Candidates Seeking Election To The State Board Of Education Should Tell Their Vision and Objectives For Public Education

According to the State Board of Education website, the focus of the state board is to deliver an education that will make “all students well prepared for success.” The definition of “success,” according to the state board, evidently is the acquiring of skills needed to earn a living, the skills needed for industry. What bothers me about the vision and objectives articulated by the leaders of Ohio education (see below) is that this vision / objectives for Ohio’s public education could just as easily be articulated by the ministry of education in North Korea explaining the vision / objectives for North Korean public education.

Yes, like North Korea, we want skilled and willing workers who will build our industries and make us competitive in the world. What is missing from the objectives for public education in Ohio listed by the state board is any mention of the importance of preparing children to be full participants and contributors to their democracy. This omission of any emphasis of a democratic purpose for public schooling is also evident in the Common Core.

I agree with the point of view expressed by Alan Singer in “What’s Missing From Common Core Is Education for Democracy.”

Common Core standards are supposed to “provide a consistent, clear understanding of what students are expected to learn” and be “relevant to the real world.” But “real world” expectations are defined as preparing students for “success in college and careers” and “to compete successfully in the global economy.” As best as I can ascertain, in the entire document, there is no real discussion of life in a democratic society and the role of education in promoting democratic processes and democratic values. …

Democracy is hard to build as we are witnessing around the world. It requires a sense of shared community, respect for democratic values such as minority rights, concerns for the well being of others, freedom of expression, and the right to be actively involved in the political process. It requires a sense of being part of an inclusive and diverse body politic, of citizenship.

District 3 is composed on Senate Districts 4,5 and 6

District 3 is a large territory — composed of Senate Districts 4,5 and 6

The state board website notes, “The State Board of Education was established in the Ohio Constitution in 1953 to ensure that citizens were given a voice in decisions relating to public education.”  There are nineteen members of the state board. Each serve a four year term. Eight of the members are appointed by the governor and the other eleven members each represent a geographic district composed of three senate districts. We live in District 3 and this year we are empowered to elect one member of the state board to be the voice of citizens in this district on the board.

There are four candidates seeking election to represent District 3 on the state board. The incumbent is A. J. Wagner — appointed by Governor Kasich when Jeffry Mims resigned to serve on the Dayton City Commission. The three challengers are: Charlotte McGuire, Mary M. Pritchard, and Sarah L. Roberts.

I’ve been studying their answers on two forums:

I see nothing in these two forums that deal with the issue of defining the purpose of public education in a democracy.

I am looking for a candidate to the state board who will seek to revise the mission / objectives of the state board so that it would be impossible to confuse it with the mission / objectives of the education in a totalitarian state. I am looking for a candidate who will advocate a mission for Ohio public education that focuses on building the capacity of children to be active and contributing citizens in a democracy.

 

The State Board of Education

Our Vision

The State Board of Education’s vision is for all Ohio students to graduate from the PK-12 education system with the knowledge, skills and behaviors necessary to successfully continue their education and/or be workforce ready and successfully participate in the global economy as productive citizens. Ultimately, all students will graduate well prepared for success.

Our Objectives

To graduate all students well prepared for success, the State Board will focus on the following objectives:

  1. Teaching 21st century knowledge and skills for real-world success;
  2. Effectively delivering support for a high quality education;
  3. Providing sufficient resources which are efficiently managed; and
  4. Developing a statewide outreach and communication strategy on board policy and the importance of education in the 21st century.
Posted in Special Reports | Leave a comment

Dee Gillis Should Challenge Beagle To Debate This Question: “We Should Make Ohio’s Tax System More Progressive”

Democrat Dee Gillis is campaigning to replace Bill Beagle as senator for Ohio’s District 5. (This district covers most of Dayton and all of Preble County.)

Beagle is bragging in his TV ads that he voted with the Republican majority to reduce taxes by over $3 billion each year.

Gillis needs to respond to Beagle’s boast of reducing taxes. She needs to challenge Beagle to a debate about taxes. She should make these three points:Screen Shot 2014-10-09 at 12.04.22 PM

  1. In order to reduce taxes at the state level the Republicans cut funding to local schools and local governments. These reductions have forced local communities to increase local property and local income taxes.Screen Shot 2014-10-09 at 12.10.52 PM
  2. The across-the-board reduction in state income taxes, combined with an increase in sales tax and increases in local property taxes has changed the shape of Ohio’s tax system — making it less progressive, more flat, less fair.
  3. If the last $3 billion in cuts each year to Ohio’s income tax had been made so that the progressivity of the system was not altered, each taxpayer would have received the same amount of reduction — about $750 each year.

Gillis should answer Beagle’s boast of cutting taxes by raising the question of tax fairness and tax purpose.  If income tax revenue is reduced by $3 billion, what is the most fair way to return this money to taxpayers?

Under Beagle’s $3 billion tax reduction plan, higher incomes got thousands of dollars of tax reduction each year and lower incomes got almost no tax reduction each year. Reducing the tax obligation of each taxpayer by the same amount maintains the progressively of the system. The first graph illustrates how total taxes could be reduced by 50%, without changing the progressivity of the system. As I figure it, $3 billion equally divided among Ohio taxpayers would have amounted to about $750 each year for each taxpayer. This reduction would have resulted in thousands of Ohioans, who now pay Ohio income tax, having zero Ohio income tax obligation.

The $3 billion in tax cuts Beagle is bragging about were made by reducing all income tax brackets by the same percentage. Ohio’s income tax structure is progressive so this “across the board” tax cut makes the progressively less steep, more flat. To illustrate, in the second graph the blue line shows a progressive tax system and the green line shows a 50%  “across the board” reduction in that system. Note that the green line is less steep, more flat than the blue line. The yellow line shows an 80%  “across the board” cut to that system. The more reduction, the flatter the system becomes. Note that the yellow line, showing a whopping 80% reduction, is almost completely flat.

At one time there was wide-spread agreement that to make taxes more fair, higher incomes should be taxed at a higher rate than the rate paid by lower incomes. I think there would be wide public support for the point of view that any future changes made to Ohio’s tax structure should be changes that either maintains or improves the progressivity of Ohio’s tax structure. Gillis should raise the issue of tax fairness and should challenge Beagle to a debate on the question: “Ohio’s system of taxation should be made more progressive.”

Posted in Special Reports | 2 Comments

Advice To Rob Klepinger: Make Your Passion For Democracy The Message Of Your Campaign

This is my note giving advice to Rob Klepinger, Democrat seeking election to the U. S. Congress to represent Ohio’s 10th District — Montgomery and Greene Counties. Rob is challenging the Republican incumbent, Mike Turner, congressman for the 10th (formerly the 3rd) for 12 years. Rob is 46 years old. He currently is employed as a high school chemistry teacher at a public high school. He has worked as a teacher for the last twenty years.

photo 2

Rob Klepinger, Democratic candidate seeking election to congress to represent Ohio’s 10th District

Motivation is tough to discern, but, as I study your campaign, it seems to me that what drove you to seek election to the U. S. Congress is your passion for democracy. Your banner on Facebook says “Congressman For The People,” and in your you-tube interview with David Esrati you indicate that your big motivation to seek election to congress was your frustration at the thought that the incumbent, Mike Turner, might run unopposed.

There is wide-spread concern that our democracy is failing to solve problems and failing to plan for the future. If you could communicate your passion for democracy, your concern that our democracy is failing, you could gain the attention of a lot of “persuadable” voters who believe that the dysfunction of Washington — the ineptitude, corruption and partisan posturing — is caused by the dysfunction of our democracy. Many of these “persuadables” are looking for a point of view that offers an alternative to partisan posturing.

The 10th District would make a great battleground for a pro-democracy movement. Your message should be that a person elected to the U. S. Congress has the big responsibility of providing leadership to the District that he or she represents. You should show how your experience as a teacher has given you a lot of experience in leadership and make the point that an effective teacher is an effective leader.

Importantly, to gain credibility you must show a plan for leadership that, if elected, you will implement. You could post that plan here on DaytonOS. Such a plan would show, for example, how the work of congress would be made transparent and understandable. It would show a strategy to encourage public discussion and public education about matters of civic importance. Such a plan of your intentions would make a vivid contrast to the record of Turner’s behavior.

In summary, here is my unsolicited advice: In these last few weeks, make your message the fact that you are passionate about democracy. People are attracted to passion.  Make a plan for leadership that will be compelling in its imagination and scope. Post that plan here on DaytonOS.

See:

Posted in Special Reports | 4 Comments