Feeds:
Posts
Comments

SAANYS has recently received a number of inquiries regarding the release of student test performance data. On June 2, Kevin Casey, Don Nickson, and I met with Commissioner King and Deputy Commissioner Slentz and requested clarification. On June 4, we received the following information:

1. What student information may be released district-to-district for “records requests” when families relocate? Is responding to a records request the same as sending a student transcript?

Response: A response to a request for records does not constitute a transcript. “The legislation specifically allows scores to be transferred to the state or other school districts.” Therefore, student performance of 3-8 common core-aligned tests, or other tests, may be shared with other districts based on a records request.

2. For students taking both a common core-aligned Regents examination and a 2005 NYS standards-aligned Regents examination, which score or scores must be entered in a student’s transcript?

Response: “If the student takes both the Common Core and the old test, both scores should be reported to the State through SIRS, but the district decides what to do on local transcripts, etc. For example, they can certainly decide to include only the higher score on local transcripts.”

We hope that you will find this information helpful. We will continue to keep you updated. All the best. … Jim Viola

Provided below is a bullet point summary of selected state budget provisions related to K-12 education.

Utilization of Test Data
Individual student scores on the state 3-8 ELA and math assessments may not be placed on a students’ official transcript or maintained in a students’ permanent record, but may be used in required state and federal reporting.

Notice must be provided to parents that the 3-8 ELA and math results will not be included on official transcripts or maintained in the students’ permanent record. The above provisions expire on December 31, 2018.

Promotion/Placement
Student promotion and placement decisions may not be based upon results of the state 3-8 ELA and math assessments. Such results may be a factor in such decisions, along with other measures. The promotion and placement policy shall be provided to parents annually.

Pre-K – 2 Test Ban
The commissioner is to promulgate regulations prohibiting standardized tests, but not those required by federal law or those designed to demonstrate application of knowledge and skills.

Test Time

The commissioner is to promulgate regulations creating the following testing restrictions:

–  State assessments may not exceed one percent of the minimum required annual instructional hours for each grade. Assessments not required by state or federal law also may not exceed one percent of the minimum required annual instructional hours for each grade.

–  Test preparation for standardized tests may not exceed two percent of the minimum required annual instructional hours per grade. Teacher administered quizzes and exams are exempted from these limitations. We expect the creation of regulations that provide clarity to these provisions to be challenging.

SED is also to issue guidance on the reduction and elimination of standardized tests not required by law, and report all standardized tests that are administered, by district. Each district shall be required to post this report on its website.

Students With Disabilities/ELL

The commissioner is to issue regulations to allow students with disabilities who are not eligible for the alternate assessment to be assessed on instructional level rather than chronological age.  ELL may be assessed with a state exam that measures English language development rather than the ELA exam for their first two years of enrollment.

Test Administration

The commissioner is required to reduce field tests, make more test questions from the 3-8 ELA and math exams available for review and to expedite review of proposed changes to APPR plans designed to reduce testing.

Universal Pre-K

$340 million to fund Pre-K, $300 million of which is dedicated to New York City.  Pre-K will be funded by grants awarded by SED pursuant to an application scoring system that SED is to develop.  Pre-K programs must provide at least five hours of instruction per school day by certifed teachers and the programs are subject to annual inspections. Grant awards may only be used to supplement and not supplant current expenditures on Pre-K programs.

Teacher Excellence Fund
A teacher excellence fund was funded with $10 million. Districts must submit their locally negotiated plan on supplementing “highly effective” teachers with up to $20,000 to SED and DOB for approval.

The state budget contains many more educationally related items. This summary is designed to provide a quick overview of some of the more high profile items. Any questions or comments should be directed to Jim Viola, director of government relations at jviola@saanys.org.

With the grade 3-8 ELA and math tests scheduled for administration next week, we are receiving inquiries as to school requirements and options in connection with students “opting out.” This week, SAANYS met with Commissioner John King and Deputy Commissioner Ken Slentz – and we included this issue in our agenda.

Encouragement to Take the Test

In introducing the discussion item, we reiterated our position that SAANYS does not endorse students opting out of the state tests. SAANYS continues to consistently and loudly assert that such testing results should NOT be used for high stakes purposes for students, teachers, and principals for a period of at least two years. However, SED officials referred to a January 2013 field memorandum issued by Steven Katz stating that there is neither a statutory nor regulatory provision/procedure that recognizes or allows for opting out. The Katz memorandum may be accessed at by clicking here.  Subsequent to our meeting, SED issued a Fact Sheet – Common Core and Assessments, available by clicking here.

School Responsibilities When Students Opt Out

It is clear that some students will opt out of the upcoming state tests. SAANYS has heard of a “sit and stare” requirement that some have attributed to the State Education Department, but we were informed that this is not the case. In the end, SED leadership agreed that what school districts should do when students opt out of state testing is a matter of local policy. There is no “requirement” that students who opt out remain in the testing room with the other students who are taking the test. It is SAANYS’ position that such a procedure may be distracting to test-takers, and some may regard such a requirement to be uncomfortable for the students opting out. Based on local policy, students who opt out “may” be sent to an alternative location, or “may” remain in the test location with permission to read, or “may” be otherwise assigned. The one caveat the SED leaders provided is that the school district policy regarding students who opt out should not serve as an enticement to do so. For example, students should not be sent to the gymnasium to play.

After Finishing the Test

We are also taking this opportunity to draw to your attention that, as stated on page two of the SED fact sheet document, students who complete their test early, before the allotted time expires, should check their work. A student who finishes a test early “may” be permitted to read silently. If all students complete the test earlier than the allotted time, the proctor may end the test session.

We hope that you will find this information helpful. We will continue to keep you updated and – we wish you and your students all the best for a successful test administration…Jim Viola

On Monday March 24, the State Education Department sent a letter to school superintendents pertaining to the administration of state tests scheduled for administration to students in grades 3 to 8.

Commissioner King’s letter includes a link to access the 3-8 test schedule, including administration dates, make-up dates, scoring dates, and dates for the submission of answer sheets. However, the overriding theme of the commissioner’s letter is an encouragement for schools to communicate with teachers, parents, and students to correct misinformation to help them better understand “how the assessments help us better identify student strengths and needs and better support the growth of classroom teachers.” It is the commissioner’s expectation that such communication will alleviate stress and frustration among students and teachers.

The information released by SED does not address the matter of students opting out of state testing. However, when SED sent material on March 23, in preparation for a SAANYS-SED meeting held on March 25 under the heading Information on Student Participation in State Assessments, a link was included to access a January 2013 memorandum issued by Steven Katz. The memorandum states: “With the exception of certain areas in which parental consent is required, such as Committee on Special Education (CSE) evaluations for students with disabilities and certain federally-funded surveys and analyses specified under the federal Protection of Pupil Rights Amendment (see 20 U.S.C. 1232h), there is no provision in statute or regulation allowing parents to opt their children out of state tests. The failure to comply with the requirements provided above will have a negative impact on a school or school district’s accountability, as all schools are required to have a 95 percent participation rate in state testing.”

Download Commissioner King’s letter.

Tuesday afternoon SAANYS met with Senators Dean Skelos and John Flanagan, and with Assemblymember Catherine Nolan’s Legislative Director, Devra Nusbaum. The following is an update regarding the status of state budget negotiations for 2014.

General Support for Schools

At meetings with both the senate and assembly members, SAANYS expressed that the current proposal for state aid to schools is insufficient and will result in additional cuts of programs and personnel. We, again, recommended that any funds that are contemplated to initiate/support other programs (such as full-day pre-kindergarten, after school services, and P-TECH) be re-directed to operating aid. The current proposed allocation amounts are:

  • Governor – $21.9 billion ($807 million increase)
  • Senate – $21.9 billion ($811 million increase)
  • Assembly – $22.2 billion ($1.1 billion increase)

Foundation Aid /Gap Elimination Adjustment

The senate and assembly have adopted different approaches to the allocation of funds to reduce the Gap Elimination Adjustment versus increasing Foundation Aid. SAANYS expressed that our members’ school districts are in different positions – some would benefit more from reducing the GEA, some would benefit more from increased Foundation Aid. SAANYS recommended both in our legislative testimony. Current respective proposals follow:

  • Governor – Foundation Aid $15.182 billion (no increase); $323 million GEA restoration
  • Senate – Foundation Aid $15.182 billion (no increase); $541 million GEA restoration (phase-out in 2016-17)
  • Assembly – Foundation Aid $15.5 billion ($335 million increase); $367 million restoration (4-year phase-out)

Tax Freeze/Tax Cap

SAANYS expressed strong concern about the devastating consequences that would accrue from the proposed tax cap freeze – dramatically exacerbating those of the current tax cap. We also expressed to the senate representatives our upset with their contemplated action to make the Property Tax Cap permanent. Respective positions follow:

  • Governor – Property Tax Freeze tied to staying under the cap and mergers/consolidations
  • Senate – Property Tax Freeze tied to staying under the cap and would count prior actions – makes cap permanent
  • Assembly – Rejects Property Tax Freeze and provides a circuit-breaker tied to income

Mandate Relief

SAANYS expressed our continuing support of the governor’s proposal to establish a mechanism, with safeguards and parent notice and participation, for waivers from statutory requirements (and concomitant regulatory requirements) specified in §4402 and §4403 of Education Law. The status of this proposal follows:

  • Governor – Allow schools to request waivers from requirements in Sections 4402 and 4403
  • Senate – Allows schools to request waivers from requirements in Sections 4402 and 4403
  • Assembly – Rejects waivers for special education requirements

SAANYS continues to remain active in meeting with members of the legislature. Also, we are planning for our next Government Relations Committee Lobby Day on April 9.

The New York State Board of Regents met in Albany on March 10 and 11. Two discussion items were the main topics of the meeting:

  • Common Core K-12 Social Studies Framework
  • Next Generation Science Standards

K-12 Social Studies Framework

A panel of seven members of the Social Studies Content Advisory Panel explained that although the framework has been aligned with the Common Core Learning Standards (CCLS), it maintains the standards statements from the existing 1996 NYS Learning Standards for Social Studies. The framework includes Key Ideas, Conceptual Understandings, and Content Specifications, for each grade level.

Based on information released by the National Council for Social Studies, the New York Framework has been enhanced with the incorporation of the “Inquiry Arc” – an approach to increase rigor through questions and planned inquiries that apply disciplinary concepts and tools, evaluate sources, and use evidence to communicate conclusions and take informed action. The advisory panel also recommended a Global History and Geography split, with Global History and Geography I (Grade 9) beginning with the Paleolithic Era and continuing to a period of global interactions from approximately 1400 to 1750. Global History and Geography II (Grade 10) would begin with a snapshot of the world in 1750.

The framework draft is posted on the SED website for public comment, and will be presented as an action item at the Regents’ April meeting. Upon adoption of the framework, the Content Advisory Panel will begin development of a Social Studies Field Guide, including instructional resources and strategies, shifts in social studies instruction, and guidance and examples for leveraging key ideas. The framework Regents item included no information or recommendations regarding possible revisions of state testing or graduation requirements.

Science Standards

Deputy Commissioner Kenneth Wagner presented an initial discussion item regarding science standards. He summarized initial public feedback to a SED survey issued in April 2013 seeking recommendations whether to revise current NYS Science Learning Standards or to adopt the Next Generation Science Standards developed by the National Research Council. (The NGSS standards may be accessed at http://www.nextgenscience.org/next-generation-science-standards.)  The deputy commissioner said that there is a clear need for more engineering and mathematics content in science standards. Wagner also indicated that a science strategic plan is also under development to guide planning and implementation if the Board of Regents determines to adopt new science standards, update existing standards, or develop a hybrid set of standards.

Regent Betty Rosa expressed that the Washington D.C. Fordham Institute, an organization that strongly supports CCLS, gave the common core-aligned science standards a “C.” She went on to explain that the Institute gave the standards from 12 states a “superior” rating. Rather than considering only two options, she recommended that New York State also consider standards from other states. Also, Regent Roger Tilles recommended that art be added to the science standards –STEAM, not STEM.

Regents Election

During the second day of the Regents’ meeting several members signaled their tension and frustration with regard to public recognition of their efforts – and successes – in rolling-out the various planks of their education reform agenda. Several board members recommended that the department develop a public relations document to summarize what has been done and to recognize implementation successes. In discussing recommendations from institutions of higher education and teacher candidates to postpone the high stakes aspects of the Ed TPA examination requirement for teacher certification/licensure (due to a 70 percent pass rate), Regent James Tallon said, “We’re being picked-off one issue at a time … We are under attack.” In his remarks at the opening of the full board meeting, Vice Chancellor Anthony Bottar said, “This is a challenging time to serve on this board. There are many distractions; it is imperative for us to stay focused.”

The Regents’ frustration no doubt extended to actions to be taken by the state legislature later that same day – voting upon four Regent appointments:  at-large appointment currently held by Wade Norwood; at-large appointment currently held by James Cottrell, Judicial District XIII (Richmond), appointment currently held by Christine Cea; and Judicial District III (Albany, Rensselaer, Columbia, Greene, Schoharie, Ulster, Sullivan), appointment currently held by James Jackson. The continuation of incumbent Regents was not assured as almost two dozen candidates were nominated by legislators and many members of the legislature attribute the flawed roll-out of CCLS, at least in part, to the Board of Regents.  In the end, Regent Jackson resigned his position and was replaced by Victoria Finn. In the end, the three Regents who were up for reelection – James Cottrell, Wade Norwood, and Christine Cea, were all reelected by significant margins.

On Wednesday, March 5, after hours of debate, the State Assembly passed a far-reaching bill relating to multiple planks of the Board of Regents’ education reform agenda. The bill – A-8929 – addresses the following points

  • APPR high stakes for teachers and principals,
  • Student high stakes in connection with common core-aligned assessments,
  • Reducing field testing and releasing more test items,
  • Standardized APPR assessments for students k-2,
  • Standardized assessments for students in pre-kindergarten,
  • Common Core professional development,
  • Personally identifiable information, and more.

Although the bill is not perfect, SAANYS found the preponderance of its voluminous provisions to be consistent with our positions, and there are no provisions with which we are categorically opposed. Any shortcomings have been addressed by including recommendations. We thought that you may be interested in some of the details of the bill, and so our legislative review is attached to this communication.

We hope that you will find the attached review informative. We will continue to keep you updated. All the best. …Jim Viola

LR A8929 CC, Tests, APPR, PD, Info (PDF)

On February 26, the SAANYS Government Relations Committee (GRC) was joined by the NYS Federation of School Administrators representing the New York City, Buffalo and Yonkers city school districts for a Lobby Day. During the morning, three teams visited 15 legislators and Governor Cuomo’s Deputy Secretary for Education, Ian Rosenblum. During the afternoon the entire delegation met with Commissioner King, and Deputy Commissioners Ken Slentz and Ken Wagner where discussion principally evolved around the State Education Department’s ESEA Waiver Application, English Language Learner Blue Print, and adjustment options to Common Core Learning Standards.

Meetings in the Legislative Office Building and State Capitol focused on four issues:

State School Aid for 2014 – Years of state aid cuts, the enactment of the Gap Elimination Adjustment (GEA) and frozen Foundation Aid, coupled with the property tax cap have resulted in many school districts in fiscal stress, districts that are educationally insolvent, and districts planning for how they will be out of compliance with mandates in a manner that does the least harm to students. More than 30,000 educators have been laid-off over the past five years – proportionately more administrators than teachers – and the governor’s proposed state aid increase of 3.8 percent ($807 million) will result in more cuts of personnel and programs. According to calculations completed by the Education Conference Board (ECB) $1.5 billion is needed to maintain the status quo. We strongly recommended an increase of $1.9 billion.   Our delegation described the cuts that have already been implemented in their respective districts, their state aid increase (or decrease) based of the proposed Executive Budget, and the additional cuts that would accrue if the governor’s proposed budget is enacted. The teams recommended that other proposed programs – full-day prekindergarten, after school Programs, P-TECH, and the Teacher Excellence Fund – should NOT be funded if they would reduce the allocation for school operating aid.

Lobbying teams also discussed the proposed Two-year tax cap freeze – which would be tantamount to a Vote No Proposition. This proposal would be harmful to schools and students, and exacerbate the inequality of educational opportunities district-to-district already resulting from the property tax cap. (Under the current property tax cap, the wealthiest school districts raise more than seven times the revenue of the poorest school districts (source: ECB). It will also pit homeowners against schools, and place school leaders in a no-win situation; reducing the possibility of mustering the 60 percent supermajority needed to exceed the tax cap (1.46 percent for 2014), or attempting an override of the tax cap (asking tax payers to pay more taxes and forego rebates) and running the very real risk the budget will be rejected, resulting in a $0 increase in local revenue. The refrain of expecting schools to do more with less – will in the end, result in less educators, less programs and services, and fewer students graduating college and career ready .

Common Core – Lobby teams recommended that New York State continue to phase-in Common Core Learning Standards, curricula, instructional materials, and pedagogy – following ECB’s five recommendations: Build common understanding across stakeholders, invest in professional development, ensure adequate funding, reassess the State Education Department’s approach to student testing, and engage key stakeholders in reviewing and refining implementation. The teams also recommended continuation to implement common core-aligned tests in grades 3 to 8, but the results of such testing should be used as an indicator to gauge the extent successful phase-in. There should be a “pause” or a “moratorium” on the use of 3 to 8 test results ensuring they are NOT for any high stakes purposes for students, teachers, or principals. SAANYS supports Senate Bill 6009, by John Flanagan / Assembly Bill 8356, by Catherine Nolan that would require a comprehensive independent audit to determine the validity, appropriateness, and application of common core test results – including the duration of the “pause” or “moratorium.”

During the course of meetings with state legislators, Assemblymember Catherine Nolan asked that James Viola, from SAANYS; Peter McNally, from NYSFSA; and Mark Cannizzaro, from CSA meet with staff attorneys from her office for a detailed discussion regarding the Common Core Learning Standards recommendations detailed above.

Dignity of All Students Act – The Executive Budget amendments will not further safeguard students – there is no change in the definition of harassment, bullying, discrimination and cyberbullying; no change in the student characteristics protected; no change in scope and circumstances of protection (i.e., definition of School Property). The proposal  is a heavy-handed, inappropriate approach to punish principals who fail to “promptly” complete investigations of alleged harassment, bullying, or discrimination and to report a “pattern” of harassment, bullying or discrimination of which they knew or “should have known” in a “timely” manner. The proposal would:

1.     Establish vague requirements with harsh penalties – How long is a timely investigation? How is it determined what an individual should have known?  What constitutes a pattern? What does timely mean? These questions are important when your career is on-the-line.

2.     Shift from §3020-a to §306 –

§306 specifies the bases and procedures for “removal of school officers.” It applies to a trustee, board of education member, clerk collector, treasurer, district superintendent, superintendent of schools, or other school officer. A school principal does NOT fall within the definition of public officer. The hearing is conducted by the commissioner of education, who may order the removal of the school officer from his or her office.

3.     The principal or superintendent must “promptly” report any verified pattern of harassment, bullying, or discrimination to the commissioner, the Division of Human Rights, and the Division of State Police.

Reporting requirements are currently specified in Sections 13.1.i and 15. The broader reporting of material incidents/patterns contemplated in the Executive Budget may be accommodated.

4.     SAANYS is supportive of services and DASA revisions that will better protect students and educators. For this reason, we recommend that SED make available guidance and professional development, and we also recommend a state school aid increase of $1.9 billion to reinstate some of the counseling personnel who have been cut.

Special Education Waivers – SAANYS supports the establishment of a procedure for a variance from provisions in 4402 and 4403, along with concomitant regulations. The quality of special education services would be ensured as such waivers are required to be “innovative” and consistent with federal requirements. Parents would be involved in the waiver process, culminating in review and approval by SED, and followed by annual reports by the school district/BOCES. This proposal may produce meaningful special education mandate relief, which may later be scaled-up through broader implementation.

Important SED APPR Revisions

The link below was released by the State Education Department the morning of February 25. The link provides access to a field memorandum issued by Julia Rafal-Baer, executive director of the SED Office of Teacher and Leader Effectiveness, Policy and Programs. The memorandum pertains to APPR revisions accruing from the Board of Regents February 2014 meeting, including the following actions:

  • Effective February 11, 2014,  Expedited APPR Reviews to reduce unnecessary testing
  • Effective February 11, 2014, Core Subject Areas permitting school-wide, group, or team measures
  • Effective March 2, 2014, no APPR plan shall be approved by SED for 2014-15 that includes traditional standardized third party or vendor assessments to students in kindergarten through grade 2.
  • Effective March 2, 2014, SED will eliminate from its list of State-Approved Assessments for 2014-15, traditional standardized assessments for use in kindergarten through grade 2.
  • Effective March 2, 2014, any APPR plan submitted for approval in 2014-15 must certify that no more than 1 percent of total instructional time in each classroom or program will be spent taking locally-determined traditional standardized assessments from the state’s approved list or traditional standardized district, regional or BOCES-developed assessments for APPR purposes. (This requirement does NOT apply to assessments that are used for formative or diagnostic purposes.)
  • Updates will be made to SED resources according to the following schedule:

Week of February 24, 2014
– Review Room 2.0 Portal – add school-wide option for 6-7 science and 6-8 social studies
– APPR Guidance and Purple Memo
– SLO Guidance
– Task-by Task Guidance

Week of March 3, 2014
– Certifying Instructional Time APPR Guidance
– State-approved third party assessment list
– Review Room 2.0 – change third party assessment option for K-2
__________________________________________________________________
To: NYSDATA@listserv.nysed.gov
Subject: memo re: APPR and recent BOR meeting posted

Summary of the Board of Regents Recently Announced Regulatory Changes to Subpart 30-2 of the Rules of the Board of Regents, Relating to Annual Professional Performance Reviews (APPR) for Teachers and Principals ha been posted at

http://www.engageny.org/sites/default/files/resource/attachments/appr-impact-field-memo-2-24-14.pdf
__________________________________________________________________

The SAANYS Government Relations Committee will discuss this memorandum, as well as all of SED’s 19 “Adjustment Options” with Commissioner King and Deputy Commissioner Ken Slentz on February 26.

We hope that you will find this information helpful. We will continue to keep you updated. All the best. …Jim Viola

On Wednesday, February 19, SAANYS was called along with the other six organizations comprising the Education Conference Board (ECB) to present testimony and answer questions from the Common Core Implementation Panel in regard to Common Core implementation. John Yagielski, ECB Chairperson, presented testimony on the behalf of the seven ECB organizations, expressing support of the common core concept with the proviso that five additional actions must be implemented to support successful transition:
1.       Statewide campaign to build a common understanding
2.       Investment in professional development
3.       Ensure adequate funding
4.       Reassess and revise the state’s approach to student assessment
5.       Establish a process of ongoing review and refinement

Five others also presented testimony to the Panel:

  • Michael Cohen,  Achieve
  • Carmel Martin, Center for American Progress
  • Jonathan Schleifer, Educators 4 Excellence
  • Pam Allyn, LitWorld
  • Theresa O’Brien, Watervliet Elementary School Principal

All those presenting testimony expressed support for the common core standards – some much more effusively than others. (It appears to some that panel members may have been selected partly due to their positive predisposition in this regard.) So too was there general agreement about the need for better communication and more professional development. In addressing the panel, I pointed out that there appears to be general agreement that teachers have not received the professional development and support needed for successful common core implementation,  and that such professional development and support is even more lacking for school principals and other school administrators. In terms of benchmarking, several presenters cited Tennessee and Kentucky as states that “got it right.”

The Governor’s panel is chaired by Stanley Litow, IBM International Foundation. Other panel members are:

  • John Flanagan, Chairperson of Senate Education Committee
  • Catherine Nolan, Chairperson of Assembly Education Committee
  • Linda Darling-Hammond, Stanford University Graduate School of Education
  • Todd Hathaway, East Aurora High School Teacher
  • Alice Jackson-Jolley, Parent from Westchester County
  • Anne Kress, Monroe Community College
  • Nick Lawrence, Teacher at the East Bronx Academy for the Future
  • Delia Pompa, National Council of La Raza
  • Charles Russo, Superintendent of East Moriches UFSD
  • Dan Weisberg, The New Teacher Project

The Panel is next scheduled to meet on March 5, 2014, and the focus areas will be frequency of student testing and standardized testing in K-2. In delivering his closing remarks for the meeting, Mr. Litow did not indicate a target date for the release of the Panel’s report and recommendations. We hope that you will find this information helpful. We will keep you updated. All the best. …Jim Viola