State Board of Education

The State Board of Education elections are critically important as 7 of the 11 elected seats are up for election and the board leadership hangs in the balance. Decoding Dyslexia OH supports public education but does not endorse any political candidate.   We wanted to raise awareness about this important election so that voters can make educated choices when casting their ballots on November 4, 2014.  It is important to note that 2 currently elected board members are not seeking re-election:  Debe Terhar of District 4 and Debbie Cain of District 8 (term-limited).

Why is voting for a State Board of Education member important?  The State Board of Education interprets and implements educational related legislation passed by the Ohio General Assembly.  State Board of Education candidates do not run based on party affiliation, so it is important to know their stance on issues that are important to you prior to going to the polls.

State Board Statement on Curriculum Recommendations:

Pursuant to ORC 3301.079(B)(3) and 3313.60, it is the responsibility of Ohio’s local boards of education to vet and approve curriculum and educational materials for use in the public schools within their district.

The use of any materials posted or linked to on the Ohio Department of Education website, including materials within the Common Core State Standards or Appendices or any state model curricula or other educational resource material, is entirely up to the discretion of each local board of education.

Please click on the the candidate’s name to be taken to their campaign website or facebook page.  If the candidate is an incumbent, clicking on incumbent will take you to their biography posted on the Ohio Department of Education website.  There are a few candidates that no campaign website could be found.  If there is one, please email Info@DecodingDyslexiaOH.org so the link can be added.

ohio_map_new_districts-2012Elected Members

District 2: (link to debate here)

District 3:

District 4:

District 5:

District 7:

District 8:

District 10:

 The following elected members will continue to serve their terms, which end on December 31, 2016:

 

At-Large Members

The terms of the following appointed members end on December 31, 2014. These members can be re-appointed by the governor.

The terms of the following appointed members end on December 31, 2016:

 

 Links to learn more:

 

 

What is Evidence Based?

Evidence based should be used rather than research based as they are not the same. Per Dr. Sally Shaywitz, evidence based is proven methods while scientifically based reading research (SBRR) is based on theories of science but not necessarily proven.

Evidence based is systematic, explicit instruction and the term evidence based must be used in:

  • early screening
  • intervention
  • professional development
  • training
YCDClogo_index2012
An excerpt from A Major Step Forward by The Yale Center for Dyslexia And Creativity:

Cautionary Note:
Prior to selecting a reading program, you must always ask:  “Show me the evidence.”

We must ensure that programs that are used truly meet the standard of “evidence –based” and that this scientific term is not used indiscriminately, that is, plunked down to describe a program that does not truly meet the high standard and implications of what “evidence-based” implies. This means that if a program promotes itself as “evidence-based,” it must be required to produce evidence of a randomized field trial where the program in question is tested against other programs and that this program was demonstrated as effective in improving students’ reading. The model for such evidence-based field trials are those required by the FDA for medications before the medication is approved as effective and ready for use.

It would be a shame to allow the term “evidence-based” to be used to describe a program, indiscriminately, without reliable evidence that the program is actually effective in improving students’ reading. It is important to appreciate that anecdotal or received wisdom is insufficient. We have come too far and made too much progress to allow anything less than valid scientific evidence to be used in determining if, indeed, a program is effective in improving students’ reading. Thus, there must be a strict criterion of proof emanating from positive field trials – whether used:

  • in a school to teach children to read;
  • by colleges to train future teachers of reading; or
  • in providing professional development to teachers.

The gold standard must be proof (evidence) that the program improves the children’s reading. To accept anything less would be a regressive step backwards and a loss for all the parents, educators and children who are eagerly awaiting programs that truly have evidence that they are effective.

The above is an excerpt from the article A Major Step Forward.  Please take the time to read the entire article as it is excellent.  It summarizes “The Science of Dyslexia” House Committee Hearing as well as provides Dr. Sally Shaywitz’s recommendations made to the Congressional Science, Space and Technology Committee on September 18, 2014.  Please also refer to The Yale Center for Dyslexia and Creativity’s Dyslexia Declaration of Rights.

Please watch Dr. Sally Shaywitz at the House Committee hearing on “The Science of Dyslexia,” September 18, 2014 as she explains the difference between Evidence-Based Programs compared to Research-Based Programs and why we need to select evidence-based programs to help students with dyslexia succeed. Evidence based instruction is not only crucial for the 1 in 5 students with dyslexia, but it makes ALL students more successful.