are not currently taught, or taught well enough, in the public schools.  I hope that your plans include vocational technical training for the next generation of folks needed to keep America running.

Posted May 21, 2012

In Cleveland, each levy brings in about $6 million. So 10 mills (which is a pretty big lift) would bring in roughly $60 million a year, starting January 2013 if it passes in November 2012.

I've heard through unofficial channels that the district is considering a levy that large.

Posted May 21, 2012

Why can't we consider earmarking a nickel of every $ gambled in the new Casino to help fund education ? I'm sure that  it would take some work , but I'm betting it would generate a great deal of funds !

Posted May 21, 2012

Hello Dan and thank you for  providing the venue to speak to what we are most energized by relative to the education plan.

Positive results for a number of studentshave gleaned some promise in theClevelandMetropolitanSchool District; Schools within the City ofClevelandhave sound Union leadership, diligent teachers, school leaders and other staff members who continue to work painstakingly to achieve, and thus, some successes have been realized. However, the academic successes do not proliferate throughout the school district and given the academic plans that are currently in place,the pace of change has not occurred rapidly or profoundly enough to overcome the challenges within the district.  Real systemic and sustainable change cannot occur without forging a fundamentally different course of action. 

Recent years and much research have yielded the concept of school reform in the forefront for educators, government officials, families, students and other stakeholders in the community. Outside of our traditional public education system, parents are interested in the concept of choice.  The notion of a school district that encompasses a Portfolio Strategy affords families the ability to choose high quality schools-traditional, new, innovative, charter-that foster caring environments, provide technologically advanced curriculum, differentiate instruction, require high expectations for students, parents, and all staff, promote effective collaboration, and offer a variety of learning options that meet children’s academic, social and emotional needs.

These reform efforts are the cornerstone of Cleveland’s child-centered, comprehensive education plan for reinventing public education and a strategy to implement the Transformation Plan introduced in 2010.  To accomplish this lofty goal, Cleveland resolves to transition from a traditional single source school district, where currently new and innovative schools serve as a microcosm of the larger district, to a portfolio district of familial choice and options.

Mayor Jackson has held that improving educational attainment is the key to our City’s continued resurgence. Thus, we are most energized by the Cleveland Education Plan as we contend it will create conditions for success by seeking necessary changes in state policy, creating a sustainable financial strategy and a new approach to how management and labor collaborate and work together. The Plan offers the opportunity to promote continued transformation of Cleveland schools and it purports to provide a high quality education that is equitable and just for children and fair to adults. Further, having more educated students who will become productive citizens is a strong predictor of economic strength and prosperity for our city and region.

Posted May 21, 2012

Dan and Piet... my sources say one mill brings in about $4 million in actual collected revenue.  Perhaps experts have the exact number.

Posted May 21, 2012

The information I am finding talks about a bond in November (page 37), which seems to have replaced the discussion of a levy from the February plan.  In addition, savings are anticipated from selling six administration buildings (and consolidating into one downtown leased facility) (page 28), roughly $5.2 million/year.  The revenue generated by the sales is not specifically mentioned, so it isn't clear whether that revenue is captured in the "savings" or would be in addition to it.  At least as of the date of the budget presentation (back in April), a vote related to the sales is set for today.

Proposed SB 335 does modify funding somewhat, but I haven't read through it closely enough to tell whether it might include some creativity around bonds (which cannot currently be used for operating expenses), or just permits an allocation of revenue generated by levies and bonds to community (charter) schools.

Posted May 22, 2012

The Cleveland Plan is integral to passing a levy in this town.  If voters are going to support and  increase in their property taxes, they need to be convinced that it will make a real difference. 

I give the mayor a ton of credit; he's really sticking his neck out.  But, at the same time, I think he's being very practical.  Mayor Jackson has seen the demographic shift over the past several decades: families are leaving Cleveland for better edcuational options fortheir children.  His plan is our best shot at retaining population today as we prepare a more educated and skilled workforce of tomorrow.

Posted May 22, 2012

We did a poll on the Cleveland Plan a couple months ago.  We only had one or two questions on the levy.  Of note, 70% of the Cleveland voting public support the concept of sharing local levy dollars with high performing charters that are sponsored by or partner with the district.

Posted May 22, 2012

The Cleveland Education Plan focuses on three main components: academics, financial sustainability and accountability. At this juncture, I will briefly outline the rationale of financial sustainability or the notion of a levy.

The CMSD has a 66 million dollar budget deficit. CEO Gordon and others are working to balance the budget by the end of the fiscal school year, June 30, 2012 as prescribed by law. Employee layoffs and other cost reduction efforts will not sustain the CMSD in the long term. Thus, the Cleveland Plan, with legislative modifications, will position the CMSD to put a levy on the ballot in November 2012.

We intend to demonstrate to the citizens what they can expect different and enhanced with respect to results from the CMSD. The proposed levy would conceivably be renewed by voters after five to seven years (A specific timeframe will be determined before the levy is put on the ballot.) thereby holding us accountable for implementing the necessary changes that positively impact our children.

Posted May 22, 2012

Dan and all,

I've tried to respond to a few of these items above, but here are a couple other quick thoughts.

State Foundation Revenue from Ohi0 (excluding the portion that is passed through to charter schools) is $31.6 million dollars less this year than last, and is projected to decrease another $12.3 next year (that's $43.9 million in two years alone).  A large part of this loss is the result of Federal Stimulus Funds expiring.   In addition, the state phase out of a utility tax reimbursement ( a revenue decrease of $4.4 million this year) and the accelerated phase out of the CAT tax reimbursement (a revenue decrease of $12.9 million this year and an additional decrease of $13 million next year) have also negatively impacted the district.  Total revenue (again, excluding the portion that is passed through to charter schools) for the District is anticipated to decline $74.4 million in a two year period (July 2011-June 2013).  Even by carefully controlling expenditures, which have remained flat over the same period of time, we faced a $66 million deficit challenge.  Our full budget report is available on our website for those who would like more information: 

Dan,

CMSD and the CTU have been working over the last year to implement a very strong new Teacher Development and Evaluation System.  It is based on national research by Dr. Charlotte Danielson and evaluates teachers on a rubric of 22 resaarched criteria defining effective teaching.  Teachers are evaluated through multiple formal observations (some announced, some unannounced) brief walk-through observations (both of their planning process and of their actual work), and evaluation of work products.  Teachers and evaluators together examine evidence against the rubrics, giving teachers ownership in their own professional growth and evaluation.  This has been implemented in 25% of CMSD schools already this year and just last week school teams from our other schools began training for implementation in their schools in the fall.

We are also continuing to work on the multiple measures which will make up the other 50% of the evaluation.  Using data is important but we have to be careful to use it responsibly.  Keep in mind that the achievement tests we currently use in Ohio were not developed for the purpose of measuring teacher performance and that those tests are all expected to change in 2014.  There are many emerging models around the country to examine.  One, for example, looks at eight different data points (each worth about 6% of the evaluation) which when combined provide a robust picture of a teacher's performance.  These measures include academic test data, student growth or teacher "value-added" data, parent perception data, student perception data, etc.  Hillsborough County (Tampa) Florida has done a great deal with the use of data as well and can also serve as a model. 

CMSD is also implementing the Ohio Principal Evaluation System, which is a similar evaluation system to the one described above.  Again, our administrators association is taking the lead in developing the tools collaboratively so that they, like our teachers, have ownership in their own professional growth and evaluation.

Finally, the District is working on a performance metrics strategy for the central office which will more clearly define the performance expectations of central office employees for their own evaluations.

Effective evaluations are critical to The Cleveland Plan.  Without a comprehensive, fair, thorough evaluation system, the other elements of the plan (reduction in force based upon performance, differentiated compensation systems, etc.) cannot be effective.

Posted May 22, 2012

As a former teacher in an academically and financially challenged school district, I hope that linking performance evaulations based on student achievement to retention and pay can be done in a manner that does not discourage the best and brightest teachers from accepting positions teaching in the most challenging classrooms or schools.

I taught computer programming (which attracted the brightest children in the school) and applied math (the second of two below algebra classes then requried for graduation - which was the landing place for students who were truly academically challenged as well as for 21 year old, often very bright, seniors who were typically absent (or suspended) enough days they failed by virtue of never having accumulated enough points to pass (but not enough days to have been removed from the school system).  If my pay or job retention had been linked to student achievement, I would have been tempted to opt to move out of teaching the latter classes in favor of the former where, by pretty much any student achievement scale, my performance was far superior.  That kind of bias needs to be eliminated if there is any hope of encouraging idealistic, energetic, and talented individuals to take a risk teaching the children who need them most.

In my mind, that would require a relative evaluation scale of some sort - which perhaps scales student achievement based performance evaulations based on the classes and perhaps schools which were the setting of those evaluations.

Posted May 22, 2012

To follow up on what Eric said, the new Evaluation system and the work CTU and CMSD has already done in creating the new system has focused on building level teacher and principal buy-in.   Our initial agreement would have piloted this system in 10 schools this year.  As Eric indicated, roughly 25% or 23 schools volunteered to be part of the pilot.   Clearly, our educators want a say in building the new system and have stepped up to meet that challenge. 

Likewise, I think the work we do around multiple measure, while challenging, is going to be a very robust discussion and we will have a fair and thorough system.  While there is no "silver bullet" evaluation systme out there, the work that is being done in Hillsborough and others have given us a good roadmap to follow or look at. 

This is clearly the biggest concern of educators.  Since elements of the plan are tied to the evaluation system getting this right is going to be critical. 

Posted May 22, 2012

It seems to me as though the evaluation plan has been thoroughly considered.  I agree with Nancy that you do have to make sure there is an advantage or at least fairness when it comes to teaching special populations.  With the at risk population you described there is an opportunity to make much greater strides in progress in the right environment.  Students in the special education program have to especially be considered since their progress can not be monitored on a typical scale. 

I appreciate the blend of data and observation.  Below is an article that details what happens when data is relied on too heavily at the detriment of teacher dignity and professionalism. It takes trained insightful leadership in order to do highly detailed observations.  The amount of documentation required is likely to have them spending a lot more time on this aspect of the job.  I am wondering how many administrators on site will be trained to perform this job function?

The evaluation system is currently implemented in 29 schools, next year all CMSD schools will be implementing this research based evaluation system.  The program takes into account special needs students and the experience level of the educator.  It gives educators an ooprtunity to reflect, self evaluate and collaborate with  their instructional  leader to improve their professional practice.  The evaluation system is crucial in our continued efforts to improve educational outcomes and ensure a quality educator in every classroom. 

Posted May 22, 2012

Thanks Dan.

The Greater Cleveland Partnership has been advocating for years that we must develop a better way to measure teachers/principals and that if done properly it could inform district decision making.

Recent changes in state law (HB153) are a good first step to make sure we are considering "value-added" data when evaluating teachers.  Clearly this is a work in progress for Cleveland, Ohio and the nation.  I understand Eric's point that the tests currently in use were not developed to measure teachers, but to paraphrase a Brooking Institute report from late 2010, there are consequences to students if we don't incorporate value-added data.  We applaud the district for their work on evaluations. 

An occasionally overlooked provision of HB525 moves the annual deadline from April 1 to June 1 for the district to have completed their teacher evaluations.  Giving the district more time ensures they get it right and include all the relevant information.  This is an important provision of the bill. 

Posted May 22, 2012

Ann, that piece by David Brooks is by inspiring. What he describes reminds me a bit of the depth of innovation and commitment at The Equity Project, another exciting innovative model in NYC.

Ann, 

I agree that there is room for more types of innovative educational models. I usually refer to the standard american educational model as "One size fits nobody".  I was the "smart kid" growing up, and as miserable as that was, I can only imagnine how miserable the kids were that got labelled the "dumb kids"

I'm a big fan of Intergenerational's mastery-based approach, but it doesn't appeal to everyone.  I know some families in the area that would love to see a Waldorf school opened in Cleveland, for instance.  

One of the problems that I know CMSD schools have to deal with is a high degree of transience of the student body.  I recall reading that as many as 30-40% of students will change schools in a given year.  That makes it very hard for teachers to know what to do when a new student suddenly shows up mid-year.   I wonder if maybe we could look to the medical field, where eletronic medical records now allow physicians to more easily pull up your medical history and make judgements regarding treatment plans.  If there were similar electronic educational records, it might be easier for teachers to get up to speed when a new student arrives in the classroom. 

Posted May 23, 2012

In my opinion, learning has changed so much that we can now make a "school" out of anything!  The key isn't just that kids know facts (especially since they can quickly and easily access the most difficult mathematical formulas online - try wolframalpha.com for a really cool tutorial on the "mathematical google").  Now more than ever, learners have to be able to use the information that is available to them in thousands of different contexts.  So context becomes the key. 

* An outdoor environmental school located on Dike 14 (that piece of land jutting into the lake North of MLK Blvd off the Shoreway)?

* A convention logistics school at the Medical Mart?

* A construction rehab school located in an abandoned house reclaimed from the city landbank?

* A theater of school where young artistic students have to demonstrate their understanding of cell structure by producing and performing a play demonstrating their knowledge - anyone remember constructing the cardboard cell?  This would be better!

Wow!  Then the possibilities are endless!

Posted May 23, 2012

Call your state legislator.  Tell him/her you support the Cleveland Plan.  Find your legislator at: http://www.legislature.state.oh.us/ 

Contact your staterepresentative and ask them to support this  plan. Visit one of our schools and see the difference our educators are making eachday in the lives of our students and their families.

Posted May 22, 2012

Educate yourself.  Read the plan summary.  It includes a good overview, as well as a comparison to current law.

Then - whether you agree or not - contact your state legislator and let him or her know how you would like them to vote.

Posted May 22, 2012

Go to this link and in 90 seconds you will send 10 emails to legislators that need to know about the plan. 

http://votervoice.net/core.aspx?AID=1388&Screen=alert&IssueId=28851&APP=GAC&SiteID=-1&VV_CULTURE=en-us

Please do it now. thanks!

Posted May 22, 2012

Putting pressure on state legislators would be a big help.  The charter school accountability provisons (The Transformation Alliance part) seems to be getting pushback.  

http://bit.ly/JPVRJS

Posted May 23, 2012

Use all of the links below to make sure your voice is heard in the Ohio House and Ohio Senate.  And help your legislators know that this is urgent!  Make sure that the legislature understands that we need everyone to be accountable in this plan and that it must be a plan for our entire public education system, not just for a subset of our traditional public schools. 

Posted May 23, 2012

At Breakthrough, we'll likely hire about 15 Teach for America corps members. In addition, with Ursuline College, we've created the Cleveland Urban Teacher Residency Program.  CUTR will fast track folks with bachelor's degrees who want to teach... we'll get them a masters in a year, with a teaching certificate, and they'll spend 80% of their time teaching in one of our schools under a master teacher.  Those are 2 ideas... we're hiring 70 teachers this coming year.  www.breakthroughschools.org to apply.

Posted May 22, 2012

Great question Dan.

The reality is that we have been in "downsizing mode" for so long that we not only haven't been investing in a talent pipe but have been losing young talent as well.  At last night's Board meeting we renewed 2,757 teacher contracts for the 2012-13 school year.  Of those, only 454 are "limited" contracts.  The rest are all veteran enough to have a "continuing contract" or tenure.  That isn't a condemnation of tenure.  With CTU's help, we've made certain in the Plan that tenure is respected but not treated as the holy grail.  But it does point out just how veteran the CMSD staff has become!  (25% of CMSD employees could retire today, without even finishing the school year, if they wanted to!).

Also important here is that we can't simply hire those who apply.  When I was a high school principal in an affluent suburban school district, I had 1000 applications for 1 social studies position!  Every one of the people I interviewed thought they deserved to work in that district because they were "good".  The urban district near me did NOT have 1000 applications for their social studies position.  Many of those same people who thought they deserved to work in a "good" district wouldn't have deined to work in the urban school.  We can't afford to have teachers and leaders who only deign to work with our children.  We must go find those who are inspired to do so.  And they exist!

We've begun some recruitment work for principals and are working with CTU to use Race to the Top dollars to create pipeline for high need areas like special education.  But we have a long way to go which is why it is considered an Investment in The Cleveland Plan.

Posted May 23, 2012

To follow on the talk of community engangement, one thing that I think would help would be if school buildings could be made more available for community events after the traditional school day.  I think most people in Ohio City have never seen the inside of Garrett Morgan, and I myself have never seen the inside of Kentucky.  

We have lots of community events in Ohio City and sometimes finding a space is challenging.  even so, I've never heard "Garrett Morgan Auditorium" as a suggestion for a site. 

Posted May 23, 2012

Eric, I agree the school and community have to work together in order to be successful. It is great what you have been able to accomplish on the west side.  I currently work in the Saint Clair Superior neighborhood and serve on the core committee for MyCom which focuses on youth development.

There have been some great organizations come in to the neighborhood to do programming, but it is underutilized.  The schools are a great asset to provide support and information to families.  If schools, non-profits- and neighborhood development groups have a more symbiotic relationship students can receive the services and programming they need. 

Posted May 23, 2012

This is, again, the resource issue I raise whenever the question of charter schools comes up.  If parents want to select private schools they pay for out of their own pocket, I can't really argue with them givng their own children the best they can afford.  I have obections, on principle, to perpetuating the cycle of people who have more resources pulling their children out of public schools, leaving the public schools with fewer people who care about them, or have the resources to try to fix them.  But from a practical perspective I can't argue with wanting to make sure my own child doesn't suffer.

My concern about using public money to fund charter schools is that it allows parents with greater resources (some of which you have mentioned) to make that choice on the public dollar.  If public money is used to fund charter schools, I want all parents (regardless of resources) to the equal ability to choose to send their children there.  This is traditionally looked at in connection with the out of pocket costs - but, as you note, there are a lot of costs that cannot be reflected in dollars.

Making sure high quality schools (charter or public) are available within easy reach of all families is a start, but it is only a start in addressing the inequities in school choice that I am not comfortable perpetuating with public money.

Posted May 23, 2012

Anne, What you say has some truth, but not totally.  The transportation issue is big, I agree, but the funding for charter schools is so thin as to require cuts to academics in order to provide.  Convenience plays a big role too.  I spent a lot of time trying to recruit students to NWIS from Lakeview Estates, a large CMHA property in our neighborhood.  Many students from there go to a F-rated, for-profit charter school that is seven blocks closer than NWIS.  I don't know that I successfully shifted any kids.  The other school offers on-site aftercare, which we cannot.

I also wish that I felt our parents were quite as universally engaged as you think.  Many of the kids we have live in pretty tough circumstances.  I went into my son's class one day to make ice cream sundaes for all the kids as a reward.  I remember one student in particular who didn't know if he wanted chocolate sauce on his ice cream, he'd clearly never been given the option before. 

And yet, I believe these kids will do well at NWIS, because of the developmental/mastery-based educational model. I also am confident that my kids won't be "held back" because other students in their classroom.  Don't discount what alternative educational models can provide.

Incidently, The Intergenerational School is the lowest poverty Breakthrough school at 65%.  Citizen's Acadamy is about %80 and E-prep is about 85%.  Those are still high numbers. 

Posted May 23, 2012

I have a similar question.  Currently charter schools cannot offer pre-K.  They get no funding for it, and even if they offer a pre-K program on-site, it cannot be used to guarantee admission to Kindergarden. This is a state law.

If the extension of levy dollars were to allow our high performing charters to offer pre-K, it would also be helpful if enrolling a child at the pre-K level represented admission to the school.  It would make such a program a much easier sell and get more people into the public system, which is good across the board.  

Posted May 23, 2012

Dan - I just touched on this with another thread, but PreK education is not part of the Ohio K-12 education system.  Therefore there is no legislation as part of our education bill.  However, the district already uses local dollars to support 50 PreK classrooms in 45 schools and a future levy would also need to raise local revenue for the expansion of PreK.

Posted May 23, 2012