Panel to make recommendations for grading system

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

State leaders have created another new education panel – this one to help develop an A-F grading system to replace one that has come under fire following accusations it was adjusted to help a specific school.

The Accountability System Review Panel will be a 17-member group with appointments from House Speaker Brian Bosma, R-Indianapolis; Senate President Pro Tem David Long, R-Fort Wayne; Republican Gov. Mike Pence; and Superintendent of Public Instruction Glenda Ritz, a Democrat.

Ritz will serve as co-chair of the group along side a member assigned the role by the Legislative Council, an administrative arm of the General Assembly. Members will include teachers, administrators and technical advisors.

“Hoosiers know that accountability is essential to success in the classroom,” Pence said in a statement. “And they deserve to be confident that our system of accountability for schools is fair and equitable.”

Former state Superintendent Tony Bennett is accused of changing the current A-F grading system to benefit a charter school he had been touting. The change benefited other schools as well, raising questions among educators and lawmakers about whether the grades are fair.

In addition, school officials had long complained that the underlying system was unfair as well and so lawmakers had ordered changes – even before the accusations against Bennett became public.

The General Assembly assigned the job of developing the new A-F system to the State Board of Education. But state leaders signed a memorandum of understanding on Wednesday that creates the accountability panel, which is to report recommendations for grading system changes by Nov. 1.

The announcement comes less than a week after Gov. Mike Pence announced he was creating the Center for Education and Career Innovation to improve collaboration among a number of education-related agencies and commissions, including the Department of Education, Board of Education, Indiana Education Roundtable, Indiana Career Council and Indiana Works Councils.


Post a comment to this story

We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. How can any company that has the cash and other assets be allowed to simply foreclose and not pay the debt? Simon, pay the debt and sell the property yourself. Don't just stiff the bank with the loan and require them to find a buyer.

  2. If you only knew....

  3. The proposal is structured in such a way that a private company (who has competitors in the marketplace) has struck a deal to get "financing" through utility ratepayers via IPL. Competitors to BlueIndy are at disadvantage now. The story isn't "how green can we be" but how creative "financing" through captive ratepayers benefits a company whose proposal should sink or float in the competitive marketplace without customer funding. If it was a great idea there would be financing available. IBJ needs to be doing a story on the utility ratemaking piece of this (which is pretty complicated) but instead it suggests that folks are whining about paying for being green.

  4. The facts contained in your post make your position so much more credible than those based on sheer emotion. Thanks for enlightening us.

  5. Please consider a couple of economic realities: First, retail is more consolidated now than it was when malls like this were built. There used to be many department stores. Now, in essence, there is one--Macy's. Right off, you've eliminated the need for multiple anchor stores in malls. And in-line retailers have consolidated or folded or have stopped building new stores because so much of their business is now online. The Limited, for example, Next, malls are closing all over the country, even some of the former gems are now derelict.Times change. And finally, as the income level of any particular area declines, so do the retail offerings. Sad, but true.