20 hours ago, Gramarye said:

 

That doesn't change the truth of anything I said, though.  It's orthogonal to my point.  What I said would still be true if we made undergraduate attendance compulsory or ceased making high school attendance so.

 

 

I think you're living in denial here, sorry.  Schools not only are run like businesses, but they have never been more run like businesses, particularly at the university level.  Not to mention that you didn't read my post very closely if you're talking about profit, when I was very clear in my post that I was making a not-for-profit business analogy:

 

 

Or do you also deny that all not-for-profit corporations are businesses, too?

 

You don't have business metrics like return on equity because there are no equity holders in a nonprofit (including a school).

 

 

And yet they generally teach very well, and I haven't seen any evidence yet that turnover is substantially greater than among public school teachers.  Not a great advertisement for the need for cartelization of the teaching profession.

 

Also, Catholic schools do require state certification to be a school in the first place, at the institutional level.  Just not at the individual teacher level.

 

 

"Do your own research."  (And "you'll know your research is complete when you agree with me.")  Classic.

 

 

And I wouldn't dare send my kids to Akron Public.  Different strokes for different folks, perhaps.  But I think the more likely reason that "over and over ... people ... prefer public schools to Catholic schools" is that one is free to the customer consumer and one is not.  At least for the moment.  Of course, if a strong version of the backpack bill that started all this discussion passes, we may get something approaching real cost parity, and then we'll see what people actually prefer.

 

In the current environment, saying that people prefer public schools to private schools is like saying that they prefer cars and autocentric suburbs to walkable neighborhoods and good transit options, after 75 years of overwhelmingly directing government money to one over the other.

Maybe you can help me understand, how are universities run like businesses? Is the customer always right? Do students "get what they pay for", such as grades (hey, I paid my tuition, I deserve an A? I hear this a lot for private university colleagues.) Do we have shareholders and "owners" who rake in profits? Do we close if we lose money one year? Are universities businesses, or services? (We seem to have forgotten that distinction in the US). I've spent 16 years working in a public university, and I've worked in business, and I see a lot of differences that you don't seem to.

 

Turnover at Catholic schools is substantially lower because there are almost no other opportunities for someone without a college degree to work at that level of education. Perhaps a better gauge would be: how many public school teachers are leaving their schools for Catholic schools? Most of the teachers I know working in private, charter or Catholic schools are constantly looking for public school jobs - benefits and pay, as well as more supportive administrators (who've studied schools and school administration) are the chief reasons I hear for their desire to leave. 

 

I;ve also talked with thousands of college students over the years about their school experiences, and most of the students who've attended Catholic and public schools said their public school education was far superior to the "inerrant truth" bit at their Catholic schools. That might work well in younger grades when children don't have many difficult questions, but when they become teenagers, the limits of that Catholic education become very clear. Sex education? Biology? Astronomy? Democracy? Not the strong suits of the Catholic Church. 

 

Backpack bills will be the death of Catholic education. All it will take is a liberal administration to very rationally say that public funds=public oversight, and hold Catholic and other private schools to the same standards as public schools (admit people with disabilities, don't kick out queer kids, rights to unionize), and Catholic schools will not continue in their current form.  This is actually an important reason to oppose public funding if you support Catholic schools in their current form.

 

The biggest lie we've been fed the past 20 years about school funding is that it should "follow the child". In some states with less oversight than Ohio, parents "homeschool" their kids, cash a check from the government, and then do nothing, except maybe buy a new TV. Public school funds pay for public schools, not tuition at public schools. Public schools are open to all children, whether their parents pay taxes or not. Even if you don't have children in schools, you pay to support the schools, for the community, not the individual wishes of the parents or children. Parents are very free to not send their children to public schools, but the money they pay in taxes still goes to support the public system. Maybe the Catholics need to step up, police their own priests and teachers, and use the millions they've paid out in settlements for sex abuse to fund their schools better, instead of suckling at the government teat. 

 

Future settlement, from 5/12/23 Toledo Blade, just this week!

https://www.toledoblade.com/local/courts/2023/05/12/priest-convicted-all-5-counts-molesting-3-boys/stories/20230512127

"A federal jury on Friday convicted a Roman Catholic priest of five sex trafficking counts for molesting three teen-age boys he had met at a Toledo parochial school and then coercing them to continue sexual activity with him as adults.

"According to witnesses during six days of trial testimony, the Rev. Michael J. Zacharias, 56, paid two of the boys thousands of dollars over a period of years to let him perform oral sex on them, and later paid at least one of them also to whip him repeatedly while requesting other forms of humiliation.

"The priest engaged the third victim, who was a younger brother of one of the other two, when his older brother was serving a two-year prison sentence for burglary. All three had developed opiate drug addictions after taking painkillers for sports or bicycling injuries."

 

 

1 hour ago, Lazarus said:

 

Good.  

 

Nearly all (upwards of ten) of the teenage waitresses at the restaurant I worked at in high school were pregnant or already had kids.  It was a disaster zone.  The place was a swirl of alcohol, drugs, cigarettes, pregnancies, scratch-off lotto tickets, and cars dragging their mufflers behind them.  Those people all made fun of me for not getting involved in any of it, but I wasn't tempted for even a second.  

 

 

You also forgot to mention that the life goal for nearly all the people you were working with at the time was to be featured on the Jerry Springer show. 

2 hours ago, OliverHazardPerry said:

What a lot of the comments in this thread are overlooking is the fact that Catholic (and other private) schools do not have the obligation to serve everyone like public schools do. I'll only speak to Catholic schools since I attended them from K-12. I saw them kick out (or quietly tell the families to enroll elsewhere) about a dozen overly disruptive kids during my time, particularly at my high school. A public school district has a much higher level of burden of proof before they can expel someone who lives in their district. Catholic schools, as long as it isn't protected by federal discrimination laws, can use pretty much any reason to not allow a kid back in the classroom. My sister's Catholic high school kicked a girl out in March of her senior year for getting pregnant, even though she would have graduated before having the baby.

 

Also, Catholic schools often do not provide any special education services, so they don't have to expend the extra resources to educate those students. Public schools don't have a choice.

 

I'm thankful for the mostly great education I received from Catholic schools, and for my parents who sacrificed a lot financially to send me there. But I would be burying my head in the sand if I said that Catholic/private schools and public schools were on a level playing field when it came to their student populations.

I nearly gagged when I saw this story from Monroe Michigan - this it the first time students in any Catholic school in Michigan have gone to school with a person with cognitive disabilities, and they're making it sound like they're pathbreaking, when in reality they are woefully behind the times. 

https://www.monroenews.com/story/news/2021/04/25/smccs-inclusion-program-produce-first-graduate/7355747002/

 

"For the last three years, the program has welcomed students with differing cognitive abilities into its classrooms, cultivating individualized plans that address families’ educational goals while offering those students a high school experience typical of their peers.

"While Jacob was the first student in the program — and will be the first inclusion student to graduate from such a program at a Catholic high school in Michigan — the program also is home to five other students with more hopefully on the horizon."

^that just brings home the entire point of private schools which is to self-segregate and not have to interact or engage with all of society. I wonder what people tell their kids when (and if) the conversation occurs. 
 

“why don’t I go to the school down the street mom?”
 

I personally have no problem with others choosing private school, but I don’t want to pay for them to learn about “creationism” and their Jesus.

 

3 hours ago, OliverHazardPerry said:

What a lot of the comments in this thread are overlooking is the fact that Catholic (and other private) schools do not have the obligation to serve everyone like public schools do. I'll only speak to Catholic schools since I attended them from K-12. I saw them kick out (or quietly tell the families to enroll elsewhere) about a dozen overly disruptive kids during my time, particularly at my high school. A public school district has a much higher level of burden of proof before they can expel someone who lives in their district. Catholic schools, as long as it isn't protected by federal discrimination laws, can use pretty much any reason to not allow a kid back in the classroom. My sister's Catholic high school kicked a girl out in March of her senior year for getting pregnant, even though she would have graduated before having the baby.

 

Catholic schools offer a different product than public schools. They have the ability to kick out disruptive kids and send them elsewhere. That is a key benefit of Catholic Schools. Also, they have the benefit to teach the religious doctrine to those who want their kids to receive such education. For parents who find these important, then Catholic Schools provide a great service. Generally, the results tend to support that in the outcomes of the kids too.  However, Catholic school is not for everyone nor should it be. 

 

The biggest argument I hear from people who do not like Catholic Schools is that they are not subject to the same rules as public school counterparts. That is the whole point. People go there because they cant find what they want in a public school. It helps to offer choices. Public School proponents tend to want to get rid of choice and have everyone in the same homogenous system for education. Children learn differently. Having an educational marketplace with many options is a good thing. 

 

3 hours ago, OliverHazardPerry said:

Also, Catholic schools often do not provide any special education services, so they don't have to expend the extra resources to educate those students. Public schools don't have a choice.

 

Many Catholic schools do offer some level of these services. My kids school has a psychologist, reading specialist, speech therapist as well as other specialists for the students. They may not have the same capabilities as the public schools, but can offer some level of additional services.  

53 minutes ago, westerninterloper said:

Turnover at Catholic schools is substantially lower because there are almost no other opportunities for someone without a college degree to work at that level of education.

 

 

I have no idea what you're talking about.  It would certainly come as a complete surprise to me and everyone else who attended Catholic schools that any of the teachers didn't have college degrees.  A few of the lunch ladies, perhaps.     

 

 

55 minutes ago, westerninterloper said:

I;ve also talked with thousands of college students over the years about their school experiences, and most of the students who've attended Catholic and public schools said their public school education was far superior to the "inerrant truth" bit at their Catholic schools. That might work well in younger grades when children don't have many difficult questions, but when they become teenagers, the limits of that Catholic education become very clear. Sex education? Biology? Astronomy? Democracy? Not the strong suits of the Catholic Church. 

 

 

So everyone is a helpless, squirming victim of the Catholic Schools?  Both those who attended and those who didn't?  

 

 

 

 

 

 

8 minutes ago, Clefan14 said:

I personally have no problem with others choosing private school, but I don’t want to pay for them to learn about “creationism” and their Jesus.

You don't pay for them. They pay. 

They pay taxes too. their share is going toward the school of their choice.

1 hour ago, westerninterloper said:

I nearly gagged when I saw this story from Monroe Michigan - this it the first time students in any Catholic school in Michigan have gone to school with a person with cognitive disabilities, and they're making it sound like they're pathbreaking, when in reality they are woefully behind the times. 

https://www.monroenews.com/story/news/2021/04/25/smccs-inclusion-program-produce-first-graduate/7355747002/

 

"For the last three years, the program has welcomed students with differing cognitive abilities into its classrooms, cultivating individualized plans that address families’ educational goals while offering those students a high school experience typical of their peers.

"While Jacob was the first student in the program — and will be the first inclusion student to graduate from such a program at a Catholic high school in Michigan — the program also is home to five other students with more hopefully on the horizon."

 

My Catholic grade school had about 15 "developmentally handicapped" (I believe that was the term) students 30+ years ago.  Down syndrome, etc.  I remember that we had visits from the deaf students at St. Rita's School for the Deaf.  

 

I mean, are you just pranking us?  All of this stuff that you assert to be real and true is the complete opposite of what exists and what has existed for many decades.  

 

 

 

1 hour ago, GCrites80s said:

The white underclass is extremely outgoing. They are so outgoing that they think everyone else is stuck up and strange without realizing it is they that are the outlier.

 

This place was about 50/50 black/white staff, with one or two Mexican cooks.  I remember one of the black waitresses yelling at me for being "racist" because I sat some family in her section who didn't tip her.  I couldn't even remember who these people were, but she accused me of knowing ahead of time that they wouldn't tip and maliciously seating them in her section (I didn't even know which section was hers).  That's the mentality you're dealing with out there in blue collar land - wild accusations, no impulse control, drugs, no call/no show, etc.  Zero intellectual curiosity, jeering at people who read books, etc.  

 

I can't write down all of the stuff that happened at my other high school job.  The stuff was WAY over-the-top, with tons of hazing, vandalizing employee cars in the parking lot, guys trying to steal girlfriends/wives, people provoking others into fights, etc.  We had one guy choke on his own vomit and die in the parking lot, the husband of one of the office girls show up waving his gun, etc.  

 

And you wonder why the boys all wanna stay home and play video games instead. 

1 hour ago, westerninterloper said:

Turnover at Catholic schools is substantially lower because there are almost no other opportunities for someone without a college degree to work at that level of education. Perhaps a better gauge would be: how many public school teachers are leaving their schools for Catholic schools? Most of the teachers I know working in private, charter or Catholic schools are constantly looking for public school jobs - benefits and pay, as well as more supportive administrators (who've studied schools and school administration) are the chief reasons I hear for their desire to leave. 

That is not correct. Most Catholic school teachers (the vast majority) have a college degree. Most Catholic schools pay less than their public school counterparts but that being said, they are competitive and have many teachers who prefer that environment over the corresponding public school in the area. There are always some teachers in a competitive environment who will choose the money at a public school over the Catholic school, but it is not universal and not necessarily because they have a college degree or masters. 

 

Secondly, at my children's catholic school, I sit on the teacher compensation committee. In our situation, we target teacher pay at 75% of what the corresponding public school teacher earns with the same level of education. This often leads to strong retention because the tradeoff in salary often comes with similar benefits (in some cases slighltly better). Some teachers are willing to take less pay in exchange of having to deal with more unruly students, uncooperative administrations, etc. Sometimes, teachers will take less money for better quality of life. 

1 hour ago, westerninterloper said:

I;ve also talked with thousands of college students over the years about their school experiences, and most of the students who've attended Catholic and public schools said their public school education was far superior to the "inerrant truth" bit at their Catholic schools. That might work well in younger grades when children don't have many difficult questions, but when they become teenagers, the limits of that Catholic education become very clear. Sex education? Biology? Astronomy? Democracy? Not the strong suits of the Catholic Church.

Interesting, I think you probably need to expand from your bubble some. I speak with many people who have attended Catholic Schools, especially Catholic high school and they have a great experience from it. I know a lot of people sending their kids to good public schools now to prepare them for Catholic High School.  Certainly, to your point, many public schools have better facilities than Catholic Schools in the area does ring true, however, facilities do not necessarily make an education and you should not put too much emphasis on the bells and whistles of facilities when looking at overall results. 

 

1 hour ago, westerninterloper said:

Backpack bills will be the death of Catholic education. All it will take is a liberal administration to very rationally say that public funds=public oversight, and hold Catholic and other private schools to the same standards as public schools (admit people with disabilities, don't kick out queer kids, rights to unionize), and Catholic schools will not continue in their current form.  This is actually an important reason to oppose public funding if you support Catholic schools in their current form.

I find this argument weak and non-compelling and against over 70 years of precedent. On the Federal level, there are decades and decades of Supreme Court precedent from 1950s on that have often sided with religious schools over the limitations placed on them by either Federal or even State officials. This established case law grounded in First Amendment principles pretty much guarantees that the outcome you suggest wont happen, or will be extremely difficult to accomplish by any left wing administration. 

 

1 hour ago, westerninterloper said:

The biggest lie we've been fed the past 20 years about school funding is that it should "follow the child". In some states with less oversight than Ohio, parents "homeschool" their kids, cash a check from the government, and then do nothing, except maybe buy a new TV. Public school funds pay for public schools, not tuition at public schools. Public schools are open to all children, whether their parents pay taxes or not. Even if you don't have children in schools, you pay to support the schools, for the community, not the individual wishes of the parents or children. Parents are very free to not send their children to public schools, but the money they pay in taxes still goes to support the public system. Maybe the Catholics need to step up, police their own priests and teachers, and use the millions they've paid out in settlements for sex abuse to fund their schools better, instead of suckling at the government teat. 

It is almost comical that the people who hate Catholic schools always go back to the pedophile priests from years ago. That was a horrible stain on the church but Catholic schools are far more than priests or bad priests who worked there 20+ years ago. The vast majority of teachers are not religious and to continue to trump up the priest abuse scandal does a disservice to the many lay professionals who serve in the catholic school environment. You should really be ashamed of yourself to keep bringing up that argument. 

 

Regarding your point about paying into the public school system. Everyone still pays into the public school system even those with vouchers. The voucher only covers the cost of the individual student portion that the state will allocate to the student. The taxpayer still pays to fund other aspects of the public schools even though their child is not going there. So yes, the public school may get less money from that taxpayer, but that taxpayer is still funding the public school system too. t

School choice is a sham. If you want to go to a private/charter school you should pay for it (and pay full school taxes for your district). This is nothing more than shifting public dollars to private entities (and in the case of charter schools, for-profits).

 

https://www.dispatch.com/story/news/2021/09/08/ohio-edchoice-scholarship-private-school-voucher-expansion-lawsuit-legislation/5651293001/

 

https://www.gse.harvard.edu/news/95/07/studies-show-school-choice-widens-inequality-popular-among-parents-little-evidence 

 

Funny how folks who moved to places for the schools now vote down levies because they don't have kids going through the system anymore - the definition of eff you I got mine. 

 

11 minutes ago, Brutus_buckeye said:

You should really be ashamed of yourself to keep bringing up that argument.

 

Its still happening(!!!): https://www.whio.com/news/local/ohio-catholic-priest-convicted-sex-trafficking-abusing-churchgoing-minors-into-adulthood/NKEPFSTOOBEL7LNSM6FFXGGUTY/

 

Google 'catholic priest ohio' and have fun with the wool over your eyes.

Edited May 17, 20232 yr by GISguy

31 minutes ago, GISguy said:

 

 

Its still happening(!!!): https://www.whio.com/news/local/ohio-catholic-priest-convicted-sex-trafficking-abusing-churchgoing-minors-into-adulthood/NKEPFSTOOBEL7LNSM6FFXGGUTY/

 

Google 'catholic priest ohio' and have fun with the wool over your eyes.

I did not say it isnt' or it wont ever again. But it is rare today and it continues to be exposed. Daylight is the best disinfectant. 

 

However, for every "bad priest" that public school proponents like to trot out, you seem to overlook all the public school teachers/coaches/administrators etc that  molest their students, have sexual relationships with students, etc.

There are many more stories on the news about teachers having inappropriate relationships with students than priests. Keep that fact in mind. 

Ohio Senate passes SB 83, controversial higher education bill. What would it do?

 

https://www.beaconjournal.com/story/news/politics/2023/05/17/ohio-senate-moves-to-restrict-dei-training-at-public-universities/70222442007/

 

Major changes could be coming to Ohio's public colleges and universities. The Republican-controlled Senate voted, 21-10, to restrict mandatory diversity training, ban faculty strikes and penalize professors who fail to create classrooms free from bias. ...

 

But as support grows among Republican politicians, opposition to the legislation continues to grow in Ohio's institutions of higher education.

 

Ohio State's Board of Trustees issued a rare public statement Tuesday, saying SB 83 raised "important questions about 21st-century education," but the legislation as its currently written could "undermine the shared governance model of universities, risk weakened academic rigor, or impose extensive and expensive new reporting mandates."

 

==========================

 

Legislative text link here:

 

https://www.legislature.ohio.gov/legislation/135/sb83

 

The relevant portions of the proposed amendments begin on page 22, with the proposed addition of R.C. 3345.029.

 

And I have to admit, even as someone who agrees with the goal, my first reaction based on 10 minutes of light reading is not completely positive.  Too specific (micromanagerial) in some places, too toothless and/or indirect in others.  The OSU board has a point.  But still at least some things to like in there, at least from those of us who see woke decolonization of academia as an urgent priority.

 

===========================

 

There is apparently a companion bill floating around somewhere in the Ohio House, probably still in committee.

44 minutes ago, Gramarye said:

Ohio Senate passes SB 83, controversial higher education bill. What would it do?

 

https://www.beaconjournal.com/story/news/politics/2023/05/17/ohio-senate-moves-to-restrict-dei-training-at-public-universities/70222442007/

 

Major changes could be coming to Ohio's public colleges and universities. The Republican-controlled Senate voted, 21-10, to restrict mandatory diversity training, ban faculty strikes and penalize professors who fail to create classrooms free from bias. ...

 

But as support grows among Republican politicians, opposition to the legislation continues to grow in Ohio's institutions of higher education.

 

Ohio State's Board of Trustees issued a rare public statement Tuesday, saying SB 83 raised "important questions about 21st-century education," but the legislation as its currently written could "undermine the shared governance model of universities, risk weakened academic rigor, or impose extensive and expensive new reporting mandates."

 

==========================

 

Legislative text link here:

 

https://www.legislature.ohio.gov/legislation/135/sb83

 

The relevant portions of the proposed amendments begin on page 22, with the proposed addition of R.C. 3345.029.

 

And I have to admit, even as someone who agrees with the goal, my first reaction based on 10 minutes of light reading is not completely positive.  Too specific (micromanagerial) in some places, too toothless and/or indirect in others.  The OSU board has a point.  But still at least some things to like in there, at least from those of us who see woke decolonization of academia as an urgent priority.

 

===========================

 

There is apparently a companion bill floating around somewhere in the Ohio House, probably still in committee.

This is a terrible bill introduced by a bunch of idiots. 

Oh jeez-us. The anti "woke" and anti "cancel-culture" vultures are doing the exact things they say they are against....AGAIN.

Who is going to want to come to Ohio at the pace our illegally gerrymandered legislature is moving at?

 

Sound of Ideas had a great episode on why this bill is terrible: https://www.ideastream.org/show/sound-of-ideas/2023-03-17/ohio-senate-bill-takes-aim-at-perceived-bias-in-higher-education.

1 hour ago, GISguy said:

Who is going to want to come to Ohio at the pace our illegally gerrymandered legislature is moving at?

 

Sound of Ideas had a great episode on why this bill is terrible: https://www.ideastream.org/show/sound-of-ideas/2023-03-17/ohio-senate-bill-takes-aim-at-perceived-bias-in-higher-education.

People are not moving to areas based on whether their state and local governments are gerrymandered nor is it likely the majority of people relocating to the area (outside of academia, and even that affect would be marginal) because of this. This is the same type of argument you hear whenever a Republican wins an election in a state or the White House, all the progressives talk about moving to Canada or some other country and of course they never do. 

1 hour ago, VintageLife said:

This is a terrible bill introduced by a bunch of idiots. 

 

More crappy state-level policy. One reason the Rs want to give everything to the states is so that we have a bunch of crappy state laws that make government dysfunctional. 

4 hours ago, Gramarye said:

Ohio Senate passes SB 83, controversial higher education bill. What would it do?

 

https://www.beaconjournal.com/story/news/politics/2023/05/17/ohio-senate-moves-to-restrict-dei-training-at-public-universities/70222442007/

 

Major changes could be coming to Ohio's public colleges and universities. The Republican-controlled Senate voted, 21-10, to restrict mandatory diversity training, ban faculty strikes and penalize professors who fail to create classrooms free from bias. ...

 

But as support grows among Republican politicians, opposition to the legislation continues to grow in Ohio's institutions of higher education.

 

Ohio State's Board of Trustees issued a rare public statement Tuesday, saying SB 83 raised "important questions about 21st-century education," but the legislation as its currently written could "undermine the shared governance model of universities, risk weakened academic rigor, or impose extensive and expensive new reporting mandates."

 

==========================

 

Legislative text link here:

 

https://www.legislature.ohio.gov/legislation/135/sb83

 

The relevant portions of the proposed amendments begin on page 22, with the proposed addition of R.C. 3345.029.

 

And I have to admit, even as someone who agrees with the goal, my first reaction based on 10 minutes of light reading is not completely positive.  Too specific (micromanagerial) in some places, too toothless and/or indirect in others.  The OSU board has a point.  But still at least some things to like in there, at least from those of us who see woke decolonization of academia as an urgent priority.

 

===========================

 

There is apparently a companion bill floating around somewhere in the Ohio House, probably still in committee.

The one thing that I think is really good about the bill is allowing standing to donors and their families to recover monetary gifts when the school does not follow through on the donor's initial bequest.  This stems from Ohio State abusing the Moritz family and not following their bequest to grant 30 scholarships to students for the money but Ohio State only used about 1/3 of the money and then charged a hefty endowment fee to "manage" the endowment. It really was a scam on OSU's part.

50 minutes ago, Brutus_buckeye said:

People are not moving to areas based on whether their state and local governments are gerrymandered nor is it likely the majority of people relocating to the area (outside of academia, and even that affect would be marginal) because of this. This is the same type of argument you hear whenever a Republican wins an election in a state or the White House, all the progressives talk about moving to Canada or some other country and of course they never do. 

 

Let me rephrase: why would someone attend an Ohio public institution when there are a million different options that don't require a mandatory course on the constitution and the federalist papers or verbiage that is put in to give conservatives a safe space? Why would professors come here? What's the incentive? 

 

State schools aren't floating in cash if you haven't noticed - if you add this "US History Course" requirement you're asking broke schools to pretty much hire an entire department just to placate the "fiscally responsible" republicans. Sounds like an unfunded mandate to me.

Edited May 18, 20232 yr by GISguy

6 minutes ago, GISguy said:

Let me rephrase: why would someone attend an Ohio public institution when there are a million different options that don't require a mandatory course on the constitution and the federalist papers or verbiage that is put in to give conservatives a safe space? Why would professors come here? What's the incentive? 

Because 1) State schools offer a lot of value 2) State schools offer proximity to in state residents 3) Out of state scholars may go there for scholarship money because it is affordable, 4) maybe their parents went to such school and it is nostalgic for them, 5) ..... etc, etc. etc.  Point being, there are a multitude of reasons why people would attend a particular school and having to take a mandatory civics course would be extremely low on most of their lists.  I went to a college that required an extensive liberal arts core. At the time, I hated much of what I was "required" to take. It did not really factor into my decision when it came time to choose that particular university. 

 

10 minutes ago, GISguy said:

State schools aren't floating in cash if you haven't noticed - if you add this "US History Course" requirement you're asking broke schools to pretty much hire an entire department just to placate the "fiscally responsible" republicans. Sounds like an unfunded mandate to me.

Most likely the department is already in place. You just take a professor in place (likely a non-tenured one) and get a few TA's and have them teach a large lecture hall. It really would not burden resources to do this. 

Quote

A professor from Central State University is concerned that limits on teaching about racism in social studies will diminish the experience at the state’s only public historically Black university.

https://www.cleveland.com/news/2023/05/ohio-senate-oks-sweeping-higher-education-reform-bill-that-targets-woke-bias-capitol-letter.html

 

Who thinks Republicans "forgot" that Central State exists?

The idiocracy of the bill is discussed around 17 minutes in. The bill is NOT a good thing, period. 

 

https://www.ideastream.org/show/sound-of-ideas/2023-05-19/stadium-repair-and-renovation-requests-keep-coming-for-cleveland-and-cuyahoga-county

 

And an Op-Ed from an Ethnic Studies Professor: https://ohiocapitaljournal.com/2023/05/19/making-ethnic-studies-illegal-in-ohio-even-watered-down-sb-83-requires-teaching-racism/

 

"Because of the way it defines “controversial beliefs,” SB 83 does not require that geography professors describe flat earth theory to keep their jobs. It does, however, require me to teach the “divergent” theory of racial construction, which is that race is a biological, fixed, natural attribute of humankind.

 

It requires me to teach the “divergent” theory of civil rights, which is that the constitution allows for the legal separation of races and that this is a justifiable form of equality. It requires me to teach that the South seceded because it wished to defend states rights against the unlawful aggression of the Lincoln administration, not because it wanted to protect the principle that some humans can be treated as property.

 

The list of what constitutes the “divergent” version of an ethnic studies concept contains many other ugly, false, and dangerous ideas drawn from discredited nineteenth century scientific racists, American Eugenicists, Klansmen, and German Nazis."

Edited May 19, 20232 yr by GISguy
Was editing as Gramarye posted

On 5/18/2023 at 4:46 PM, GISguy said:

Let me rephrase: why would someone attend an Ohio public institution when there are a million different options that don't require a mandatory course on the constitution and the federalist papers or verbiage that is put in to give conservatives a safe space? Why would professors come here? What's the incentive? 

 

Why do you not ask the same dismissive questions about diversity-education requirements?  Why could I not do so?

 

https://ugeducation.osu.edu/general-education-ohio-state

 

 

Quote

Theme courses (8-12 hours) -- All students will take courses in the Citizenship for a Diverse and Just World Theme (4-6 hours) and in one additional Theme of their choosing

 

Now, I don't actually know what the syllabi for any of these courses in the "Citizenship for a Diverse and Just World" Theme are.  But diverse and just at this point in academia are generally not their dictionary definitions; they're codewords for specific, narrow conceptions of those things that are generally hostile to colorblindness, individualism, meritocracy, and other values that, at the very least, conservatives defend with fewer reservations than progressives do, and at most, progressives openly attack and deride as fictions--or heresies against the gospel of DEI.  Maybe I'm wrong.  But the fact that that was the single mandatory topic and all the others were optional members of a set of electives is at the very least a red flag.  This on top of "race, ethnicity, and gender diversity" being a required foundational-course category, placed on par with social and behavioral sciences, natural sciences, mathematical and quantitative reasoning.

6 minutes ago, Gramarye said:

 

Why do you not ask the same dismissive questions about diversity-education requirements?  Why could I not do so?

 

https://ugeducation.osu.edu/general-education-ohio-state

 

 

 

Now, I don't actually know what the syllabi for any of these courses in the "Citizenship for a Diverse and Just World" Theme are.  But diverse and just at this point in academia are generally not their dictionary definitions; they're codewords for specific, narrow conceptions of those things that are generally hostile to colorblindness, individualism, meritocracy, and other values that, at the very least, conservatives defend with fewer reservations than progressives do, and at most, progressives openly attack and deride as fictions--or heresies against the gospel of DEI.  Maybe I'm wrong.  But the fact that that was the single mandatory topic and all the others were optional members of a set of electives is at the very least a red flag.  This on top of "race, ethnicity, and gender diversity" being a required foundational-course category, placed on par with social and behavioral sciences, natural sciences, mathematical and quantitative reasoning.

 

See my Op-Ed edit above. It's dangerous plain and simple. Listen to the Sound of Ideas episode. One example: if you can teach the Letter from the Birmingham Jail but not the reasons behind it is that education? If you need to show the alternative views to King's fight for equal rights, what's the point? 

6 hours ago, GISguy said:

See my Op-Ed edit above. It's dangerous plain and simple. Listen to the Sound of Ideas episode. One example: if you can teach the Letter from the Birmingham Jail but not the reasons behind it is that education? If you need to show the alternative views to King's fight for equal rights, what's the point? 

 

Which provision of the proposed law would teaching either Rev. King's Letter from a Birmingham Jail or the reasons behind it violate?  I just went through using Ctrl-F for the "controversial belief or policy" language at issue there and I don't see which provision he's worried about running afoul of.  This feels like a game of telephone at this point: "the law bans _______!"  "How do you know?"  "I heard from someone who heard from someone who read a Tweet about it."

On 5/17/2023 at 12:56 PM, Brutus_buckeye said:

Many Catholic schools do offer some level of these services. My kids school has a psychologist, reading specialist, speech therapist as well as other specialists for the students. They may not have the same capabilities as the public schools, but can offer some level of additional services.  

 

It may be different in Cincinnati but in the Columbus Diocese at least, while these specialists may serve students at Catholic schools they were employed and provided by the public school district. At my Catholic school, the reading specialist wasn't even allowed in the building, you had to go out to a maxi van permanently stationed in the parking lot to receive those services

 

Edited May 20, 20232 yr by NW24HX

1 hour ago, NW24HX said:

 

It may be different in Cincinnati but in the Columbus Diocese at least, while these specialists may serve students at Catholic schools they were employed and provided by the public school district. At my Catholic school, the reading specialist wasn't even allowed in the building, you had to go out to a maxi van permanently stationed in the parking lot to receive those services

 

My Catholic elementary school had the same, a permanent trailor staffed by the local public school district, or maybe the state? Kids that were behind got tutored in "the trailor", and I recall hearing,eyesight tests and stuff being done in there. The people were allowed in the building though because I recall them coming to get kids.

 

Our core curriculum books were also stamped with the local public school district. It was in Stark County but in the Youngstown Diocese. We didn't have any Nuns. The convent house was offered to the Principle as a residence if they wanted to live there.

 

 

On 5/20/2023 at 11:33 AM, NW24HX said:

 

It may be different in Cincinnati but in the Columbus Diocese at least, while these specialists may serve students at Catholic schools they were employed and provided by the public school district. At my Catholic school, the reading specialist wasn't even allowed in the building, you had to go out to a maxi van permanently stationed in the parking lot to receive those services

 

I believe they changed the laws about 15-20 years back. These specialists are still employed by the public school district but they no longer have to be in vans parked outside the building. They may not have an office or classroom space in the building, however, I believe that office space needs to be segregated from classroom space where religious studies take place. 

SB 83 Passed Last Week — Here’s What That Means

 

The Ohio Senate passed a massive higher education bill that would significantly alter college campuses. 

 

Wednesday’s 21-10 vote comes a week after changes and clarification were made to Senate Bill 83, which was introduced by state Sen. Jerry Cirino, R-Kirtland in March. SB 83 now moves to the House for committee consideration.

 

Republican state Sen. Louis W. Blessing, III, Sen. Nathan Manning and Sen. Michele Reynolds joined the seven Senate democrats in voting against the bill, also known as the Ohio Higher Education Enhancement Act. Reynolds flipped her vote after voting in support of SB 83 Wednesday morning during the Senate Workforce and Higher Education Committee meeting.

 

“This legislation is an urgently needed course correction,” Cirino said. “If you desire an education that involves learning analytic skills, evaluating many ideas and many sides of issues and how to think better, not what to think, this bill is for you.”

 

If SB 83 is passed by the GOP-supermajority House, university staff and employees would be banned from striking, college students would be required to take certain American history courses, professor tenure would be based around “bias,” and Board of Trustees terms would be reduced from nine years down to four. 

 

The Senate Workforce and Higher Education Committee passed SB 83 Wednesday morning by a 4-1 party vote, with the lone dissenting vote coming from state Sen. Catherine D. Ingram, D-Cincinnati. Opponents clad in red, some with black masking tape over their mouths, packed the committee meeting. More than 100 people submitted written opponent testimony.

 

More below:

https://columbusunderground.com/sb-83-passed-last-week-heres-what-that-means-ocj1/

Ohio Legislators Want to Update Classroom Curriculum for Kids

 

Ohio legislators on both sides of the aisle are hoping to change how students learn about things like government affairs and history.

 

On one side, Democrats and supporters presented their argument for changing the model curriculum for K-12 social studies in a Tuesday press conference, with members of education associations and minority advocacy groups pushing for House Bill 171‘s passage.

 

That bill would direct the Ohio State Board of Education to “update” the social studies lessons in the state by July 1, 2024, to include “age and grade-appropriate instruction in the migration journeys, experiences and societal contributions of a range of communities in Ohio and the United States.”

...

A Republican-led bill that’s already seen committee activity since being introduced in March is House Bill 103, which seeks to create a “social studies task force” to develop academic standards for K-12 social studies.

 

Those studies have a specific model in HB 103, however, with the bill specifically targeting standards presented in “American Birthright: The Civics Alliance’s Model K-12 Social Studies Standards.”

 

The Civics Alliance is a New York-based group which states in its mission statement preceding “American Birthright” that it is “dedicated to preserving and improving America’s civics education and preventing the subornation of civics education to political recruitment tools.”

 

More below:

https://columbusunderground.com/ohio-legislators-want-to-update-classroom-curriculum-for-kids-ocj1/

 

lol

 

 

Colleges Push Back on Ohio Law to Create Conservative “Safe Spaces” on Campuses

 

University of Toledo law students and Ohio State University professors spoke out in opposition against a bill that would create new centers at both universities that would expand and affirm what sponsors deem “intellectual diversity.” 

 

Senate Bill 117 would create the Salmon P. Chase Center for Civics, Culture, and Society at Ohio State University and the Institute of American Constitutional Thought and Leadership at the University of Toledo’s College of Law. 

 

Eleven people submitted opponent testimony and there was one interested party for SB 117 at Wednesday’s Senate Workforce and Higher Education Committee meeting. There was little questioning from the five-person committee.

 

The bill was introduced by Sen. Rob McColley, R-Napoleon, and Sen. Jerry Cirino, R-Kirtland, who also introduced a massive higher education bill that would overhaul college campuses that recently passed in the Senate. 

 

SB 117 would give UT $1 million in fiscal year 2024 and $2 million in fiscal year 2025 for the Institute, and Ohio State $5 million in fiscal years 2024 and 2025 for the Center. 

 

$5 million during those two years could pay Ohio State’s full in-state tuition costs for 400 students each year of the biennium, said Steve Mockabee, an associate professor at the University of Cincinnati, speaking on behalf of the Ohio Conference American Association of University Professors. 

 

“At a time when college affordability is a significant concern for Ohio families, we owe it to Ohioans to be sure that funds allocated by the legislature are being spent in ways that maximize their positive impact,” he said.

 

“We remain deeply concerned that attempts by the General Assembly to override the autonomy of our colleges and universities will have many unintended consequences that damage, not enhance, the climate of free inquiry on our campuses and the quality of education that is offered to our students.”

 

Way more below:

https://columbusunderground.com/colleges-push-back-on-ohio-law-to-create-conservative-safe-spaces-on-campuses-ocj1/

 

Ohio GOP Seeks Updates for Public School Curriculum to Promote Patriotism and Christianity

 

A task force to revise Ohio K-12 social studies standards to be in line with an “American Birthright” model being pushed by a Trump-aligned group would have more time to come up with the standards under an amended Ohio House bill currently being considered by committee.

 

But that timeline doesn’t allow for enough time, some Democrats on the committee argued in a recent hearing on House Bill 103.

 

The bill would direct that task force to create K-12 academic standards in social studies, with a specific model mention in the bill, called the “American Birthright.” The model, developed by a Trump-aligned, right-wing group called The Civics Alliance, promotes patriotism and Christian history in America, while seeking to prevent the “subornation of civics education to political recruitment tools,” according to documents on the model.

 

Bill sponsor state Rep. Don Jones, R-Freeport, listed as an American Birthright policymaker in the model documents, said the Civics Alliance doesn’t provide a specific curriculum along with its model.

 

More below:

https://columbusunderground.com/ohio-gop-seeks-updates-for-public-school-curriculum-to-promote-patriotism-and-christianity-ocj1/

7 hours ago, ColDayMan said:

Ohio GOP Seeks Updates for Public School Curriculum to Promote Patriotism and Christianity

 

A task force to revise Ohio K-12 social studies standards to be in line with an “American Birthright” model being pushed by a Trump-aligned group would have more time to come up with the standards under an amended Ohio House bill currently being considered by committee.

 

But that timeline doesn’t allow for enough time, some Democrats on the committee argued in a recent hearing on House Bill 103.

 

The bill would direct that task force to create K-12 academic standards in social studies, with a specific model mention in the bill, called the “American Birthright.” The model, developed by a Trump-aligned, right-wing group called The Civics Alliance, promotes patriotism and Christian history in America, while seeking to prevent the “subornation of civics education to political recruitment tools,” according to documents on the model.

 

Bill sponsor state Rep. Don Jones, R-Freeport, listed as an American Birthright policymaker in the model documents, said the Civics Alliance doesn’t provide a specific curriculum along with its model.

 

More below:

https://columbusunderground.com/ohio-gop-seeks-updates-for-public-school-curriculum-to-promote-patriotism-and-christianity-ocj1/

God these people are trash. They want the state to be as dumb as possible. 

 

Chances of DeWine vetoing that are about 0%.

More on this from the Dispatch:

 

https://www.dispatch.com/story/news/politics/2023/06/30/higher-ed-out-universal-vouchers-in-as-ohio-reaches-budget-deal/70372777007/

 

Here's what made it into the final budget as it heads to Gov. Mike DeWine for his signature:

• All Ohio school children will be eligible for a school voucher, but how much those EdChoice scholarships are worth will depend on family income. Children whose families earn up 450% of federal poverty will be able to get a full EdChoice scholarship to help them cover the cost of attending private schools. Students whose families earn more will be able to get smaller scholarships. That's a 77% increase ($825 million) over current voucher spending.
• New teachers will earn more money when this budget takes effect. The state minimum salary for teachers increased from $30,000 to $35,000. That's less than the House version, though.
• Who controls the Ohio Department of Education will change. The budget gave control over most education responsibilities like statewide curricula to the governor's office. It also renamed the agency as the Department of Education and Workforce.
• The governor received a significant investment in childhood literacy and phonics-based programs in this budget. Per his request, Ohio will restrict the use of other literacy programs and provide training in phonics to teachers.
• Five public universities in Ohio will get a "free speech institute" on their campus "that would allow students to receive broadened viewpoints." Republicans say this will increase viewpoint diversity on Ohio's college campuses. Democrats say these institutes were sprung on the colleges, and they have concerns about how they will operate. The schools are Ohio State University, University of Toledo, Miami University, Cleveland State University and the University of Cincinnati.
• Ohio's higher institutions can no longer ban students from being on campus if they refuse certain vaccinations.
• High school students who graduate in the top 5% of their classes will be eligible for $5,000 scholarships for Ohio colleges and universities.

But a controversial Senate plan to transform life at Ohio's public colleges and universities didn't make the final budget.

 

The higher education plan, which passed the Ohio Senate as a separate piece of legislation, would ban most mandatory diversity training, ban faculty from striking during contract negotiations and evaluate professors on whether they create "classrooms free from bias."

 

Huffman said he was told "nearly all" House Republicans support Senate Bill 83, but there were objections to putting it in the budget.

 

"If that's true, they should pass it as an individual bill as soon as possible," Huffman said.

 

======================================

 

The universal vouchers reform is something I never seriously thought I'd see happen in Ohio when I was a lonely voice supporting them all the way in back in 2010 on this thread, and others, back when I was still single and childless and just supporting them on principle.  Still a long way from the complete privatization of public education, but if this is possible in 13 years, maybe I can dare to dream of what will be possible in 26.  (Of course, I recognize that the 13 number is arbitrary and the school freedom movement did not begin with my first mentions of the topic on UrbanOhio.)  And even this midway step is a big one, and one that I'm considerably more vested in now not just for my own family--we likely won't get that much from the universally-available vouchers considering that they'll scale down above 450% of poverty--but for the families of some of my children's friends who have confided that they might not be able to continue to afford to keep their children at our school without a reform like this.  This budget bill may well prevent the breakup of some of my own kids' social circles, in addition to giving more such deserving kids a shot at schools like ours.

 

It's been a really good week.  Happy birthday, America!

7 hours ago, Gramarye said:

More on this from the Dispatch:

 

https://www.dispatch.com/story/news/politics/2023/06/30/higher-ed-out-universal-vouchers-in-as-ohio-reaches-budget-deal/70372777007/

 

Here's what made it into the final budget as it heads to Gov. Mike DeWine for his signature:

• All Ohio school children will be eligible for a school voucher, but how much those EdChoice scholarships are worth will depend on family income. Children whose families earn up 450% of federal poverty will be able to get a full EdChoice scholarship to help them cover the cost of attending private schools. Students whose families earn more will be able to get smaller scholarships. That's a 77% increase ($825 million) over current voucher spending.
• New teachers will earn more money when this budget takes effect. The state minimum salary for teachers increased from $30,000 to $35,000. That's less than the House version, though.
• Who controls the Ohio Department of Education will change. The budget gave control over most education responsibilities like statewide curricula to the governor's office. It also renamed the agency as the Department of Education and Workforce.
• The governor received a significant investment in childhood literacy and phonics-based programs in this budget. Per his request, Ohio will restrict the use of other literacy programs and provide training in phonics to teachers.
• Five public universities in Ohio will get a "free speech institute" on their campus "that would allow students to receive broadened viewpoints." Republicans say this will increase viewpoint diversity on Ohio's college campuses. Democrats say these institutes were sprung on the colleges, and they have concerns about how they will operate. The schools are Ohio State University, University of Toledo, Miami University, Cleveland State University and the University of Cincinnati.
• Ohio's higher institutions can no longer ban students from being on campus if they refuse certain vaccinations.
• High school students who graduate in the top 5% of their classes will be eligible for $5,000 scholarships for Ohio colleges and universities.

But a controversial Senate plan to transform life at Ohio's public colleges and universities didn't make the final budget.

 

The higher education plan, which passed the Ohio Senate as a separate piece of legislation, would ban most mandatory diversity training, ban faculty from striking during contract negotiations and evaluate professors on whether they create "classrooms free from bias."

 

Huffman said he was told "nearly all" House Republicans support Senate Bill 83, but there were objections to putting it in the budget.

 

"If that's true, they should pass it as an individual bill as soon as possible," Huffman said.

 

======================================

 

The universal vouchers reform is something I never seriously thought I'd see happen in Ohio when I was a lonely voice supporting them all the way in back in 2010 on this thread, and others, back when I was still single and childless and just supporting them on principle.  Still a long way from the complete privatization of public education, but if this is possible in 13 years, maybe I can dare to dream of what will be possible in 26.  (Of course, I recognize that the 13 number is arbitrary and the school freedom movement did not begin with my first mentions of the topic on UrbanOhio.)  And even this midway step is a big one, and one that I'm considerably more vested in now not just for my own family--we likely won't get that much from the universally-available vouchers considering that they'll scale down above 450% of poverty--but for the families of some of my children's friends who have confided that they might not be able to continue to afford to keep their children at our school without a reform like this.  This budget bill may well prevent the breakup of some of my own kids' social circles, in addition to giving more such deserving kids a shot at schools like ours.

 

It's been a really good week.  Happy birthday, America!

Unmitigated disaster of policy. 7 bullets in your post. 3 wins - focusing on phonics, increasing teacher minimum pay, small scholarships for doing well in high school. 4 bullets summarizing terrible policies that continue the unwavering assault on public education in the state. Our schools used to be near the top in rankings. As Republicans continue their attacks, Ohio school rankings continue to plummet. Another sad day for our once great state.

11 hours ago, Gramarye said:

Five public universities in Ohio will get a "free speech institute" on their campus "that would allow students to receive broadened viewpoints." Republicans say this will increase viewpoint diversity on Ohio's college campuses. Democrats say these institutes were sprung on the colleges, and they have concerns about how they will operate. The schools are Ohio State University, University of Toledo, Miami University, Cleveland State University and the University of Cincinnati

How did they decide on those five? 

I bet those institutes will be fun places. 

The paradox of tolerance.

Free speech institutes?  WTF?  Please show me where college campuses, especially these five public universities, don't already permit free speech? 

Cool!!!!! This means we can now allow discussion about non heterosexual heads of household, or other "broadened viewpoints" concerning slavery or the interpretation of American history in primary public schools!!!!!!

Oh wait...more GOP hypocrisy.

 

14 hours ago, Gramarye said:

The universal vouchers reform is something I never seriously thought I'd see happen in Ohio when I was a lonely voice supporting them all the way in back in 2010 on this thread, and others, back when I was still single and childless and just supporting them on principle.  Still a long way from the complete privatization of public education, but if this is possible in 13 years, maybe I can dare to dream of what will be possible in 26. 

 

I have several objections to vouchers, but one thing that maybe we could agree on is that the expenditure of public money should be transparent and there should be oversight of how public dollars are spent.  How would you structure oversight over how schools spend public dollars?

 

I don't think the State can afford parallel systems of private schools and public schools, and you seem to be advocating for eliminating the public school system entirely.  What do you propose for unruly kids of unruly parents?  What about developmentally and physically disabled kids?  How do we ensure that there are schools near where kids live?

3 hours ago, Foraker said:

 

I have several objections to vouchers, but one thing that maybe we could agree on is that the expenditure of public money should be transparent and there should be oversight of how public dollars are spent.  How would you structure oversight over how schools spend public dollars?

 

I don't think the State can afford parallel systems of private schools and public schools, and you seem to be advocating for eliminating the public school system entirely.  What do you propose for unruly kids of unruly parents?  What about developmentally and physically disabled kids?  How do we ensure that there are schools near where kids live?

Supporters of those voucher policies just ignore those questions, and lead us to think private or religious schools will take those kids. Publicly supporting private education is probably unconstitutional, because the state is supposed to set up a system of public schools, not pay out tuition to parents and private schools. More and more Black parents, having experienced the disinvestment in urban public education as children when white flight was at its peak, have given up on public schools and now also believe Catholic or other private schools are better. 

4 hours ago, TheCOV said:

Free speech institutes?  WTF?  Please show me where college campuses, especially these five public universities, don't already permit free speech? 

Cool!!!!! This means we can now allow discussion about non heterosexual heads of household, or other "broadened viewpoints" concerning slavery or the interpretation of American history in primary public schools!!!!!!

Oh wait...more GOP hypocrisy.

 

 

Anytime conservatives name something with "free speech" or "freedom" in it, it invariably means the exact opposite. 

1 hour ago, westerninterloper said:

Supporters of those voucher policies just ignore those questions, and lead us to think private or religious schools will take those kids. Publicly supporting private education is probably unconstitutional, because the state is supposed to set up a system of public schools, not pay out tuition to parents and private schools. More and more Black parents, having experienced the disinvestment in urban public education as children when white flight was at its peak, have given up on public schools and now also believe Catholic or other private schools are better. 

 

Republicans have refused to fix the unconstitutional school funding issue for decades, and this is an explanation why. It's the same philosophy they take with all government- "Government doesn't work and when we're in control, we'll make sure of it." Of course, they have no issue whatsoever robbing public schools to pay for their pet projects. Who cares how many kids get left behind in schools they are killing.

On 7/4/2023 at 12:30 AM, Gramarye said:

More on this from the Dispatch:

 

https://www.dispatch.com/story/news/politics/2023/06/30/higher-ed-out-universal-vouchers-in-as-ohio-reaches-budget-deal/70372777007/

 

Here's what made it into the final budget as it heads to Gov. Mike DeWine for his signature:

• All Ohio school children will be eligible for a school voucher, but how much those EdChoice scholarships are worth will depend on family income. Children whose families earn up 450% of federal poverty will be able to get a full EdChoice scholarship to help them cover the cost of attending private schools. Students whose families earn more will be able to get smaller scholarships. That's a 77% increase ($825 million) over current voucher spending.
• New teachers will earn more money when this budget takes effect. The state minimum salary for teachers increased from $30,000 to $35,000. That's less than the House version, though.
• Who controls the Ohio Department of Education will change. The budget gave control over most education responsibilities like statewide curricula to the governor's office. It also renamed the agency as the Department of Education and Workforce.
• The governor received a significant investment in childhood literacy and phonics-based programs in this budget. Per his request, Ohio will restrict the use of other literacy programs and provide training in phonics to teachers.
• Five public universities in Ohio will get a "free speech institute" on their campus "that would allow students to receive broadened viewpoints." Republicans say this will increase viewpoint diversity on Ohio's college campuses. Democrats say these institutes were sprung on the colleges, and they have concerns about how they will operate. The schools are Ohio State University, University of Toledo, Miami University, Cleveland State University and the University of Cincinnati.
• Ohio's higher institutions can no longer ban students from being on campus if they refuse certain vaccinations.
• High school students who graduate in the top 5% of their classes will be eligible for $5,000 scholarships for Ohio colleges and universities.

But a controversial Senate plan to transform life at Ohio's public colleges and universities didn't make the final budget.

 

The higher education plan, which passed the Ohio Senate as a separate piece of legislation, would ban most mandatory diversity training, ban faculty from striking during contract negotiations and evaluate professors on whether they create "classrooms free from bias."

 

Huffman said he was told "nearly all" House Republicans support Senate Bill 83, but there were objections to putting it in the budget.

 

"If that's true, they should pass it as an individual bill as soon as possible," Huffman said.

 

======================================

 

The universal vouchers reform is something I never seriously thought I'd see happen in Ohio when I was a lonely voice supporting them all the way in back in 2010 on this thread, and others, back when I was still single and childless and just supporting them on principle.  Still a long way from the complete privatization of public education, but if this is possible in 13 years, maybe I can dare to dream of what will be possible in 26.  (Of course, I recognize that the 13 number is arbitrary and the school freedom movement did not begin with my first mentions of the topic on UrbanOhio.)  And even this midway step is a big one, and one that I'm considerably more vested in now not just for my own family--we likely won't get that much from the universally-available vouchers considering that they'll scale down above 450% of poverty--but for the families of some of my children's friends who have confided that they might not be able to continue to afford to keep their children at our school without a reform like this.  This budget bill may well prevent the breakup of some of my own kids' social circles, in addition to giving more such deserving kids a shot at schools like ours.

 

It's been a really good week.  Happy birthday, America!

My neighbor was talking about this over the weekend. Our neighborhood is in 2 school districts and on his side, he was able to get a voucher for his kids but was informed that the school district had improved and his second child would not be eligible for the voucher as she was about to enter HS so he has been fretting about paying the full freight. It is good to hear this is coming to pass.

2 hours ago, Brutus_buckeye said:

My neighbor was talking about this over the weekend. Our neighborhood is in 2 school districts and on his side, he was able to get a voucher for his kids but was informed that the school district had improved and his second child would not be eligible for the voucher as she was about to enter HS so he has been fretting about paying the full freight. It is good to hear this is coming to pass.

I'll put the same questions to you:  Should the expenditure of public money be transparent and should there be oversight of how public dollars are spent?  How would you structure oversight over how schools spend public dollars?

 

I don't think the State can afford parallel systems of private schools and public schools, and Gramarye seemed to be advocating for eliminating the public school system entirely.  What do you propose for unruly kids of unruly parents?  What about developmentally and physically disabled kids?  How do we ensure that there are schools near where kids live?