Arts on Line Education Update April 25, 2016

Ohio Alliance for Arts Education
Arts on Line Education Update
April 25, 2016
Joan Platz

 

LEGISLATIVE NEWS

131st General Assembly: Both the Ohio House and Senate are holding sessions on Wednesday, April 27, 2016.  In addition, Ohio lawmakers have planned a rather full agenda of committee meetings this week.

 

The House Education Committee, chaired by Representative Brenner, will meet on Tuesday, April 26, 2016 at 9:30 AM in hearing room 017.  The committee will receive a presentation from the Ohio Department of Education (ODE) on value added, and testimony on the following bills:

-HB524 (Cupp) State Report Card Measure:  Requires a review the structure and impact of the value-added progress dimension measure on the state report card for school districts, schools, and students; an analysis of value-added’s potential success for districts, schools, and students; and an evaluation of its transparency for districts, schools, and students.

-HB487 (Latourette-Roegner) State Seal – Bi-literacy:  Requires the State Board of Education to establish the state Seal of Bi-literacy to be attached or affixed to the high school transcripts of qualifying students.

-HB481(Thompson-Koeher) Student Enrollment Reporting:  Revises the requirements for reporting student enrollment for public schools; mandatory student withdrawal policies; scholarship program eligibility for students who choose not to take state assessments during the 2015-2016 school year, and declares an emergency.

-HB137 (Grossman-Phillips) Organ Donation-Health Curriculum:  Requires the health curriculum of each school district to include instruction on the positive effects of organ and tissue donation. A vote is possible.

 

The House Finance Committee, chaired by Representative Smith, will meet on April 26, 2016 at 10:00 AM in hearing room 313.  The committee will receive testimony on the following bills:

-SB310 (Oelslager) Capital Appropriations:  Makes capital appropriations and changes to the law governing capital projects for the biennium ending June 30, 2018.

-HB475 (Schuring) Motion Picture-Tax Credit:  Authorizes motion picture companies to transfer the authority to claim refundable motion picture tax credits to other persons; adjusts how the credit is calculated, increases the total amount of credits that may be awarded per year, removes the limit on the maximum credit amount that may be awarded to a motion picture, and creates a job training program for resident film crew members.

 

The Senate Finance Committee, chaired by Senator Oelslager, will meet on April 26, 2016 at 3:00 PM in the Senate Finance Hearing Room.  The committee will consider the governor’s appointments to various boards and councils, including the appointment of Susan Block to the Ohio Arts Council, and receive testimony on a number of bills, including SB298 (Schiavoni) Charter Schools-Contracts, which would change the requirements for operating Internet- and computer-based community schools.

 

The Senate Education Committee, chaired by Senator Lehner, will meet on April 26, 2016 at 4:00 PM in the Senate Finance Hearing Room. The committee will consider the appointment of Robert McDonald Jr. to the State Board of Education, and receive testimony on the following bills:

-HB113 (Grossman-Manning) CPR-Graduation Requirement:  Requires instruction in cardiopulmonary resuscitation and the use of an automated external defibrillator.

-HB425 (Hayes) Religious Expression-Students:  Supports the right of students to express their religious views, and permits religious organizations to have access to schools in the same manner as secular organizations.

-SB297 (Hughes) Student Expulsion-Violent Threat:  Requires certain procedures regarding the expulsion of a student from a school district, community school, or STEM school for communicating a threat of violence to occur on school grounds.

 

The House Finance Subcommittee on Higher Education, chaired by Representative Duffey, will meet on Thursday, April 28, 2016 to receive testimony on HB474 (Brown) Higher Education Mid biennium review.  The bill amends laws pertaining to higher education to increase accessibility and reduce costs in the following ways:

-Requires the Chancellor of Higher Education to establish ten bachelor’s degree programs to be offered through community colleges

-Permits the Chancellor to enter into a partnership with Western Governors University, an online university in Indiana, to offer competency-based education programs

-Requires the Chancellor to develop three-plus-one baccalaureate degree program models, that allow students to take three years of classes toward a bachelor’s degree at a community college before transferring to a four-year college

-Permits the Chancellor to endorse the Midwest Student Exchange program of the Midwestern Higher Education Compact, in order to permit state institutions of higher education and nonprofit private colleges and universities in Ohio to participate in the program.

-Financial Literacy:  The bill requires the Chancellor, in consultation with the state Superintendent and other interested parties, to develop model standards and resources for the creation of financial literacy education programming at state institutions of higher education.

The bill also requires each state institution of higher education, beginning with the 2017-2018 academic year, to integrate financial literacy education programming into existing academic advising, financial aid programming, freshman experience programming, or career services.

-Revises the College Credit Plus (CCP):  The bill makes a number of changes in how the Ohio Department of Education will make CCP payments to institutions of higher education, and requires the Chancellor, in consultation with the Superintendent of Public Instruction, to adopt rules specifying which CCP courses are eligible for funding from the Department of Education.

The bill also requires the Chancellor, in consultation with the state Superintendent, to adopt rules specifying conditions under which a student may continue participating in CCP, if the student withdrew from a CCP course or received a grade of “D” or lower.

 

The bill also creates the CCP Corequisite Remediation Pilot program, to begin operation with the 2017-2018 school year.  Under this program approved partnerships may offer to students the opportunity to simultaneously enroll in a remedial course and an introductory college course in the same subject area, or enroll in an introductory college course that incorporates remedial curriculum.  The pilot program will be limited to high school seniors, and courses in the subject areas of math and English.   The bill allows three partnerships for the 2017-2018 school year.  The partnerships must be approved by the Chancellor and include one school district and one college.

See https://www.legislature.ohio.gov/download?key=4505&format=pdf

 

The Joint Education Oversight Committee, chaired by Senator Cliff Hite, will meet on April 28, 2016 at 10:00 AM in the North Hearing Room.  The committee will discuss suggestions to broaden the committee’s mission, and the executive director’s position.

 

The 2020 Tax Study Commission, co-chaired by Representative Jeff McClain and Senator Bob Peterson, will meet on April 28, 2016 at 10:00 AM in the South hearing room.  The commission will receive a presentation about the Historic Preservation Tax Credit and cable and satellite taxes.

 

The EMIS Advisory Board, chaired by Senator Lehner, will meet on April 28, 2016 at 1:00 PM in hearing room 121.  The committee will receive a presentation from the ODE on EMIS and career-technical education.

 

Last Week At The Statehouse:

Update on SB 310 Capital Budget:  The Ohio Senate quickly dispatched the Capital Budget bill (SB310-Oeleslager), voting it out of the Senate on April 20, 2016 by a vote of 32 to 1.  The bill includes $2.6 billion in capital appropriations for community projects, schools, highways and transportation, parks and recreation, and other state building projects.  The bill would allocate $650 million for local school construction, $428 million for public colleges and universities; $100 million for social service programs; $160 million for community projects; and funding for roads, bridges, water and waste-water systems, dams, and state parks and recreational facilities.

 

The Senate Education Committee, chaired by Senator Lehner, reported out two bills:

HB299 (Blessing III-Razabek) Custodian-Autism Scholarship:  Permits the temporary, legal, or permanent custodian of a qualified child to apply for an Autism Scholarship. The bill was amended to allow private schools accredited by the Independent Schools Association of the Central States to use alternative assessments in place of end-of-course exams for students attending the schools using a voucher.

SB252 (Hite-Patton) Cardiac Arrest-Youth Activity (Lindsay’s Law):  Establishes specific provisions related to monitoring and response to symptoms of sudden cardiac arrest in athletic activities in most public and nonpublic schools, and in athletic activities organized by youth sports organizations.

 

The House Finance Committee, chaired by Representative Ryan Smith, reported out on April 20, 2016 HB130 (Hagan-Duffey) DataOhio Board.  The bill would make information about Ohio government more accessible.  It creates the DataOhio Board to oversee the posting of public records online, requires the Auditor of State to adopt rules for a uniform accounting system for public offices, and establishes an online catalog of public data at data.Ohio.gov.

The Grace Commission met on April 20, 2016 and received testimony from the Ohio Shared Services Collaborative, a consortium that includes 20 local school districts, one board of developmental disabilities, four educational service centers, and two informational technology centers located in Southeastern Ohio.  The consortium described how it was able to improve bus routes; reduce the costs of transporting students; and reduce the idle times for buses through a $1.76 million Straight A Fund grant.  The consortium estimates that school districts could save between $50,000 to $200,000 a year by joining the consortium, and asked the commission to help it expand the project in other parts of the state.

 

Bills Introduced

  • SCR19 (Skindell) U.S. Supreme Court-Confirmation Hearings:  To urge the United States Senate to hold any and all necessary hearings, to perform the Senate’s constitutional duty, and, after appropriate consideration, to hold a vote to confirm or deny the nomination of the Honorable Merrick Garland to the Supreme Court of the United States.
  • HB524 (Cupp-Smith) State Report Card Measure:  To review the value-added progress dimension measure used for purposes of state report card ratings for school districts and schools.

 

NATIONAL NEWS

Dashboard Accountability System Proposed: Kentucky’s Commissioner of Education, Stephen Pruitt, is recommending changing Kentucky’s K-12 accountability system, by replacing school and district rankings with a “dashboard” approach that uses multiple and varied indicators that tell parents more about their schools and districts, and let parents decide the importance of the indicator.

According to an article in the Lexington Herald Leader, Superintendent Pruitt says that the federal Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) provides states more flexibility to create accountability systems that are more meaningful.

Kentucky’s K-12 accountability system now ranks schools and districts with a single score based on several indicators, similar to Ohio. But Superintendent Pruitt favors a broader, fairer, and more reliable approach, and is holding town hall meetings across the state to gather recommendations from parents, students, educators, and communities.

He is quoted in the article as saying, “‘If we don’t come out with an accountability system focused on students, then we’ve failed. It can’t be about adults chasing points. The system needs to promote what’s best for students.’”

See “Kentucky education commissioner says new accountability system should not involve ranking schools,” by Valarie Honeycutt Spears, Lexington Herald Leader, April 17, 2016 at http://www.kentucky.com/news/local/education/article72370582.html

 

ESSA Assessment Regulations Released:  The U.S. Department of Education (USED) released on April 21, 2016 draft assessment regulations which are required under the federal Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA).  The rules were developed through a “negotiated rule process” by selected stakeholders over the past month, but will not be official until they are published in the Federal Register.

The same process was being used to develop the controversial “supplement-not-supplant” regulations, but negotiators were unsuccessful in efforts to come to consensus on them. As a result, USED staff will now complete the rules, which have already caused a stir among some lawmakers who opposed the draft rules that were released.  Senator Lamar Alexander told U.S. Secretary of Education John B. King at a recent hearing that the proposed rules are an attempt to “rewrite” the law, and warned the USED that he would take further action if the rule was not changed.

(See http://www.help.senate.gov/chair/newsroom/press/alexander-education-negotiators-deserve-thanks-for-protecting-classrooms-from-national-school-board)

Agreement was reached on the assessment regulations.  ESSA requires states to test students in math and English languages arts in grades 3 through 8 and once in high school, and test students in science once between grades 3-5, once between grades 6-9, and once at the high school level.  The results of these tests must be reported separately for students by gender, English-language status, special needs status, racial and ethnic groups, economic status, migratory status, homeless status, students in foster programs, and student from military-connected families.

The law requires all students to take the same assessments that are aligned to college and career-ready standards.  There are some exceptions for districts running pilot assessment programs or are already using a nationally recognized exam to determine college readiness.

States have flexibility to use assessments “partially delivered in the form of portfolios, projects, or extended performance tasks,” or use interim assessments, as long as summative results are reported.

Tests also have to accommodate English-language learners and students in special education.

The following are some highlights of the proposed regulation:

-Child in Foster Care:  The regulations define “child in foster care” as a child in a foster home, group home, residential facility, pre-adoptive home, or emergency shelter.

-Students with severe cognitive abilities:  The regulations require that states define “severe cognitive ability” within certain parameters.  For example, states could not claim that a student learning English fits the definition of “severe cognitive ability” unless another condition existed. And, states must consider the adaptive behavior of students when determining if the student has a “severe cognitive ability.”

-Alternative Assessment:  Students with “severe cognitive abilities” may take an alternative assessment, but ESSA caps the percent of students that take an alternative assessment at 1 percent of the total number of students in the State who are assessed in that subject. The cap does not apply to individual school districts, and states cannot prohibit a local district from administering an alternative assessment to a student, but states must monitor and assist school districts that might be overusing alternative assessments.

-Waivers:  States can apply to the US Secretary of Education to receive a waivers (for one year) which would allow the state to exceed the cap on alternative assessments.  But, to receive a waiver, the new regulations require states to meet several requirements, and demonstrate that they are testing 95 percent of their students overall and 95 percent of students with special needs.

-English-language learners:  Under ESSA states must test English-language learners in reading, writing, speaking, and listening skills, and include in their state accountability systems a measure of student progress toward English-language proficiency.

States must make an effort to accommodate students who speak different languages, and consider offering assessments in the most common language spoken after English, and the second most common language after English.

And, students in Native American language immersion programs can take an assessment in their native language, if the assessment is approved by the USED.

-Nationally recognized college ready test:  States can use a test for college entrance or placement to assess students in high school, if the test is approved through the federal peer-review process; is used in multiple states; and provides accommodations for students with special needs and English-language learners. With state permission, districts can use a locally-selected, nationally recognized high school test instead of the state exam, but the exam must be used by all high schools in the district, and parents must have an opportunity to provide input about the exams.  Some of the assessments that could qualify are SAT, ACT, PARCC, SBA, AP, and IB, although there might be some challenges for these tests when it comes to providing accommodations for students with special needs and English-language learners.  Some assessment experts also question using standards-based assessments, such as PARCC and SBA to demonstrate student readiness for college and careers.

-Computer-adaptive tests: The regulations allow states to use computer-adaptive tests to track student academic growth, but the test must also show if the student is on grade level.

-Testing 8th grade students: The regulations allow students in 8th grade, who are taking advanced math classes, to take a test at their academic level, instead of the regular state math test for 8th graders, but there must be accommodations for students with special needs and English language learners.

See “Students with Disabilities Get Testing Protections Under Draft ESSA Regulations,” by Catherine Gewertz, Accelify, April 19, 2016 at https://www.accelify.com/accelify-blog/2016/04/19/students-disabilities-get-testing-protections-draft-essa-regulations/

See http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/campaign-k-12/Draft%20updated%20full%20assessment%20regs_2016_0401_for%20posting.pdf

See “ESSA Negotiated Rulemaking Committee Agrees on Testing Issues” by Alyson Klein, Education Week, April 19, 2016 at http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/campaign-k-12/2016/04/essa_negotiated_rulemaking_com.html?utm_source=feedblitz&utm_medium=FeedBlitzRss&utm_campaign=campaignk-12

 

OHIO NEWS

Nominations Open for 2017 Ohio Teacher of the Year: The ODE is accepting nominations for the 2017 Ohio Teacher of the Year program through April 29, 2016. The nominating process is lead by members of the State Board of Education, who form committees within their regions to select a regional candidate to compete statewide for the Teacher of the Year title.

A timeline, instructions, the nomination form, and a list of State Board territory leads are posted on the ODE’s Ohio Teacher of the Year Web page at http://education.ohio.gov/Media/Ed-Connection/April-18-2016/Nominate-a-candidate-for-2017-Ohio-Teacher-of-the

 

Ohio Standards Under Review:  The State Board of Education has initiated a process to update Ohio’s Learning Standards to comply with the requirement in law that departments and agencies update regulations every five years.

Ohio’s Learning Standards in English language arts and mathematics were adopted in 2010, and will be updated this year, followed by social studies, science, and financial literacy, (fall of 2016) and then technology, family and consumer science, and the arts (2018).

The Ohio Department of Education reported on April 18, 2016 that an advisory committee to review state standards in English language arts and math met for the first time on April 14, 2016.  The advisory committee, which includes representatives from 18 statewide educational organizations, reviewed the results of a statewide survey conducted between February 23 – April 5, 2016.  The ODE received more than 1,000 comments from individuals and organizations about the standards in five categories — grade level appropriate, clarity, content error, and other.

The committee will use the survey information and recommendations from an earlier report about the standards to review each standard, and recommend that the standard either be revised; addressed when the state’s model curriculum is updated; or remain unchanged. This information will provide direction to working groups of teachers who will meet in May and June to draft the revised standards.

The ODE is expected to post a draft of the revised standards for public comment in July 2016.  The State Board of Education is scheduled to approve the standards in December 2016.  The new standards will be implemented in the 2017-18 school year.

See http://education.ohio.gov/Media/Ed-Connection/April-18-2016/Standards-review-advisory-committees-hold-first-me

See http://education.ohio.gov/Topics/Ohios-Learning-Standards/Ohio-s-Learning-Standards-Revision

 

REPORTS

Perspectives from the New Education Majority: Wade Henderson, president and CEO of The Leadership Conference Education Fund, released on April 11, 2016 a report of the results of a survey and focus groups entitled “The New Education Majority: Attitudes and Aspirations of Parents and Families of Color” by Anzalone Liszt Grove Research.

The report is premised on the fact that “For the first time in American history, the majority of students in the public school system are students of color. These students are the “new education majority.” These groups have historically been underrepresented in the debate over equitable funding, education policies, and opportunities for students.

The survey and focus groups were conducted in order to identify the concerns and interests of new education majority parents and families and share those concerns with decision-makers.

The results of the survey are based on the responses of 400 African-American and 400 Latino or Hispanic parents or family members actively involved in the upbringing of a child between the ages of 5-18.  The survey was conducted between March 14-20, 2016, while the focus groups were conducted on February 2-3, 2016 in Chicago (Latinos) and Philadelphia (African Americans). The following are some of the key findings:

  • A majority of African-American parents and family members (53 percent) rate U.S. schools negatively when it comes to educating Black children.
  • Most African-American parents (66 percent) do not believe that their children are receiving the same education as White students.
  • The survey found that 83 percent of African-American parents and 61 percent of Latino parents “…reject the notion that their communities receive as much funding as schools in White communities.” ”The lack of funding is seen as the biggest driver of racial inequities in American schools, but racism and a lack of quality teachers are also cited as factors.” If new funding is available, both communities believe it should be directed toward improving the academic program, “…such as attracting and retaining quality teachers and ensuring that students have access to computers and tutoring.”
  • New majority parents and families see quality teachers as the most important element of a great school.
  • Over 90 percent of both communities rated having the right teaching materials and students leaving the school prepared as very important qualities for schools.  Over three-quarters of these parents and family members also rated “a wide range of extracurricular activities and afterschool programs as very important.
  • A majority of both communities (96 percent) said that school safety is very important.
  • New majority parents and families want schools to set high expectations for students.  This priority was supported by 90 percent of African-American and 83 percent of Latino parents, and 90 percent of both communities believe that high expectations should be expected for low-income students.
  • When asked to choose the most important factor in determining the success of a student from a low-income family, both African Americans and Latinos cited support from home.
  • New majority parents and families believe they have a great deal of power to change the education system, and are willing to do their part, but they also believe that all levels of government must step up to address funding and other disparities that harm African-American and Latino students.”

The Leadership Conference Education Fund is a coalition of civil rights organizations founded in 1969, and works to promote and protect the civil and human rights of every person in the United States.

See http://www.civilrights.org/press/2016/new-education-majority.html.

 

Survey Identifies Consequences Associated with New Teacher Evaluations: The Network for Public Education (NPE) published on April 17, 2016 a report entitled Teachers Talk Back: Educators on the Impact of Teacher Evaluation.

The report was released by the NPE at their third annual conference held in Raleigh, North Carolina on April 16, 2016.  The report describes some of the consequences of high stakes testing, and using student test scores to evaluate teachers.

The report is based on the survey responses from 2,964 teachers and principals from 48 states about state teacher evaluation systems implemented as a result of the Race to the Top grant and No Child Left Behind waivers. The report includes the following findings:

-83 percent of respondents reported that the use of test scores in teacher evaluations has had a negative effect on eight areas of instruction:  classroom instruction, instructional strategies, classroom time spent preparing for tests, self-reflection, anxiety related to evaluation, professional feedback, professional development, and collaboration with colleagues.

-88 percent reported that more time is spent on test prep than ever before.

-84 percent reported significant increase in teacher time spent on evaluations. In previous studies teachers reported 0 to 1 hour a month on evaluation related activities.  But in this survey, 71 percent of teachers reported spending four hours or more a month on evaluation activities, including 29 percent who reported spending 8-9 hours a month on evaluation activities.

-66 percent reported a negative impact on relationships with their students as a result of the pressure to focus on increasing test scores.  Teachers commented that there was no time for conversations; teachers were more cautious with students and less honest with parents; creativity and free-thinking are no longer celebrated; and students are more stressed.

-52 percent reported witnessing evidence of bias against veteran educators.  The report notes that another study by ASI in 2015 found a relationship between evaluation practices and a drop in the number of black teachers in nine major cities.

-85 percent indicate that high quality professional development is not connected to their evaluations.

-84 percent found a negative effect on conversations between teachers and supervisors.

-72 percent indicate that the use of test scores has hurt the sharing of instructional strategies among teachers and has caused a decrease in collaboration and an increase in competition among teachers.

The report makes the following recommendations:

-State policy-makers should stop using test scores as any part of any teacher evaluation.

-Teacher collaboration should not be tied to evaluation, but instead be a teacher led cooperative process that focuses on the instructional needs of students and their own professional learning.

-The observation process should focus on improving instruction—resulting in reflection and dialogue between teacher and observer—the result should be a narrative, not a number.

-Evaluations should require less paperwork and documentation so that more time can be spent on reflection and improvement of instruction.

-Researchers should investigate the role that test-based evaluations might play in the decline in the number of teachers of color and veteran teachers, and the impact that such a decline will have on schools and the teaching profession.

-Teachers should not be “scored” on professional development activities. Nor should professional development be dictated by evaluation scores rather than teacher needs.

See “Teachers Talk Back: Educators on the Impact of Teacher Evaluation,” by Xian Franzinger Barrett, Carol Burris, Anthony Cody, Amanda Koonlaba, and Jessica S. Martinez, NPE, April 2016 at http://networkforpubliceducation.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/NPETeacherEvalReport.pdf

 

FYI ARTS

2016 AEP State Status Report Now Available: The Arts Education Partnership (AEP) updated its annual State of the States Arts Education State Policy Summary in March 2016.  The report provides information about arts education policies for all of the states and the District of Columbia.  Here’s how Ohio looks, according to this report:

-Arts as Core Academic Subject:  According to the report, Ohio is among 22 states that doesn’t define the arts as a core or academic subject.  That is not exactly correct.  References to “core courses” are included in several sections of the Ohio Revised Code.   Section 3319.074(A)(1) requires the State Board of Education to adopt standards and requirements for establishing and issuing educator and principal licenses, and here “Core subject area” is defined as reading and English language arts, mathematics, science, foreign languages, government, economics, fine arts, history, and geography.

-Early Childhood Arts Education Standards: Only two states, South Carolina and Missouri, do not have early education standards for the arts.  According to this report Ohio has early childhood arts education standards, but Ohio’s Learning Standards in the Arts include grades K-12, not pre-K.

However, Ohio’s Early Learning and Development Standards for infants, young toddlers, older toddlers, and pre-kindergarten include about five standards for the arts, under the Learning Approaches domain; and strand for creativity, and the topic:  “Expression of Ideas and Feelings Through the Arts.”  The arts are not included in other domains or strands, including the Cognition and General Knowledge Domain, which includes strands for cognitive skills, mathematics, social studies, science, and language and literacy development.

See http://education.ohio.gov/getattachment/Topics/Early-Learning/Early-Learning-Content-Standards/Birth-Through-Pre_K-Learning-and-Development-Stand/ELDS-ATL.pdf.aspx

-Elementary and Secondary Arts Education Standards: Ohio is among the 49 states and the District of Columbia that has adopted K-12 standards in dance, drama/theater, music, and visual art.  Iowa is the only state without arts standards.

The National Coalition for Core Arts Standards updated national standards in the arts in 2014, and included standards for media arts, such as animation, film, gaming and computer design.

-Arts Ed Instructional Requirement Elementary:  Most states (45), including Ohio, require that states provide instruction in one or more arts disciplines at the elementary level. The states that do not are Alaska, Colorado, District of Columbia, Hawaii, Michigan, and South Dakota.

-Arts Ed Instructional Requirement Middle School: Most states (45), including Ohio, require that states provide instruction in one or more of the arts disciplines at the middle school level.  The states that do not are Alaska, Colorado, District of Columbia, Hawaii, Michigan, and South Dakota.

-Arts Ed Instructional Requirement High School:  Most states (44), including Ohio, require that states provide instruction in one or more of the arts disciplines at the high school level. The states that do not are Alaska, District of Columbia, Hawaii, Idaho, Michigan, and New Mexico.

-Arts Requirements for High School Graduation: Half of the states require students to complete an arts course as a graduation requirement.  Ohio is one of those states, and requires students to complete two semesters or the equivalent in the arts in any grades 7-12 in order to graduate.  But Ohio law allows for some students to be exempt from the requirement, including students in dropout recovery schools, students in career tech programs, and students who have opted out of the core graduation requirements.

-Arts Alternatives for High School Graduation: Only 19 states, including Ohio, include the arts among the elective courses required for graduation.  However, Ohio students can meet this requirement easily, because there are so many elective courses to choose from.

-Arts Ed Assessment Requirements: Only 17 states, including Ohio, require state, district, or school-level assessment of student learning in the arts.

-Arts Ed Requirements for State Accreditation:  Only 17 states have an arts education requirement for accreditation.  Ohio doesn’t “accredit” its schools or districts, and so this category really doesn’t apply to Ohio. However, the State Board of Education grants a “charter” to traditional public school districts and private schools in Ohio to operate, and requires these schools to comply with Operating Standards for Ohio Schools and School Districts.  Community schools are not “chartered” because they are established and operate under their own Chapter 3314 of the ORC.  There are also separate rules for non-tax-non-chartered schools.

-Licensure Requirements for Non-Arts Teachers: Most states (36), including Ohio, have some requirements for regular classroom teachers (non-arts teachers) who teach the arts.  In Ohio only teachers with a PreK-3 license and those with the K-8 license are eligible.  Teachers can also be eligible if they earn an endorsement to teach the arts.

-Licensure Requirements for Arts Teachers: Most states (43), including Ohio, have established specific licensing requirements for arts teachers.

-State Arts Ed Grant Program or School for the Arts: Most states (31), including Ohio, do not have separate state funding, or a state grant program, to support arts education programs or an arts school.  However, there are several school districts and charter schools that have created separate schools for the arts in Ohio.  The good news is that 20 states do provide this special support for arts education.  These states are Utah, South Carolina, Oklahoma, North Carolina, New York, New Mexico, New Jersey, Mississippi, Minnesota, Maine, Louisiana, Kentucky, Georgia, Florida, Colorado, California, Arkansas, and Alabama.

See http://www.ecs.org/ec-content/uploads/2016-State-of-the-States-of-Art.pdf


This update is written weekly by Joan Platz, Research and Knowledge Director for the Ohio Alliance for Arts Education.

The purpose of the update is to keep arts education advocates informed about issues dealing with the arts, education, policy, research, and opportunities.

The distribution of this information is made possible through the generous support of the Ohio Music Education Association (www.omea-ohio.org), Ohio Art Education Association (www.oaea.org), Ohio Educational Theatre Association (www.ohedta.org); OhioDance (www.ohiodance.org), and the Ohio Alliance for Arts Education (www.oaae.net).

Advertisements

About OAAE

Since our founding in 1974, by Dr. Dick Shoup and Jerry Tollifson, our mission has always been to ensure the arts are an integral part of the education of every Ohioan. Working at the local, state, and federal levels through the efforts of a highly qualified and elected Board of Directors, our members, and a professional staff we have four primary areas of focus: building collaborations, professional development, advocacy, and capacity building. The OAAE is funded in part for its day-to-day operation by the Ohio Arts Council. This support makes it possible for the OAAE to operate its office in Columbus and to work statewide to ensure the arts are an integral part of the education of every Ohioan. Support for arts education projects comes from the Ohio Arts Council, Ohio Music Education Association, Ohio Art Education Association, Ohio Educational Theatre Association, VSA Ohio, and OhioDance. The Community Arts Education programs of Central Ohio are financially assisted by the Franklin County Board of Commissioners and the Greater Columbus Arts Council. We gratefully acknowledge and appreciate the financial support received from each of these outstanding agencies and organizations.
This entry was posted in Arts On Line and tagged , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s