Container Top
Homes   Jobs   Cars   Shopping
Search

Events Calendar

EVENT SEARCH:

In This Section


Most Read Stories


Blogs:


Pets:
Sick Pets Get High-tech Health Care

The Heldenfiles:
Friday Night Notebook

Patrick McManamon:
The proposed new LeBron mural doesn't do it for me

Akron Zips:
Two blowouts, one night

Tribe Matters:
Seven players added to Tribe’s 40-man roster

Cleveland Browns:
Hey, somebody's gotta stick up for the Browns

Kent State Sports:
Singletary update

Cleveland Cavaliers:
Gameblog: Cavs at Indiana Pacers

Buckeye Blogging:
OSU – Michigan college football rivals meet in Baghdad

Varsity Letters:
Bowling season starts today

All Da King's Men:
Attention Haters, Palin And Hannity Together

Blog of Mass Destruction:
Muslim McCarthyism & Death Prayers

Akron Law Café:
Federal Judge Declares DOMA Unconstitutional

See Jane Style:
Vintage Chic

Car Chase:
TIME TO GET YOUR COLLECTOR CARS WINTERIZED

Let's Talk Real Estate:
Silverdome Potentially SOLD!

Ohio Travels with Betty:
Norma asks if Barkitecture is still at Stan Hywet.

Sound Check:
Steely Dan Plays "The Royal Scam" at E.J. Thomas Hall

HRLite House:
Colloquium at University of Akron

Akron Gamer:
Nintendo's Mario endures even as games come and go

What's behind the curtain?

The governor's private calculations for public schools

From the moment Ted Strickland went public with a school-funding plan, practically everyone recognized the basis for the budget allocations needed revision. Questions abounded: Why, for example, would some wealthy districts receive more state money than much poorer ones? How were the costs calculated for components of the key funding factor, the Instructional Quality Index?

The governor now has set in motion the inevitable revisions. Yet his process invites doubts about the fundamental issue of transparency.

An ''evidence-based model'' should present clearly and fully the evidence supporting the funding decisions for districts. Such clarity and openness would dispel any suspicion the governor is fudging, say, in computing teacher salaries, to fit budget constraints.

With that in mind, it is disturbing to learn that a private consulting firm is heavily engaged in the plan revisions. Ordinarily, the job would go to the state Department of Education. A key difference? The department is obligated to make its records public. The private consulting firm is not.

According to the Associated Press, the firm, Driscoll & Fleeter, under contract with the Education Tax Policy Institute, which does research for the Ohio School Boards Association, is sharing its work with the governor's staff and legislators. The concern is that by relying on a private firm, the governor has abandoned transparency. What's wrong with a complete public airing of the numbers and assumptions?

From the moment Ted Strickland went public with a school-funding plan, practically everyone recognized the basis for the budget allocations needed revision. Questions abounded: Why, for example, would some wealthy districts receive more state money than much poorer ones? How were the costs calculated for components of the key funding factor, the Instructional Quality Index?

Get the full article here.


Story tools

Email  Email   Print  Print   Save  Save   Reprint  Reprint   Popular  Most Popular   Reprint  Subscribe

Share this story

AddThis Social Bookmark Button


peter
stow, oh

Posted 06:48 AM, 03/27/2009

"What's wrong with a complete public airing of the numbers and assumptions?"

The more of the details that are known of Gov. Strickland's tax increasing education 'reform' plan, the quicker and stronger the resistence to it will be.
















Most Commented Stories