Some Oregon students are signing up for a fifth year of high school — that’s really a first year of community college. Districts use state per-pupil funding to pay for community college tuition, fees and books — and throw in a counselor to help students handle the transition.
Tennessee, Oregon — and possibly Texas — are offering two free years at a community or technical college to high school graduates. But “Promise” programs are struggling to get unprepared students to complete college credentials.
When Texas Gov. Rick Perry challenged public universities to craft four-year degrees costing no more than $10,000, many said it was impossible. Three years later, 12 Texas universities have announced $10,000 bachelor’s degrees and the idea has spread to Florida, Oklahoma and Oregon.
Worried about a shortage of skilled workers, Tennessee, Oregon and Mississippi are debating free community college tuition. But some say students will work harder if they have a little “skin in the game.”
Oregon is looking for ways to lower college costs in hope of producing more college graduates.
Taking a structured set of courses increases the odds of completion, students say.
Community college would be tuition-free for two years for Oregon high school graduates with a C average, under a state legislator’s proposal.
Indiana hopes to raise college graduation rates by “guiding” students to choose a “pathway” to a degree. Once students commit to a major or program of study, they’d be told which courses to take to reach their goal.
The Obama administration “waiver gambit” lets states — and now eight CORE districts in California — “ignore poor and minority kids,” writes RiShawn Biddle on Dropout Nation.
The CORE districts’ waiver application doesn’t show how they’ll improve education, he writes, citing the review panel’s criticisms.
Kansas, Oregon, and Washington State — threatened by the feds with losing the waivers – “are unlikely to implement their proposed reforms,” Biddle writes.
It has also been clear that the administration’s decision to allow states to focus on the worst five percent of schools (along with another 10 percent or more of schools with wide achievement gaps) — and ignore those districts serving up mediocre instruction and curricula — will lead to widening achievement gaps.
The administration could have “worked within the imperfect yet successful accountability framework No Child put in place 11 years ago,” writes Biddle, “if Barack Obama used his bully pulpit and political capital.”
Instead, the CORE, Kansas, Oregon, and Washington State waivers show the administration’s “shoddy and irresponsible” policymaking.
“Education insiders’ ripped the CORE waivers as bad policy, according to Whiteboard Advisers’s survey, reports Politics K-12.
- “Is there nothing they won’t permit? Why CORE but not Burlington, Vermont? Why push for common standards but permit so much local control in how you collect and use data and what you measure?”
- “The waiver was not well put together, the process for approval wasn’t transparent, it doesn’t maintain accountability. In other words it does none of the things the Secretary of Education keeps piously saying that the waivers all do.”
- “Terrible. At this point, the Department is just making things up as they go along. It’s impossible to discern a coherent strategy. [Race to the Top] for states, for districts; waivers for states, for districts. They are leaving federal education policy a complete shambles.
And the ultimate nightmare: “Just imagine what a Republican president will do with this authority and what Arne Duncan as a school leader would have said.”
Oregon and Colorado students can spend a “fifth year” in high school taking free community college courses leading to an associate degree.
Under Oregon’s Pay It Forward, Pay It Back plan, students would pay no tuition at state universities – if they agree to pay the state 3 percent of their earnings for 24 years. It’s a gamble for students and taxpayers, say critics. Students who plan careers in medicine, law, business and engineering will do much better paying the tuition up front, leaving Pay It Forward for students who don’t anticipate earning very much.
Once hostile to teachers’ unions, Education Realist now thinks unions are blamed unfairly for many education problems. She starts with teachers’ cognitive ability.
. . . high school teachers have always been pretty smart, and drawn from the top half of the college grad pool. . . . testing and knowledge standards for elementary teachers was once low, is now much higher and more than reasonable since the states dramatically increased the credentialing test difficulty as part of their adherence to NCLB.
However, “this dramatic increase did not result in either improved outcomes or evidence that new teachers who qualified with tougher tests were superior to teachers who didn’t,” she writes. “The research at best shows that smarter teachers give a teeny tiny boost to outcomes.”
States — not unions — set knowledge requirements for teacher credentialing, she writes. They struggle with disparate impact. “Set credentialing standards high, and you lose your black and Hispanic teachers.”
Reformers “unions promote pay scales that give all teachers the same raise, regardless of quality” and oppose performance pay.
Okay. So the very notion of a union is antithetical to getting competitive, performance-driven people who want rewards for their hard work.
But “there’s no point to performance pay if the objectives are delusions, she argues. If competitive, high-performance people became teachers, they’d be unable to raise outcomes and they’d quit.
The “big Kahuna of teacher union beefs” is that it’s hard to fire bad teachers.
If government unions ceased to exist tomorrow, teachers would still have Loudermill, the relatively recent Supreme Court decision that says that employment is a property right, and states can’t deprive their employees of property rights without due process. And most states have tenure written into their laws, independent of union contracts. So the changes necessary to undo teacher rights are far more than just dumping unions.
Oregon dropped tenure in favor of renewable two-year teaching contracts, but nothing changed. Oregon is below average in teacher dismissal rates, reports the Center for American Progress. While some states without tenure laws have high dismissal rates (Alabama, Alaska), others have low ones (Mississippi, Texas). The “bulk of the apparently onerous dismissal laws are encoded in state law, not in union contracts.
Teacher unions to blame for big pensions and “a compensation structure that repels competitive, performance-driven workers,” Education Realist concedes. However, “many of the teacher protections and all of the standards lie at the state level, entirely out of the union’s purview.”
Of course, teachers’ unions have a great deal of influence on state law.