<
School FAQ Research Committee
(Non-Advocate)
Last Updated September 22, 2000
Jump to Questions and Answers
To get your penetrating question answered:
-
Post it at www.chuh.net/discus/messages/50/90.html
-
E-mail it to schoolfaqs@chuh.net
-
Paper mail it to:
School FAQ
1036 Pembrook Road
Cleveland Hts, OH 44121
Include your phone number and other contact information with your question.
Your question will be assigned to a committee member. They will contact
you to chat and start the research effort to get your answers.
This URL (www.chuh.net/school/FAQs) will have the links to all the questions
and answers as they develop. The CH-UH Public Library will also maintain
a paper version of your questions and answers.
Introduction (About Us)
The main purpose of the Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) group is to
provide an independent resource that researches issues and stimulates analysis
of practices and decisions on any aspect of K-12 education for our community.
We are non-advocate in our research and seek to present all aspects of
the issues, independent of our personal beliefs or positions. We are volunteers
and welcome new people to the research efforts at any time.
The second purpose of our group is to hear and respond to penetrating
questions from citizens. The idea is to work iteratively with questioners
to formulate questions that go to the heart of issues and develop the answers
to a depth that satisfies the questioner. We trust that this helps us all
to understand more and to make better choices for the education of children.
Our research will present information and facts from primary sources
from all levels of government, academic sources, and other research organizations.
We hope to present our findings in ways that assist citizens in thinking
through their own positions and to avoid offering ready made decisions.
Besides publishing our findings here we also publish our work in progress
at the web site
Our children are the future, and our belief is that only through an
informed and energetic community can we hope to solve the many education
problems that beset us. Cleveland Heights/University Heights has a proud
tradition of racial, ethnic and religious diversity, and a history of excellence
in our schools. But it is now faced with new challenges. Our community
has responded to the issues in the past, and is now being called upon to
confront fresh, new realities. We believe that knowledge is power, and
that only by recognizing and identifying the causes of our problems can
we hope to achieve our goal of a truly successful, integrated community.
Thus we of the FAQ group see our efforts as one small part of a larger
effort to recreate ourselves into a remarkable community for the twenty-first
century, a community that does not run from new challenges, but one that
has resourceful and effective responses.
The committee members currently are: (Join us?)
Technical Definitions (PDF file) for
EMIS Report Card Database valid through 1998-99 school year.
Question and Answer set:
-
Since the Cleveland Heights-University Heights School
District is weak on 4th and 6th State Proficiency Tests, what are the actual
scores compared to other districts in Cuyahoga County
-
What trends across the county correlate with these test scores?
-
Since correlations do not establish cause and effect, what are the
suspected causes for the observed scores?
Last Revised September 2, 2000
The more complete answer to this question is
now in the CH-UH library branches at the information desks. It can also
be downloaded in PDF format at http://chuh.net/school/FAQs/pamphlet/proficiency.question.pdf
In sharing this report with the Ohio Department of Education (ODE)
some clarification of the reasons for the different student scores in 4th,
6th, and 12th grade versus 9th grade was
provided by ODE: September 19, 2000
http://chuh.net/school/FAQs/proficiency.trent.html
-
Where to request or download past Proficiency Tests with scoring
criteria.
-
http://www.state.oh.us/proficiency
Click on the grade level test of interest and "Previous Tests" is a link
on each grade level page. To request order forms by phone, call 614-466-0223.
-
One answer : Tables from 1998-99 school
year State EMIS database information.1
-
4th Grade Reading Proficiency Plotted
against Percent of Disadvantaged Students.1
-
4th Grade Reading Proficiency Plotted
against Stability Rate as defined by Sate.1
-
It looks like Percent of Disadvantaged Students correlates very well and
not much else.
-
Here are ALL the Proficiency Score Trends over the last 3 Years (NO METRIC
INCLUDED ON RELATIVE TEST DIFFICULTY AT DIFFERENT GRADE LEVELS).1
-
4th Grade, CH-UH % Passed
All Tests
-
6th Grade, CH-UH % Passed
All Tests
-
County-Wide 9th Grade, CHUH is strong upward, except where already
proficient
-
County-Wide 10th Grade, CHUH is strong across the board with
only Science just below 75%
-
County-Wide 12th Grade, CHUH is predominantly weak and static
except writing
-
Background/History of Ohio Proficiency Tests.3
[1] Data from State 1998-99 EMIS Report Card data downloaded from http://www.ode.state.oh.us/reportcard/rc_download.htm
[2] Data downloaded from the Ohio Department of Education's Interactive
Local Report Card for Cuyahoga County.
[3] E-mail communication from Ohio Department of Education, Assement
and Evaluation (614) 466-3224.
[4] National Education website for
Achievement Improvement: (www.achieve.org)
-
Critics of the last levy suggested that CH-UH had too many
administrators. Since much of the school budget pays for staff, this
seems an important issue. How does the staffing in this district compare
with adjacent districts?
-
We need the poster of this question to give the FAQ group their name, phone,
and e-mail address. We need to get back to you to clarify the question.
We also like to be able to chat with you and be sure we satisfied you when
we are finished with the answer.
-
1998-99 School Year Table and Graph
Comparing All Cuyahoga County Schools.1
-
The January 2000 Administrative Reorganization will save the district roughly
$1,125,000 over the next 1.5 years?2
-
Detailed staffing http://www.chuh.net/school/FAQs/staff.and.salaries.99.html
and http://www.chuh.net/school/FAQs/staff.and.salaries.00.html
that give breakdowns in people and total salaries during the 98-99
and 99-00 school years respectively prior to the impact of cuts.3
-
Does this suffice to answer the question?
[1] State 1998-99 EMIS Report Card data downloaded from http://www.ode.state.oh.us/RC_download.htm
[2] http://chuh.net/school/FAQs/cuts.sched.html
provided by CH-UH Schools.
[3] Provided by Human Resources Department of CH-UH Schools as data
available to them from State EMIS.
-
There is a common perception that CH-UH school expenditures
per pupil (PPE) are very high. How do they compare with other
districts? Have the recent cuts reduced them significantly? In what
areas?
-
At least two distinct definitions exist: (Be Careful of which School
Years are Referenced.)
-
General Fund expenditures divided by the number of pupils in the district
{Average Daily Membership (ADM), be careful whether Fall, Spring, or Average
Annual ADM.}. These expenditures fund the day to day operational costs
of schools, including teachers, transportation, textbooks, utilities, etc.
The majority of expenditures in the general fund budget is on personnel
({$42,748,985 (wages and salaries) + $12,395,900 (benefits)}/$68,047,270
(total General Fund Budget Expenditures) = 81%, in 1998-99 budget).
Table Comparing 96/97 and 97/98
School Years for each District County-Wide.0
In 1997/98, Cleveland Heights/University Heights had the 6th
highest PPE in
the county. It also has the 6th highest percentage of disabled
students in
the County.
-
Total Expenditures Per Pupil (not limited to General Funds) defined in
EMIS as {Administration+Building Operations+Staff Support+Pupil
Support+Instruction Expenditures}/Annual Average Daily Membership.
Table (third column) Comparing
All Cuyahoga County Schools, 1998-99.1
Here CH-UH had the 8th highest PPE in the county.
-
Recent Projected Budget Reductions
for 1999-2000 and 2000-2001 school years.2
By law, the District must have a balanced budget. Failure of timely
levy passage can result in cuts. The 1999-2000 cuts are preemptive to enable
cuts less deep in the 2000-2001 school year. It is the 2000-01 school year
that a deficit is projected due to the levy failure in November 1999. If
the levy passes sometime in 2000, tax collections start in January 2001
and will provide new funds for the second half of the 2000-01 school year.
The District must also maintain a 5% of General Fund cash carryover at
the end its fiscal year in order to avoid State designation of being on
fiscal
watch or fiscal emergency depending on how far below 5% they
are. Teacher contracts are automatically renewed if not notified of non-renewal
by April 1 or each year. So failure of the March 2000 levy will require
notification of non-renewal of some contracts to cover the unknown risk
of no levy passage in 2000.
-
The Revenue and Expenditures from 1993-94 through 2003-04 Without
Levy Before Cuts (need research on why revenue declines all the way
out to 2003-04) and With March '00 Levy and With
Cuts.2 These are assumed to cover General Fund only. Growth
Trends.
-
One Contributing Cause: high population of disabled (special education)
students.
According to state numbers in Table above, 13.2% of CH-UH students
had disabilities. This is the sixth highest in the county. The statewide
average is 11.6%. Parents of disabled children may choose to live in CH-UH
because of the community and good services, but a high proportion of disabled
children costs the District money.
"Educating a "regular" student (an average student in a regular classroom)
costs $7,436. The cost of educating the average vocational student is $9,973
due to the cost of vocational programs which are offered to those students
in addition to the regular education program. And the average cost of educating
a special education student (which includes special programs for SBH, multiple
handicapped, physically handicapped, learning disabled and emotionally
disturbed youngsters) is $16,471. We have approximately 900 special education
students in the district." (1997-98 school year numbers.)
-
Other Possible Causes: (needing further research to quantify)
-
All Day Kindergarten (roughly 20% State funded)
-
Above average investment in Staff Development (comment
on school vs. corporate)
-
New Technology Infrastructure and Operations.
-
Richer Curriculum at Heights High than most schools in County
-
Summer School for larger population with stricter promotion-retention policies
and effort on proficiency.
[0] Ohio Department of Education: http://www.ode.ohio.gov/www/ims/www_vitals_graph.html
[1] State 1998-99 EMIS Report Card data downloaded from http://www.ode.state.oh.us/RC_download.htm
[2] Provided by CH-UH Schools.
-
For the 1999 proficiency test, Beachwood schools had 104
4th graders tested on all parts of the test and 101 6th
graders. The best class size that I could come up with was 120 in
each grade. This means that 20% of their students did
not take the test or their results were not counted. In CHUH, 501
our of 561 fourth graders scores counted and in 6th 488 out
of 546. Due to the social and economic make up of the two schools,
CHUH should have been able to exempt more students, but they don't. Why?
Also in one of the community meetings the treasurer of the CHUH BOE stated
that it took 3.3 mills in CHUH to equal 1 millage in Beachwood. If
we are educating four times more students with one-third the industry tax
base, should we not need 12 mills for every mill in Beachwood?
-
Generally we don't have grade-wise enrollments, but your numbers for CHUH
are accurate for 98-99 school year based on CH-UH PTA's Parent-Teacher
Conference Scheduling database.
-
Beachwood has a 15.9% and CHUH has 13.2% disabled population in their
student body.1
-
Tables of % of children required and who actually took 4th
and 6th grade proficiency tests:2
-
County-Wide 4th Grade
-
County-Wide 6th Grade
-
Identification of students for special education follows relatively strict
federal and state guidelines. Although there are still
areas where individual judgment comes into play . The most variance
is in decisions made to exempt or not exempt students from testing. These
decisions are made in the Individual Education Planning (IEP) process.
The decision to exempt may be different from district to district and from
teacher to teacher.
If a disabled student is required to take the test their results are
part of the numbers reported for the district. Students who are disabled
and exempt are not included in these numbers whether or not they choose
to take the test.
Example: The percent proficient on the 4th grade math test
is calculated using the following formula:
NUMBER PROFICIENT (the number of nonexempt 4th graders who
are proficient in math) DIVIDED BY TOTAL NON EXEMPT STUDENTS (the total
number of enrolled fourth graders minus the number of disabled 4th
grade students who are exempt from mathematics.)
100% of regular education students are required to take the test.
The 88% refers to the percent of all enrolled 4th grade students
some of whom are disabled and exempt. Students who do not take a required
test because of absence, suspension, truancy etc. are counted the
same as not proficient.3
-
My understanding on your millage question and hearing Treasurer Bruce Beamer
before on this; he is describing absolute dollars one can get per tax mill
given the different total taxable value in Beachwood compared to CHUH.
Beachwood has 3.3 times more taxable value to supply its revenue, hence
it needs less millage to get the same revenue compared to CHUH. The expenditure
side of the ledger sheet legally has no bearing on revenue per mill. It
is up to our community and the Board of Education to decide on and defend
the needed expenditures.4
[1] www.chuh.net/school/FAQs/disabled.cuy.html
[2] State 1998-99 EMIS Report Card data downloaded from http://www.ode.state.oh.us/RC_download.htm
[3] Whole Sub-Bullet Section provided by CH-UH Schools Evaluation Coordinator.
[4] Interim
CH-UH Treasure Lowell Davis' Financial Overview in Spring 1999 provided
by CH-UH Schools.
-
Where can one find the details of Bargaining Unit Contracts
with the School District?
-
Having just stepped out of the corporate work force within
the last year, I know that in almost every industry employees are now asked
to contribute in some form to the benefits they receive (paying for a portion
of their hospitalization, dental, vision plans, for example). I would like
to know specifically, in dollars, what benefits the taxpayers are providing
for both teaching and non-teaching positions.
-
American
Federation of Teachers (AFT) 795 Teachers' Insurance and Fringes in Contract,
Section 16.1
-
Ohio
Association of Public School Employees (OPSE) (cafeteria worker, cleaners,
aides, and secretaries) Local 102, Hospitalization and Insurance in Contract,
Section 21.1
-
OPSE
(custodial, transportation, maintenance, and operations) Local 617, Hospitalization
and Insurance in Contract, Section 23.1
-
Social
Agencies Employees Union (SAEU) (Instructors to food service employees
in the Early Childhood Department), Hospitalization and Insurance in Contract,
Section 19.1
-
AFT
795 Monitors, Insurance and Fringes in Contract, Section 10.1
-
AFT
795 Tutors, Medical and Hospitalization in Contract, Section 12.03.1
-
Educational
Administrative Council (EAC) (All Administrators), Insurance and Fringes
in Contract, Section 4.1
[1] All Bargaining Unit Contracts
March 30, 2000, Courtesy of the Unions and the School District.
Data for your curiosity:
Nineth Grade
Proficiency Performance vs. Years Taught by the CH-UH District and an Ethnic
Comparison, 1998-99. This was provided by the Coordinator for Assessment
in the CH-UH School District.
Reaching the Top: A Report of the National Task Force on Minority High
Achievement
- Executive
Summary
- Whole
Report in PDF
epic hospital software