Issue 108: Cleveland teachers, schools want a Yes to maintain progress, results
By Sarah Mertz
At Miles School in Cleveland, students from prekindergarten to eighth grade walk through the freshly painted, bright hallways to their classrooms, where they hang their belongings in clean, spacious, individual cubbies. The library is cozy and clean, with new carpeting and neatly organized shelves. Students enjoy gym class with floors so smooth and clean, the squeak of tennis shoes can be heard down the hall. Miles School’s new, $16-million building was opened in January 2014, one of several new schools opened in the city of Cleveland since a 15-mill levy — which translates to approximately $70 million per year for the district — was passed by city voters in 2012.
This November, Cleveland voters must decide if the levy will be renewed for another four years. It’s called Issue 108.
The Cleveland Plan, or Ohio House Bill 525, was signed into law in July of 2012. It was created to rebuild failing Cleveland schools by carrying out four main tasks:
1. Close and replace failing district schools and incorporate* charter schools
2. Give individual schools control over budget and staffing
3. Create the Cleveland Transformation Alliance to ensure the district remains accountable to the plan, and
4. Phase in all of these reforms from preschool to 12th grade.
*Cleveland schools now partner with a number of charter schools, and those schools, in turn, receive a portion of the tax money.
Once this plan was created, the district went to voters for the money to implement these changes, and Cleveland residents showed their support by passing the levy in 2012.
Gaining support for a levy of this magnitude was no small feat, considering the U.S. Census report showing the average salary of Cleveland residents from 2010–2014 was $26,179 and the average home value was $73,100. The levy would would raise property taxes on a home of that average value by $335 per year.
This year, it won’t raise taxes at all because that hit has already been absorbed. Indeed, that’s the slogan of the pro-Issue 108 campaign: It won’t raise taxes.
Since 2012, the Cleveland Transformation Alliance has monitored and evaluated the progress of the schools. Executive Director Piet van Lier pointed out some of the successes noted in this year’s report.
“The graduation rate is really a highlight. The rate has gone from 56 percent in 2011 to 66 percent — the four-year graduation rate. And now it’s actually at 69 percent,” van Lier said during a phone interview.
And while the Transformation Alliance does not track parent or community sentiment, van Lier pointed out that enrollment in Cleveland schools has increased.
“It looks like parents are starting to choose Cleveland schools in a noticeable way.”
Other improvements noted by the Transformation Alliance in this year’s report included:
- improvement in students’ college readiness,
- an addition of 1,200 high quality preschool seats,
- an increase in the number of students meeting the third-grade reading guarantee, a benchmark set by the state that students must reach in order to be promoted to fourth grade.
One challenge Cleveland schools have faced—making it difficult to show the gains they have made since 2012—is the changing criteria used by the state of Ohio to evaluate school districts. Over the past three years, the state’s standardized assessments (largely relied upon to create the state school report cards) have changed three times.
In September, after the state released its 2014–2015 school year district report cards, Cleveland.com ranked local districts according to a grade-point average derived from these report cards. The Cleveland Metropolitan School District was at the bottom of the list of northern Ohio districts, receiving a GPA of 0.00
“We try to look at the benchmarks that will allow meaningful comparison over time. One hope is that the state assessment system will stabilize, and that will allow use of the state’s measures,” van Lier said when asked about the changing criteria.
There were actually several gains to highlight in this year’s report from the Cleveland Transformation Alliance. But there were also a few areas where the district was not improving as quickly as planned.
As van Lier pointed out, Cleveland had made measurable gains on the National Assessment of Educational Progress, known as the national report card, but the Alliance’s report stated that Cleveland is still ranked near the bottom of the list of 21 urban district peers.
The report also outlines problems, such as:
- a drop in college enrollment
- only one third of Cleveland’s preschool-aged children are attending high quality preschools that will prepare them for kindergarten.
Another issue Cleveland schools have had to grapple with during this election season is contract negotiations with the Cleveland Teachers’ Union. Part of the Cleveland Plan was to compensate teachers based on performance, rather than years of teaching or degrees earned, as is the case in most districts. CMSD would be the only district in the state to determine teacher compensation in this way.
As of August 2016, only a portion of the new teacher compensation plan had been put in place. On Aug. 15, after working for nearly a year without a contract, teachers voted to strike if an agreement was not reached by Sept. 1. The teachers’ union claimed their compensation was based too heavily on standardized tests and didn’t include factors such as training, leadership development and teaching in hard-to-fill positions and schools, as promised by the Cleveland Plan.
The district and teachers’ union reached a tentative agreement on Aug. 30 and managed to avoid a strike. The Cleveland Teachers’ Union voted on and rejected this proposed deal on Sept. 22, so negotiations will continue.
Despite the union’s grievances with the district, teachers are clearly in support of Issue 108. A statement on the Cleveland Teachers’ Union’s website states, “This levy is critical for the school district to continue moving forward.”
Teachers have served as vital members of the levy campaign, reaching out to voters in the community, and reminding them of the levy slogan: It won’t raise taxes.
Terry Butler, head of the campaign for Issue 108, was asked what will happen if the levy doesn’t pass. He explained that the district and campaign have not focused on the fear of what-ifs during this campaign, but rather the success the Cleveland Plan has generated over the past four years, saying, “When you have a good product, sell them what you’ve got.”
Butler acknowledged that many parents are not familiar with the Cleveland Plan and prefer clear-cut facts about the schools’ progress. “What we have found in our campaign is that they are very much supportive of the plan and the district, once we enlighten them about some of the accomplishments within the district.”
Butler, like van Lier, highlighted the increased number of preschool seats, and rising graduation rate. He also pointed to a 6.3 percent decrease in chronic absenteeism. Butler also said that Cleveland is doing a better job of meeting the third grade reading guarantee than Canton, Cincinnati or Toledo.
Another recent bright spot for Cleveland schools was the announcement that CEO Eric Gordon had been named “Urban Educator of the Year” by the Council of the Great City Schools. This title is awarded in recognition of outstanding achievement in urban education. According to the council’s website, Gordon was chosen because, “under his leadership graduation rates have risen, parent participation has strengthened, and the district has experienced an increase in enrollment for the first time in decades.”
Cleveland schools are hopeful that voters agree with their assertion that the district has made significant progress towards its vision of a reformed district that boasts school choice, high academic expectations and the resources to support them—and many more new buildings like Miles Elementary.
