Four people are dead in two separate accidents in Central Ohio. In Pataskala, investigators say a head-on collision on East Broad took three lives. One vehicle crossed the center line. Early this morning, the driver of a pick-up truck was killed when he slammed into a tree in a residential area south of Route 104 [...]
Columbus Education Meeting Discusses Possible Big Changes
Listen to the Story
The commission studying the future of the Columbus City Schools met for their final hearing Thursday and got to the heart of the matter — who should run them. The Columbus Education Commission heard suggestions on how the troubled school district should be governed. As WOSU reports, the theme of the meeting was big change is needed.
Education Commission director Eric Fingerhut opened the final meeting with a lesson about democracy and change. Fingerhut said, â€œthe [U.S.] prizes its democracy,â€ and underscored change does not diminish democracy.
The meeting focused on possible big changes in school leadership.
The mayor and commission members assert they are not trying to overthrow Columbus City Schools leadership. But some remain unconvinced.
Much of the commissionâ€™s final session focused on districts with appointed school boards and heavy mayoral involvement. Eric Fingerhut offered some appointment models.
“The state of New Jersey appoints the attorney general. The state of Ohio, the governor, appoints the board of the Ohio State University,” he said.
Fingerhut specifically noted how Bostonâ€™s mayor appoints school board members from a community panel.
Columbus City School Board president Carol Perkins, who serves on the commission, vehemently opposes an appointed school board.
“Local control is still very, very important. Constituents should have the right to select school board members.â€
Commission members heard from Susan Bodary, with Education First, an organization that analyzes current educational trends. Bodary noted mayors run about 20 school districts around the country.
She presented commission members with the different degrees of mayoral control from passive support to total oversight. And Bodary quoted results of a Center for American Progress study which indicates about half of the districts run by mayors show significant progress and are closing the achievement gap. But she acknowledged the model doesnâ€™t always work.
“There is no silver bullet. There is no guarantee,” she said. “Each city has to examine itself, its leadership and its structure, and look at its state policy context and make a decision for whether change is significantly going to help them get where they want to go.â€
Bodary pointed to success in low income districts, and said poverty is not an excuse for failure.
School Board president Perkins said they are not making excuses, but she questioned how success is possible in a district, like Columbus, where some students are homeless.
Fellow commission member Janet Jackson countered that Columbus City School children are surrounded by organizations able to assist those who face poverty.
â€œI hear too many excuses. So here now, letâ€™s just move forward,” Jackson said. â€œWe must need [Columbus Mayor Michael Coleman's] continued involvement. But Iâ€™m not sure what style or model that is. We certainly have seen models such as in Cleveland, kind of a mayoral takeover. I donâ€™t believe thatâ€™s what our mayor has ever wanted. But I believe we have to have more accountability.â€
Commission member and businesswoman Tanny Crane leans toward some mayoral control. While sheâ€™s unsure what the model will look like, she said change is imperative.
â€œThe status quo will not work. Iâ€™m convinced of that,” she said. “So whether itâ€™s mayoral involvement with leadership of the community in an appointed or electoral, or maybe itâ€™s a hybrid.â€
The commission is set to meet April 10 and 26 to hammer out a specific recommendation. Because the commission has no legal authority, any significant changes would require modifications to state law.