Election season is fast approaching, which means local districts will once again have the opportunity to approach taxpayers to help fund school initiatives.
Since Indiana passed property tax reform measures in 2008, school corporations have seen a smaller share of local tax money. As a result, they now turn more often to referenda to fund construction and other projects. Just this past spring, 13 school districts placed 17 individual measures on their local ballots.
This go-around, there are only seven school-related measures statewide. The smaller number could be attributed to research that finds referenda offered in May have a better chance of passing – since spring ballots don’t include big races such as this year’s mayoral contests or next November’s presidential election, researchers say May is prime time for pro-referenda voter turnout.
Here’s a list of referenda that will appear on various local ballots November 3:
- Greater Clarke County Schools is asking for 39.27 cents per $100 of assessed valuation to finance what its calling the “2015 Multi-Facility Safety, Security, Technology, Construction and Restoration Project.” The district estimates the total project cost at around $109.2 million. Jerod Clapp of the News & Tribune reports the money will fund renovations for three district middle schools and one elementary, in addition to new buildings on existing sites for three other schools.
- The East Noble School Corporation will ask for 34.06 cents per $100 of assessed valuation to fund construction of a new middle school building. The district attempted this same measure last fall to no avail.
Leaders at the Indiana Department of Education, along with State Board of Education members and Indiana Charter School Board staff, participated in a conference call with federal officials Tuesday to discuss next steps for correcting errors in this year’s Title I distributions. This comes after several state charter schools questioned the IDOE’s process for distributing the funds for low-income kids.
State officials asked the feds in late September to weigh in, and they said Indiana’s system was incorrect. They discovered inconsistencies in the calculations used to divvy up awards for charters and traditional public schools, in addition to finding the state had not properly applied a federal rule governing Title I to all schools.
That rule, a provision in U.S. statute called “hold harmless,” says no school or “local education agency” may lose more than 15 percent of the previous year’s allocation.
Some Hoosier schools saw decreases of up to 33 percent this year. The feds determined nearly half of Indiana’s charter schools were shortchanged; in contrast, the same thing happened to fewer than one percent of traditional public schools.
The feds said IDOE officials will likely need to take “corrective action” to fix this year’s award amounts. The two departments are working to figure out exactly what that might entail – but first, they want to see how far back the problem may reach.
“During Tuesday’s call, federal officials expressed that it is possible that both charter and traditional public schools may have received an excess allocation of federal dollars over the years,” IDOE officials said in a statement. “This year, many schools have seen the possibility of a reduction…similar reductions were possible in previous years, but federal stimulus funding prevented cuts.”
The review will look at systems in place under current state Superintendent Glenda Ritz‘s leadership, as well as those administered by former superintendent Tony Bennett. Bennett served as state schools’ chief from 2008 to 2012.
IDOE spokesman Daniel Altman confirms Indiana has not changed its formula for Title I allocations in more than a decade.
Altman adds that during Tuesday’s conference call, no specific timeline was set for collecting and submitting the historical data.
This story is part of The First Year series, which follows three new teachers as they navigate the ups and downs of the first year in the classroom. See the full series and listen to and read more content here.
When you’re new to something, it takes a lot of trial and error to figure out a rhythm. For first-time teachers, this process happens with dozens of students acting as their guinea pigs.
The three first-year teachers spent years in their undergraduate classes learning teaching tactics and classroom management skills and practicing them during their time as student teachers. But now that they have a class of their own with no other teachers to help, they have to figure out what works and what doesn’t for their students.
“You have to really find what fits your kids’ needs”
Gabe Hoffman’s third grade class at Nora Elementary has a math test coming up, so he’s leading them in a review game. He writes an addition or subtraction problem on the board and they solve it on their own. If a student gets it wrong, he or she is out. But right now, the group is talking too much when they should be working.
“I’m going to sit here, you have 30 seconds to get it together or we are not playing,” Hoffman calls out over the noise.
He’s frustrated because he wants to play games with his students and make the test review fun. But six weeks into the school year, he’s getting a handle on what types of games work – and don’t work – with his kids.
“It just depends, you have to really find what fits your kids’ needs,” he says.
For Hoffman, he’s learned his students can’t focus when they play games in teams, and he has to give them more structure when doing group work.
“I know other teachers can do whatever they want and their kids are fine getting right back together,” Hoffman says. “But I have a group where I have a couple in the room that are particularly able to amp up everybody else, so it just depends on who’s in the room at what time.”
Which has caused some growing pains for Hoffman. Today’s review game is a good example. Since the kids came back from recess they’ve had trouble calming down and focusing on their work. He tried playing a two-minute educational video to calm them down. He read aloud from a novel they’re reading as a class and had them work in small groups using class computers. But they keep getting rowdy. So Hoffman starts walking around the room collecting the white boards they were using to show their answers and hands them a worksheet to complete silently instead. Continue Reading
Mention standardized testing in the Hoosier state, and you’re sure to hear plenty of opinions.
Teachers and students spend a good portion of their instructional time preparing for and taking a variety of tests. And of late, state legislators and education officials have spent a decent chunk of their time discussing what to do about it.
Michael Cohen is president of Achieve, an independent, nonprofit education reform organization that regularly works with states on standards, assessments and accountability measures. The group has been a player on Indiana’s education scene for many years, most recently helping state officials review the newest set of academic standards before the state adopted them in 2014.
In other words, Cohen has been around the block. He’s seen several states go through situations similar to the one Indiana currently finds itself in: general dissatisfaction on the part of parents, teachers and many others with the state of standardized testing.
Lawmakers are evaluating their options. The latest discussion took place Wednesday, when the General Assembly‘s Interim Study Committee on Education met to discuss testing and the related reporting requirements imposed on Hoosier schools.
And they invited Cohen to add his two cents. Here’s what he had to say…
1. Make sure tests actually measure Indiana’s standards.
This is precisely what Cohen warns against. He says adopting a test “off of a shelf someplace” means items are not likely to be designed with Indiana in mind.
“Those tests were developed for different purposes, and not particularly for Indiana standards,” Cohen explains.
Committee co-chair Rep. Bob Behning, R-Indianapolis, agrees. He adds that from a business perspective, it wouldn’t make much sense for a national vendor to try to adapt their product to Indiana’s specific needs.
“All of our open-ended questions are released and made available to the public, so that would be a problem with a national vendor because the way they’re able to be lower cost is the fact that they’re able to use those in multiple states,” Behning says. “If you’re going to release every question, then you’re going to end up having to pilot everything in Indiana specific[ally].”
2. Better define “proficiency.”
Cohen says for the last several years, Indiana has been aiming well below the rest of the nation on their standard for proficiency, citing statistics from the statewide ISTEP+ in contrast to the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), widely known as the “nation’s report card.”
The portion of fourth graders Indiana considered proficient in math in 2012-13 came in at 83.4 percent. The percentage of the nation’s fourth grade students labeled as proficient on NAEP sat closer to 35 percent.
That gap alarms Cohen.
A handful of Indiana charter school leaders recently voiced concern that their awards for the 2015-16 school year fell well below levels allowed in federal statute while also challenging the IDOE to explain why their neighboring traditional public schools saw funding increases.
The Indiana Charter School Board and two of Indiana’s U.S. representatives echoed these calls, and in response the department requested feedback from their federal counterparts on Indiana’s process for doling out funds to low-income kids.
U.S. Department of Education staff responded via email last Thursday to let state officials know they had been calculating Title I awards incorrectly, advising they take “corrective action” to fix the situation.
“We want every school to be funded equitably,” Altman said. “We’re obviously going to make sure the schools get the money they were supposed to get.”
According to a provision in federal statute called “hold harmless,” no school – charter or traditional public – is supposed to get less than 85 percent of the previous year’s Title I allocation. The feds found that through Indiana’s process, about 47 percent of charter schools were receiving amounts below that allowable threshold. The same was true for less than one percent of the state’s traditional public schools.
Michelle McKeown, interim director for the state’s Charter School Board, says this is a step in the right direction.
“I’m pleased to see that the U.S. Department of Education was wiling to step into this,” McKeown says. “My hope is just that charter schools receive the dollars to which they are entitled.”
McKeown will participate in a phone call with federal authorities Tuesday morning, along with State Board of Education and IDOE officials, to discuss next steps.
In response to inquiries from several members of Indiana’s educational community, the feds have spoken – and they say Indiana calculated Title I funding incorrectly.
According to correspondence between federal and state officials, the U.S. Department of Education told Indiana officials that they will likely need to take “corrective action” on the allocations they made for the 2015-16 school year.
As we reported earlier in the week, several members of Indiana’s charter school community experienced significant losses in Title I funding for the current year, and they challenged the Indiana Department of Education about their practices of distributing such funds.
Some charter leaders were upset that they lost Title I funds while their neighboring traditional public schools saw an increase.
Additionally, many claimed their funding has shrunk below levels allowed by federal statute. Much of the confusion stemmed from a specific provision called “hold harmless,” which says a local education agency may not lose more than five, 10 or 15 percent of their Title I allocation from the previous year. How much a school retains depends on what their student population looks like, based on poverty numbers and other relevant statistics.
When local charters began asking questions, the IDOE told them that hold harmless does not apply to public charter schools because they are not considered a “local education agency.” The Indiana Charter School Board contacted the USED to see if this was true.
And according to the feds, it’s not – they say charter schools do count as LEAs, a unique kind that warrant special considerations the IDOE is not currently making.
In an email obtained by StateImpact, the Office of State Support at the U.S. Department of Education explained to Indiana officials that a state may not reduce any LEA’s allocation – including a charter school’s – below its hold harmless amount, unless there are insufficient funds to pay all LEAs their due amounts. The federally-established hold harmless amounts are based on poverty percentages as follows:
The IDOE had told the feds charter school enrollments generally fluctuate more than public school enrollments, so they reasoned it would be “educationally disruptive” to provide a shrinking charter 85, 90, or 95 percent of its prior year’s Title I allocation. They said that’s because it would likely be more than the charter could use, and would take away from other schools with more educationally at-risk children.
The feds say this is “inconsistent with the statute and regulations,” because a state is not allowed to reduce any LEA below its hold harmless amount except in limited circumstances – none of which include a declining enrollment.
Students in Shelby County will soon be able to attend college locally for free.
Both the Shelbyville City and County Councils unanimously approved a plan that will pay for two years at Ivy Tech Community College for local students who qualify – one of the first initiatives of its kind in Indiana.
Using funds largely received through the Indiana Grand Racing Casino, the “Advantage Shelby County” program will cover whatever costs federal Pell grants will not over two years. Local high school graduates can qualify if they enroll full-time at Ivy Tech, maintain a minimum 2.0 GPA and satisfactory academic progress benchmarks, and complete a minimum of 10 hours of community service per semester.
The program will be open to students pursuing degrees in Advanced Automation and Robotics Technology, Business Administration, General Studies or Transfer General Education Core. According to Dan McGowan at Inside Indiana Business, city and county council members selected these pathways with help from industry representatives.
Shelbyville Mayor Tom DeBaun describes his industrial town as a blue-collar community. He says the program will address a main concern for all area industries: maintaining a sustainable workforce.
“We know we’re not Indianapolis, we know that we’ll never have that downtown nightlife. We know that we won’t have the appeal of a Chicago or a San Francisco or a New York City,” DeBaun says. “But what we want to do is have the job opportunities and the community amenities to bring those kids home when they’re ready to raise their families. And to do that, you’ve got to have quality of place and job opportunities.”
As we reported earlier in the week, several Indiana charters have raised concerns recently about significant decreases in their Title I money for the current school year. Many are upset that their funding has shrunk below levels allowed in federal statute for “local education agencies,” a label they argue should apply to them.
In addition, some charter leaders say their neighboring traditional public schools saw an increase in Title I funding, which leads to questions about how the entitlement is calculated on the state level. Many are worried about the lack of clarity.
IDOE staff has asked the U.S. Department of Education to advise on this point. In particular, the department is asking about the calculation of Title I funds for charter schools “in light of an overall reduction of Title I dollars and a significant decrease in the Census Poverty Count for several charter schools,” according to a statement.
“Title I dollars are provided by the federal government to help schools that have high levels of poverty,” the statement reads. “Generally speaking, the Census Poverty Count is one of the major factors in the formula that determines how much a school receives in its Title I allocation. This year, many schools saw a reduction in their Census Poverty Count, which could lead to a reduction in their Title I allocation.”
The IDOE will communicate with both charter and traditional public schools once it receives further federal guidance.
We’ve been talking about a “teacher shortage” in Indiana for a few months – but much of the conversation thus far has revolved around causes, not necessarily concrete solutions.
Most of the discussion has been based on anecdotes, – but the Indiana Department of Education did release some official statistics Thursday in the form educator licensing data. The numbers show that the IDOE issued 3802 initial practitioner licenses during the 2014-15 school year, down from 4806 during the 2013-14 school year – a 21% drop. The 2015 total demonstrates a 33% overall decrease since the 2009-10 school year.
The IDOE only counted educators who received multiple licenses once in this total. The initial practitioner license count includes administrative, instructional, and support services licenses, such as those awarded to counselors.
The data show that there is, in fact, a steady drop in the number of first-year educators granted a teaching license in the Hoosier state.
And data presented during the most recent meeting of Indiana’s Blue Ribbon Commission only further confirmed the problem. The group, convened by State Superintendent Glenda Ritz to develop statewide strategies for addressing the shortage, met for the second time Thursday.
According to the Great Lakes Comprehensive Center, the number of students enrolling in teacher preparation programs in Indiana has declined steadily since 2009. The biggest drop happened between the 2011-12 and 2012-13 academic years, when 31 percent fewer students enrolled in these programs, according to federal data. That includes traditional and alternative options.
But aside from confirmation of the facts, the majority of the data presented Thursday is not news. And one commission member took the time to point this out.
When asked to put the cause of the recent challenge into words, John Jacobson, dean of the teachers college and professor of elementary education at Ball State University, said he couldn’t.
“I think the biggest challenge is we don’t know,” Jacobson told his colleagues. “We haven’t asked our high school students about their career paths.”
GLCC representatives presented some potential reasons, including data showing median salaries for Indiana’s classroom teachers lag behind the nation at elementary, middle and secondary levels, as well as limited opportunities for students to explore the teaching field early on – only 34 percent of state school corporations offer this for their high school students, excluding some of the biggest districts, like Indianapolis Public Schools and the Gary Community School Corporation.
But Jacobson pressed for, at the very least, a random survey of high school students to find out about the perceptions they have of the teaching profession. GLCC research associate Tara Zuber says that’s the goal – the kind of conversations her organization is facilitating with this Commission will help them craft the right kind of survey.