By Lesley Weidenbener
TheStatehouseFile.com

INDIANAPOLIS – The State Board of Education voted Wednesday to delay approving letter grades for schools because members said they were unsure about the underlying data.

The decision came after two school administrators complained about the appeals process for their grades and board members learned that the nonpartisan Legislative Services Agency has not finished running the numbers, a process meant to verify the Department of Education results.

“I see somehow a lack of leadership, a lack of detail, that places us” in a bad situation, said board member David Freitas, who was addressing state Superintendent Glenda Ritz and her staff at the Department of Education.

“You have not provided us some of the key ingredients to make an intelligent decision,” Freitas said. “We need to ensure the data is accurate.”

Ritz, who chairs the education board, said later she had also sought to delay approving the grades until the legislative agency had finished its work. But she didn’t say why the issue landed on the agenda anyway.

The board plans to reconsider grades at a meeting Nov. 5 when Ritz said the data issues should be resolved and the LSA review would be completed.

Meanwhile, the board launched a rules making process to create a new A-F system, one that will put more emphasis on individual student growth. However, the board decided Wednesday that overall achievement – meaning do students pass standardized tests and other measures of proficiency – will count slightly more than how much individual students improved.

The school grades that will be approved next month will be based on the current system, which Ritz acknowledged doesn’t always fairly represent the work a district is doing. Still, she urged board members to follow the existing rules as they considered appeals and questions from districts who disagreed with their proposed grades.

The board voted, for example, to change the way that the grade for the Cristel House Academy will be calculated this year. That’s the Indianapolis charter school that caused problems for former state Superintendent Tony Bennett, who also changed the way grades were calculated to raise the school’s rating.

Department of Education officials had recommended that this year, the school receive a grade based on partial information because the high school hasn’t been in operation long enough to collect all the data points used in the typical calculation. Still, Ritz said the rules allowed for the use of partial data.

Board members disagreed, voting instead to base the school’s rating only on its middle and elementary school performance, a move that will raise the school’s overall grade.

“Above all else we want the system to have integrity. I want them to mean something,” said board member Sarah O’Brien, who voted for the change. The letter grades produced by the rules need to “match what we’re seeing in these buildings.”

In addition, Guerin Catholic High School Principal James McNeany told the board that his school had discovered an error in the data used to determine its grade but had initially been unable to convince the Department of Education to make a change. Eventually, the department acknowledged that some data may not have been included and is working now on a change.

But education officials acknowledged that the change could affect as many as four other schools.

“That’s making me nervous,” said board member Andrea Neal.

Other board members were frustrated that the Legislative Services Agency had not finished running the numbers to confirm the grades calculated by the Department of Education. A study of the issues involving Bennett and Cristel House led to the recommendation that LSA serve as a backup or a check on the education department.

Ritz said the information had been sent to LSA several weeks ago but the agency – which writes and analyzes legislation for the General Assembly – had not finished its work. She said it should be completed next week.

That prompted board member Brad Oliver to propose delaying the vote on all the grades. “Let’s table it” until the comparative analysis is done, he said. “Then we’ll know beyond a shadow of doubt it’s as good as we can get it right now.”

Lesley Weidenbener is executive editor of TheStatehouseFile.com, a news website powered by Franklin College journalism students.

By Lesley Weidenbener

TheStatehouseFile.com

By Hannah Troyer
TheStatehouseFile.com

FRANKLIN, Ind. – In a congenial candidate forum Monday at Franklin College, incumbent U.S. Rep. Todd Young acknowledged that incremental change is the goal when trying to turn around a political system he calls dysfunctional.

But the men trying to unseat him – Democrat Bill Bailey and Libertarian Mike Frey – said it’s time for a change. Now.

Frey told audience members that there is a third choice when voting this November – Libertarian.

“Washington is full of professional politicians. They go to Washington and never leave,” Frey said. “I want to bring the private sector perspective to Congress. It’s time to bring in someone who can balance the budge and knows how to do it. I have come to the conclusion that both parties are big government parties. The two parties are one.”

Frey, a first time candidate, used the debate in part to say that the candidates should be appearing together more often to give voters a chance to see the three men interact. Bailey on the other hand, used the debate to talk about his government experience as he returned to the political scene after retirement.

Bailey was Seymour’s mayor and decided to run for Congress after witnessing the sequester and government shut down. Before ending his retirement, Bailey spent more than 100 days weighting the decision to run for Congress and realized it was the right thing for him to do.

“(Running) interrupts my now retirement. This interrupts my bucket list. But, it’s worth it,” Bailey said. “This isn’t about me. It’s not going to be a career. This is about my children and grandchildren.”

The Democratic Party stands for “people first,” he said. “It’s more about people than corporations. It’s time we have more people thinking about people.”

After serving in the U.S. House since 2011, Young acknowledged that Congress functions poorly. All three candidates agreed the Democratic and Republican parties need to work together so the federal government can be more productive.

Young believes he is part of the solution in bipartisan issues rather than the problem.

He also told audience members that there is a disconnect between the public and Congress. Young wants voters to understand that change to big issues like the economy and healthcare – which both Bailey and Frey wish to change – does not happen quickly.

“There needs to be more of an effort to reach out across party lines, fewer attacks, and more specific, concrete solutions,” Young said. “My work in Congress isn’t done yet. I’m proud of the work we’ve done in my office in what is a dysfunctional time. We will solve some of these pressing issues in another couple congressional terms. My background and temperament can be part of the solution.”

After each candidate talked with mediator, John Krull, the director of the Pulliam School of Journalism at Franklin College, about why he was running and where he stood on various issues, audience members were able to write down questions. Each candidate was given a turn to address each one.

One of those questions concerned the terrorist group ISIS or ISIL. Young said he was “disturbed by the uncritical eye that many have brought to the issue of ISIS.  He also addressed the fact that lawmakers continually heard conflicting information about ISIS and its threat.

Bailey said he believes that “diplomacy might be the best first shot to fire instead of out of a gun” when dealing with ISIS.

Frey said he believes other countries in the Middle East should handle the ISIS conflict. But if the United States must get involved, he wants the country’s military generals to handle the fighting strategy – not the federal government.

All three candidates said job growth can happen if the private sector is expanded.

Each also said he will do the most good in Washington. The election is Nov. 4.

Hannah Troyer is a reporter at TheStatehouseFile.com, a news website powered by Franklin College journalism students.

Jennifer Nelson for www.theindianalawyer.com

The Indiana Supreme Court affirmed a trial court’s decision to not impose Crime Victims Relief Act liability on a couple who sold their home knowing it had defects. And although the Indiana Court of Appeals also affirmed, Chief Justice Loretta Rush pointed out the high court has different reasons for leaving the trial court’s judgment in place.

Barbara and William Johnson deeded their home to a trust in 1996 and sold it to Joseph and Carmen Wysocki in 2006. Most of the work done on the home through the years had been done by William Johnson. When they sold their house, Barbara Johnson signed the seller’s residential real estate sales disclosure form stating there were no building code violations or foundational, structural or other problems with the home.

The case is Joseph Wysocki and M. Carmen Wysocki v. Barbara A. Johnson and William T. Johnson, both Individually and as Trustees of the Barbara A. Johnson Living Trust dated 12-17-1996, 45S03-1407-CT-459.