School Laws of Ohio
State LAWS:
.A provision in Ohio’s (June, 2011) budget law requires that by Sept. 1, (2012) the state must rank all public schools and charter schools based on a report card measure called the Performance Index- a calculation of student performance on state tests.
. Schools ranked in the bottom 10 percent will require teachers of “core” subjects to take licensing exams within the school year. Core subjects include reading, math, science, and social studies (English language arts, foreign language, government, economics, fine arts, history and geography).
. Re-testing teachers, Gov. John Kasick has said, will hold them more accountable and give districts and charter schools the ability to move ineffective teachers out.
. A preliminary list includes 32 Cincinnati-area schools among the 345 lowest-scoring schools.
What’s a performance Index? The PI is a weighted measure of students’ test results and academic levels based on Ohio Achievement test in grades 3-8 and the Ohio Graduation Test I grade 10. Student scores place them in one of five performance levels: limited, basic, proficient, accelerated and advanced. The PI is calculated by multiplying the percentage of students at each performance level by a multiplier, ranging from 0 for untested students to 1.2 for advanced students. The sum is the PI, a score ranging from 0 to 120, with 100 being the goal.
Source: Ohio puts teachers on notice.
Instructors at state’s low-scoring schools must take licensing tests. By Denise Smith-Amos The Enquirer 2/5/12 A1
***********
In 1983, Ohio General Assembly passes Senate Bill 133 The Ohio Public Employee Collective Baragaining Act (which allowed for negotiations).
Chapters under The Collective Bargaining Act:
ORC 4117.01 (B) who is a public employer
ORC 4117.04 duties of a public employer
ORC 4117.01 (C)
ORC.4117.03 rights of public employees
ORC4117.08(B) prohibited subjects, matters not to be bargained
ORC 4117.08(C) 4117.09 4117.10 The Collective Bargaining Agreement
ORD 4117.09(B) grievence procedure ending in arbitration
ORC 4117.09 (B)(1) Grievence
ORC 4117.14 Negotiating a Successor Agreement
ORC 4114.15 Strike limitations
NOTE : see Responses below
————————————————————————————————
ORC 3306.01 (A) (2) and ORC 3313.48 Mimimum School Year Standards
ORC Sec. 3306.05 (B) (1) Student Teacher Ratio. Core teachers are calculated at one teacher for every 15 students in grades K-3 and one teacher for evry 25 students in grades 4-12.
K-3 = 15:1
4-5 = 25:1
6-8 = 25:1
9-12 = 25:1
(1/8/11 – LittleMiamiL board member said the state minimum is 35 and 25 students per teacher for 5-12 and K-4 grades. i.e. dismissing teachers.)
ORC 3301.07 (D) (3) Minimum Operating Standards
ORC 3327.01 (2-Mile Walk Zones) State Minimum Busing Requirements Effective 1-4-10
ORC 3311.29 Dissolution of district (no Ohio district has ever been disolved. No precedent, no procedures in place. If there is no agreement with neighboring districts, the state will order it to be done – per 11/8/2011 board presenter at Oasis CC)
BILLS:
H.B. 366 if enacted would allow for district exemption of all-day kindergarten requirement.
=============================
Class size requirements will be phased in over a six year period. Smaller class sizes entail that more space will be required and more teachers will have to be hired to accommodate the provision.
http://www.stateofohioeducation.com/2009/09/unfunded-mandates-in-new-evidence-based.html
==========================================
Friday, September 11, 2009
Unfunded Mandates in the new Evidence Based Model?
Now that the Strickland education reform celebration is coming to a close and the Evidence Based Model “OEBM” funding plan is in place, local school boards are screaming “unfunded mandates” and wondering how this “fix” is actually going to fix anything. They need more OEBM Kool-aid, ’cause it looks like they are quickly becoming non-believers.Source: Ohio House votes to undo school plan, by Catherine Candisky, Columbus Dispatch . The Enquirer Feb. 17,2011
HB 191, pending in the Ohio House would require schools to start after labor Day and end before Memorial Day. It would switch schools from a days-based calendar to hours-based.
Source: Bill calls for shorter school year. A longer summer could mean more tourist dollars. By Jessica Brown May 28, 2011 The Cincinnati Enquirer
======================================================
Restrictions on nepotism or hiring family members
Ohio Revised Code Chapter 102. and Sections 2921.42 and 2921.43
==================================================
Senate Bill 133 To Do
Re-elect Rep Connie Pillich, her HB516 will save Sycamore $12 million while her opponent’s support of HB400 will cost district near $1mil!
CONTRIBUTION CHANGE REMOVED FROM BUDGET BILL
The proposed state budget no longer includes language that would set the contributions for public employers and their employees to 12% from each. On April 28, Substitute House Bill 153 (commonly referred to as the “budget bill”) was presented at the House Finance and Appropriations Committee meeting with the proposed contribution change removed. This now enables any discussion of contributions to be held within the context of the pension reform package proposed by the five Ohio statewide public pension systems.
STRS Ohio’s proposed pension reform plan calls for a 3% increase in member contributions, to 13% from 10%, and no change in the current 14% employer contributions as a way to help the pension fund meet the 30-year funding requirement. STRS Ohio was on record as opposing the 12-and-12 scenario, noting that the resulting decrease in revenue would require additional cuts in benefits for STRS Ohio’s active members and retirees and/or even more in contributions from members. Many STRS Ohio members also voiced their concerns with legislators about the budget bill language.
This most recent step in the House committee helps allow any proposed changes to STRS Ohio’s plan to be discussed and their actuarial impact analyzed in conjunction with the other plan components. We will continue to monitor Sub. H.B. 153 as it moves through the legislative process.
Source: STRS 4/27/11
‘Teach for America’ wins OK in Ohio Senate approves training plan
By Jon Craig,
The Enquirer 4/14/11 C2
.
Teach for America students could be teaching in Ohio in 2012 because of legislation passed Wednesday by the Ohio senate. Gov. John Kasich, … said he will sign the measure into law. .
.
About 300 Ohioans are enrolled in the highly competitive 21-year-old nonprofit program, but state licensing requirements do not allow any of the trainees to teach within Ohio..
.
This year, more than 1,800 Ohioans applied to be a part of the program, according to (Sen. Gary) Cates. An average of one in 10 applicants gets accepted.
.
The national program recruits recent college graduates of all majors for paid two-year teaching jobs in urban and rural areas, including Indianapolis. Participants also must complete a five-week summer training seminar.
.
But to be a licensed teacher in Ohio, applicants must get a “resident educator license” which requires passing a state licensing exam and graduating from a teacher-preparation program. To continue teaching for more than four years, they must get their “professional educator license,” which requires participation in a four-year teacher residency program that includes mentoring and professional development..
House Bill 21 requires the Ohio Board of Education to offer a resident educator license for Teach for America applicants who meet certain minimum qualifications such as having a bachelor’s degree, maintaining at least a 2.5 grade-point average, and having passed the state board test in the subject they’ll be teaching. It also gives an Ohio license to applications who have taught two years in another state through the Teach for America program.
.
Teach for American which pays for training, is primarily funded by donors and foundations; schools pay the teachers at regular district rates.
.
During his first State of the State speech last month, Kasich promised to open Ohio up to Teach for America, calling it astonishing that its participants can’t teach here.
.
“Did you know that Teacher for America is not in Ohio?” Kasich asked. Did you know we have kept them out because we have to jump through hoops and cross T’s and dot I’s, while the best and brightest are available to teach in other parts of America? Teach for America is coming to Ohio. I promise you that.”
Attention Bloggers! Let us know which Ohio laws you want to know about.
- Kindergarten class size limits
- Busing
- Dismissal of teachers
Senate Bill 5 would:
+Wipe out. or severly limit, collective bargaining for all state workers – including unionized faculty and staff at Ohio colleges and community colleges.
+Ban public employee strikes
+Limit a local union’s right to bargain for health insurance
+Eliminate automatic pay increases for public employees
+Strip teachers of the right to pick their classes or schools
+Require union employees to pay at least 20 percent of their healthcare costs
+Eliminate class size limits for teachers.
Source: Thousands protest bill on unions. By Jon Craig The Cincinnati Enquirer Feb. 18, 2011
State and local governments would have saved an estimated $1.3 billion in 2010 on health insurance and automatic pay increases if the limits imposed by Senate Bill 5 were in effect, according to a new analysis by the Office of Collective Bargaining.
.
The analysis estimates the savings for schools and local governments would have topped $1.1 billion.
.
… the bill would remove from state law step increases and longevity pay – automatic pay bumps. on top of any negotiated raises.
.
Local contracts often include a variety of step increases, particularly in the first decade of employment.
.
The savings estimate did not include the bill’s proposed ban on employers paying any part of an employee’s share of his pension costs.
Source: “SB 5 would’ve saved $1.3B in 2010″ By Jim Siegel The Columbus Dispatch. The Enquirer Feb. 26, 2011 Section C
In a February 25, 2011, Charles Krauthammer column entitled US rescue coming at state level, he writes, “They ($3.6 billion budget shortfall …) came largely from a half-century power imbalance between the unions and the politicians with whom they collectively bargain.”
.
Our state legislators negotiate (bargain) directly with the teacher unions. They Collectively Bargain with each other.Our locally elected board of education (BOE) officials do not bargain with teacher unions on many matters, notably benefits such as health care and pension.
Our local board official’s hands are tied in many cases. Even if they wanted to be more fiscally conservative, some compensation costs are out of their control.
The only thing that the BOE has control over are those aspects that they directly negotiate with the unions, i.e., wages. And, even that is only partial control. BOE control relates to their decisions about the actual dollar amounts shown on the salary schedule and whether or not to grant cola increases with a specific percentage amount. They do not have control over the costly automatic step raises that are built into the teacher’s salary schedule structure, which is part of the Collective Bargaining law.
SB 5 battle highlights disconnect between teachers’ perceptions and fiscal reality
By Terry Ryan 2/23/11
.
The Midwest is in turmoil over proposed changes to state laws that deal with collective bargaining rights and pensions for public sector employees, including teachers and other school personnel (as well as police officers, state employees, and more). Madison looks like Cairo, Indianapolis like Tunis, and Columbus like Bahrain, with thousands demonstrating, chanting slogans, and pressing their issues. (Fortunately, nobody has opened fire or dropped “small bombs” as in Tripoli.) Economics are driving this angst: how should these states deal with their wretched fiscal conditions and how should the pain be distributed?
.
To address these problems, Republican lawmakers and governors have proposed major changes to collective bargaining laws and pension systems. In Ohio, Senate Bill 5 would continue to afford teachers the right to bargain collectively over wages, hours, and other conditions of employment. But the bill would also make profound alterations to the status quo, including: requiring all public-school employees to contribute at least 20 percent of the premiums for their health-insurance plan; removing from collective bargaining – and entrusting to management – such issues as class size and personnel placement; prohibiting continuing contracts and effectively abolishing tenure; removing seniority as the sole determinant for layoffs and requiring that teacher performance be the primary factor; and abolishing automatic step increases in salary.
.
Not surprisingly, these changes are being fiercely resisted by the Buckeye State’s teachers, their unions, and their political allies. Battle lines are forming, and we at Fordham—as veteran advocates for “smart cuts” and “stretching the school dollar”—have been drawn into the fray. In the past week, I testified at a legislative hearing on key education components of SB5, and joined a conversation in Dayton with Senator Peggy Lehner and a group of teachers and union leaders. On both occasions, large crowds of disgruntled protestors stood outside the meeting rooms, though most were respectful.
.
In those sessions and beyond, my colleagues and I have argued that changing state law to offer school districts more flexibility over personnel during times of funding cuts is critical for helping them maintain their academic performance. Further, this flexibility to make smart cuts is critical if our schools and students are to emerge out of this financial crisis stronger than ever.
.
And a crisis it is. The federal “bail-out” dollars will that have cushioned Ohio and its school districts for the past two years will dry up by late 2011 and the state is required to balance its budget. Adding to the challenge, dollars for schools must compete with other valuable public programs. Though Ohio’s K-12 enrollment has been all but flat for a decade, during that same period the number of Ohioans enrolled in Medicaid has leaped from 1.3 million to 2.1 million.
.
Changing state law to offer school districts more flexibility over personnel during times of funding cuts is critical for helping them maintain their academic performance..
Something has to give. The state can either raise taxes or cut programs (or both) but Governor Kasich and the legislative majorities in both chambers were elected in November on the promise not to raise taxes. So cuts will be made and, as K-12 education eats up about 40 percent of the state’s revenue, schools and school employees will bear a share of the pain.
.
Can this be done while protecting children and their learning? We know, for example, that relying on seniority-based layoffs to close fiscal gaps hurts pupil achievement. Last-hired/first-fired also hurts high-poverty schools, which typically have more junior teachers. Seniority-based RIFs will also trash some of the state’s most innovative schools – like STEM schools – because they’re new and staffed largely by younger teachers.
.
I made this case to the group of teachers in Dayton the other morning and they unanimously rejected it. They defended seniority on two fronts. First, they insist that district officials will RIF their most expensive teachers first simply to save money. Second, they said, Ohio doesn’t have a decent system for measuring teacher performance and test scores—they insisted—don’t prove much and certainly not the caliber of a teacher’s effectiveness.
.
Further, they kept asking, why the rush? Why all of the sudden is the state needing to make these changes? The teachers felt that GOP lawmakers are attacking them in retaliation for their unions not supporting Kasich in the last election. They seemed completely unaware of how thoroughly they (and other Ohioans) had been left in the dark these past few years about Ohio’s impending budget cliff, thanks to the federal stimulus dollars, some tricky accounting at the state level, and former Governor Strickland’s celebration of his hocus-pocus school-funding scheme, which promised billions of non-existent new dollars for schools over the next decade.
.
Earlier this week, the self-same former governor emailed his supporters that “thousands and thousands of Ohioans just like you have crowded the Statehouse because the livelihoods of Ohio’s families are on the line. I was so inspired by these crowds that I decided to join them this past Thursday. There’s just too much at stake to let Governor Kasich and the legislature roll back the clock on progress for Ohio’s middle class.” It’s important to recall that not once during the three gubernatorial debates last autumn did Ted Strickland state that to balance Ohio’s budget would call for increased taxes. If that wasn’t his intent, however, how did he expect to balance the budget other than by cutting—which is precisely what Republicans are proposing?
.
Teachers may be forgiven for feeling like all of this change has come out of nowhere because Ohio had zero leadership around the looming fiscal crisis before last month. The real debate in Ohio is just starting and there is no doubt that the current bills under consideration will be significantly amended or even put aside for alternatives. An air of suspense blankets the state until Kasich himself presents his budget by March 15.
.
Hinting at what’s coming, the other evening he said, “We are searching for a balance. Give our managers, our cities, our schools, and even our state the tools to control their costs.” He added, “Workers have been overpromised. This is not about attacking anybody. It is about fixing the state and making us competitive again.”
He’s right. And it isn’t just Ohio that he’s right about.
“…(representatives in the) Ohio House are preparing legislation to repeal key elements of Ohio’s school-funding setup, including a requirement that school districts offer tuition-free, all-day kindergarten.”
.
“…would also wipe out a plan to fund smaller class sizes.”
.
“.. to abolish mandates that schools establish family and civic engagement councils …”
.
..school financial forecasts would be for three years, down from the current five years.”
.
“Gardner said his bill will not address pensions or collective bargaining, but separate legislation on those issues is expected.”
.
“These 28 local districts requested and received all-day kindergarten waivers for 2010-11, saying they could not afford it, did not have enough space or both:…” (Note: Sycamore was listed as one of the 28 districts)
.
Source: Rollback sought on school mandates. Districts could save on local spending. By Catherine Candisky. The Columbus Dispatch. Enquirer staff writer Cindy Kranz contributed. 1/18/11 pp B1, B2
This week StudentsFirst is introducing its legislative agenda, “A Challenge to States and Districts: Policies that Put Students First.” It is a comprehensive set of policies and legislation that we believe must be adopted to create the right environment at local and state levels, where transformational school reform can take hold.
Source: “In Budget Crisis, an Opening for School Reform,” by Michelle Rhee, Wall Street Journal, January 11, 2011. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704739504576068142896954626.html?mod=googlenews_wsj
The Little Miami Local district (in Fiscal Emergency) has two more levy tries – May (13.95 mills by state order) and November 2011. If both fail, the State by law can disolve the district and assign students to other districts. Whether they do it or not is another issue.
The district had seven straight tax levy defeats since 2008. It has a history of requiring 3 levy votes before one is passed.
State school officials have urged the district to let the state’s fiscal emergency process play out this year in order to restore Little Miami’s financial viability.
Source: Jan. 8, 2011, Little Miami school board presentation to neighboring district school board officials.
—————————————————
A new teacher contract negotiation is currently on hold awaiting state approval to more forward. The July 1, 2006 through June 30, 2009 MASTER CONTRACT is still in effect. There is no indication that teachers will pay more for the escalating insurance benefits which are estimated to add about $3.8 million annually, or 10 percent to the total expenditures.
———————————————————
“Dunbar (board president) argued ’15.95 mills do a much better job to get us out of fiscal emergency. But board member Bobbi Grice countered “we have to have something that is passable’ explaining her support of the 13.95-mill levy.” Source: Little Miami board can’t agree. 13.95 mills not enough, some members agrue. The Enquirer January 13, 2011 by Michael D. Clark.
————————————————————
“We are in such a severe financial situation,” said (Lakota) Board President Joan Powell.
.
Despite cutting $13 million from personnel and programs in the last two years, Lakota officials said busing was an obvious money saver and one of the few major budgetary areas allowed for elimination under Ohio school law.
.
Source: Lakota bus cuts start in Jan. – 6,000 affected this school year.
By Michael D. Clark The Enquirer 12/14/10 B1