Public Hearing the Evolution of Student Assessments: Where We Started; Where We Are; and Where We Should Be Going

1 BEFORE THE NEW YORK STATE SENATE

STANDING COMMITTEE ON LOCAL EDUCATION 2 ------------------------------------------------------ 3 PUBLIC HEARING 4 THE EVOLUTION OF STUDENT ASSESSMENTS:

WHERE WE STARTED; WHERE WE ARE; AND 5 WHERE WE SHOULD BE GOING 6 ------------------------------------------------------ 7 Legislative Office Building

181 State Street 8 Van Buren Hearing Room A - 2nd Floor

Albany, New York 12247 9

June 11, 2012 10 10:30 a.m. to 3:00 p.m. 11 12

PRESIDING:13

Senator Charles J. Fuschillo, Jr. 14 Chair 15 16 SENATE MEMBERS PRESENT: 17 Senator Suzie Oppenheimer (RM) 18 Senator Hugh T. Farley 19 Senator Kenneth P. LaValle 20 Senator Carl Marcellino 21 Senator George D. Maziarz 22 Senator Michael H. Ranzenhofer 23 Senator Joseph D. Robach 24 25 1

SPEAKERS:PAGE QUESTIONS 2

Dr. John B. King 8 30 3 Commissioner

Valerie Gray 4 Executive Deputy Commissioner

New York State Education Department 5

Andrew Palotta 74 85 6 Executive Vice President

Marie Neira 74 85 7 Vice President

NYS United Teachers/United Federation 8 of Teachers 9 Jane Fox 74 85

Teacher 10 Heidi Sabatino (ph.) 74 85

Teacher 11 Albany City School District 12 Hillary Luallen Southern (ph.) 74 85

Teacher 13 Schenectady City School District 14 Timothy G. Kremer 116 128

Executive Director 15 NYS School Boards Association 16 Robert Lowry 142 158

Deputy Director 17 NYS Council of School Superintendents 18 Dr. Lorna Lewis 142 158

Superintendent 19 East Williston Central School District 20 Jennifer Pyle 162 167

Deputy Director 21 Conference of Big 5 School Districts 22 Jim Viola 168 178

Director of Government Relations 23 School Administrators Association of NYS 24 Paul Gasparini 168 178

Principal 25 Jamesville-Dewitt High School 1

SPEAKERS:PAGE QUESTIONS 2

Dr. Kenneth Mitchell 180 186 3 Superintendent

South Orangetown Central School District 4

Dan Drmacich 194 198 5 Retired School Principal

Rochester City School District; 6 and Chair of the Rochester Coalition

for Justice and Education 7

Donald Barlow 194 198 8 Educator

(Organization not announced) 9

Jaye Bea Smalley 210 212 10 Co-Chair

Citywide Council on Special Ed 11

Lisa Edstrom 224 228 12 A Parent

Parent Voices New York 13 14 ---oOo--- 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 SENATOR FLANAGAN: Can everyone hear okay? 2 All right. 3 Good morning. Welcome to the 4 Senate Education Committee hearing on tests. 5 And, I want to start by thanking and 6 introducing my colleagues who have joined us this 7 morning. I know everyone has very busy schedules, 8 so I appreciate everyone taking the time: 9 Senator Maziarz, Senator Farley, 10 Senator Robach, Senator Marcellino, and, my friend 11 and colleague, the ranker on the 12 Education Committee, Senator Suzi Oppenheimer. 13 Couple of brief things. 14 First of all, thank you to everyone for being 15 here. 16 I sincerely apologize, there are things that 17 we can control and things we can't control. 18 The fact that it's about 97 degrees in here 19 was not done on purpose. Water is available at $5 a 20 bottle. We will give that to the State Education 21 Department. 22 [Laughter.] 23 SENATOR FLANAGAN: And we have -- here's what 24 we are trying to do: I just want to make some 25 remarks before we go to the Commissioner, and be 1 very brief at the same time. 2 We asked for people to provide written 3 testimony before the hearing. And I know the 4 Commissioner is very good at this, but anyone who 5 comes up to testify, if you are going to read your 6 testimony, I will politely interrupt you, because 7 everyone in the room is smart, everyone can read, 8 and they can read independently on their own. 9 It would be far better to make comments, 10 summarize, and then we can actually have more of a 11 dialogue. I think that's far more productive. 12 So, just in advance, if I cut somebody off, 13 it's only because I'm trying to be fair to everyone 14 here, and allow our colleagues to ask as many 15 questions as possible. 16 And, usually, like Senator Hannon is really 17 good with technology stuff. So, I'm taking a stab 18 at this. 19 This is a very quick set of slides on some of 20 what we were trying to talk about. And what we did 21 was, ask State Ed, school boards, school 22 superintendents, and NYSUT: What do you believe are 23 all the tests necessary to get a diploma in the 24 state of New York? 25 And it's sort of like many other things in 1 life, everybody has a slightly different 2 interpretation. 3 There is real consistency in what's there, 4 but we just thought it might be useful to take a 5 quick look at that. 6 And let me also added that there are copies 7 of the testimony that will be available for 8 everybody. There was very lengthy testimony 9 submitted from the School Boards Association, with a 10 multitude of comments. 11 Those comments are not available in volume 12 right now, but everything that comes out of today 13 will be put into a record that will be available to 14 everyone as quickly as possible. 15 So, briefly, I hope, and everyone can see 16 that, but -- okay, here we go. 17 Now, if we could turn the lights down there 18 quickly, maybe we can do the air conditioning at the 19 same time. 20 [Laughter.] 21 [Slide show begins.] 22 SENATOR FLANAGAN: Okay, just quick: 23 Areas of focus: How many exams? 24 And since I told everyone else not to read, I 25 know everyone can quickly read that. Sort of broad 1 questions. 2 And then, okay, first one is: 3 State Education Department. 4 I believe their position is, is that there 5 are 19 different exams that are required for a 6 Regents diploma. 7 And, again, all of this will be available. 8 The School Boards lays it out slightly 9 differently. And they do add, even though they 10 aren't, technically, there for the Regents, that 11 there are AP exams, PSATs, SAT, or ACT, and elective 12 classes. 13 And, oh, God, I remember the TerraNova test 14 from my own kids, so that's certainly another test 15 that people have to be involved in. 16 Council on School Superintendents, they gave 17 a broader description. 18 And I know it's a little hard to see, I 19 apologize for that, but they included field tests 20 and a variety of different tests that are available. 21 But, there is a consistency with the -- all 22 four groups in terms of the general number, of, 23 like, between nineteen and twenty, or twenty-one, in 24 terms of getting a Regents diploma. 25 And then NYSUT was interesting in its own way 1 because, not only did they lay out the number of 2 tests, but they gave the amount of time that was 3 required for each of them. And clearly put in their 4 description here, that it doesn't include time spent 5 taking field tests. 6 And they line out, in terms of the number of 7 minutes for kids who are taking tests. I think it's 8 4,400 minutes, or, 74 hours, of testing. 9 So, if we could raise those lights again, 10 that's it on that. 11 And maybe it will cool off the room if it's 12 darker. 13 But, Commissioner, welcome, and we appreciate 14 you taking the time. 15 Before I go to you, I just want to ask 16 Senator Oppenheimer if she wanted to make any 17 comments. 18 SENATOR OPPENHEIMER: No. 19 My only question is: Is this in our 20 materials, the -- what we just saw here? 21 SENATOR FLANAGAN: Yes. 22 SENATOR OPPENHEIMER: No, I'm anxious to hear 23 what everyone has to say. 24 SENATOR FLANAGAN: Commissioner. 25 SENATOR OPPENHEIMER: I'm going to keep my 1 mind open. 2 SENATOR FLANAGAN: And, Val, thank you for 3 being here as well. 4 COMMISSIONER KING: Good morning. 5 Thanks, Senator Flanagan. 6 Thanks, members of the Committee. 7 Let me start by introducing our 8 executive deputy commissioner, Val Gray, who's 9 joining me for today's testimony. 10 What I thought I would do, is try and walk 11 quickly through the materials that we provided, at a 12 high level, and give you a sense of how the 13 Department sees the landscape. 14 As you will recall from my budget testimony 15 earlier this year -- 16 [Microphone repositioned.] 17 COMMISSIONER KING: As you'll recall from my 18 budget testimony earlier this year, it's never been 19 more critical for our high school students to 20 graduate ready for college and careers. That's 21 essential for the future of our state's economy, and 22 essential for the future of our state's democracy. 23 Our assessment program obviously plays a 24 critic a role in that work, and a critical role in 25 the Regents reform agenda. 1 The first page of the presentation that we 2 provided to you highlights the four core elements of 3 the Regents strategy for trying to increase the 4 percentage of students who graduate from 5 high school, college- and career-ready. 6 We've adopted a new set of standards: the 7 common-core standards; 8 We are building instructional data systems to 9 help schools and teachers make good use of data on 10 student performance; 11 We're doing a lot of work on teacher and 12 principal preparation, and, teacher and principal 13 effectiveness; 14 And, a focused effort to turn around our 15 lowest-performing schools. 16 You'll note on the second page of the 17 presentation, just an overview of where we are in 18 terms of graduation rates. This is the week where 19 we announce the prior year's graduation rates, final 20 graduation-rate numbers. 21 You'll see that our graduation rates have 22 risen steadily over the last five year, now reaching 23 74 percent statewide. And, yet, despite that 24 improvement, we continue to see a very large 25 achievement gaps; great disparities between and 1 across need-resource categories. 2 On the next page, we illustrate the 3 graduation rates for the Big Five, and you can see 4 the scope of our challenge. 5 The Big Five city school districts certainly 6 have significantly lower graduation rates than our 7 overall state graduation rate. 8 On the next page, we focus on -- this is 9 page 4, we focus on college- and career-readiness. 10 What's the percentage of students who 11 actually graduate high school, prepared to succeed 12 in college, prepared to enroll in credit-bearing 13 college courses? 14 And what you'll see there, is that, 15 unfortunately, of the students who began as freshmen 16 in 2007, in June of 2011, under 35 percent actually 17 graduated college- and career-ready. 18 So, the scope of the challenge is quite 19 great. 20 And the next page, page 5, emphasizes the 21 implications of the college- and career-readiness 22 gap for our economy. 23 Even, very recently, there have been a series 24 of studies that have shown how poor the employment 25 rate is for students who only have a high school 1 diploma, and aren't prepared with the skills they 2 need. 3 On the next page, we try to put the 4 assessment system in context. All right? 5 The assessment system is a part of a 6 multi-pronged strategy to improve performance. 7 The assessment system is a key measure for 8 how we see students doing against the New York State 9 learning standards, it's a key measure for school 10 accountability, and it is a component, one of 11 multiple measures to be used evaluating teacher and 12 principal performance. 13 On page 7, we describe the history of the 14 New York State assessment system. 15 The assessment system dates back, actually, 16 all the way to the beginning of the Regents exams in 17 1865. So, there's a long history to our assessment 18 system. And over time, the Regents exams at the 19 high school level were supplemented by exams at the 20 grade 4 and 8 level, in English language arts and 21 math. 22 And then, as we describe on page 8, with the 23 advent of "No Child Left Behind," the assessment 24 system was expanded to grades 3 through 8, English 25 language arts and math; 1 A federal requirement for there to be a 2 science exam, in grades 3 through 5, and then again 3 in grades 6 through 9, and then again in grades 10 4 through 12; 5 And the requirement that there be at least 6 one high school English language arts exam, and 7 mathematics exam. 8 And, obviously, with NCLB, all of these 9 assessments became even more critical tools for 10 school accountability. 11 Page 9, explains the history of how that 12 assessment system translates into operational tasks. 13 The 3-through-8 assessments, that system was 14 competitively bid, initially, in the contract that 15 was awarded to CTB/McGraw-Hill. 16 And then, in 2010, a second RFP process was 17 completed, and the contract was awarded to Pearson 18 for the 2012-to-2015 period. 19 The Regents exams, different from 20 grades 3 through 8, are actually developed by the 21 Department. 22 And the development process for both the 23 3-through-8 assessments and the Regents exams relies 24 on the participation of teachers throughout the 25 development process. 1 On page 10, we turn to the subject of testing 2 time, and the testing schedule. 3 One of the issues that's gotten a lot of 4 attention, even in slides that Senator Flanagan 5 opened with, is the amount of time for the 6 third-through-eighth-grade assessments. 7 Page 10 tries to lay out that the assessments 8 are designed, the tests are designed to take, 9 anywhere from 45, to a maximum of 70, minutes for 10 students. 11 We did ask this year, for the first time, for 12 this districts to schedule a 90-minute block for the 13 assessments, even though the tests are not designed 14 to take 90 minutes, so that students would not have 15 the experience, which we have heard complaints about 16 in previous years, of having the test pulled from 17 their hands as they struggle to finish the last 18 question. 19 We're not trying to assess speed. We're 20 trying to assess student knowledge against 21 New York State standards. 22 And so, for that reason, we changed to the 23 same approach that Massachusetts, the New England 24 Consortium, takes to test scheduling, allowing 25 students the time that they need to finish the exam, 1 if it takes more than the target time. 2 So, again, the actual time for each session 3 ranges from 45 to 70 minutes, although we ask 4 schools to schedule 90 minutes in case students 5 needed more time. 6 Page 11, speaks to some recent changes in the 7 assessment system. 8 In the summer of 2010, after several years of 9 very large test-score gains, the Regents reevaluated 10 how the State was defining proficiency. 11 And one of the things we looked at was: How 12 good a predicter are the third-through-eighth-grade 13 assessments of student performance at the college 14 level? 15 What can we learn about student performance 16 in college courses? 17 Who's assigned to remediation? 18 And, then, how might we use that information 19 to inform where we set the proficiency bar in the 20 third-through-eighth-grade assessments? 21 And so what we found, unfortunately, was that 22 we were labeling as "proficient," an eighth-grader 23 with a less than one-third chance of ultimately 24 performing the level necessary to enroll in 25 credit-bearing college courses. 1 So, we raised the bar for proficiency, and 2 that had the result of changing the performance 3 levels across districts across the state. But, we 4 thought it was important to make sure that we were 5 defining proficiency at the level necessary for 6 college and career success. 7 We also introduced, at that time, a number of 8 changes to the assessment system: 9 We added audit questions, to compare New York 10 performance against performance nationally; 11 And, we began the process of embedding 12 field-test questions; that is, putting into the 13 test, as most large-scale assessments do, tasks that 14 were testing out for potential use in future years. 15 And I'll come back to that topic in a moment. 16 It's also worth noting, that over the last 17 few years, the Department and State have been 18 engaged in an effort to phase out the local diploma, 19 and to raise the bar for high school graduation. 20 You'll notice in the chart on page 11, then 21 beginning in 2005, the Regents required, that in 22 order to get a local diploma, a student needed to 23 take five Regents exams. They could have three 24 scores above 55, and two above 65. 25 Over the last four years, that has inched 1 upwards. 2 So it moved: 3 In 2006, to three exams at 65; 4 For the 2007 cohort, four exams at 65; 5 And, for the cohort that will graduate this 6 June, five exams at 65. 7 There's been a lot of discussion about the 8 phaseout of the local diplomas. 9 Some key points to clarify: The local 10 diploma remains available, even after this year, for 11 students with disabilities, and, for a subset of 12 general-education students. 13 The change between the cohort that graduated 14 last June and this June, is that, in order to earn a 15 diploma, those students will need to earn a 65 on 16 one more exam than last year. 17 So, it's a 10-point change. They were able 18 to take that exam at a 55 the previous year. This 19 year, it is 65. 20 The next page, page 12, talks about field 21 tests, and we're in the midst of the field-test 22 period. 23 "Field tests" are, essentially, the testing 24 out of test questions for use in future years. 25 Most large-scale assessment systems, 1 virtually all, embed their field-test questions; 2 that is, you want to see that students are trying 3 their hardest. So, you put a small number of test 4 items that are being tested out for future years, 5 inside of the operational test. 6 Unfortunately, in New York, as far as we 7 know, the only state that prints and ships their own 8 tests. 9 As a result, we only print four forms of each 10 exam; four versions of the exam. 11 So we can only sprinkle a very small number 12 of field-test items into the operational tests. 13 For that reason, unlike other similar large 14 states, we have to do standalone multiple-choice 15 field tests; that is, tests that are entirely 16 composed of trial questions. 17 That's what's happening now. 18 It's a 40-minute period, where students are 19 asked to do trial questions for future years. To 20 read passages, do math problems, that could then be 21 used for future years' assessments. 22 But it's important to note that we certainly 23 would prefer to embed the field-test questions, but 24 given that we print our own tests, which was a 25 decision made many years ago, given that we print 1 our own tests, we only have those four forms. And 2 that requires us to do the standalone field testing 3 of multiple-choice items. 4 Now, open-response items, extended response, 5 where students are writing essays or responding to 6 open-ended questions, all states use standalone 7 field tests as a general matter -- virtually all 8 states, for those open-ended questions. 9 But, multiple choice, New York is quite 10 unique in having to do those standalone field tests 11 at the scale that we do, and as a result of our 12 printing our own exams. 13 In order to take a different approach, we 14 would either need to spend a lot more on printing 15 and shipping, or, move -- what we think is the 16 better option, is to move as quickly as possible, as 17 a state, to computer-based testing, so we eliminate 18 the printing and shipping component of the work and 19 administer the assessments by computer. 20 On page 13, we speak to the issue of costs. 21 New York State spends, as you know, well over 22 $50 billion on education. 23 And we spend just below $35 million -- 24 $34.5 million -- on assessments. 25 So, the assessment costs, the State 1 investment in assessment is certainly very small 2 relative to the overall spending on education. 3 You see on the -- on page 13, how the 4 assessment costs break out, grades 3 through 8, the 5 Regents exam. 6 And then there are other assessments that are 7 required by federal law, related to students with 8 severe disabilities, English-language learners, 9 et cetera. And that rounds out the cost 10 calculations there. 11 On page 14, we speak to an issue familiar to 12 all of you, that we have faced at the Department, a 13 structural deficit with respect to our assessment 14 system over the last few years, as a result of a 15 decrease in State General Fund appropriations to the 16 Department, as well as a decrease in some federal 17 funds, as well as the exhaustion of our federal 18 carryover funds. 19 Last year, we sought $15 million in -- to 20 cover the structural deficit. We received 21 $7 million. 22 As a result, we had to take a number of 23 cost-cutting measures, including, at one point, the 24 potential elimination of the January exams, 25 although, that was prevented by a philanthropic 1 [unintelligible], that allowed us to continue the 2 January Regents exams. 3 This year, in the budget, we were fortunate, 4 and we appreciate getting $8.5 million, which allows 5 us to maintain the Regents program in its current 6 form, including the January Regents exams. 7 Page 15, there's certainly been a fair amount 8 of media attention to some issues on the exam, as 9 developed by Pearson, the 3-8 exams. 10 I just want to take a moment to walk through 11 what those issues were, and the actions that we are 12 taking. 13 First, there was a passage on the 14 eighth-grade English language arts exam that we 15 concluded was inconsistent with the rigor level 16 required for the New York State learning standards. 17 It was a passage that Pearson developed years 18 ago. It's been used in six states and three large 19 districts, multiple times, over a 10-year period. 20 Nonetheless, we concluded, upon review of 21 that passage, that it did not meet the standards for 22 rigor for the New York State exam system, and we 23 removed that passage. 24 We are in the final stage of completing an 25 amendment to our Pearson contract, to put in place 1 additional layers of review around passage quality. 2 I'll also speak in a few moments to the work 3 we're doing to convert the exams to the new 4 common-core standards, which I'll describe in more 5 detail. And that will require more rigorous 6 passages, even more than we've seen in past years. 7 And, so, we are making those changes in 8 response to that issue. 9 A second issue: There were a small number, 10 4 out of 1,116 items, in which there were 11 typographical errors. 12 Any error is a problem, and we should do 13 everything possible to minimize them. 14 So, we are requiring, as part of our -- an 15 amendment to the contract with Pearson, additional 16 layers of review, and the introduction of an 17 electronic system for tracking edits and revisions, 18 to minimize, going forward, the potential for any 19 typos, although, obviously, human beings are always 20 going to be fallible; and, so, there's always the 21 possibility of an error. But, we are putting in 22 place additional procedures to minimize those. 23 Third: There were a number of errors in the 24 translations. 25 We translate our 3-through-8 exams into 1 five languages, as well as braille. 2 It requires, this year, for example, well 3 over 4,000 items, in terms of the translated items. 4 There were twenty of them in which there were 5 translation errors. 6 Pearson has a subcontractor that does the 7 work on translations. 8 We are requiring, as part of their contract, 9 that they put in place additional procedures, 10 additional levels of review, again, to try to 11 minimize any errors as a result of translation. 12 I should say that, in any time -- not only 13 this year, but, historically, any time an error is 14 identified, it is not held against students or the 15 teacher or schools. 16 Pearson is also putting in place, we've 17 required as part of this contract amendment, an 18 independent review of the exam-development process, 19 not only for 2012, but for 2013. We want to make 20 sure that the work is of the utmost quality. 21 And, finally, I should say that the contract 22 amendments will also provide for financial penalties 23 if there are unacceptable items or translation 24 errors. 25 So, those are steps that we are taking to 1 address the Pearson issues. 2 Pearson has expressed their commitment to 3 providing the highest-quality product to New York, 4 and we will hold them to that. 5 On page 16, we begin to talk about the future 6 of the assessment system. 7 Obviously, the assessment system, as I've 8 said, plays a crucial role in our work to improve 9 college- and career-readiness. 10 We are doing work to continue to build the 11 assessment system. 12 First: We are aligning the assessments to 13 the common core, which I'll describe in more detail. 14 We are one of 45 states to adopt new 15 common-core standard, mapped backwards from college 16 and career success. 17 We are participating in a consortium of 18 states funded by a federal Race to the Top 19 assessment grant, to build next generation 20 assessments that would be delivered by computer. 21 And, so, we're working with 24 states on that 22 project. 23 We also put in place this year a new test 24 security unit, based on concerns in previous years 25 about test improprieties. 1 A test security unit, headed by a former 2 federal prosecutor who's assembled a talented -- is 3 assembling a talented team of folks, to ensure the 4 integrity and security of our test system. 5 And then, certainly, we are moving forward, 6 as we describe on page 17, on the work, using the 7 assessments as one of multiple measures within the 8 evaluation system. 9 And that's an important point, obviously 10 understood by members of the Committee, but worth 11 emphasizing for the public. 12 The evaluation system that was first passed 13 into law in 2010, the law was -- improvements were 14 made to the law, as you know, this session. 15 That law makes assessments a part of a 16 multiple-measures evaluation system. That includes, 17 observations of the teacher by the principal, or 18 observations of the principal by a superintendent or 19 other administrators. Includes locally selected 20 measures. 21 But one of the measures, 20 percent of the 22 score for those teachers and tested subjects, will 23 come from the state -- from growth on the State 24 assessments. 25 And that's also an important point to 1 emphasize. 2 It's not absolute performance, but the growth 3 that students have made under that teacher's care 4 and guidance. 5 On page 18, we talk about these new 6 common-core standards, which I've referenced. 7 Again, a State-led effort, involving 8 45 states, three territories, creating common 9 standards, developed by talking to higher-ed 10 faculty, talking to higher-ed administrators, 11 talking to business leaders, about what skills are 12 needed for students at the entry level, and then 13 mapping backwards from there, to tenth grade, to 14 seventh grade, all the way back to kindergarten. 15 We believe those standards are more rigorous 16 than the standards we have had in place, and will 17 help us meet the aspiration of college- and 18 career-readiness for all students. And, will also 19 allow better collaboration across states, on the 20 work of ensuring that we've the highest-quality 21 instruction for our students. 22 Page 19, describes some of the changes in 23 instruction required by those new common-core 24 standards. 25 Just to illustrate one example: One of the 1 things that the common-core standards' authors heard 2 from higher-ed faculty and business leaders, was 3 that students, upon entry, after graduating from 4 high school, are often asked to read non-fiction 5 texts, whether it's a research article in a science 6 course, a history textbook, a technical manual, in a 7 new career. 8 And we need to make sure that students are 9 prepared to do that. 10 Too often, in K-12, we are not pointing 11 students toward those non-fiction texts. 12 And, so, those are the kinds of changes in 13 instruction that the common core brings. And we are 14 using "Race to the Top" resources to support the 15 creation of tools to help teachers with implementing 16 the common core, from professional-development 17 videos, to curriculum modules, to examples -- 18 videotape examples, of great teaching aligned to the 19 common core. 20 On page 20, we speak to the NCLB waiver that 21 New York just secured. 22 For both Race to the Top and the NCLB waiver, 23 states were required to implement the common core, 24 which we're doing, and to implement the teacher and 25 principal evaluation system that incorporates 1 student growth, which we are doing. 2 In exchange, the waiver allows us some key 3 areas of flexibility. 4 We, like most states, were on a path to 5 having a tsunami of identified schools by 2014, 6 under the targets set in the original NCLB. 7 And, at times, schools were identified, in 8 the accountability status, as underperforming, that, 9 actually, were making very significant gains, but 10 were just missing the absolute target. 11 And one of the changes that the waiver allows 12 is for us to look at growth as part of our 13 accountability system. That will allow schools that 14 are making very significant progress for their 15 students, to avoid accountability status simply 16 because they've missed an arbitrary target. 17 The other thing that the waiver provides, is 18 greater flexibility in the use of federal funds at 19 the district level. And, certainly, that will be of 20 value, particularly to our highest-need districts. 21 We also describe in the waiver application, a 22 series of supports that we will continue to put in 23 place for those districts that have our most 24 struggling schools. 25 On page 21, we summarize some key issues 1 around the future of the assessment system. 2 We will see greater rigor with alignment to 3 the common core. The tests will be more 4 challenging, and will better reflect college- and 5 career-readiness. 6 That will begin with changes to the 7 third-through-eighth-grade assessments for next 8 school year, and then continue with changes to the 9 Regents exams in the years that follow. 10 We want to get to a place of greater 11 coherence between K-12 and higher education. We 12 don't want the students to graduate from high school 13 thinking that they are ready for college courses, 14 only to discover that they're required to attend 15 remediation. 16 And we all know the stark remediation 17 statistics: Over 40 percent in SUNY's two-year 18 institutions. Over 75 percent in CUNY's two-year 19 institutions. 20 The assessment systems have to inform 21 instruction, and they have to drive instruction in 22 the right direction. And that's part of the reason 23 to align them to the common core. 24 And, we've got to take advantage of new 25 technologies, like computer-based testing. We've 1 got to get there as quickly as we can. 2 And, we've to have an evaluation system that 3 uses student growth as a part of the picture around 4 educator performance, and then informs high-quality 5 professional development. 6 So, thank you for your attention. 7 I look forward to your questions. 8 SENATOR FLANAGAN: Thank you, Commissioner. 9 I'm going to start off with a couple of 10 questions. And I know my colleagues have some, and 11 I will probably come back. 12 But, when I think about these things, there's 13 two things that come into mind right away. 14 Number one: Even though my youngest is now 15 graduating high school, I think of this in the 16 context of being a parent; 17 And, number two: I try to think, as elected 18 officials, how do we go back to our constituents and 19 explain this so the people can actually understand 20 it? 21 When you talk about embedding and rubrics, 22 and all these different types of things, I get it, 23 because I'm immersed it in. 24 But, I'm trying to figure out: How does this 25 go out to the parent who's in the district working 1 closely with the teacher? 2 And, it seems to me that we title this, you 3 know: Where we were, where we are, where we're 4 going. 5 I would like you to comment on several 6 different things. 7 It seems to me that, when Senator Robach and 8 I were in high school, a few years ago, we were 9 going through the Regents, and everybody seemed to 10 refer to that as "the gold standard." That we took 11 a lot of tests, but we didn't take a crazy amount of 12 tests. 13 This predates the NCLB, and the ELA in fourth 14 and eighth grade, and then all the additional tests. 15 So, it seems like, in past, we were, 16 essentially, geared towards a Regents standard. 17 Now, we seem to be evolving from NCLB, and 18 have added a great deal of tests along the way. 19 And, then, where we're going seems to be more 20 aligned with common core and moving away from NCLB. 21 Is that too simplistic a description? 22 COMMISSIONER KING: No, I think that's fair. 23 I think that's a fair characterization. 24 I wouldn't say -- I think over the last 25 decade, there's been an increased interest in having 1 a good sense of where students are on the path to 2 that -- to the Regents exams, to the -- to the 3 destination. And that that's been a driver 4 alongside the NCLB requirements. 5 SENATOR FLANAGAN: Okay. 6 But, then, from an educator standpoint, 7 listening to teachers and administrators, 8 superintendents, and I've heard this term now many 9 times, "the cohort," now you have to have five exams 10 with 65 or more. 11 It also seems to me, that if a kid starts in 12 kindergarten, because now we're talking about 13 back-mapping, your term, all the way back to 14 kindergarten, why can't we basically make a 15 blueprint that says: For a kid who's enrolling in 16 kindergarten in September, for that child's 17 education, through the end of high school, it's 18 going to stay the same, it's not going to change, so 19 everybody knows what the rules? 20 Is that too far a reach? 21 COMMISSIONER KING: Well, I think the common 22 core aspires to that. 23 One of the challenges is, that there is so 24 much change in our state's economy, and what's 25 demanded. 1 I think if you looked at even what the 2 fastest-growing jobs are today, versus a decade ago, 3 when the students who are in high school today began 4 their education, they look very different. 5 And, so, I think there's a balance to be 6 struck between clarity, when students enroll in 7 kindergarten, and having a system that is responsive 8 to changes in the state's economy, and the country's 9 economy. 10 SENATOR FLANAGAN: All right, three other 11 quick things. 12 You talked about, and I'm going right through 13 your testimony -- well, let me start with this: In 14 terms of test preparation, there's been a lot of 15 discussions about Pearson, and a lot of the factors 16 like that. And it was McGraw-Hill before them. 17 And I think the old contract was even more expensive 18 than the one we're presently operating under. 19 But, ultimately, just as we, as the 20 legislative entity, are responsible, Pearson, 21 everything gets cleared through SED. 22 So when those tests come out, ultimately, 23 it's the responsibility, the credit or the blame, 24 for SED and the Regents, because there's been a 25 whole host of eyes looking at that. 1 Is that accurate? 2 COMMISSIONER KING: Depends on the portion of 3 the assessment. 4 So, for example: Around translations, we 5 don't have, at SED, a staff that speaks -- staff 6 members who are experts in each of the translated 7 languages. So we rely on Pearson, through the 8 contract, to ensure that the translations are right. 9 When the final typesetting is done for an 10 exam, for example, the questions, issues of format, 11 potential typographical errors, could be introduced 12 at that final stage when they go to final printing. 13 So there are places where there's not that 14 final review, but there is a process by which we 15 have panels of educators look at questions and 16 passages. 17 The questions obviously go through the 18 field-testing process. 19 So there is, certainly, a lot of oversight, 20 but there are pieces that are ultimately the 21 responsibility of the contractor. 22 But, look, it's our contract, and in the 23 end -- at the end of the day, it's our task to make 24 sure that our vendor does the things that are 25 required of them. 1 SENATOR FLANAGAN: All right, let me put 2 translation to the side for a second. 3 Just, you're assuming the test is given in 4 English. 5 Ultimately, the test that goes out the door, 6 I'm assuming that, the Department, then I understand 7 the Regents fellows play a role in this as well -- 8 There is -- who's the last person to approve 9 what actually goes out the door? 10 COMMISSIONER KING: There's not a simple 11 answer to that, unfortunately. 12 The last version that goes to the printer is 13 coming from the person that's responsible for 14 typesetting. 15 So that's why I say there's the possibility 16 for the introduction of errors at the typographical 17 level. 18 In terms of passages and questions, those go 19 through multiple layers of review, both with Pearson 20 and with the Department. 21 The Department signs off on the passages. 22 Although, it's worth noting, that the passage 23 that attracted all of the criticism this year, was a 24 norm-referenced Pearson passage that was used in 25 multiple states. 1 As part of the terms of the contract, we 2 included the use of those norm-referenced items to 3 make comparisons nationally. 4 So that passage itself was reviewed by a 5 panel of New York State educators, was field-tested 6 in New York, was ultimately included through all the 7 usual protocols, but it was a passage that was 8 constructed by, and the questions were constructed 9 by, Pearson. 10 SENATOR FLANAGAN: Okay, before I go to 11 Senator Marcellino, I just want to read part of -- 12 this is one of the values of getting the testimony 13 beforehand. 14 In NYSUT's testimony, it says: Contrary to 15 some reports, teachers have no approval role in the 16 State's selection of standardized tests. 17 How would you respond to that? 18 COMMISSIONER KING: So teachers participate 19 in a panel of educators that reviews the items, and 20 provides feedback to the Department and Pearson on 21 the items. 22 I think the question of approval, as I 23 described, there's multiple stages of review and 24 recommendations, and approval, that the panel of 25 educators is giving feedback. 1 So, if the distinction is between feedback 2 and approval, it's a fair one. 3 SENATOR FLANAGAN: Okay. I have a number of 4 other questions, but Senator Robach wanted to jump 5 in here on that follow-up point, so... 6 SENATOR ROBACH: I guess, Commissioner, thank 7 you. 8 And I wanted to thank Senator Flanagan for 9 having this hearing. 10 I remember, even when he moved to the 11 testing, I found those hearings were very impactful 12 on me, especially hearing from a lot of 13 African-American women who were educators, who said, 14 without the testing, they were always encouraged, as 15 soon as they didn't do well in a grade, to go into 16 cosmetology, or something else, which I found 17 fascinating. I heard that all over the state. 18 But, following up on John Flanagan, I heard 19 you -- you know, we talked about the vendor, we 20 heard SED even mentioned business leaders. And this 21 is obviously a work in progress. And, I mean, 22 "high stakes," is the right word for everybody 23 involved, most importantly, the students. 24 And we always hear from parents, from 25 teachers, from other people: What is their ability 1 to impact the whole process, from the core goals to 2 the testing? 3 Is there really a blueprint for that to get 4 the final product out the door? 5 What is their mechanism, Commissioner, if 6 somebody calls us, how do they get in, besides a 7 hearing like this? 8 How would they get to SED? 9 COMMISSIONER KING: It's a great question. 10 So, in the development of a common-core 11 standards, there was a very extensive process of 12 gathering feedback from educators, not only in 13 New York, but in each of the states that were 14 participating. 15 Over -- you know, over many, many months, 16 there were several drafts issued, feedback was 17 gathered from educators, from educator associations, 18 from all across the country, and so forth. And, we 19 took extensive comments from educators and from the 20 public on the standards prior to adoption, and we 21 made some adjustments. 22 States were allowed to make some adjustments 23 to standards, to add up to 15 percent to the 24 standards. 25 And, we made some additions based on that 1 feedback. 2 In terms of the assessments, one thing that 3 we're doing later this week, we will publish our 4 sample items, that reflect how the assessments will 5 change as we align to the common core. And we're 6 publishing them intentionally as drafts, so that we 7 can get feedback from educators and parents, and 8 others, on those items. 9 And then, obviously, the field testing itself 10 is a way for us to sort of learn from 11 student-performance information that informs the 12 development of the assessments. 13 But whenever we make changes to the -- to, 14 for example, graduation requirements, we always go 15 through a process of public comment, and so forth. 16 SENATOR ROBACH: Do you think, and, you know, 17 this is more, maybe, and I want to apologize, my 18 political hat, I hear from parents, and I represent 19 pretty diverse school districts -- the city of 20 Rochester; Brighton, which gets cited as one of the 21 best; some more rural districts -- but all across 22 that, a lot of parents were very involved with their 23 kids, they're doing what they're supposed to, 24 comment on the length. 25 Not the stress to their kid, but the length. 1 Do you feel the current set of testing is too 2 lengthy right now and should be adjusted, or do you 3 think it's good where it is? 4 COMMISSIONER KING: Well, we're reviewing a 5 set of survey results that we took after this last 6 test administration. 7 You know, the challenge is, the complaint 8 that we heard prior to this year, was around: 9 Students not being able to finish the exam; 10 Or, students were furiously rushing through 11 the last few questions, you know, as the time ticks 12 away, and the teacher's coming over to take the 13 paper from the student's hands. 14 And so the choice was, between that model, 15 and the model that's in use in Massachusetts and the 16 New England Consortium, and other places, of 17 allowing much a longer period of time for those 18 students who need it, so that students have plenty 19 of time to finish. And if they needed some extra 20 time to continue working, to allow them that time. 21 We opted for that latter model, but we took 22 survey results, to try to get a sense of how 23 educators felt it went. And, we also did some 24 observations in schools, talking with folks, to hear 25 how it went. 1 So, we're looking at that, particularly 2 around the third and fourth grade. 3 But, I actually think a lot of them, reaction 4 to the amount of time on testing, is driven by a 5 reaction to the amount of time that's spent, 6 instructionally, on test prep. 7 And I think one of our challenges, as a, sort 8 of education community, is to help teachers and 9 principals understand that test prep, as a strategy, 10 is likely to be significantly less effective at 11 driving improved student performance, than really 12 rich instruction. 13 It's one of the reasons we're going to use 14 Race to Top money on curriculum materials, to help 15 provide curriculum materials that illustrate what 16 rich instruction would look like, that would ensure 17 students are prepared for the test without having, 18 you know, day after day of instruction. 19 Look, you know, just like the -- sort of a 20 photocopied version of test-prep materials. 21 SENATOR ROBACH: Okay. Thank you. 22 SENATOR FLANAGAN: Senator Marcellino. 23 SENATOR MARCELLINO: Thank you very much. 24 Thank you very much, Commissioner. It's a 25 pleasure to see you. 1 I was just reminded, when John Flanagan 2 talked about his days in high school as being only a 3 few years ago, I remember my own. And it wasn't 4 easy in those days, carrying those stone tablets -- 5 [Laugher.] 6 SENATOR MARCELLINO: -- back and forth to 7 school. It was heavy work. 8 The Governor has, on many occasions, pointed 9 out that New York State spends huge amounts of 10 money, the most in the nation, on education, yet we 11 rank, as a state, 37th, I believe was the number 12 that he uses, nationwide, for education. 13 Why is that? 14 COMMISSIONER KING: So, I think that the 15 challenge of those two numbers, is that there's a 16 lot of nuance on the ground when you look across the 17 700 districts. 18 So, on the one hand, you have districts that 19 are very high spending and get outstanding results; 20 You have districts that are fairly high 21 spending and have mediocre results; 22 And, you have districts that are low 23 spending, and really struggling; 24 And, districts that are low spending and 25 getting very impressive results despite that. 1 So, there's a lot of nuance. 2 Certainly, when the Governor talks about 3 graduation rates, he's right to worry about our 4 overall performance. 5 You know, when you think about the life 6 chances of those students who don't graduate from 7 high school -- we've got a quarter of our students 8 who are not graduating at all from high school -- 9 and what jobs are available for those students, 10 there's a lot of reason to worry about a 74 percent 11 graduation rate. 12 On the other hand, there are particular 13 communities where you've got a 99 percent graduation 14 rate, and 100 percent of kids going on to 15 competitive colleges. 16 So, the challenge is getting at the nuance. 17 There's a lot of work we need to do to make 18 sure that every school is providing students with a 19 real path to college- and career-readiness. Part of 20 that is about the core instruction. Right? 21 That's why we adopted the common core. 22 Part of it is about making sure that every 23 adult in the building feels accountable for a 24 student performance, teachers and principals, and 25 has the support they need. And that's what we're 1 driving at with the evaluation system. 2 Part of it is about making sure that students 3 can see a connection between their experience in 4 high school and what's afterwards. 5 It's one of the reasons that the Department 6 has asked the Board of Regents to consider 7 increasing the role of career and technical 8 education in graduation requirements, to create 9 another pathway for students, so that students can 10 see why the day-to-day work in class and high school 11 matters, and what possibilities there are for them 12 afterwards. 13 So the answer to your question is complex. 14 And, again, one of the challenges of how much 15 we spend, and what results we get, is getting to the 16 level of nuance on what the variety look likes 17 across the state. 18 SENATOR MARCELLINO: Well, I can understand, 19 when you say that there are, different districts 20 perform differently; different reasons, different 21 circumstances, and so forth. 22 Given the fact that money is dear, and 23 probably, in the long term, will continue to be 24 dear: the common core. 25 I get a lot of complaints from districts that 1 I represent, which, in many cases, are 2 high-performing. 3 From Long Island, my districts are 4 high-performing districts, for the most part. They 5 do well. They're graduating high percentages. The 6 Regents-exam passage is a high percentages. 7 You heard Senator Robach talking about 8 Rochester, one of the school districts he 9 recommended with high percent. 10 Why are we mandating a common core on 11 everybody? 12 Why don't we cherry-pick? 13 Why aren't we letting those districts that 14 are doing well, leave them alone? 15 Let them continue to do what they have to do, 16 what they're doing. 17 If they're doing well, leave them. Don't 18 throw that kind of money at them, don't force them 19 to change. 20 Why are we making everybody do the same? 21 Why not concentrate on those districts that 22 are not performing, where they need your help, where 23 they may need, I don't know, maybe extra money, 24 maybe extra expertise, specialty, people going into 25 the districts that State Ed can provide -- whatever 1 help you can give? 2 But, if we have districts that are 3 performing, and doing well, by all standards that we 4 ask of them, why don't we leave them alone? 5 Why do we mandate the common core? 6 COMMISSIONER KING: Well, certainly, the 7 responsibility of the Department is to set a clear 8 set of academic standards for all schools. And we 9 want those academic standards to align with college 10 and career success. 11 But, if you look at page 19, and the shifts 12 in instruction that are described for English and 13 math, I would argue that those districts that are 14 high-performing, these are the very things that they 15 do. 16 Senator Flanagan will recall, he and I had 17 the experience of being at Commack High School. And 18 we were sitting with students in the international 19 baccalaureate program, and they were very 20 impressive. 21 And their -- the work that they're doing, the 22 research that they're doing, the papers they're 23 writing, very impressive. 24 So I said to them, you know: If your school 25 district wanted more students, at the high-school 1 level, to be ready to get an international 2 baccalaureate diploma; wanted more students, at the 3 high-school level, to be able to do the kinds of 4 coursework that you're doing, do the kinds of 5 research that you're doing, what should the 6 schools -- what should schools do differently at the 7 elementary- and middle-school level? 8 And they literally described all of the 9 things on page 19. 10 They talked about the need for students to be 11 writing more, to be writing more with evidence, to 12 be writing to make arguments, because that's the 13 kind of writing that they're asked to do in the IB 14 program, that they'll be asked to do in college. 15 They talked about, students having the 16 opportunity to read non-fiction, to gain 17 information, and to use that to support their 18 writings. 19 So, in many ways, the common-core standards 20 are an effort by the entire country -- and we're 21 talking about 45 states -- by the entire country, to 22 look at the places that are excelling, both within 23 the United States and internationally, asked: What 24 is it that they're doing that is working so well, 25 and how can we make sure that all schools are doing 1 it? 2 So, you know, when people talk about the 3 transition to the common core, many of the districts 4 that are highest-performing will be able to see, as 5 they dive into the standards, and prepare for next 6 year, that many of the things that the common core 7 is asking. Are the things that they're already 8 doing well, it's reason their students are 9 succeeding, are in the IB programs, AP courses, are 10 prepared for college. 11 Other districts will discover that they've 12 allowed, for example, history and science to lose 13 their place in the elementary-school curriculum, and 14 as a result, don't have the background knowledge to 15 grapple with difficult tasks. And they will need to 16 make a shift in which books they use at the 17 elementary level. 18 So I -- it's very variable for districts, how 19 much of a transition the common core will require, 20 but it is absolutely built on the best practices, 21 nationally, and internationally. 22 SENATOR MARCELLINO: I hear what you're 23 saying, but what, in fact, is being required, if 24 these districts are now going back, and having to 25 readjust, realign, and change curriculums that 1 they're doing now, to meet the core standards? 2 And, again, if the district is performing, if 3 the district is doing well, by graduation standards, 4 by Regents-test standard, by the standards the State 5 is requiring, why are we requiring changes in 6 methodology, changes in technique, which is what 7 you're talking about? 8 Requiring them to go through hours of 9 training, and retraining, and readjustment, when 10 they're already meeting the goals, leave them alone, 11 and go to those districts that need the help, and 12 supply the assistance and care and organization. 13 You have limited resources. 14 You said this when you opened your remarks: 15 You have limited resources. 16 So why spread them too thin? 17 Go to those districts that need the 18 assistance, and give them whatever you can, by 19 expertise, by help -- by whatever -- so that they 20 can perform, and let the other districts -- I'm not 21 saying forever. You got to go back and test to make 22 sure they maintain a standard. 23 That's understandable. 24 But, why require them to redo everything? 25 COMMISSIONER KING: Well, again, they only 1 have to redo everything if they see a large gap 2 between what they're doing and the common core. 3 So if the district believes that their 4 students are prepared for what's required in the 5 common core; that is, that they have the exposure to 6 non-fiction, that they're prepared to write with 7 evidence from sources, that they have the ability to 8 apply math, not just at a set of procedures, but as 9 a toolkit, almost to solve challenging problems, if 10 they're developing those skills, then they should 11 have to make very modest adjustments. 12 Now, one challenge, though, I will 13 acknowledge, is that, there are school districts 14 that, I think, when you look inside the results, 15 even though they are doing well against our current 16 metrics, if you look at how their students do 17 afterwards, when they get to college, we see gaps. 18 We know, as a country, this is a challenge we 19 face; that, when our students get to higher 20 education, they are less competitive than some of 21 our international competitors, when it comes to math 22 and science, for example. 23 And the common core was developed, in part, 24 to address that concern. 25 So even for districts that are doing well, 1 some of them know, and I think, as they look at the 2 common core, they'll see this, that there are gaps 3 in what they're doing to ensure that their students, 4 not only go on to college, but, are able to succeed 5 in that biochemistry major that they want because 6 they have the right set of skills. 7 SENATOR MARCELLINO: See, I can understand 8 you saying that, you want to follow the kid into the 9 college and see what they're doing, and how well 10 they perform in the college. 11 That, we can do. 12 That, you can do statistically right now. 13 You know where they came from. You know the school 14 districts from which these kids come from. 15 So, if Student A, B, C, and D is coming from 16 a School District Y, and, another group of students 17 and they're performing poorly on a -- in the college 18 curriculum, you can go back to the college after a 19 while, after a couple of years, and say: Hey, look, 20 in checking the records, we find out that these kids 21 aren't doing so well. You get them out there, you 22 get them into the college, but they're not 23 performing when they get there. Let's take a look 24 at what you're doing. What's the reason for that? 25 There could be a whole host of reasons for 1 that, both socially and educationally. 2 But, let's take a look at it after the fact. 3 But what you're saying now, is, the districts 4 have to go back and come into line. 5 Where my suggestion is, and a lot of the 6 districts are saying the same thing: We're already 7 there. 8 You know? 9 If we're wrong, if we're failing, fine. 10 But, we're not, and you're making us change. 11 Even that minor adjustment, according to the 12 superintendents I deal with -- and you know why 13 we've invited you to come down. I'd like to see you 14 come down and speak to my superintendents, and 15 explain the situation to them, in small groups, not 16 thousands. But, you know, I represent 14 districts. 17 I'd like to get you with -- in with a group of 18 14 superintendents, and some, you know, board 19 members, and the like, and let them talk to you, and 20 you can go through the explanation, and hear from 21 them directly, it would make some sense. 22 We're looking forward to that meeting. 23 But, I still believe you could focus your 24 money where it can be best applied, and where you 25 can use it the most, and get the most bang for the 1 buck, because the buck is limited. 2 I appreciate your time. 3 Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 4 SENATOR FLANAGAN: Senator Oppenheimer. 5 SENATOR OPPENHEIMER: Oh, Lordy be, I have 6 too many questions. 7 Of course, the point that was made by my 8 colleague, is one that I've made to you so many 9 times, because we do have, within my Senate 10 district, some of the top districts of the 11 United States. 12 And I have appealed on different occasions, 13 on different -- in different arenas. And you have 14 been most gracious to come down and talk to my 15 superintendents, who were sort of up in arms. And 16 you've been very calming, and, even though they 17 don't think you necessarily subscribe to what they 18 think. 19 But, we certainly have tried to overcome 20 that. 21 But, in teaching to the common core, I've had 22 a lot of parents come in, and say: Why -- why, in 23 the middle of my kindergarten-child's year, did they 24 suddenly get a big box from, I guess it was Pearson, 25 and now you have to teach to that box? 1 And they say, before that, the children were 2 having a grand time, with very creative 3 opportunities, in kindergarten, which is a good time 4 to explore. 5 But this, apparently, big box came, and they 6 were told they had to only teach to that box; what 7 was in that box. 8 Now, I'm not sure what this is about. 9 Nor do you. 10 We'll have to explore this further -- 11 COMMISSIONER KING: Right. 12 SENATOR OPPENHEIMER: -- because it was a 13 highly specific thing, and they were very, very 14 unhappy. 15 But it does leave me to question: What has 16 happened to history? What has happened to 17 geography? What has happened to civics 18 responsibility? -- the important things, I think, 19 for our society. 20 COMMISSIONER KING: I couldn't agree more. 21 And I think that's exactly what the common core is 22 trying to get at. 23 You know, if you look at page 18, you know, 24 one of the things that's important about the 25 common core, is it's not just the common core in 1 English language arts and mathematics. It's 2 actually the common core in English language arts, 3 and literacy in history, social studies, science, 4 and the technical subjects. 5 And, so, the common core is actually calling 6 on schools to do precisely what you're describing: 7 engage students with history texts, with science 8 texts. 9 One of my favorite common-core exemplars that 10 we have on our website is on the 11 "Gettysburg Address," and it's significance as a 12 historical document, and also as a piece of writing, 13 and an argument that Lincoln was making. 14 The common core, also, I would say, attends 15 to the issue of creativity. 16 We -- so, you know, there are choices that 17 districts are making about curricular materials. 18 Those are theirs to make. 19 All right? 20 We don't mandate a curriculum in 21 New York State. We don't have text-book approval in 22 New York State, unlike other states. 23 You know, we set the standards. The 24 assessments will reflect those standards. 25 If districts feel like their kids are well 1 prepared for the complexity of readings that are on 2 the common-core assessments, if they feel like their 3 kids can do the multi-step math problems that the 4 common core will require, then they probably don't 5 have to change very much. 6 On the other hand, if districts need to make 7 adjustments, either to sequencing or to content, to 8 get kids to the common core, that's exactly right, 9 and what the Regents envisioned in adopting the 10 common core. 11 The final point I'd make, just on the 12 curricular materials, is -- and it goes back to the 13 point I made to Senator Robach, on time and testing: 14 One of our biggest challenges is a set of 15 pedagogical judgments, teaching judgments, that are 16 made, that would suggest, well, if we know that the 17 test is going require students to read a short 18 passage and answer some multiple-choice questions, 19 what we'll do is, we'll make every day look like 20 that. 21 When, in fact, if every day looks like that, 22 you will get lower performance, not better 23 performance. 24 Right? 25 We want students to do the play, to do -- to 1 read the exciting novel, to have all of those 2 experiences, precisely because, those experiences 3 will prepare them for success in college and 4 careers, and that will be reflected in their 5 assessment results. 6 So there is a gap, I think, between what 7 people take away that they should do, and what the 8 assessments actually intend. 9 And what the assessments intend is, a 10 measure, you know, a useful measure among multiple 11 measures of readiness for college and careers. 12 But, the test isn't supposed to be the 13 curriculum. The curriculum is supposed to be a rich 14 set of learning experiences. 15 And that's one of the reasons, again, why 16 we're putting Race to Top resources into building 17 curriculum materials, and making those available for 18 free. They won't be mandated. They won't be part 19 of any regulation, but, just as a resource for 20 districts. 21 SENATOR OPPENHEIMER: God bless, I wish you 22 well, because, I see in my own district, places like 23 Scarsdale, say: We're never going to teach to the 24 test. What we're doing is fine, and our children 25 are going to do fine on the tests. 1 And then I see another community, where my 2 daughter is a reading specialist, and they've done 3 nothing but teach to the test. 4 And, they've had her proctoring some of these 5 things, and she's not even permitted to talk. 6 So that, I said: Well, there's an 7 opportunity. Maybe you can help some students. 8 "Oh, no, no, no. I'm not permitted to do 9 that." 10 There's just such a discrepancy in what I 11 see. 12 And I -- I mean, I hope what you're saying 13 will occur, but I'm somewhat concerned, in our areas 14 that are more challenged, that, you know, this might 15 not happen. 16 Okay, couple of more fast questions. 17 We have seen in the past week, in my Senate 18 district -- seems to be a district that is riled up 19 on things -- that they have said they -- the field 20 tests that are being taken by Pearson are not -- 21 many of their students did not show up at school. 22 They were told by the superintendent of 23 schools that if you stay out of school the day that 24 the Pearson test -- field tests are happening, that 25 it will not be held against you. 1 So, in at least two of my districts, they 2 stayed out of school. 3 Now, how does Pearson going to evaluate this? 4 I mean, maybe one-third of the class took the 5 test. 6 And maybe those that were most competent 7 said: Oh, we don't need to help, Pearson. Why 8 should we help Pearson? We're being tested to 9 death. Why should we do field tests? 10 COMMISSIONER KING: Well, it's important to 11 note, first, the field tests are not for Pearson. 12 All right? 13 The field tests are for the items that will 14 be used in future New York State tests. 15 That said, you know, the field tests are 16 designed to be a sample. Based on everything that 17 we've heard so far, we'll have more than adequate 18 sample to be able to assess the validity of the 19 items. 20 So, I understand some parents made the choice 21 to hold students back. 22 Our sense is, it's a relatively small number 23 compared to the absolute whole of the sample. 24 And, actually, it's not unusual. 25 You know, that there's a certain climate 1 around testing that can be acrimonious at times. 2 And as you look across the country, whether it's 3 this year, or five years ago, or ten years ago, 4 there's always been some degree of acrimony around 5 tests, and some who've chosen to opt out. 6 And, you know, that's to be expected. 7 SENATOR OPPENHEIMER: How quickly can we get, 8 which I just heard today, from the four printed 9 forms on your testing, to something on the Internet? 10 I mean, that sounds foolish. 11 COMMISSIONER KING: So, it's a great 12 question. 13 We have got to get to computer-based testing. 14 All right? 15 It's clear that that's the right future. 16 The challenge is, you know, we have some 17 districts that are very well positioned to do that. 18 They have lots of devices, whether it's 19 desktop, laptop computers, or iPads. 20 We have other districts that have challenges 21 in terms of the hardware that they need. 22 We have some districts that have very robust 23 technical support. So, if a computer goes down, 24 someone's there from the district right away to fix. 25 Other districts, some of our smaller 1 districts that are reliant on a BOCES that may be 2 some distance away for technical support, if their 3 computers go down, they have a much more difficult 4 time getting them back up. 5 We also have bandwidth challenges. Sometimes 6 by community, sometimes by buildings. Some of the 7 older buildings that don't have reliable high-speed 8 Internet access. 9 So, one of the things that we're doing, along 10 with all of the other states participating in the 11 Park Consortium that we're a part of, is a survey 12 tool that's being done this spring and summer, to 13 gather feedback from districts on what their 14 capacity is for computer-based testing, so that we 15 can move there as quickly as possible. 16 We also asked in our budget request for a 17 small amount of funds to pilot one of the Regents 18 exams as a computer-based test. 19 That's something we would still like to do. 20 I think we'll come back with that budget request 21 again next year, because we think, unless you sort 22 of start, it's the kind of thing that it's slow for 23 folks to build capacity around, because it seems 24 like something off in a distant future. 25 But, if we were to take one of the Regents 1 exams and start to make it available, by computer, I 2 think you'd see a shift. 3 And this is what you see across assessment 4 systems. I mean, most of the large-scale assessment 5 systems are shifting to computer-based tests. 6 SENATOR OPPENHEIMER: And -- 7 Which is just a statement at the end, and 8 then I'm finished. 9 -- which, makes me underscore what 10 Senator Marcellino said. 11 If we had districts where they are sending 12 95 to 98 percent of their students to college, why 13 are we not putting our efforts, all of our efforts, 14 into those districts where they need computers and 15 hardware? 16 Thank you very much. 17 SENATOR FLANAGAN: Thank you, 18 Senator Oppenheimer. 19 Senator Farley. 20 SENATOR FARLEY: Yes, thank you. 21 Incidentally, this is a very nice 22 presentation that you made here. 23 But, on page 2, the very first part, about 24 graduation rates, I see that you lump urban and 25 suburban together, which is a strange marriage, 1 because they end up putting (unintelligible). 2 I would imagine, unless -- because, in my 3 district, it's certainly different between the urban 4 and the suburbans school. 5 What would be the breakdown between the two 6 of those? 7 I would imagine, the suburban are rather high 8 and the urban's rather low. 9 Is that right? 10 COMMISSIONER KING: Yeah, well, this is 11 broken down by need-resource categories, so this is 12 particularly those suburban communities that are 13 closest to the urban communities in terms of their 14 level of need. 15 So, many of the traditional -- the districts 16 we think of as traditionally suburban, which fall 17 into the other two categories: low need and average 18 need. 19 But we can get you a specific breakdown of 20 which districts are in each category. 21 SENATOR FARLEY: Because, first, as to my 22 district, we have suburban districts that are -- 23 abut the urban area, and the differentiation is 24 startling -- 25 COMMISSIONER KING: Exactly. 1 SENATOR OPPENHEIMER: -- to say the least. 2 COMMISSIONER KING: Exactly. Exactly. 3 So, we'll get you the breakdown. 4 And our actual -- on the web today, as we 5 released these, which we always do, we'll have, I 6 think it's some 200 sites that breaks down the 7 information from different perspectives. 8 But, we'll be sure to get you a breakdown of 9 these need-resource categories. 10 SENATOR FARLEY: That's it. 11 SENATOR FLANAGAN: Commissioner, I have 12 several other questions, and you're at a slight 13 disadvantage because I'm going to ask everyone who 14 comes up here the same thing: On a scale of 15 1 to 10, if you were to grade New York's testing 16 system, what would you give that grade, and why? 17 COMMISSIONER KING: Well, I think until we 18 implement the common core, we -- it would be 19 somewhat in the middle. Probably "6," or "7," given 20 the gap between what we ask and what is required for 21 college- and career-readiness. 22 When you look at the remediation rates at 23 SUNY and CUNY, and you know that many of those are 24 students who we said, as a system, were performing 25 fine all along the way, until they arrived at higher 1 education, that points to a real challenge. 2 So, there's work to do. 3 The other piece, is that we should get to 4 computer-based testing as quickly as possible, 5 because it's more efficient, because we can have 6 better items, because scoring can be managed better, 7 because we can embed field-test items. 8 So, in the absence of computer-based testing 9 in the common core, which is exactly what we're 10 focused on trying to create, I think we have a 11 distance to travel. 12 SENATOR FLANAGAN: How long before we get to 13 a "9," if we follow what you've outlined? 14 COMMISSIONER KING: The goal for the 15 Park Consortium is to have those assessments online 16 in 2014-15, but a lot will depend on how quickly we 17 can build the capacity to do computer-based testing. 18 I do think we'll move probably to an "8" with 19 alignment to the common core. 20 And that we will see phased in, beginning 21 next year, with the 3-through-8 assessments, and 22 then in the following year with the Regents exams. 23 SENATOR FLANAGAN: Okay, you have in your 24 testimony, you talked about, on page 12, the title 25 is "Importance of Field Tests." 1 And it says: It allows SED to build valid 2 operational exams and accurate measure of college- 3 and career-readiness. 4 And then you have below that: Embedding 5 field-test questions in an operational exam is the 6 best practice that generates higher-quality test 7 data and standalone field tests. 8 No disrespect, it just seems inconsistent. 9 And I know, going back to part of what 10 Senator Oppenheimer was asking about, Why are we 11 doing field tests anymore, to begin with? 12 And I'll have this as a sub-question: If 13 you're going to embed tests, and we have certain 14 limitations because of printing, if we're going out 15 and doing field tests now, aren't we spending a lot 16 of money on field tests independent of the, 17 quote/unquote, real exams? 18 COMMISSIONER KING: So, yes, I mean, it would 19 be better, again, if we didn't have to do standalone 20 field tests. 21 Let me take a moment to describe the 22 mechanics. 23 So, if you have for a given test, four forms; 24 so, you have Version A, Version B, Version C, and 25 Version D, and you sprinkle a small number of 1 field-test items into each of those operational 2 tests, let's say you had ten, in each of the four 3 forms, as an example, that will only give you 4 40 field-tested questions at the end of the 5 operational tests. 6 But in order to build the test, you need a 7 lot more questions than that. And, you know that 8 when you're field testing, some of the questions 9 will not perform well and you'll need to not use 10 them. 11 So, you not only need enough questions to 12 populate the actual test, but you need more, so that 13 you can take out questions that don't perform well. 14 So, that's why, in many large states, you're 15 talking about 15, 20, 25, 30 forms, so that they can 16 have a small number of field-test questions in each 17 of those forms. 18 We would much rather be able to embed all of 19 the field-test items. It would be more efficient, 20 it would save us the time on field testing, it would 21 save us the cost of printing and shipping field 22 tests, so forth. 23 But, we are constrained by the process we use 24 to print and ship exams; which is, we have a 25 printing machine, we have a printing staff. And 1 that was a decision made many year ago at the 2 Department. 3 To take a different approach would require 4 contracting that work out, which would be an 5 expensive potential undertaking. And, I would 6 argue, a potential distraction from getting to 7 computer-based testing which would solve the 8 problem, and, have the benefit of eliminating 9 printing and shipping as a part of the process, 10 because, with computer-based testing, then you can 11 have as many forms as you want without all of the 12 constraints that come with printing and shipping. 13 SENATOR FLANAGAN: How much do we spend on 14 field tests? 15 COMMISSIONER KING: It's embedded in our 16 overall contract. 17 I don't know that we have a breakdown of 18 field-testing costs alone. 19 VALERIE GRAY: I think -- 20 Is this on? 21 -- as we've looked at it over the last 22 several years, on average from -- 23 SENATOR FLANAGAN: Try that again, Val. I'm 24 sorry. 25 VALERIE GRAY: I think, that as we've looked 1 at prior contracts and prior experience, it ranges, 2 on average, between four and five million. 3 SENATOR FLANAGAN: Okay, so if we were -- I 4 want to make sure that I'm understanding the 5 distinction. 6 If we were to get rid of those separate field 7 tests, and we were just going to fully embedded, 8 quote/unquote, regular tests, we're constrained by 9 the process that we use, because of the printing and 10 everything else. 11 Right? 12 So if you -- if we were to go to an outside 13 vendor, so that the State were not doing it, but it 14 was not yet computer-based, are we talking about 15 4.5 million, or are we talking about 40 million, 16 or -- 17 VALERIE GRAY: Yeah, I think it's difficult 18 to say. 19 And I also want to clarify the average 20 figures for sample field tests, that was not just 21 printing, shipping, and administration. That also 22 included the item development and the scoring and 23 some of the other technical aspects. 24 I think it's difficult to estimate how much 25 it would cost if you outsourced that. You would 1 probably need do some sort of RFI, or, a request 2 from a number of bidders. 3 In general, you know, we spend about 4 6 million for printing and shipping for all of the 5 exams throughout the year, so that gives you a 6 little bit of a flavor of the overall 7 printing-and-shipping costs. 8 SENATOR FLANAGAN: So if we go to a 9 computer-based model, are we saving money? 10 COMMISSIONER KING: Yes, on the annual 11 operating costs, but, that requires that you have 12 the capacity in districts to execute on that. 13 But, yes, you'd be eliminating the whole 14 printing and shipping, so, that six million, for 15 starters. 16 But, also, scoring would be that much easier 17 to do, right, because each teacher who's 18 participating in scoring could be sitting at 19 their -- at a computer at their school, rather than 20 having to go to a central location, and all of the 21 costs of transporting exams through a central 22 location for regional scoring. All of that would be 23 saved as well. 24 Computer-based testing would be less 25 expensive, year over year, operationally, but, we've 1 got to build the capacity to get there. And that 2 will require an up-front investment in hardware, 3 tech support, and bandwidth. 4 SENATOR FLANAGAN: I get that. 5 But, why are we waiting to find that out? 6 I mean, if you are -- if you're going to put 7 in budgetary requests, that the number's 8 4.5 million, or 6 million, and you're talking about 9 districts in Senator Oppenheimer and 10 Senator Marcellino's area that are, technically, at 11 capacity, I think we should be figuring out what it 12 would cost to do it in those areas where there are 13 more challenges. 14 Is there anything going on like that? 15 COMMISSIONER KING: Exactly right. So that's 16 the survey tool that we're doing, along with the 17 other states that are participating in Park, the 18 technology-survey tool that we are asking districts 19 about. 20 You know: How many computers should they 21 have? Where are they situated? What is their 22 bandwidth speed? 23 All those kinds of questions, so that we can 24 do exactly the assessment you are describing, and 25 come back then, with a budget request, potentially, 1 both, at the state level, around district capacity, 2 and, potentially, even at the federal level, around 3 some of the bandwidth issues, and the investment in 4 high-speed Internet access that's required. 5 And in some buildings, it's even an 6 electricity issue, and whether they have the 7 electricity capacity. 8 One of the questions that we are also working 9 through with the consortia is: What kind of device 10 can be used? 11 So many school districts, I think, are 12 rightly, for instructional reasons, going towards 13 tablets. So, iPads, or other tablets. 14 We want to make sure that the assessments can 15 be delivered through those tablets. And, so, our 16 assessment consortium, just federally funded, and a 17 second consortium of other states that is also 18 federally funded, have been meeting with major 19 tablet-makers, to make sure that those tablets are 20 able to be used for delivery of the assessments. 21 So, we're trying to answer exactly these 22 questions. 23 I do think a pilot would be the most 24 effective way to expedite the process. 25 One of the reasons we've included that in our 1 budget request, because, until you actually start 2 doing it operationally, you don't always know all 3 the questions that may come up, all the challenges 4 that you may discover. 5 SENATOR FLANAGAN: What are the five 6 languages? 7 COMMISSIONER KING: I believe it is Chinese, 8 Korean, Russian, Spanish, and Haitian Creole. 9 SENATOR FLANAGAN: Okay. 10 And last question, I appreciate your 11 indulgence: Within reasonable constraints, if you 12 could change one thing right away, in testing, what 13 would it be? 14 COMMISSIONER KING: The alignment of our 15 [unintelligible] assessments and Regents exams with 16 the common core and with college- and 17 career-readiness. 18 It troubles me deeply that there are students 19 who have their five 65s, think that they're ready 20 for college-level work, show up on a college campus, 21 and are told that they have to take a remedial 22 course that they themselves and their families have 23 to pay for. 24 And, so, we have an incoherence between 25 our -- what higher ed and employers demand, and what 1 we are using as our targets within the K-through-12 2 system. 3 So that alignment, so that we know, that when 4 students leave us, they are ready for college and 5 career success, I think that, around assessments, 6 that is the thing that I would be most eager to 7 change. 8 SENATOR FLANAGAN: Now, I'm fairly certain if 9 I had to asked Val the same question, she would just 10 ask for a pile of money. 11 COMMISSIONER KING: That's her job. 12 SENATOR FLANAGAN: That's right. 13 Thank you very much, Commissioner. 14 COMMISSIONER KING: Thank you. 15 SENATOR FARLEY: Thank you. Good job. 16 SENATOR FLANAGAN: Next is, New York State 17 United Teachers: Mr. Palotta, Ms. Person, and 18 Ms. Neira. 19 Good morning. 20 ANDREW PALOTTA: Good morning, 21 Senator Flanagan and members of the Education 22 Committee. 23 You have copies of our testimonies, and I 24 know that you've read it, because you quoted it 25 already. So, that's a good thing. 1 I am Andy Palotta, executive vice president 2 of NYSUT. 3 Joining me today are: 4 NYSUT vice president, Marie Neira; 5 And, three current practitioners from the 6 Albany City School District, sixth-grade teachers 7 Jane Fox [ph.] and Heidi Sabatino [ph.]; 8 And, from the Schenectady City School 9 District, Hillary Luallen Southern [ph.]. 10 Maria and I also have many decades of 11 teaching experience, so we have a lot of good 12 knowledge here. 13 On behalf of NYSUT, I want to thank you for 14 holding these hearings, and providing us with this 15 opportunity to speak to you about our thoughts, and 16 on how we can improve teaching in New York State. 17 A few points: 18 New York has a long history of teaching, and 19 testing, which we should be proud of. 20 Our Regents exams are known as the gold 21 standard around the country. Teachers have been 22 involved in designing these tests since 1906. 23 In addition to the Regents exams, we have 24 traditionally tested students, once during 25 elementary school, and once during middle school, in 1 ELA and math. 2 With the passage of No Child Left Behind by 3 Congress, the federal test mandate expanded for 4 grades 3 to 8, for math and ELA, and also required 5 science tests in elementary and middle school. 6 The requirements for high school exams in 7 ELA, math, and science had no effect on New York 8 because of the Regents exam requirements. 9 And these federal requirements have had a 10 major impact on what we do each and every day in the 11 classrooms. 12 Our vice president, Marie Neira, will now 13 speak about the impact of testing. 14 MARIE NEIRA: Thank you, Andy. 15 I will briefly highlight four major points: 16 The time on testing, the narrowing of the 17 curriculum, issues with the current tests, and 18 NYSUT's recommendations. 19 As we've heard, no country tests its children 20 more than the United States does. 21 And, as you saw, we do estimate, and that's a 22 real rough estimation, that we test about 74 hours 23 if a student is in school from kindergarten to 24 twelfth. And that doesn't include the additional 25 assessments that are sometimes administered and laid 1 on at the district level. 2 What I do want to emphasize in this 3 particular piece, is not just the time spent on 4 testing, but as the Commissioner mentioned, it is 5 the time that is spent on test prep. 6 And that time, we can estimate, and this is a 7 very rough estimation, between four to six weeks, 8 depending where you are in the state, which is 9 really at the core of the fixation on testing. 10 Research has told us, over and over, that the 11 excess on test prep distorts the purpose of testing. 12 And that is a piece that I want to highlight. 13 As much as we spend time on testing, we know 14 that it's not just about getting higher test scores. 15 And usually that's what the test prep will 16 emphasize. 17 We have -- the overemphasis on testing, and 18 the use of results, to determine graduation, and 19 promotion, has increased the stress, not only of 20 students, but of parents. 21 And we've heard that. We've seen how parents 22 have exercised to show their anger about these 23 issues. 24 In NYSUT, we commissioned a whole of parents, 25 where we have 63 percent of parents who said too 1 much emphasis is being placed on standardized tests, 2 as we will have demonstrated through the numbers 3 that you have seen. 4 Also, you will know that most test developers 5 will tell you that assessments are not designed for 6 high-stakes purposes. 7 In most cases, a test and assessment is a 8 point in time, and it is really about the -- a small 9 point in time. 10 In short: We really believe that the 11 overreliance on testing comes with the cost to our 12 students, and the time that they are put through the 13 paces. 14 On the curriculum, the focus on testing and 15 test prep has led to a serious narrowing of the 16 curriculum. 17 And we have heard it today already, where we 18 have the emphasis -- in some districts, not all 19 districts, where the emphasis is on ELA and math. 20 And, you have entire discipline areas that 21 are not part of the entire educational process -- 22 the arts, music, social studies, science -- our 23 educators will tell you. 24 It -- also, research tell us that high-stakes 25 standardized tests are poor measures of high-quality 1 curriculum, because, remember, an assessment is only 2 measuring a certain amount of questions, and will 3 not capture the entire curriculum for that year in 4 any one area. 5 Narrowing the curriculum fails to engage our 6 students, and we see that constantly. And, it does 7 not, currently, as the Commissioner said, prepare 8 our students for college- and career-ready, and I 9 would say, because we are not giving our students 10 that entire round of education. 11 While we can say that adopting the 12 core-curriculum standards is the right -- in the 13 right move, it also provides the opportunity for 14 New York State to pause, and to take a better look 15 at how it is aligning. 16 It's not only the standards and the 17 assessments, but notice the big gap in the 18 communications, which is the curriculum. 19 There is no curriculum right now guiding our 20 process. 21 So, we have standards that are being rolled 22 in, we have a set of assessments that are already 23 being adjusted, but there's this big hole in the 24 middle, which is curriculum, which is something that 25 we really must pay attention to. 1 On the problems with this year's tests, in 2 addition to the concerns, with time that we have 3 been extremely concerned about, and the quality, we 4 are, definitely, very concerned about the purpose, 5 and the amount of errors in this year's tests. And, 6 cannot overestimate what -- the complexities of 7 educational testing cannot be ignored. 8 We're glossing over some of the very big 9 complexities. 10 And we believe, and our members believe, that 11 students should not bear the consequences of a 12 flawed assessment process. 13 So during our convention, we heard very 14 disturbing stories from our members. And you have 15 those stories in our testimony. 16 The negative impact of the tests on our 17 students? 18 When students do not understand test items, 19 because they are unnecessarily confusing, they 20 cannot effectively demonstrate what they know. 21 And one of the big questions and -- that -- 22 one of the comments that were repeated throughout 23 our surveys from our members, was the fact that the 24 test questions were, in many instances, very 25 complex. In some instances were not clear, and very 1 confusing, especially on the math assessment. 2 Which, remember, math is supposed to be the 3 international language. It doesn't matter what 4 language you speak. But, if it becomes more of a 5 reading-comprehension test, then you are going to be 6 distracted from the mathematical skills that you 7 have to provide. 8 We have three practitioners today who 9 administered the tests, so, if during the questions, 10 you have specific questions about administration, we 11 have our three members who will be more than happy 12 to follow up with those questions. 13 Very quickly: In our recommendations, as 14 NYSUT, we have voiced concern over our current 15 testing system, especially with test prep, and the 16 misuse of data. 17 And I want to emphasize, when we talk about 18 the misuse of data, data -- there's one test. And, 19 that single test, right now, is serving all masters, 20 and, it's trying to create data that is not 21 necessarily designed to give us. 22 So, in that instance, sometimes we have to 23 make sure that we are understanding what that 24 assessment is really telling us. 25 Educators are not opposed to student 1 performance or being held accountable. We just want 2 to make sure that these assessments are fair. We 3 want to make sure that they are -- we get it right 4 this time, because we have the opportunity to do 5 that. 6 Our members recently considered a resolution 7 to our leadership. 8 The resolution demands that SED take a look 9 at, and end, the demands of the current system of 10 testing in the way that it is currently being 11 implemented, because it harms our students, and 12 hinders real learning, and affirms our support for 13 multiple measures. 14 We have to make sure that we don't have one 15 assessment that is making all the decisions for our 16 students' future. And through the assessments we 17 can assure that we have an accurate, fair, and 18 appropriate process. 19 We are calling for a balanced system; a 20 system that prioritizes instruction, and not 21 testing. 22 And that is what the members of NYSUT 23 continue to ensure, that we are talking about, 24 balance, and instruction. 25 It is also clear that, simply, getting 1 Pearson and SED to fix the flaws within the existing 2 system is not the solution to the testing dilemma. 3 In my -- as an educator for 18 years in the 4 classroom, I can tell you that a computer -- taking 5 the test on the computer is not going to deal with 6 the issue of it being high stakes. 7 If it is a high-stakes assessment, it will 8 continue to be test prep. The test prep will be 9 done on the computer, and, we will have test prep 10 computer programs to do the test prep. 11 So, in wrapping up, I would want to leave you 12 with, that the real question we believe needs to be 13 at the center of this debate, is: What do our 14 students need? And, do we have the will to get it 15 right this time? 16 I believe that we have the opportunity, with 17 the changes in the current system, with the roll in 18 of common core, with a new generation of 19 assessments. 20 I will turn it over to Andy for a wrap-up. 21 ANDREW PALOTTA: Thank you. 22 As you consider what we've talked about so 23 far today, and the concerns you've heard, we would 24 like you to act now, to protect teachers from the 25 media abuses, that the data from these tests are 1 linked to teacher performance, and made public. 2 Divulging that information through the media 3 will corrupt the intent of the new-teacher 4 evaluation system, especially when that data is 5 coming through, that is defective and imprecise. 6 We ask you to approve legislation that would 7 clearly prohibit the media and general public from 8 having access to teacher-principal evaluations, and 9 other personnel information. 10 You know that this information has caused a 11 disaster in New York City, with the 12,000 names 12 published. And, it was inaccurate and unfair. 13 We thank you again for holding these 14 hearings. 15 We believe that -- in short, the answer to 16 Senator Marcellino's question on the standing of 17 New York State schools, the number that is usually 18 given by the governor, is incorrect. 19 And, the number we go by is the number from 20 "Education Week," which has us as Number 3 in the 21 nation. 22 And the short answer to the question that was 23 posed on, Do the teachers have the final say in 24 drafting these tests? -- the answer is no. 25 So, thank you for your time. 1 SENATOR FLANAGAN: And if I could, and please 2 forgive me for not having listened properly, could 3 you just give the teacher names again? 4 JANE FOX (ph.): Oh, I'm Jane Fox. 5 SENATOR FLANAGAN: Jane. Okay. 6 HILLARY LUALLEN SOUTHERN (ph.): I'm 7 Hillary Luallen Southern. 8 SENATOR FLANAGAN: Hillary. 9 HEIDI SABATINO (ph.): Heidi Sabatino. 10 SENATOR FLANAGAN: Okay. 11 I have -- I'm sure my colleagues have 12 questions, and I'll just start off with a couple. 13 In reading the various pieces of testimony, 14 some you haven't heard yet, it seems to me like one 15 of problems, is that you don't really know what the 16 test is, and that you're not allowed to see, and 17 you're sort of, I guess, shooting blind, almost, in 18 terms of figuring out, how do you properly 19 prepare? -- whether it's through the curriculum and 20 getting to the test, or just actually doing test 21 prep. 22 So, as a backdrop on that, and I don't know 23 if this would be helpful to hear from the classroom 24 teachers: Is it ridiculous to suggest, that, in the 25 beginning of the school year, whatever the grade may 1 be, if we're going to do an assessment, just do a 2 test right in the beginning of the year? 3 No test prep. Just, find out, as a gauge of 4 where kids are. And then the, quote/unquote, real 5 test at the end of the year; the one that can gauge 6 what has happened over the course of that academic 7 year. 8 Is that helpful? hurtful? 9 HILLARY LUALLEN SOUTHERN (ph.): In our 10 district, we are working towards that. 11 The difficulty is, that the test really has 12 to be the same one, in the fall and the spring, or 13 whenever you choose to do it, or the same family of 14 tests. Otherwise, you're measuring apples and 15 oranges. 16 So, the State assessment obviously won't 17 work, unless the initial assessment is designed by 18 the same company. 19 And I'm not sure how you feel, but I have 20 huge issues with the test, beyond the publicized 21 errors that have been discussed, and made much of in 22 the media. 23 SENATOR FLANAGAN: Okay. 24 JANE FOX (ph.): We currently do a test at 25 the beginning of the year, and we do a test in 1 the -- January, and we do another test at the end of 2 the year. That is a district policy that we do. 3 For the State test, I think the skills that 4 we know that are on the test are embedded in our 5 teaching throughout the year, which is what the test 6 is grading us on. 7 However, some of the issues that I find with 8 the test, students that have special needs, 9 throughout the year, you're able to assist them. 10 It's part of their plan. 11 However, when it comes to the day of the 12 test, you're telling them: Here it is. You're on 13 your own. 14 And they've had this assistance because, it 15 is part of what we decided is best for the student, 16 to get them from Point A to Point B. 17 And, I don't think the test gauges that, when 18 they don't have, whether it be reading the test to 19 them, because, in the past, they've had somebody 20 who's read the test to them, or read the answers to 21 them, because they might have difficulty at that 22 grade level. 23 That's my concern with the tests. 24 HEIDI SABATINO (ph.): As far as just testing 25 them, and getting their abilities, the State test 1 does not give us any feedback on their abilities. 2 We get a score, and that's it. 3 We don't see where their strength and where 4 their weaknesses are. We just get the score. 5 SENATOR FLANAGAN: But if you could come up 6 with something that would accurately measure that, 7 do you see that as a problem doing the thing in the 8 beginning of the year, and then at the end, as long 9 as there was consistency in the test? 10 HEIDI SABATINO (ph.): Right, that would be 11 great. That's more of a diagnostic test, where we 12 see where they need work on, and where they're fine 13 at. 14 That -- you take it at the beginning of the 15 year, you work on those skills, and then you test 16 again at the end of the year, that would be 17 wonderful. 18 MARIE NEIRA: So, I'm old enough to say, 19 that, it has been done in New York State. 20 [Laugher.] 21 MARIE NEIRA: After 35 years, when I started 22 teaching, you had a pre-test and a post-test. 23 And that's exactly what you did. 24 You knew what the skills would be at the 25 beginning of the school year. You embedded that 1 throughout your curriculum. 2 And, I dare say I'm old enough also to know 3 that New York State used to give you the curriculum 4 that would allow you to meet those skills, and then 5 you would be tested at the end. 6 Now, things have changed over the 35 years, 7 and especially this year's testing. 8 This year's testing is a transitional year, 9 where we're testing on standards from 2004. But, 10 there were -- also, embedded common-cause standards 11 were embedded, plus, you had the field-test 12 questions. 13 So just imagine the kind of assessment that 14 was put in front of our students this time around. 15 And, every year, that I can remember, 16 especially with the coming in of No Child Left 17 Behind, every year, the assessment has changed. 18 So, we, as classroom teachers, have a moving 19 target every single year. 20 SENATOR OPPENHEIMER: That's crazy. 21 SENATOR FLANAGAN: I'll go back to the 22 question that I asked the Commissioner, which I said 23 I was going to ask everybody. 24 This might be very interesting to hear from 25 our classroom teachers. 1 If you were grading, on a scale of 1 to 10, 2 how would you grade the State of New York, and why? 3 HILLARY LUALLEN SOUTHERN (ph.): I hate going 4 first. 5 All right. I would have to say that I think 6 that the score the Commissioner gave is high, and 7 optimistic. 8 And I would aim it right in the middle. I'll 9 say "5." 10 There's not enough time, you know, for all of 11 us to talk about our experiences doing this, but, 12 one of the issues that I was listening to this 13 morning was the movement towards computerized 14 testing. 15 And I thought, "Wow." 16 Because one of the problems that I see as an 17 ELA teacher, is the discrepancy between asking our 18 kids to find details, and defend their thinking. 19 With a standardized-test question, it only 20 has one right answer, which is what you get with 21 multiple choice. 22 So, I looked at -- I can't discuss the test 23 with you. 24 That's another issue, because it's embargoed, 25 it's secret; we can't discuss any of the questions 1 or the answers. 2 But, there were many multiple-choice 3 questions in the reading passages, which I could not 4 answer definitively. And I have a master's degree 5 in reading, and I graduated summa cum laude from 6 college. 7 So, if I cannot decide, definitively, that 8 one answer is correct, how can my eighth-graders do 9 that? 10 And, how can we talk, in good conscience, 11 about going to a completely computer model? 12 That's crazy. 13 And I'm also thinking about the computers in 14 my classroom that are missing keys, that they won't 15 fix. 16 So, you know, there's a huge -- I can't -- 17 I -- I -- there's too much to talk about. 18 But, I don't think that we're doing a "6." 19 And I think the notion that we'll get to a 20 "9" by 2014 is not possible. 21 SENATOR FLANAGAN: Jane, how about you? 22 JANE FOX (ph.): I would agree. Probably 23 more like a "4." 24 The problems with the tests, and I'll talk 25 about technology first, in a building with 625-plus 1 students, if you have -- if the State sets the time 2 that they do this, here's the week that you give 3 testing, and here are the two days that you get to 4 make up tests, you have to have 625 computers that 5 are working, for the kids to sit down for that time 6 period of 90 minute, or 60 minutes, or, if they 7 adjust it because it's computerized, I don't foresee 8 a district being able to take on that expense, or 9 the State is going to want to say, I'm going to 10 supply this many. 11 And that's one school in the entire district 12 of twelve other schools for 3 through 8. 13 And as far as the test itself, my co-teacher 14 Ms. Sabatino, she also teaches ELA. And, we took 15 the test separately, and then we compared our 16 answers. 17 On this test, there were probably six, that 18 even when we went back -- the distracters in the 19 past were kind of close, but you could definitively 20 go back and find: You know what? Yeah, this one 21 was correct, not that one. 22 There were six questions that we, literally, 23 said, "Oh, my God." 24 And having just chatted with students, 25 "What did you think of the test?" they picked out 1 two of the same questions that we had, and said, 2 "I went back and forth between these two answers." 3 And I don't find that to be fair. 4 What are you testing them? 5 Do you narrow it down to two, and then just 6 say: Okay, I'm going to guess this one? 7 So, I don't -- I don't see it getting to 8 where it needs to be, based on the Commissioner, in 9 2014. And, I don't know if the test is really 10 gauging what the students know, because sometimes 11 the students say: I don't care. It doesn't matter. 12 But then they're put into a class because 13 they don't perform well. 14 And the growth that they may have, if they 15 scored, we'll say, a 640, or a 611, and then they 16 went to 640, they're still failing according to the 17 State, because they score one. But, there has been 18 growth, so they've made some progress, but it's not 19 shown in the test. 20 And I don't get to see the results of: Well, 21 what did they get, and what didn't they get? 22 What was the skill that they understood or 23 they had progress in, and what are they deficient 24 in? 25 I just get that number. 1 SENATOR FLANAGAN: So, the Commissioner 2 started at "6." 3 And you went to "5," and you went to "4." 4 And, Heidi, if you're going to "3," we have a 5 problem. 6 HEIDI SABATINO (ph.): Can I just say low? 7 SENATOR FLANAGAN: Okay. 8 HEIDI SABATINO (ph.): Very low. 9 [Laughter.] 10 HEIDI SABATINO (ph.): Everything that they 11 said, and it's such a small snapshot of a child. I 12 mean, we have students that are from impoverished 13 areas. We have kids, the night before, that have 14 gone into shelters, that are very emotionally 15 distraught. We just spend the 90 minutes just 16 getting -- encouraging them to get through the test. 17 So, it's just such a high-stake test for 18 these kids. And even the kids that are able to 19 perform proficience, they have such testing anxiety, 20 a lot of time is spent just coaxing them to go 21 through: It's okay. You'll be fine. 22 So, in many ways, quite low, my score would 23 be. 24 MARIE NEIRA: I would say -- 25 SENATOR FLANAGAN: Senator Oppenheimer -- 1 MARIE NEIRA: -- I would just add -- just to 2 add just to what our practitioners have said: It is 3 extremely important that we do not gloss over the 4 complexities of test design, because what you're 5 hearing here is how complex a test is to design. 6 Two points that I need to bring to your 7 attention also: 8 With test design, and moving into using 9 technology, we need to move into the world of the 10 technology. We must take into account the issue of 11 equity. Equity will be a big concern, should be a 12 big concern, for you, and especially with 13 constituencies that you represent. 14 And, most importantly, our rural school 15 districts that do not, to date, have the capacity 16 of even getting Internet or broadband into their 17 districts. 18 So, just to put that as background 19 information. 20 SENATOR FLANAGAN: Okay, thank you. 21 Senator Oppenheimer. 22 SENATOR OPPENHEIMER: Well, thank you all for 23 being here. And, you've been such a wonderful 24 resource through the years, and I want to thank you 25 before I leave the Senate, to each of you, 1 particularly Andy, who has always been there to 2 answer my questions. 3 Well, you heard what we were saying earlier 4 about broadband, and about the fact that -- 5 Oh, I'm not on. 6 I'm on? I'm not. 7 I'm on. 8 SENATOR MARCELLINO: Speak into it. 9 SENATOR OPPENHEIMER: Okay, speak into it. 10 You know, we were saying earlier, is that, we 11 find, Senator Marcellino and myself, that in many, 12 many different districts within our schools, they 13 don't need, though they'll probably contest that, 14 but there's not a great need for the resources. 15 The resources have to be placed where the 16 need is. And, if we don't have computers in some of 17 our schools, and there's no broadband, there's no 18 way to get any access, we have to focus in on that. 19 And, I think, as far as, you know, technology 20 in the classrooms, which one of you two mentioned, 21 Hillary or Jane, that can be -- the technology 22 concerning the students taking tests, there's no 23 need to have 650 computers in one school. 24 All you need is to say, grade X will take it 25 on one day. Three days later, grade -- another 1 grade will take. -- so that there will never be a 2 need to have the entire school taking tests at the 3 same time. 4 I had a couple of questions for -- 5 Hillary? 6 HILLARY LUALLEN SOUTHERN (ph.): Hillary, 7 yes. 8 SENATOR OPPENHEIMER: -- because, earlier, 9 you had said, that their were many things that 10 were -- you found distressing in the testing, quite 11 beyond, you know, typo mistakes. I mean, that seems 12 pretty superficial, even though they shouldn't be 13 there. 14 But, I'd like to hear some of your major 15 issues that you have with the testing. And I think 16 that you did mention a couple of them, but I would 17 like to hear what -- 18 HILLARY LUALLEN SOUTHERN (ph.): Well, I 19 heard someone allude to it earlier, but there's a 20 great deal of language in the test itself, which is 21 confusing to many -- most of my students. 22 So, for example, and this is going to sound 23 silly to you, but, we have a high ESL population. 24 And words like, "beneficial," 25 "advantageous" -- and I'm not -- I'm calling these 1 out of long-term memory, not recent ones from the 2 test -- those are testing-type words. 3 And, we are not allowed to answer the child 4 when he or she raises his hand and says: What does 5 "beneficial" mean? 6 If I were to say it out loud, often the kids 7 would know what it meant. But, I'm not allowed to 8 read it to them either. 9 I don't believe that the -- test, when the 10 child's result hinges on something as small as 11 understanding a directional word, I don't believe 12 that the test can accurately measure what my 13 children can do. I think it very effectively 14 measures what they can't do. 15 And that's a terrible focus. 16 The -- we talked a bit about the timing, too, 17 earlier, the 90 minutes. 18 It's a horrible amount of time to sit down 19 and be quiet, and be focused, and work on something 20 that may, to many of my students, feel as though 21 they have failed already. 22 You want to add to that? 23 JANE FOX (ph.): No, I completely agree with 24 you, 90 minutes is a long time. 25 Just imagine sitting here for 90 minutes, and 1 saying nothing, moving, don't touch anything, don't 2 write anything, other than that test sitting in 3 front of you -- for 90 minutes. 4 And you are talking about sixth-graders. 5 They need to move. 6 SENATOR OPPENHEIMER: So you're saying it's 7 impossible for those that are finished earlier to be 8 excused from the room? 9 HILLARY LUALLEN SOUTHERN (ph.): There's 10 nowhere to send them because everyone in the 11 building is testing. 12 SENATOR OPPENHEIMER: Well, that's a problem. 13 HILLARY LUALLEN SOUTHERN (ph.): And that's 14 just the design of the test. 15 You know, we have five days in which to 16 administer the test, administer makeups, and send 17 the tests back on its way. 18 And that's -- it's impossible to do it any 19 other way, than to have all of the kids testing at 20 once. 21 So that is a problem. 22 But, one test follows on the heels of 23 another. 24 No sooner have we finished ELA testing, then 25 we dive into math. 1 No sooner have we finished math testing, then 2 the science testing begins, which has four parts. 3 We are still testing in my school. We just 4 finished the math field testing, I believe, on 5 Thursday last week. 6 And there's more science testing to come. 7 We've been testing since -- 8 UNKNOWN SPEAKER: The beginning of April. 9 HILLARY LUALLEN SOUTHERN (ph.): Thank you. 10 -- the beginning of April. 11 UNKNOWN SPEAKER: Right after April break. 12 HILLARY LUALLEN SOUTHERN (ph.): Every week. 13 SENATOR OPPENHEIMER: We believe, or at least 14 we're putting money behind it, the longitudinal data 15 system, which is going to cost multiples of 16 millions, and will take some time. Part of -- half 17 of that money is coming from the feds. 18 But, will that not zero in on the individual 19 child, and show where the specifics of that child's 20 distress, the areas that they are not succeeding in? 21 What's your opinion? 22 Or your opinion, Andy? 23 Or your opinion, Marie? 24 MARIE NEIRA: Well, we know that the data 25 system that's being created is, basically, to gather 1 statewide data. 2 Reports that will be generated, we're told, 3 will have some specific individual information about 4 each student. 5 The question is going to be, is: When do we 6 get it? 7 If we get the returns in August, or 8 September, the current classroom teachers do not 9 have that data to help them try to correct or make 10 any interventions for the students at that time. 11 So, many of us, we say: Okay, we know now 12 what students don't know. And, hopefully, when they 13 go in next grade, that teacher will have an 14 opportunity to see what they don't know, and try to 15 fill in the blanks. 16 But, the current data that will be returned 17 to teachers will have very little benefit for the 18 students who are currently in front of them. 19 SENATOR OPPENHEIMER: Okay, not good. 20 Now, the last question I have, is, I've been 21 getting some -- many complaints, actually, from 22 teachers' colleges, colleges that teach the 23 teachers, and, universities. 24 And they say that the State Ed has not 25 developed a teacher-certificate process. 1 They have said that they are going to do it. 2 And they have said, on many occasions, it's going to 3 be done soon. 4 And, apparently, this has not happened. 5 Is that your experience? 6 MARIE NEIRA: New York State has changed the 7 certification process that -- the assessments for 8 the certification process. 9 SENATOR OPPENHEIMER: Right. 10 MARIE NEIRA: And they have just reintroduced 11 the teacher-performance assessment, and that is just 12 in the process of being rolled out. 13 It is true that faculty and schools of 14 education have had very little communications about 15 how this will be impacting their programs, their 16 curriculum, their syllabus. 17 So, yes, there is a lot of -- a lack of 18 communications. And, again, this is more about the 19 artificial timeline of Race to the Top, which says, 20 we were going to have a different certification 21 process. 22 So, it's being just timelined, and not 23 looking at the efficiency and the ability to 24 implement these at college level. 25 SENATOR OPPENHEIMER: You know, the concerns 1 were, from the colleges, that they couldn't plan 2 curriculum. They've have to put it out in the 3 summertime, so that -- 4 MARIE NEIRA: Absolutely. 5 SENATOR OPPENHEIMER: Well, once again, thank 6 you so much for all that you've done through the 7 years. 8 ANDREW PALOTTA: Thank you, Senator. 9 SENATOR FLANAGAN: Senator Robach. 10 SENATOR ROBACH: Yes. I will try to -- I got 11 a lot of questions. 12 But, you know, I think there really is, and I 13 hope not naively so, a collective will between 14 everybody involved, even SED, educators, the 15 Legislature, and I think the public, I won't just 16 say parents, you know, wants that. 17 You know, Carl Marcellino talked about, that 18 we do prioritize education. We use a lot of 19 resources. 20 And, so, I think there's a way, but I'm 21 unsure, you know, it sounds to me like you like the 22 direction, or at least, Marie, in your statement, 23 of, you know, moving towards these core items. 24 Is that accurate? 25 MARIE NEIRA: Yes, we -- NYSUT supports the 1 common-core standards. We believe it does focus. 2 It takes the standards and narrows it down to what 3 it is students should know. 4 Our concern is about implementation. 5 And in New York State, being the state that 6 we are, that is where the issues become 7 implementation. 8 So, we have common-core standards. Teachers 9 were involved. I have to say, yes, the teachers 10 were involved in giving input into the additional 11 standards for New York State. 12 But, the point that we're at now, is that, 13 next year, 2012-2013, the assessment will be based 14 on common-core standards. 15 If you take a survey of New York State, 16 they're -- we're just in the process of starting to 17 do the professional development that will support 18 teaching to the shifts, and changing your 19 instruction. 20 It took Finland 30 years to get to the best, 21 and we're trying to do this in less than two years. 22 SENATOR ROBACH: You had also used the term, 23 you said, you'd like to see multiple measures. 24 And I know -- I see my friend Dan Drmacich up 25 there, who's a principal in school in Rochester, a 1 School Without Walls, that did other things, but had 2 very good outcomes. 3 Do those have to be loose, or could they be 4 more defined in terms of what those alternatives or 5 multiple standards would be? 6 Because, you know, that's what I hear all the 7 time. People, they see a failing graduation rate, 8 and they see how much money they spend. And it's a 9 normal thing to get excited about that, both, on the 10 emotional level, and even from a resource level, 11 because we want kids to do good. And then you -- 12 you know, if you kind of -- you know, if you pay for 13 a Cadillac, you want a nicer car. 14 And I almost think that people who don't have 15 kids in school get very caught up in that. 16 So, I don't know what those alternatives are, 17 I can tell them, because I sort of thought, going 18 back to what my colleagues said, some of the 19 common-core things were just going to be an 20 expansion of teaching what's already working in 21 those school districts, you know, like Brighton, or 22 some of the ones across the state, where they are 23 having, you know, 99 percent graduation rates. 24 But, I'm not exactly sure. 25 And I don't mean to put you on the spot, but, 1 if you could maybe fill in some of those things for 2 me, I would like to be more versed on what those 3 are. 4 MARIE NEIRA: So -- great question. 5 Authentic assessments allows for the common 6 cores to be carried out through students actually 7 demonstrating what they can do, unlike the 8 traditional standardized tests. 9 The standardized test is, bubble in, multiple 10 questions. 11 What you -- in the Schools Without Walls, 12 what you have is, students actually demonstrating 13 their skills and their knowledge, and they're able 14 to do this through video presentation, a debate. 15 And they -- and there is a way of, quote/unquote -- 16 and I'm using "standardize" -- to standardize that, 17 because there is a protocol that is criteria-driven, 18 so that it can be comparable throughout schools. 19 So, yes, that is the kind of balance that 20 we're talking about. 21 We're always going to need to have some kind 22 of standardized testing, just so that you have a 23 sampling. 24 It's like polling. 25 When you take a poll, that's what 1 standardized testing means to me. 2 But the authentic assessments, the 3 assessments that allow us, as classroom teachers, to 4 demonstrate what students can actually do, is what 5 we are striving for as we try to ensure that 6 students are, not only career- and college-ready, 7 but they are ready for a democratic society. 8 And, I'll let me colleagues talk to that. 9 HEIDI SABATINO (ph.): As she was saying, one 10 of the shifts in the core curriculum is -- in the 11 common core, is student-centered learning. So, the 12 students takes over and is able to drive their own 13 learning. 14 It's also based on cooperative groups. And, 15 then, working in groups, to solve problems, which is 16 a very important skill today. 17 And, these -- the little snapshot of these 18 testing does not test that. We need other measures, 19 as she said, to test those types of skills. 20 SENATOR ROBACH: Can I just ask -- and I'm 21 sorry, [unintelligible] time -- you know, kind of 22 going in a different direction, there's a lot of 23 expertise up here. 24 While we want to push everybody to their 25 fullest potential, what do you feel about the 1 Regents -- or, a different, a local diploma, or 2 other tracks, for people, do you think that would 3 deter from people reaching their full potential? 4 Or, do you think that could be implemented, 5 and their should be other tracks, you know, to push 6 some kids to, maybe more career, rather than 7 necessarily, first, higher ed? 8 JANE FOX (ph.): Well, you know, as a parent 9 myself -- 10 SENATOR FLANAGAN: Jane, pull that closer. 11 JANE FOX (ph.): -- as a parent myself of 12 three, I can see the difference, and -- with my own 13 three children, and, in my classroom, the same 14 thing; that, not every child is going to go to 15 college, but, there is something that they can do. 16 And, getting your Regents diploma, and 17 getting into a college, to say, I have to graduate 18 to do something, there are kids that are graduating 19 that aren't getting a job in the field that they 20 really excel at, because the jobs are just not 21 there. 22 But, to say that every kid needs to be 23 college-ready, there are certain positions that you 24 are on-the-job trained. It is an internship. Or, 25 it is, you are working with somebody, and getting 1 your education through a field that's not, 2 necessarily, requires the Regents. 3 Yes, you need to be able to read, and do 4 math, but, it doesn't require you having a Regents 5 diploma. 6 SENATOR ROBACH: Right. 7 I guess, more specifically to what the SED 8 has dictated, are those -- you know, I don't know 9 what you want to call them -- core competencies. 10 They say, if you pass five of the Regents 11 era, now, that you can get a local diploma. And I 12 think it capped out at that. 13 Do you hear from teachers, is that working? 14 not working? Or should that be fine-tuned? 15 I say that, because there's a lot of 16 legislation being proposed, to try and address that. 17 And in your comments, I think you're right, 18 let's seize this opportunity to try and do it right. 19 MARIE NEIRA: I think that there is a real 20 need for there to be pathways, as we all know, as we 21 deal with students. And the Regents are starting to 22 talk about the different pathways. 23 CTE as a pathway. The STEMs as a pathway. 24 We support that process because, as we know, 25 boxing all students into having five Regents, most 1 of us in this room probably took Regents. 2 I can tell you, I got a -- barely a 65 in 3 algebra. 4 And, it does limit. 5 And the question that we have posed to the 6 Regents, over and over, for the last -- since 7 2000 -- in 2000, when they changed the graduation 8 standards, is: Can we put all students in one 9 track? 10 And, now, they're relooking and revisiting. 11 We do believe that when you look at these 12 pathways, you are going to need to look at the 13 graduation requirements. Not all the pathways will 14 require five Regents exams, is our position, as 15 we're taking a look at the information that they're 16 sharing with us at this time. 17 SENATOR ROBACH: Thank you. 18 MARIE NEIRA: I would also just want to 19 emphasize that, as educators, the one thing we are 20 sure of, is that we do not want the pathways to 21 track students. 22 In many instances in the past, tracking has 23 become a way of making sure certain students go down 24 a -- tracks that have -- that lead to nowhere. 25 So, we have to make sure that these 1 alternatives are really viable. 2 That's why we're saying, that when the 3 Regents are discussing pathways, they need to look 4 at it in a comprehensive manner. And it's just not 5 about just taking one Regents out and putting in 6 another. 7 SENATOR ROBACH: Thank you. 8 SENATOR FLANAGAN: Senator Marcellino. 9 SENATOR MARCELLINO: Thank you very much. 10 Andy, you mentioned, when I raised the issue 11 with the Commissioner about the Governor's comment 12 about, we spend the most, yet we're 37th statewide, 13 overall, you mentioned the different test where we 14 came out -- we in New York State came out as 15 Number 3 nationwide. 16 What's the difference between those two 17 standards? 18 ANDREW PALOTTA: Well, the number that I'm 19 quoting was in "Education Week." It was a few 20 months ago that they came out with this. It was 21 based on a broad spectrum of different standards. 22 So, I believe that that is the number where 23 we can say "Education Week" is non-biased. 24 So, that's something that we have followed. 25 MARIE NEIRA: And we also know that the 1 number that the Governor used is also cohort. 2 This was a cohort coming out of census, about 3 10 to 12 years ago. 4 So, it is a number that might be valid for 5 that group of individuals, when you're looking at 6 that cohort. 7 The information that we are looking at has 8 been for the last five years. And we have seen, 9 it's not only -- we have the most intel students who 10 qualify in New York State. Our high schools are 11 tenth. We have nineteen out of the best 12 high schools in the country, in New York State. 13 And those are the good news that we don't 14 hear about. 15 SENATOR MARCELLINO: I also raised the issue 16 of the "one size fits all," which, frankly, as a 17 teacher myself, bothers me. 18 And I think I made that clear in my questions 19 to the Commissioner. 20 If you have districts that are performing, 21 and performing well, high graduation rates, high 22 test scores, on whatever standard you want to 23 measure, why not leave them alone? 24 Why make them change their methodology to, 25 some call it a "common core," some call it, whatever 1 you want, some new system, when they're doing well? 2 Why not spend the limited resources that we 3 have, which are limited, and are not necessarily, in 4 the near future, going to get that much more? 5 Why not spend those resources on those 6 districts that need the extra help, that need the 7 extra expertise, that may need some specialists to 8 come in, that may need some equipment? 9 You're right, many rural districts may not be 10 able to get broadband or Wi-Fi at all. Just by 11 virtue of the physical, it's not there. 12 So, why not help them? 13 Why spend money where you don't have to spend 14 it, and in my mind, waste it, when you could spend 15 it where you might get a better bang for your buck? 16 What's your thought? 17 MARIE NEIRA: We have always talked about the 18 issue of equity. And that is a policy question that 19 the Regents have to answer. 20 It does come down -- and I'm not the finance 21 expert, it does come down to financing. 22 I do believe that all districts need a 23 certain amount of support in dollars. 24 So -- but I do agree with you, that those 25 districts that are doing well, should be given the 1 flexibility to continue doing what they're doing. 2 And the key word for us has always been 3 "flexibility," so that we're not all put into 4 "one size fits all." 5 So, yes, flexibility is key for when you are 6 looking at the major shift changes that are being 7 discussed in New York State. 8 SENATOR MARCELLINO: Thank you. I appreciate 9 you coming. 10 SENATOR FLANAGAN: Very quickly, just in the 11 interest of time, Hillary, I'm going to pick you 12 out. 13 I asked the Commissioner this question 14 before: If you could, within reasonable 15 constraints, change something, quickly, you got the 16 magic legislative want in your hand right now, what 17 would you do? 18 HILLARY LUALLEN SOUTHERN (ph.): I wish I had 19 a single choice. 20 I think we need to stop focusing on building 21 more tests. I think there ought to be a limit on 22 how many. I think we ought to consider reducing. 23 I'm thinking about my students when I say 24 this: It feels like punishment to them. 25 And, it would feel that way to me too, or any 1 one of us. 2 So, I think I'm -- I feel weak in this 3 answer, but I think that I'd reduce the amount of 4 time and the number of tests that we give to 5 students. 6 SENATOR FLANAGAN: You shouldn't feel weak in 7 your answer. It's a real answer, and you're 8 practicing in the field every day. So, it's 9 helpful. 10 Maria, one last quick thing, please? 11 In the testimony, there's a comment, in terms 12 of where we should be going. 13 It says: First, we need a realistic time 14 line that provides teachers with a new curriculum 15 before we can assess appropriately. 16 I get it. 17 Put it in real life. 18 Like, you know, we're talking about common 19 core. 20 What do you think that time line should be? 21 MARIE NEIRA: Right now, we are going to have 22 an assessment on common cores starting next year. 23 We have not rolled out even the exemplary curriculum 24 that would could support it. 25 I would say, first, you have to have the 1 curriculum. You need to put the cart first, before 2 you put the horse. And, right now, the time is not 3 aligned. 4 I would say we need, first, time to practice 5 the core standards, to practice a curriculum that 6 supports it, before it can be tested. And that 7 2014-2015 is not real, when you go to classrooms, 8 especially the first classrooms that we have in 9 New York State. 10 I believe that we need two to three years of 11 practice, with the curriculum, with the standards, 12 before students are held accountable, because this 13 is high-stakes testing. 14 SENATOR FLANAGAN: Thank you very much. 15 ANDREW PALOTTA: Thank you. 16 SENATOR FLANAGAN: Next is, the New York 17 State School Boards. 18 TIMOTHY KRAMER: Good afternoon, 19 Mr. Chairman, members of the Committee -- member 20 of the Committee. 21 I'm not David Little. 22 David, unfortunately, got called away. His 23 father is ill in Maine, and I'm filling in. 24 I'm Tim Kremer. I'm the executive director 25 of the New York State School Boards Association. 1 SENATOR FLANAGAN: Pull the mic in. Pull the 2 mic closer. 3 TIMOTHY KREMER: I'm Tim Kremer, the 4 executive director of the New York State School 5 Boards Association, and filling in for Dave. 6 We hope that his father is doing all well -- 7 alright. 8 I represent about 650 boards of education 9 throughout New York. 10 These are people who are representative of 11 millions of New Yorkers, who believe in public 12 education, and believe in their communities, and 13 want their children to succeed. 14 We do appreciate this opportunity to testify, 15 and we have taken this opportunity very seriously. 16 I'm not a professional educator, although I 17 have worked for State School Board Association for 18 33 years, so I -- I've hung around a lot of 19 professional educators for a long time. 20 And, in so doing, because of this 21 opportunity, and because I don't have this 22 professional education background, I did want to 23 make sure that we were gleaning from those who could 24 help us, and help you, in providing you testimony 25 from the field, if you will. 1 So, we presented with you -- to you a packet, 2 and I'm hopeful that you have that packet. 3 And, it contains testimony, you must think of 4 it this way, from virtually hundreds of people who 5 are out there: school board members, administrators, 6 many school board members, who are themselves 7 professional educators. 8 So, I try to bring that to you as 9 representative. I'm the communicator representing 10 them. 11 If you look through that packet, you'll see, 12 in Tab 1, there is a letter there from me, where we 13 try to summarize our positions, and where we are, as 14 far as this issue, and the controversy that 15 surrounds testing, which is happening in school 16 districts everywhere every day. 17 Behind Tab 2, you will find our official 18 positions, our board -- excuse me -- the delegates 19 to our annual business meeting, vote on resolutions 20 that are submitted by member boards, and going back 21 all the way to 2007 -- because once they're 22 five years old, they come off the books -- but, 23 going back to 2007, we picked up those resolutions 24 that are germane to this issue of testing. 25 And you will see a variety of things in 1 there. 2 So, this has been a debate among school board 3 members going on for a long time: 4 The issues that the teachers were talking 5 about regarding flexibility are a common theme 6 throughout all of these resolutions, that are the 7 official positions of the New York State School 8 Board Association; 9 Things that have to do with cancellation of 10 Regents exams due to bad weather, what happens; 11 Advanced notice of test results, getting them 12 in a timely facility; 13 Component retesting; 14 Testing of students who are English-language 15 learners; 16 Modified testing for students who have 17 disabilities; 18 When those exam results are made available, 19 and how they're made available; 20 The frequency and scheduling of standardized 21 assessments. 22 Those have been issues that have been debated 23 by school board members for years, and continue to 24 be. 25 So, we're very much engaged in this sort of 1 issue. 2 Behind Tab 3 is what the real essence is of 3 what I bring to you today. 4 We assembled 42 people as a focus group. 5 They were school board members, many of whom 6 were selected because they are professional 7 educators. 8 They are either teachers, administrators, or 9 school psychologists, and we had some school 10 administrators, district administrators, as well. 11 The first half of what's behind Tab Number 3 12 is an 11-page summary that summarizes the rest of 13 the document. 14 It -- what we tried to do is, is pick out the 15 things we thought were the most salient comments, 16 the things that were unique, so that if there were 17 repetitive comments, we weren't going to have you 18 read all of the repetitive stuff. 19 So, the first 11 pages are things -- across 20 8 questions, are things that we think are excellent 21 feedback to a group like yours, a Committee like 22 yours, when you're trying to some decisions about: 23 Where do we go from here? 24 The first question, for example, that we 25 asked was: Please describe how testing has been 1 either beneficial or detrimental to improving 2 student achievement. 3 And you'll see through their comments, most 4 of the -- frankly, most of the remarks we got would 5 suggest detrimental. Although, there were some, I 6 thought very thoughtful things about beneficial 7 aspects of student testing as well. 8 The second question we asked was: Is testing 9 information relevant and available soon enough to 10 inform instruction? 11 And we got some very good feedback on there. 12 I'm not going to read all of this to you. 13 I want you to know that, this first 11 pages 14 covers 8 questions. 15 And you'll find, if you continue on, a 16 38-page document, which is the full transcript of 17 the feedback we got from this focus group, including 18 the questions. 19 The 11 pages is summarized, for your benefit. 20 Tab 4, is additional information. 21 We did, what I call a "pulse poll." And we 22 had 490 school board members respond to this. 23 Now, this is not a scientific sampling. 24 These are self-selected people. 25 But, we asked them three very quick 1 questions: 2 "In general, does student testing enhance 3 instruction?" 4 56 percent of them said no. 5 We asked them a second question. 6 "Is the cost of and/or administration of 7 State assessments a burden in your district?" 8 90 percent of them said yes. 9 Now, "burden," you know, a relative term. 10 Number three: Does the current level of 11 State assessment infringe on instructional time in 12 your district? 13 93 percent said yes. 14 The sense we got from this, was certainly 15 that this is not what we would be doing if we were 16 not forced to do it. 17 The last tab there, Tab Number 5, is another 18 pulse poll that we did, actually, at the request of 19 the State Education Department, the Commissioner 20 specifically, where they have put forward this idea 21 of separate pathways: one for STEM (science, 22 technology, engineering, and math), and a second for 23 CTE. 24 And, we asked questions: 25 To what extent do you think there should be a 1 separate pathway for STEM, a separate pathway for 2 CTE? 3 Should there be a separate assessment for 4 those kids who had signed up for the STEM 5 curriculum, for those kids who had signed up for the 6 CTE curriculum? 7 And the answers to all of those were, 8 generally, yes. We think that that's a good idea to 9 have a separate pathway. There should be a way to 10 assess them differently than you would others. 11 But here's one thing interesting. 12 The last two questions said: Should those -- 13 that STEM assessment or that CTE assessment replace 14 global history, that fifth, and sometimes 15 questionable, Regents exam? 16 And the answer, generally, was more 17 equivocal: Nah, maybe not. 18 So, they're not saying that the testing is 19 bad, that the global-history test is necessarily 20 bad. 21 They would say: Probably, if you're going to 22 put a kid into a CTE program or a STEM program, they 23 might be assessed separately, but they should also 24 be accountable for their Regents exam as we know 25 them today. 1 So, those are -- that's information I wanted 2 to share with you. It's kind of virtual testimony, 3 if you will, to let you know that the -- what people 4 out in the field, that I represent, are saying. 5 For school board members, really, our job 6 boils down to, kind of, two major questions: 7 What is it that students need to know today, 8 that's going to prepare them for what they're going 9 to have to do after school, when they graduate from 10 here, when they leave here? 11 What kind of information are they going to 12 need that's going to be useful, essential, in fact, 13 for them to go forward? 14 And then, specific to your charge here today: 15 Is testing helping students learn? 16 It's a very costly proposition, as you've 17 heard, and you've seen the data. 18 It has enormous implications today on 19 people's lives. Students, staff, communities; 20 everybody is really focusing in on this testing. 21 It has huge implications for the school 22 boards having to make decisions about curriculum, 23 about teacher qualifications, about resource -- 24 scarce resource allocation. 25 So, we are really paying much more attention 1 to test results. And I think the people whom we 2 represent are as well, much more so than ever in the 3 past. 4 For that reason, the data that we get from 5 these tests has to be accurate. It has to be 6 relevant, instructive, informative, helping us make 7 smart decisions in a timely fashion. 8 If you read through this packet, I think 9 you're going to conclude that most of the people we 10 reached out to believed that the current system is 11 detrimental to student achievement. 12 You will see some balance in here. But if I 13 had to, you know, to answer your question, if I was 14 to answer it, I might come in higher. 15 But if I answered on behalf of the people who 16 filled this, this is probably a "4," or something to 17 that effect. 18 Here's some of the comments that -- 19 SENATOR MARCELLINO: Why -- why is it 20 detrimental? 21 TIMOTHY KREMER: Here's some of the comments 22 that people told me when I asked them about: Why is 23 it detrimental? 24 Testing does more harm than good; 25 It's too disruptive and too expensive; 1 It causes too much stress; 2 It narrows the curriculum; 3 And, the bureaucracy that the State has put 4 forward, regarding test administration, is too 5 rigid; 6 Takes up too much instructional time; 7 The questions that are on these tests 8 sometimes lack validity, and the data that comes 9 from the results of this test, lack validity; 10 And, the results are not available in a 11 timely fashion for us to use them on the students 12 who took this test. 13 So that's what I think people would tell you, 14 if asked the question: Why is this detrimental? 15 I once talked with a guy, who you may have 16 heard of. He's a pretty harsh critic of public 17 education. His name is Mark Tucker, and he's out of 18 Rochester -- or, he was out of Rochester. 19 He once told me something that I thought was 20 very interesting. 21 He -- we got to talking about testing, and 22 teaching to the test. A big complaint that a lot of 23 people have. 24 He suggested to me, that the United States is 25 the only country that complains about teaching to 1 the test, which I was surprised to learn. 2 And he said the reason for that is because, 3 in other countries, they invest significant amounts 4 of resources into research and development of tests, 5 to the point where these tests are viewed, and 6 perhaps as a cultural thing, but they're viewed as 7 unassailable: This is indeed what we want our kids 8 to know and be able to learn. These tests are 9 widely respected as being representative of that. 10 And, people seem to admire the fact that these tests 11 are here, and they respect the fact that these 12 measures are accurate. 13 We don't want to be like Finland and 14 Singapore, maybe not even Canada, all of which are, 15 allegedly, achieving at higher rates of student 16 achievement than the United States is, in general. 17 However, we do need to get this testing 18 question right. 19 The school boards that I represent, the 20 communities that those school boards represent, they 21 want us to have in place a system of testing that is 22 widely respected. One that is viewed as being, not 23 just beneficial -- not just deficient -- beneficial, 24 but essential part of the education program. 25 And right now, I think people look it as an 1 add-on, a burden, perhaps detrimental. 2 And we'd like it to be embedded as one where 3 people admire the fact that we have a great testing 4 program. 5 So that's what we hope that you will be able 6 to develop, in cooperation with the community 7 throughout New York, as a result of these hearings 8 here. 9 I'd be happy to answer any questions, sir. 10 SENATOR FLANAGAN: I do have a couple of 11 questions. 12 Tim, I have to really start off: Got this 13 Friday, and very much appreciate it. I just 14 finished reading it about six minutes ago. 15 TIMOTHY KREMER: Thank you. 16 SENATOR FLANAGAN: And all kidding aside, 17 there is an exhaustive amount of information in here 18 from -- 19 [Laughter.] 20 SENATOR FLANAGAN: -- no, from the people in 21 the field. And the -- it's very, very helpful. 22 TIMOTHY KREMER: Thank you. 23 SENATOR FLANAGAN: I'm looking at -- I'm not 24 sure of the page number, but, I wanted to just ask 25 you a couple of very quick, specific things. 1 TIMOTHY KREMER: Okay. 2 SENATOR FLANAGAN: And I don't know if these 3 are, paraphrasing, direct comments, but, on the 4 page, it says: Testing's Effect on Instruction. 5 TIMOTHY KRAMER: Is this in the, one of 6 38 pages, or one of 11 pages? 7 SENATOR FLANAGAN: I think it's one of the 8 eleven. 9 TIMOTHY KREMER: Okay. 10 SENATOR FLANAGAN: But, nonetheless, the 11 point remains the same. 12 TIMOTHY KREMER: Yeah. 13 SENATOR FLANAGAN: It says: "For example, 14 administrator has said that teachers become too 15 focused on preparing for tests rather than teaching 16 the curriculum. 17 "Though the district has work at teaching" -- 18 "worked at teaching teachers, that if you teach the 19 curriculum, you are teaching for the test, they 20 really don't believe it." 21 TIMOTHY KRAMER: Yep. 22 This was a sentiment that came out, that said 23 that this -- the people -- that the teachers do not 24 have faith that these tests are valid measures of 25 the curriculum. And that they, maybe they feel, 1 ill-prepared to administer these tests because, 2 they're not as familiar with the curriculum, and 3 they're getting these tests for the first -- they're 4 seeing these tests for the first time themselves. 5 So, that's what I think was coming through 6 there. 7 SENATOR FLANAGAN: Okay. 8 Then I'm looking at another one that speaks 9 to the detrimental effects? 10 TIMOTHY KREMER: Uh-huh. 11 SENATOR FLANAGAN: "The school literally 12 shuts down during the test administration. No 13 teaching occurs when students are testing. After 14 taking the test, the children are mentally and 15 emotionally drained. So, even though they are 16 actually in school, they have absolutely no desire 17 to do anything." 18 TIMOTHY KRAMER: Right. 19 Well, of course, these are anecdotal. I 20 can't say that that is something that is generally 21 true everywhere you would go. 22 But, I heard from these teachers up here just 23 a few minutes ago, about the 90-minute blocks. 24 And, some kids might be done in 17 minutes, 25 now they have to sit for the rest of the time. 1 Or, there's other kids who need 90 minutes 2 just to get settled down. 3 It's a very difficult time to do these tests. 4 Now, we have to do them at some point in 5 time. 6 I'm not a test expert. I'm not even a 7 school-administrator expert. 8 I think you'll hear from some of those 9 people, as to how to administer these test blocks. 10 But, I would tell you that it's a very 11 frustrating period of time, that we hear from school 12 board members and administrators regularly. 13 I think a big part of it is indeed that: We 14 shut down the school. Everyone's getting tested at 15 the same time in grades 3 through 8. 16 And, when you asked the one question, Well 17 couldn't somebody, when they're done, go somewhere 18 else? -- I think it was Senator Oppenheimer who 19 asked the question -- the answer is, there's nowhere 20 else to go. 21 So I do think that it almost feels like a 22 lockdown. 23 SENATOR FLANAGAN: Okay. 24 And, then, one last thing: The -- there's 25 reference here to the Park tests? 1 TIMOTHY KREMER: Yes. 2 SENATOR FLANAGAN: And there seem to be 3 comments about the using the Smarter Balanced 4 assessments as opposed to Park? 5 TIMOTHY KRAMER: News to me. I don't know 6 what that is. 7 I'm hoping somebody here might be able to 8 add -- that appears to be some sort of a -- it 9 almost sounds like it is a proprietary system, that 10 is in cooperation -- or, excuse me -- is an option 11 to the Park partnership that has been developed. 12 It is not something that I had ever heard of, 13 and it is contained here. 14 I will try to find out more about it. And if 15 I do, I will send that information on to you. 16 SENATOR FLANAGAN: Good. 17 And, again, I appreciate the depth of the 18 information. 19 I realize this is a very labor-intensive 20 endeavor, so, thank you. 21 SENATOR MARCELLINO: Well, as a former -- 22 well, you're never a former teacher. You're always 23 a teacher. Like being a marine, you're never out. 24 It bothers me that it says: Does the testing 25 enhance instruction? -- and the term, the 1 overwhelming response was, no. 2 Which tells me that testing isn't being used 3 appropriately. 4 What it does tell you? 5 TIMOTHY KREMER: Well, I don't know if I'd 6 come to that same conclusion. 7 I could see where some people are not -- or, 8 feel as if it's not informing instruction. 9 I think what people are saying is: That we 10 don't see the connection between the testing that's 11 taking place, and the results that we would hope to 12 achieve with our students. We don't think it's 13 going to be -- and maybe I'm answering your question 14 just as you would -- but, we don't think it's 15 being -- it's supplementing their educational 16 experience. 17 SENATOR MARCELLINO: Right. The young lady 18 who was here before, who said: They never see the 19 results. They're not allowed to discuss the 20 results. They're not allowed to talk to the kids 21 about the results, or even handle the results. -- 22 that bothers me. 23 TIMOTHY KREMER: Right. 24 SENATOR MARCELLINO: If you're going test to 25 find out where kids are, and make it a useful tool, 1 then the person involving the teaching has to get 2 the test, and get an analysis of the test, so that 3 that person doing the teaching knows what they did 4 or did not do, what the kids did or did not learn, 5 and why. Come to some conclusions from it. 6 That, I think goes along to the fact, whether 7 there's a disconnect between staff -- teaching staff 8 and testing. They don't see it worth anything 9 because, they never get the results, and they never 10 get to use the results, to improve their skills or 11 to improve their performance. 12 That's, to me, a knock on the whole system. 13 I asked the Governor -- or, the Commissioner 14 of Education, I asked the NYSUT people before, the 15 same question, and maybe you heard it if you were 16 sitting here: The Governor says we spend the most 17 money as a state, yet, we are 37th in performance. 18 How do you assess the fact that we are 19 37th in performance? 20 TIMOTHY KREMER: You know, I was -- have 21 questioned, several times, where that number came 22 from. 23 And what I've been told that number is, is 24 the percentage of -- or, how we rank, throughout the 25 country, for the percentage of high school graduates 1 who live in New York, who are over 25 years old. 2 Now, that includes a lot of people who came 3 to this country, who were never in our schools, who 4 live here now. 5 I don't know if that's an accurate -- if I'm 6 describing what he is describing accurately, but 7 that's what I've been told, is, that figure is the 8 percentage of high school graduates, 25 years or 9 older, living in New York, and how we compare to 10 other states, is we're 38th. 11 But, here is the interesting part: I don't 12 remember what the exact percentage is, but the 13 differences between 38th and 37th, 36th and 35th, 14 are, like, tenths of a percent. 15 So, it's not that significant of a number, 16 and it's -- in my mind, it's been taken out of 17 context. 18 SENATOR MARCELLINO: I agree with you. And I 19 agree your assessment on the population. 20 The question is: Who are you testing? 21 And who is being tested? 22 And who are the participants in the tests? 23 So if the -- you have a person who's just 24 moved into the country, may not be totally English 25 speaking, or up to the cognizance of a lifelong 1 resident, then you'll have different results and 2 different standards. 3 And that's the -- in my mind, that becomes a 4 reason to get different results, and perhaps a 5 variance in the results, that comes across. 6 The common core, I hear it from school board 7 members, and I hear it from teachers as well, it's 8 "one size fits all." 9 What are your members thinking about, as far 10 as imposing a "one size fits all" on a district, 11 whether the district is performing or not? 12 I represent many districts, as do many of us, 13 represent many districts that are high-performing 14 districts, graduating a high percentage of kids, 15 going to college, moving on high scores in Regents 16 exams, all right, all the test scores. 17 They're doing very well; yet, they're going 18 have to change their techniques, their skills, their 19 curriculum, their text books -- the whole nine 20 yards -- to fit this common core. 21 Why? 22 TIMOTHY KREMER: I am not sure that the 23 people I represent are -- I think the jury is still 24 out with a lot of them. 25 They have not yet assessed how they feel 1 about the common core, because they don't really 2 know exactly what the implications are. 3 I do believe that there are many districts 4 out there that said: We're doing great, as is. Why 5 do we have to change? 6 But, those who are proponents of the common 7 core have suggested to us, that it will lead to a 8 place where kids are better prepared for college and 9 career. That they will be more proficient upon 10 graduation. 11 And, one can't deny, that throughout this 12 state, there are school districts where, the 13 graduation rate, and if you go and measure the 14 proficiency rate, it's inadequate. 15 And there are school districts in this state 16 that have inadequate educational programs. 17 Those people, those school districts, need to 18 change. Something has to happen there. 19 The people who I represent have not been very 20 vocal in opposition to the common core. They may 21 not know all the implications. I think the jury is 22 still out. 23 As time goes on, they may have a more 24 reasoned assessment about that. 25 SENATOR MARCELLINO: I think your school 1 board members better get proficient in what the 2 common core means, because their districts are going 3 to be evaluated -- 4 TIMOTHY KREMER: Right. 5 SENATOR MARCELLINO: -- in a very short 6 period of time. 7 The lady from NYSUT, Maria, made a very good 8 point -- 9 TIMOTHY KREMER: Right. 10 SENATOR MARCELLINO: -- there's no chance to 11 even practice the curriculum that's going to be 12 imposed, and tested, and then the districts are 13 going to be evaluated by 2014. 14 That's a couple of years from now. 15 TIMOTHY KREMER: I can tell you that, we have 16 a very healthy dose of skepticism when it comes to 17 all of the top-down reforms that have come out, 18 mostly from Washington. 19 Race to the Top -- you're gonna to hear more 20 about that, I think, later on -- that the costs 21 associated with that, that are not being funded by 22 any federal money, are significant. 23 And this idea of Race to the Top, probably 24 common core, certainly APPR, all of these top-down 25 reforms -- 1 SENATOR MARCELLINO: Response to 2 intervention. 3 TIMOTHY KREMER: -- response to intervention; 4 these the top-down reforms, where somebody, 5 somewhere else, has decided what's good for our 6 community, is something that has caused a lot of 7 skepticism among my members. 8 And common core may fall into that at some 9 point in time. I just haven't heard that voiced in 10 any specific way yet. 11 We are spending a lot of time of putting 12 together workshops and seminars, and participating 13 in a lot of the network training work with the 14 State Education Department, so that we're up to 15 speed on common core, and we can advise our members 16 properly. 17 SENATOR MARCELLINO: Thank you. Appreciate 18 your time. 19 SENATOR FLANAGAN: Senator Robach. 20 SENATOR ROBACH: I would just -- I have no 21 questions. 22 I just want to say thank you. 23 There is a tremendous amount of information. 24 And, I especially appreciate the part on the 25 STEM and the CTE, because I think you're going to 1 be -- if we're going to do this right, it really has 2 to be integrated, and all encompassing, given, 3 everybody, no matter what their position is, keeps 4 talking about lead-in times. 5 So, I appreciate that. 6 And I'd say, maybe on an equal field note, if 7 you can build consensus amongst school board 8 members, that's a feat in itself. 9 [Laughter.] 10 SENATOR ROBACH: I know, just in the groups 11 that I represent, they rarely agree on everything. 12 So, thank you. 13 TIMOTHY KREMER: Variety is the spice of 14 life. 15 SENATOR MARCELLINO: Exactly. 16 TIMOTHY KREMER: Thank you very much. 17 SENATOR FLANAGAN: Thank you, Tim. 18 SENATOR OPPENHEIMER: And I want to thank 19 you -- 20 SENATOR FLANAGAN: Oh, I'm sorry. 21 TIMOTHY KREMER: Thank you, Senator. 22 SENATOR OPPENHEIMER: -- for all that you 23 have done over the years. 24 TIMOTHY KREMER: Thank you. Appreciate it. 25 SENATOR OPPENHEIMER: For me, and for 1 everyone. 2 And I -- I have just one question -- no, I 3 guess it's two. 4 The evaluation of people -- of teachers who 5 are in specialties, what do you foresee for that? 6 I have a daughter who's a reading specialist. 7 And, for the most part -- well, it's two parts to 8 the same question -- for the most part, she deals 9 with children who are rather lagging in performance, 10 to -- that's being kind to them. 11 It's impossible. How are they going to 12 possibly evaluate these children? 13 She's trying to keep them out of special ed. 14 That is her purpose. 15 TIMOTHY KREMER: Well, there are -- I don't 16 know if these -- I don't know if the children that 17 your daughter has in her classroom are subject to 18 standardized tests. 19 If they're not -- 20 SENATOR OPPENHEIMER: They are. 21 TIMOTHY KREMER: -- then they -- 22 Okay, well, then, they will participate in 23 the testing system, and will be judged accordingly. 24 And you'll find in here, positions that our 25 organization has had for a long time, that suggests 1 that children who have special needs should be 2 looked at differently than "one size fits all." 3 There is also this system of student-learning 4 outcomes (SLOs) that are being developed. And 5 that has caused a lot of interest. And, you know, 6 we asked for flexibility, but this is almost beyond 7 the pale perhaps, because every teacher is going to 8 be asked to come up with some system, whereby, 9 they're going to evaluate students who are not 10 tested by some standardized measure. And then have 11 that SLO approved by somebody else. 12 And that's going to be, I think, a very 13 complicated system of approval -- development and 14 approval process. 15 But that's the kind of thing that will come 16 into play for students, perhaps, who are not -- that 17 are in your daughter's classroom, or, people who she 18 might eventually see. 19 SENATOR OPPENHEIMER: Thank you. 20 TIMOTHY KREMER: And congratulations to you 21 as well. 22 Thank you. 23 SENATOR OPPENHEIMER: Thank you, Tim. 24 SENATOR FLANAGAN: Next is, the New York 25 State School Superintendents. 1 Good afternoon. 2 ROBERT LOWRY: Good afternoon. 3 Senator Flanagan, and other Senators, thank 4 you for having us, for conducting this hearing, and 5 inviting our testimony. 6 I'm Robert Lowry, the deputy director of the 7 State Council of Schools of Superintendents. 8 And with me is Dr. Lorna Lewis, the 9 superintendent of the East Williston School District 10 in Nassau County. She's a member of our executive 11 committee, and the co-chair of our curriculum and 12 instruction committee. 13 I'll say just a few words to lead off. 14 Lorna certainly knows a lot more about 15 testing and what actually is going on in schools 16 today, than I do. 17 But, it's possible to imagine a much better 18 future for testing; how it's conducted, and the 19 value that it provides. 20 And some of is it related to things we've 21 talked about this morning: The common core, and, 22 turn to computerized testing. 23 The common core holds the promise of 24 economies of scale, because it is being used across 25 the country. Hopefully, we'll be able to get better 1 state tests, better vendor tests, like the 2 TerraNovas, and, better instructional materials, 3 textbooks and instructional technology, than we've 4 had in the past. 5 And computerized testing also holds the 6 promise of providing teachers and schools and 7 parents, with better information, more sensitive 8 information, on a more timely basis. 9 But, how we get from here, where we are 10 today, and there, is something that's very much in 11 doubt. And the route we've been traveling has 12 certainly been filled with bumps. Some of them 13 you've heard about already; the concerns about 14 charging ahead with changing the tests to reflect 15 the common core before schools have received 16 curricula or sample tests, and so forth, to gear up 17 for that. 18 Also, you know, some of the problems we have 19 today with tests are because the -- all 3-through-8 20 tests were design for a relatively narrow purpose: 21 to try and sort kids at distinctive points. You 22 know, proficient, not proficient; mastery, not 23 mastery. 24 They're less valuable for making distinctions 25 across the whole range of performances, but, now, 1 with incorporating growth measures into teacher and 2 principal evaluation, we need tests to be able to 3 make those kinds of distinctions. 4 And so, yet, we're moving ahead with using 5 the tests in that fashion. 6 So, I think, you know, we can envision a 7 better future. 8 We support, we recognize, that the need, the 9 importance, of having standardized measures of 10 student performance. 11 And Lorna will share some thoughts on where 12 we are today, and where we need to go. 13 DR. LORNA LEWIS: Thank you. 14 And thank you for the opportunity to address 15 you. 16 As I begin, I always begin with the thought 17 of our students that are served by what we are 18 doing. 19 And, so, to answer that question, let's look 20 back at what we -- where we were. 21 I think your three questions were right on 22 point. 23 Where were we? 24 As we began this assessments back in 1998, I 25 was in Three Village at the time. And when that was 1 being unveiled, we were replacing some rather 2 low-bar assessments. Those were called the 3 "PEP tests." 4 So, kids -- they were feel-good tests. 5 Everybody did well, and, we celebrated, and we loved 6 the idea that all our schools were doing well. But, 7 really, it didn't really separate out high 8 performance or challenge. It wasn't a challenging 9 assessment. 10 So when we had the standards -- the content 11 standards introduced, we were introduced to the 12 fourth- and eighth-grade assessments. And that was 13 a -- we felt that that challenged our students. And 14 those teachers who were in fourth and eighth were 15 very challenged. 16 And when those results came out, we started a 17 new day in our area, and it was high stakes for us. 18 But, really, the other grade levels were not 19 as attentive as they could be. 20 So when the 3-through-8 assessments came out, 21 then more people stepped up to the plate, and I 22 think more challenge was there for all of our 23 students. 24 But, the important thing was, also, what we 25 had our teachers engaged in when we had those 1 assessments, because we had a tremendous amount of 2 staff development that was associated with it. 3 And, actually, the scoring of the assessment 4 was, in and of itself, a tremendous opportunity for 5 staff development for our teachers. 6 We had the results back, we had the actual 7 student performance back, so we could actually look 8 at those assessments and gain a great deal of 9 knowledge about where the gaps in performance were, 10 what the -- where the challenge levels were. 11 And, so, we gain -- the actual task of doing 12 the assessment was, in and of itself, its own 13 curriculum. 14 We usually talk about the taught test -- 15 taught, tested, and written curriculum. So, the 16 test, in and of itself, became another version of 17 the curriculum. 18 We learned so much from it. 19 So comes the 2011 assessments, and we heard 20 such things as: No vested interests. Teachers 21 could not have a vested interest in the assessments. 22 And, the security measures that had to be in place 23 so that teachers could not see what their children 24 had done. 25 Now, just imagine a surgeon going in and 1 doing surgery, and not being able to examine the 2 patient afterwards. 3 I think that that's what the era that we're 4 in. 5 So, we have this assessment. And what has 6 been driving all of our assessment procedures now, 7 is the notion of having to have accountability for 8 the teachers. 9 So that's, rather than a student-focused 10 assessment, we are now into an era where having a 11 score for the teacher is much more important than 12 actual finding out how kids are performing. And, 13 more important, learning from that performance so 14 that we can then adjust and help our students to do 15 better. 16 So that's an issue of testing. 17 While we're not saying that we do not want 18 testing, what we're saying, is that the actual 19 format that we're engaged in is not a healthy 20 format, in the sense of wanting to have our teachers 21 grow from the assessment, and have our students 22 benefit from the assessments. 23 So when we get those results back -- now, 24 this year, our students took the exam in April -- 25 early April. We will not -- we have not seen any 1 results, and we're not expecting any results back 2 until September. 3 So, any child who was in that teacher's 4 class, certainly, is not going to benefit because 5 they've not seen any -- any of their work. 6 And, so, that's fairly major piece. 7 The other issue is that, as I -- in fact, I 8 hope that you have a copy of the assessments 9 K through 12. That's just one example of a 10 district. 11 And my colleague can -- who will follow me, 12 will have a much more detailed spreadsheet on cost 13 analysis for other districts. 14 But, I wanted to focus on my small neck of 15 the wood, as a representative. 16 I have a small school district, about 17 1,800 students, and my data is very similar. You 18 could scale it up or scale it down to the various 19 districts. 20 But, K through 12, and it's not just this 21 year, because we're already in 2012-13, next year 22 every single grade level and every single teacher is 23 going to have to have an assessment that is a 24 benchmark assessment in the fall and a benchmark 25 assessment in the end. 1 So, a kindergarten teacher has to have at 2 least two assessments in the fall, math and English 3 language arts, and the same thing in the spring. 4 But what's even more important now, just 5 think -- I want you to think back: A kindergarten 6 teacher needs to know as much about their child's 7 reading ability -- Where are they coming in? What 8 is the reading level? How are they doing in the 9 fall? -- so that they can then monitor instruction. 10 What reading groups are they going to belong to? 11 What kind of materials will I use to help that 12 child? 13 With the new rules about vested interests, 14 that kindergarten teacher is no longer giving that 15 assessment. 16 So, typically, in kindergarten, you would do 17 a reading level, or those kinds of things. 18 So, in addition to the assessments that we 19 will now have to do for the student-learning 20 objectives, we still have to do those other 21 important tests, which we feel informs instruction 22 far more than some of the imposed SLO testing that 23 we will have to do. 24 In addition, we will have the State 25 assessment. We will also have -- we have to do a 1 local assessment in all the other grade levels. 2 So, for example, in my district, we have 3 adopted the NWA, which is -- which comes at a cost, 4 $25 per student. 5 So, whether you choose the Pearson 6 assessments, which are $35 per student, or you could 7 choose -- I mean, there is variability. 8 Which, in and of itself, by the way, when you 9 have that much variability, you're, really, how are 10 you comparing districts to -- one district to the 11 other? 12 Some districts will choose a low-bar 13 assessment, some will choose a high-bar assessment. 14 So, that is also going to be a part of the 15 testing regime that we'll have for next year, at a 16 very, very high cost. 17 So in my district, just to implement the 18 required assessments for next year, the scoring of 19 the assessment, every child who gets scored, it's 20 $12.85 per test. 21 So, we cannot score our tests in-house 22 because of the vested interests. Those tests are 23 going out, $12.85 per test. 24 So, you can scale it out. 25 So, the cost is one thing that is prohibitive 1 for many of us in an era when we have a 2 percent 2 tax cap that we're trying to honor. 3 That is huge. 4 Let's talk about the actual time of the test. 5 We had third-grade students sitting for 6 90 minutes. 7 And I think you've heard many of the other 8 folks who have gone before speak about the 9 inappropriateness of the time of the tests. 10 And, whereas the Commissioner might say, 11 well, the test was really geared to 45 minutes, and 12 75, you know, you could do it, I mean, yes, there 13 were many students that were finished before the 14 90 minutes. 15 But, structurally, when you have kids in a 16 classroom, you cannot take the papers of some 17 students, while other students may choose to have 18 more time. 19 If the State says, "There's 90 minutes for 20 the test," that's what we're going to have. 21 Then the other students who are students with 22 disabilities, they -- who may have double time, they 23 get 180 minutes. By the end of the day, they were 24 totally wiped out. 25 Now, I heard you speak about your daughter 1 who's a reading specialist. 2 Every single adult in a building that is -- 3 for example, my middle school is 5 through 7. Every 4 single adult in that building was being used to 5 deliver testing accommodations. 6 So, there is no other place to send a child 7 because you're using every single adult to do time, 8 location, all of those assessments. 9 At the end of the day, when a child has taken 10 180 minutes of testing, there is no other learning 11 that is going on. 12 And, so those tests were built longer, 13 thicker, because they needed to embed the field 14 tests. 15 I heard the Commissioner speak about that. 16 Well, only a few weeks later, we got a slew 17 of field tests that came. Again, using our time. 18 And, really, since April, we have been 19 engaged in testing. So, there's a tremendous amount 20 of time. 21 Now, I happen to know that there are some 22 districts that were hit harder than others. 23 So, for example, when I spoke to Brentwood 24 and to CI and some of the districts of high SDS 25 population, Hicksville, they -- because they needed 1 to have those populations in the field tests, they 2 had more -- they had a disproportionate number of 3 field tests, as I collected the data. 4 Now, when we ask kids -- it's always good to 5 ask kids what they think about the tests. 6 So, in Hicksville, one young man came to his 7 superintendent, and said: They gave us the test 8 right after vacation. I was home for two weeks. 9 Nobody speaks English in my house. So, if they had 10 given me the test before, just after I had had the 11 preparation and intense instruction, I might have 12 done better. 13 So even the timing of the tests, when you ask 14 about giving you a scale of 1 to 10, those are all 15 the things that become frustration on our part, 16 because of the timing of the test. 17 You ask about -- we pleaded -- in fact, the 18 superintendents met with the State Ed and pleaded 19 with them not to have concurrent testing. 20 First, because all of our adults needed to be 21 engaged in giving modifications. 22 When you have every single test being given 23 at the same time, all of your resources are used at 24 the same time. 25 There is -- you know, if they had been 1 staggered -- so, you have a third-grade test on one 2 day, fourth-grade test on another -- so that's a 3 tremendous siphoning of resources. 4 And, so, when the Park testing comes on 5 board, hopefully, we hope that somewhere in that new 6 testing regime is some kind of adaptive testing, or, 7 some way that all grade levels are not required to 8 take that test at the same time, because, frankly, 9 you cannot test all of Brentwood at the same time. 10 And, you know, in my district, we have 11 1,800 kids. Just in terms of the capacity of 12 computers and bandwidth and resources. And, 13 frankly, what a waste of resources. 14 Why would you want to have that many 15 computers available, only because you want to test? 16 So, you really have to rethink what is 17 driving the train. 18 Is it the students, and the outcome for the 19 students, that is driving the train, or is it that 20 we need to test? 21 You know, we often compare ourselves to 22 Finland and Denmark, and all of these 23 high-performing countries. But the truth is, when 24 you say to Finland that you test every year, and you 25 test twice a year, and, all of the batteries that 1 are coming, they look at us, and they say: Why 2 would you do that? Is that just -- that's just 3 insanity that you test that much. 4 My favorite author Doug Reeves, a renowned 5 educator, always says, "You don't pull up the 6 radishes to find out if they're growing." 7 Let's have some benchmarks that indicate what 8 it is that we want children to know and be able to 9 do. 10 We already have those benchmarks. There are 11 wonderful assessments. There are NWA that we use 12 for 3 through 8. 13 But, most important, let's forget about the 14 commercial problem -- the commercial assessments, 15 there is NAEP, which everyone likes to compare us 16 to. 17 Well, forget about comparing us. Give us 18 NAEP. Bring it on. 19 Let the -- that's a great test. It is a 20 global assessment. It is an international 21 benchmark. 22 Why aren't we using the benchmark? 23 Why are we creating an assessment so that we 24 can then compare ourselves to that assessment? 25 We have AP and IV, internationally known, 1 internationally accepted. 2 Why aren't we setting some parameters, that 3 says -- and we also know, by the way, that exposure 4 to study at the college level is a great indicator 5 of whether or not a student is college- and 6 career-ready. 7 Let's not create another assessment. Let's 8 not create another measure. We have the measures. 9 Hold us accountable for performance on those 10 measures. 11 So, come up with a battery of assessments, of 12 the -- I'm sorry -- a metric that will use 13 already-proven assessments, such as "News Week" 14 does. That includes, for example: Graduation 15 rates, percent distinction on your Regents exams, 16 the AP and IB percentage of students taking IB, 17 percentage of students who are AP scholars. 18 One of things I have in my district is -- 19 that's my focus. My focus is on percentage of 20 students who are advanced Regents diplomas, and 21 percentage of students who are AP scholars. 22 If I set that as my benchmark, and I build 23 downward, I know I'm going to get it. 24 I have 150 students graduating this year. I 25 have 120 AP scholars. 1 When I first got there, there were 50. 2 But, you set that as a benchmark, and that's 3 what you move towards; so, the percentage of 4 advanced Regents diplomas. 5 We don't have to create another assessment. 6 That's -- that's the point: If you want 7 college- and career-ready, we know what college- and 8 career-ready is. 9 Those -- 10 SENATOR FLANAGAN: Can I -- I have a couple 11 of questions for you. 12 And before I do that, I wanted to thank 13 Senator LaValle and Senator Ranzenhofer for joining 14 us. 15 On the NAEP, in your opinion, can you use the 16 NAEP as a valid assessment with the adoption of the 17 common core? 18 DR. LORNA LEWIS: I believe so. 19 I do. 20 I do. 21 By the way, I know a lot of people are -- we 22 embrace the common core. 23 We feel that the work that has been done will 24 lead us to a path that will have better learners, 25 more proficient learners, more creative thinkers. 1 So, we embrace it. 2 And, we believe that NAEP may not be 3 currently aligned to the common core that we have 4 now, but it is an assessment that is internationally 5 accepted. And, frankly, what gets measured gets 6 done. 7 And, so, if NAEP is our benchmark, you will 8 see a transformation in classrooms, because, there's 9 a trust that is associated with that test, as 10 opposed to the trust that we don't have for the 11 assessments that we currently have. 12 SENATOR FLANAGAN: Okay. In all the 13 testimony, you're the only one that referenced that, 14 which I appreciate. 15 DR. LORNA LEWIS: Yeah. 16 SENATOR FLANAGAN: The testimony is very 17 detailed. It hits on all the points that you 18 raised. 19 And, I don't know if my colleagues have 20 questions, but I have two quick questions for you. 21 And you heard me ask this to everyone else. 22 DR. LORNA LEWIS: Yes. 23 SENATOR FLANAGAN: So, on the scale of 24 1 to 10, how you would grade New York's testing, and 25 why? 1 DR. LORNA LEWIS: Okay, on a scale of 2 1 to 10, the current system, I would rate probably a 3 "4," because I don't think that is it serves our 4 children well. I don't think that we're informed by 5 the results of the tests. 6 I happen to be -- I happen to be a person who 7 is very hands-on. I've involved in the scoring of 8 the assessment, even the new assessments that just 9 came out. It's -- there are flaws in it. Some of 10 the questions are not -- they're -- they go beyond 11 the scope of the curriculum. 12 A very simple example that I would give on 13 the field test that we had: They had the law of 14 sines and closed sines in a geometry test. 15 And, I'm a math person, so, I can tell you 16 that that's not in the curriculum for geometry. 17 I mean, you don't do the laws of sine. 18 And we saw many, many examples where there 19 were actual content that was not -- that, clearly, 20 were field-test items, because they went beyond the 21 scope. 22 So, I'd say that there's a lot to be -- 23 there's a lot of room for growth. 24 SENATOR FLANAGAN: And last is: If you could 25 change one thing, you know, again, within reasonable 1 constraints, what would you change? 2 DR. LORNA LEWIS: Well, first of all, I 3 would -- the number of assessments that we have, I 4 certainly would change. 5 And, I would have benchmarks. I would have 6 testing at fourth grade, eighth grade, and the end 7 point. So that, using the whole notion of radishes, 8 so we allow flexibility in some local assessments, 9 in between. 10 But, at the same time, I'd hold every teacher 11 who has taught that kid, from K through 4, 12 accountable for the fourth-grade assessment. 13 So that's how you get your teacher of record 14 in, so that every single grade level, every single 15 teacher, who taught K through 4, for that child, is 16 responsible for their fourth-grade assessment. 17 And the same thing, eighth-grade level. 18 So, you get the accountability in, but you're 19 not killing us on the number of assessments. 20 SENATOR FLANAGAN: Okay. 21 Any questions? 22 Thank you. 23 It's obvious you're hands-on. 24 Take that as a compliment. 25 DR. LORNA LEWIS: Oh, thank you. 1 SENATOR FLANAGAN: Next is, the Conference of 2 Big Five. 3 SENATOR OPPENHEIMER: I'm sorry, I will have 4 to leave. I have grandkids here. And, one is in 5 eighth grade. She's the oldest. 6 And, she found it very distressing that she 7 had to sit. She finished the test very quickly, and 8 she had to sit for 90 minutes. 9 And I said: Well, did you -- could you bring 10 a book along so at least you could read? 11 She's a big reader. 12 And she said: Absolutely not. 13 They were not permitted to bring anything in 14 the room. 15 To make a kid sit for 45 minutes, with their 16 hands folded, and no book, nothing to do? That's 17 insanity. She's 8 years old. 18 So, it was very good that she heard that. 19 SENATOR FLANAGAN: Thanks, Sue. 20 Jennifer, welcome. 21 JENNIFER PYLE: Good afternoon, and thank you 22 so much for providing us was the opportunity to 23 comment today. 24 Georgia Asciutto wanted me to extend her 25 apologies, as she's unable to be with us here in 1 Albany today. 2 My comments today are going to focus 3 primarily on the fiscal issues, relative to 4 administering the examinations, scoring, and the 5 integrity of the examinations. 6 As you know, the Big Five recognize and value 7 the importance of having a reliable and effective 8 State assessment system. And we are in support of 9 the current system; however, we believe that much 10 work needs to be done to address deficiencies that 11 we've noted in our testimony. 12 New York State's testing system has grown to 13 levels that State Ed and school districts cannot 14 afford to maintain. 15 As you know, each year, there is the 16 discussion with regard to what gets eliminated, 17 what's necessary. We're not always on the same page 18 with regard to those issues, but, we think it's 19 something that everyone needs to come to the table 20 and address. 21 All of our districts are struggling with 22 limited resources to implement the current State 23 assessment system within the confines of a very 24 limited instructional calendar. 25 A couple of the recommendations we've put 1 forth are, as follows: 2 First: We're again calling for extended 3 school-day, school-week, and school-year initiatives 4 in order to allow us to implement the system in a 5 more effective and efficient manner. 6 We need additional resources. 7 As a number of folks have mentioned today, 8 it's quite expensive to hire substitutes and to 9 serve students with a multitude of testing 10 accommodations currently. 11 In addition, there are a number of issues 12 that could be addressed that would simplify the 13 process. 14 For example: Eighth-grade students are 15 currently required to, not only take their 16 eighth-grade math and science exams, but if they're 17 enrolled in accelerated Regents program, they take 18 those exams as well; something we think is 19 duplicative and unnecessary, and could be addressed 20 in the current system. 21 We've put forth a number of recommendations 22 to the Department in recent months, with regard to 23 streamlining, and making the Regents-examination 24 system more effective, and these are some of them: 25 First: Districts should be permitted to 1 score exams within the same building where they're 2 administered, so long as individual student exams 3 are not scored by the teachers who administered 4 them. 5 In addition, districts are struggling with 6 scheduling requirements, and out-year dates for 7 scoring requirements and testing calendars need to 8 be provided in a more timely fashion. 9 We would again like to emphasize that 10 administration of January and August Regents 11 examinations is critical to our districts, not only 12 for those students struggling that may need an extra 13 chance, but also for students enrolled in 14 accelerated programs. 15 We've also requested that the June 16 Regents-examination schedule be expanded by two or 17 three days, to allow us to have adequate time for 18 regional scoring models that are in place. And, 19 that the examination schedule be front-loaded, 20 whereby we could overlap certain exams that the same 21 students are not taking, to give us more time for 22 scoring and follow-up procedures. 23 We've also asked that the State move 24 aggressively toward implementation of a 25 multiple-pathway system. Particularly with regard 1 to the CTE exams, we would like to allow technical 2 assessments to be put in place of a Regents exam. 3 And we think that that's a good model to pursue. 4 One other issue that's not contained in our 5 testimony, that our members requested that we note, 6 that has been an ongoing issue with regard to the 7 fiscal impact of these exams, and it may be small, 8 but it just speaks to the -- our efforts to address 9 all the issues at hand, is the -- it's very 10 difficult for us to come up with accurate numbers 11 for how many exams we order each year. 12 And State Education Department took it upon 13 themselves last year to charge districts a $1 fee 14 per exam for overages over 10 percent. 15 Now, that may seem small, but in light of the 16 fact that it's very difficult for us to know how 17 many students will be absent, will be sick, will not 18 show up. 19 And, unfortunately, those numbers are 20 relatively significant in the Big Five. All of our 21 districts were faced with bills that they had -- 22 that were sent forward in the last few months for 23 last year's administration of last year's overages. 24 It's something that we've asked the 25 Department to address through, not necessarily 1 eliminating the billing, because, clearly, there are 2 some schools and some districts that are pursuing -- 3 that they're ordering is not in line with their 4 enrollment and their testing, but, perhaps, to raise 5 the threshold so that it's a more reasonable 6 request. 7 Thank you so much, again, for your 8 consideration. 9 And, we would welcome the opportunity to 10 bring our chief school officers in to meet with you, 11 and discuss some of the issues that I wouldn't touch 12 upon, that they would be more equipped to address. 13 SENATOR FLANAGAN: Just one quick question. 14 And, I appreciate having had that discussion 15 with Georgia before, about all of the extra exams. 16 I agree with you, I think it's crazy. 17 But, if we were to allow the schools to score 18 the test themselves, do you have any kind of idea 19 what you think you would save? 20 JENNIFER PYLE: I don't, but I can certainly 21 get a figure for you. 22 I don't think that's something our schools 23 could provide. 24 SENATOR FLANAGAN: Okay. 25 Thank you. 1 JENNIFER PYLE: Thank you. 2 SENATOR FLANAGAN: Thanks a lot. 3 Next is, Kevin Casey, School Administrators. 4 Kevin never looked so good. 5 JAMES VIOLA: Thank you. I get that all the 6 time. 7 Actually, Kevin Casey wasn't able to join us 8 today due to a scheduled conflict he couldn't 9 resolve. So, he asked me to step in, in his stead. 10 My name is Jim Viola. I'm the director of 11 government relations for SAANYS. 12 But, our main speaker today is going to be 13 Paul Gasparini, who is the high school principal at 14 the Jamesville-Dewitt High School. 15 PAUL GASPARINI: Right. I'm at the -- 16 high school principal a Jamesville-Dewitt 17 High School, which is in Onondaga County. 18 And with all due respect to Commack, 19 Rocky Point, and Clarence, our parents and teachers 20 and administrators believe that Jamesville-Dewitt is 21 the best school district in the state. 22 So we're very -- we very much enjoy educating 23 our kids. I love my job, and I truly enjoy. 24 And I'm grateful for the opportunity to be 25 here to talk about the issues that are before us 1 that we talked about this morning. 2 It was mentioned earlier today that great 3 schools do exist in New York State. 4 "The U.S. News and World Report - Top 100 5 Schools" that was just recently released, 19 of the 6 top 100 schools in the country were from 7 New York State. 8 The "News Week" list, which gets a lot of 9 mention as well, over 10 percent of the schools in 10 the "News Week's Top 1,000" are New York State high 11 schools. 12 Our students routinely outperform the nation 13 on ACT tests and SAT tests. And we also outperform, 14 by a large margin, on AP exams. 15 I will say this: I'm coming from a 16 high school perspective. I know there's been a lot 17 of conversation today about the 3-8 testing, but at 18 the high school, we do like tests, and we like them 19 in this way: They do organize the curriculum. 20 I believe that in my testimony, 21 Senator Flanagan, I did recount the history of the 22 Regents exams, and I talked about the Regents exams 23 as being -- as organizing the curriculum and setting 24 a standard. 25 My own history, prior to becoming an 1 administrator, I was a social studies teacher. I 2 taught the U.S. history and government. And I also 3 taught advanced placement in European history. 4 And we did use the exams, in that, in those 5 courses, to organize our curriculum, and to direct 6 our instruction. 7 So, we are certainly not anti-examination, 8 and we do believe that the New York State has had 9 the gold standard for many years. 10 They can be very useful. We do get very good 11 information from the exams. 12 At the end, there are now, we do scan 13 scoring, we get item analysis on the exams pretty 14 quickly, and our two teachers do use that item 15 analysis to inform their curriculum and instruction 16 for the following year. 17 However, I am concerned, and this I share 18 with my colleague who spoke before me, about how the 19 3-8 exams are used. 20 If you recall, when we did start, as 21 superintendent -- 22 (Cellular telephone interruption.) 23 PAUL GASPARINI: Excuse me. I do apologize 24 very much for this. I will turn this off. 25 That's from my assistant principal. I hope 1 everything is well. I'm sure it is. 2 SENATOR FLANAGAN: They're watching you. 3 PAUL GASPARINI: They told me to straighten 4 my tie, I'm sure. 5 I apologize for that. 6 The 3-8 tests should be -- they are used now 7 as end points. 8 And you see quite a bit of press about how 9 the 3-8 exams, students failed this math exam, or a 10 percentage of students that passed in this grade or 11 that grade. 12 When the exams originally came out, they were 13 to be used, not as end points, but as checkpoints in 14 progress toward a Regents examination. 15 And, therefore, if a student scored poorly on 16 the fourth-grade examination, he or she would be 17 given, what were called "academic intervention 18 services" in the fifth grade. 19 In order to support that learning, they would 20 have another checkpoint at the eighth grade. And 21 going from eighth grade into the high school grades, 22 there would be academic intervention services, if 23 necessary, for the students, in order for them to 24 perform well on the Regents test. 25 We think that this is a very useful way to 1 use the examinations, whether they're 4 and 8, 2 3 through 8, et cetera, not as end points in and of 3 themselves. 4 I'm also concerned, it was mentioned earlier 5 today, I think in the opening comments, about the 6 number of examinations that students had. And we'll 7 go with the number "19" that SED established. 8 That is true. 9 But the problem is, when you go -- when we 10 begin to move to the five core Regents examinations 11 that every student has to take and pass with 65 or 12 above, our students most at risk, our 13 special-education students, often fail an exam. 14 They have to retake that exam. 15 You fail two exams, you have to retake two 16 exams. 17 Et cetera. 18 So, instead of five Regents, they're taking 19 seven, eight, ten, or more. 20 And we're very concerned about that, and the 21 burden it places on some of the students who 22 struggle the most in the classroom. 23 It is interesting to me, we've spoken -- or, 24 the commentators today, from Commissioner King, on, 25 have spoken about the common core. And there had 1 been several questions from the Senators regarding 2 the common core. 3 The fact is, we've always had standards in 4 New York State. 5 New York State has had standards, often which 6 the Regents exams and other exams have been based. 7 And I think that those standards have been 8 very useful. 9 Senator Flanagan, I think you've asked the 10 question of almost everybody: What is one thing 11 that you would change? 12 And I think, for me, the answer would be: 13 I'd stop changing standards every few years, because 14 it has a deleterious impact on the building of 15 curriculum. 16 Here's an example. 17 They -- the aspirational graduation standards 18 are used, and used, and we need to get to those. 19 The problem is, there's no way to judge 20 how -- what a student in 1999, in math, learned, as 21 opposed to a student here in 2012. 22 Why? 23 The curriculum for math in the past 15 years 24 has changed four times. 25 We went from Course 1, to Math A, to, now we 1 have the integrated algebra, integrated geometry, 2 Algebra 2, trig. And now we're go to common core. 3 This is extraordinarily frustrating, I can 4 assure, for the teachers. 5 Extraordinarily frustrating for school 6 districts, because we have to then change, not only 7 the curriculum, but the ancillary materials that go 8 with the curriculum: textbooks, et cetera. 9 And so I would say, that the common core may 10 be fine. I have no -- as a document, I have no 11 quarrel with the common core. But I do think that 12 if we stop and applied what we have in front of us 13 now, and did that for a number of years, we'd get a 14 very good baseline for what our students could do. 15 There was then talk, moving from the common 16 core, how are they going to be assessed? 17 And, the future assessment, where we should 18 be going. 19 The Park assessments have been discussed. 20 And there was much discussion at the 21 beginning of the hearing today about the 22 computerized -- the Park assessments being 23 computerized. 24 The Park is moving to a computerized system. 25 There was some conversation about, that some 1 school districts have resources to do that. 2 The school district in which I work is one of 3 the two wealthiest districts in Onondaga County. 4 And I can assure you, we do not have the 5 infrastructure, nor will we have the infrastructure, 6 to administer computer-based tests. 7 With computer-based tests, you have to be 8 worried, not only about whether or not you have the 9 Internet system, the network support to do that, but 10 you also have to worry about whether or not the 11 software in your existing machines supports the 12 assessments coming through; whether or not the speed 13 and capacity of those machines matches the 14 assessments; whether the visuals on the screen, you 15 can even read the test that's coming up. 16 We did an internal analysis of obsolescence 17 in our district of computers. 18 Computers are obsolete within three to 19 five years. 20 You cannot -- no district, regardless of 21 their wealth status in New York State, can 22 completely change their internal computer system, 23 their internal network system, in three to 24 five years and maintain that sort of capacity. 25 So, while it does sound good as we move into 1 the supposed high-tech world, the idea of online 2 systems, I think it is a recipe, and a cause, for 3 concern. 4 I do not believe that we have the capacity to 5 move in that direction. 6 I did discuss, I think a little bit in my 7 testimony, the problems with field tests. 8 I think they are enormous; 9 I think the reliability of field tests is 10 very questionable; 11 And, I do think that most teachers see them 12 as an add-on. They're asked to be administered 13 oftentimes in May, when students are being -- 14 getting prepared for Regents exams. They're doing 15 cumulative projects for the year. 16 It is a terrible time to administer them. 17 You do not get a huge percentage of students who are 18 involved in the field testing. And, I think the 19 validity of the results that are in question, if 20 that's important, because those field tests are used 21 as a basis for the -- as was mentioned, for the 22 questions, and then the scale scoring on Regents 23 examinations. 24 Which I could talk about if the Committee so 25 desires. 1 There was talk about many paths to 2 graduation, which I do endorse. 3 Back -- way back when, when I was in 4 high school, I was a New York State student as well. 5 We had a very active BOCES program that supported 6 all sorts of career, tech, and vocational education. 7 Careers and vocations have changed. 8 Certainly, I can think of, auto mechanics, 9 which my cousin is one. His knowledge of computers 10 is vast, because it has to be, in order for him to 11 do his job properly. 12 So, there is training that changes for all of 13 those fields. I think it's important to provide for 14 that. I do think that multiple pathways are good 15 option. 16 And I am concerned, finally, in my final 17 comments here, Senators, about the job changes for 18 the high school. 19 A very wise mentor of mine once said that the 20 high school principal's job is everything -- 21 involves everything, from the road in front of the 22 school, to the hedgerow behind the school. And is 23 involved with everything. 24 And most effective principals that I know, 25 know their communities well, know the parents well, 1 know the concerns of the parents well, know the 2 students, are involved with the students, in a basis 3 outside of the classroom. 4 If the changes that are proposed go through, 5 particularly for the local exams and service of 6 APPR, the principal will become, I think in many 7 ways, a number-cruncher and a paper-pusher, and, 8 really, a desk jockey, much more than they need to 9 be, or ought to be. 10 And I think, again, effective principals in 11 any of the districts throughout New York State are 12 people who are actively engaged outside of their 13 office, with the community. 14 I appreciate, once again, this opportunity to 15 talk; speak to the issues before us. 16 And I will now accept any questions that you 17 might have, Senators. 18 SENATOR FLANAGAN: First, let me say thank 19 you. 20 Second of all, you must be doing something 21 right. 22 I noticed that you were honored as 23 High School Principal of the Year -- 24 PAUL GASPARINI: Yes, sir. 25 SENATOR FLANAGAN: -- which is always a nice 1 thing. 2 PAUL GASPARINI: Thank you. 3 SENATOR FLANAGAN: And, the written 4 testimony, which I've certainly gone through, is -- 5 Trust me, this is a compliment. 6 -- you have some really tough statements in 7 there. You have some really hard-hitting points 8 about things, like, cut scores -- 9 PAUL GASPARINI: Yes. 10 SENATOR FLANAGAN: -- and other stuff like 11 that. 12 So, it is worthy of a read for anyone who has 13 not had the opportunity yet. 14 So, in the interest of time, I really just 15 have one question, which I have asked everyone: If 16 you were to grade New York State's testing system, 17 on a scale of 1 to 10, what would you grade it, and 18 why? 19 PAUL GASPARINI: I would give the 20 Regents-exam system, 9 through 12, I would give that 21 an "8." I still think that's a strong system. 22 I'm concerned about the proposed changes. 23 And so I'd say, "8," and wavering. 24 I wouldn't say "8" with a bullet. 25 From everything I hear from the 3-through-8 1 testing, I do think that that's below a "5," for all 2 of the reasons that were articulated before I spoke. 3 SENATOR FLANAGAN: Okay. 4 Thank you very much. Appreciate the time. 5 PAUL GASPARINI: Thank you, Senator. 6 Thank you. 7 SENATOR FLANAGAN: All right, next, 8 Dr. Kenneth Mitchell, superintendent, 9 South Orangetown Central School District, part of 10 the Lower Hudson Valley Council of Superintendents. 11 I got the whole title right. 12 DR. KENNETH MITCHELL: You're right. 13 SENATOR FLANAGAN: Doctor, we have met 14 before. 15 And, you have lengthy testimony, which I know 16 you have no intention of reading. 17 If you could summarize. And I know there's a 18 lot of good backup on cost factors, and everything 19 else. 20 So... 21 DR. KENNETH MITCHELL: All right, I'll try to 22 summarize. 23 Actually, many of the points that we had 24 planned to raise have already been mentioned by 25 other organizations today. 1 However, I would like to focus specifically 2 on costs, because there's some questions that were 3 left unanswered, again, by some of the other groups, 4 regarding specific costs. And we've done some 5 analyses. 6 Now, first of all, again, I would like to 7 thank you. We crashed this party, I know. 8 And we found out in middle of the week that 9 we would have an opportunity to present. So, some 10 of the documents you received on Friday, and some of 11 the documents I believe you received just this 12 morning. 13 SENATOR FLANAGAN: Uh-huh. 14 DR. KENNETH MITCHELL: So, if you could place 15 in front of you the spreadsheet? 16 This is a spreadsheet that represents the 17 work of 18 school districts in the lower 18 Hudson Valley, and we've analyzed the cost of 19 implementing various components of the 20 New York State reforms in comparison to the Race to 21 the Top funding. 22 So, I'd like to take you through this, and 23 speak specifically to some of those costs. 24 First of all, the common-core training, 25 you'll see that -- and there are actually three 1 elements of that. 2 There's the specific common-core training. 3 And I'm prepared to share with you lists of 4 the workshops that teachers have been attending in 5 our region, the cost for the workshop, and the 6 substitute costs. 7 So we, throughout the lower Hudson, have been 8 preparing our teachers for the common-core 9 assessments. 10 We have to. It's not a local decision, 11 because these assessments will be based on common 12 core. 13 And if you look at the bottom of that column, 14 with just 18 districts, these are not projections. 15 These are actual numbers. 16 If you recall, when I presented to the 17 Mandate Relief Committee, and we had the subsequent 18 meeting, I had given you some projections. 19 We went back to the group, and we said: We 20 want real numbers. 21 In fact, we rejected some of the submissions 22 because they were, again, estimates. 23 These districts can back up all of these 24 numbers with receipts. 25 Business officials have been involved, 1 assistant superintendents for curriculum and 2 instruction have been involved, technology directors 3 have been involved, throughout the Hudson Valley. 4 And the numbers continue to come in. 5 I received an e-mail sitting here, I received 6 several e-mails yesterday, from districts who were 7 scrambling to get us the data for today. 8 And we will continue this. 9 We're also working with our colleagues on 10 Long Island, to gather information. So, we're going 11 to try to extrapolate this across the state, 12 eventually. 13 So, if you look at the bottom of the column 14 for common-core training, you'll see that districts 15 have expended $783,000, just for the training of 16 teachers. 17 And if you look all the way to the right, 18 under "Race to the Top Funding," those districts 19 receive $520,000 in Race to the Top funding. 20 If you go back and look at "Common-Core 21 Revision," again, it is not a choice. 22 Districts are -- in this region, are in the 23 process of converting their local curriculum and the 24 current New York State teaching standards to the 25 common-core standards. 1 We are not opposed to common core, but we 2 need to make sure that we have the time to align the 3 common core to our curriculum and to train our 4 teachers. 5 Districts are just beginning to purchase new 6 materials. 7 And you'll see that the numbers do vary from 8 district to district. And that's because districts 9 are at different points of development, 10 implementation, and some districts simply do not 11 have the funds to make these changes right now. 12 So, you look across those common-core columns 13 and you'll see: 783,000 for training. $1.2 million 14 for curriculum revision work. 15 And that's substitute teachers, summer 16 training, bringing in trainers. 17 And some districts are spending up to 18 $2 million -- well, the entire region, these 19 18 districts, over $2 million for new materials -- 20 new instructional materials. 21 Now, there's just the report from the 22 Thomas B. Fordham Foundation. 23 And the Thomas B. Fordham Foundation supports 24 common core, very much so. And what they have 25 identified are three approaches to the 1 implementation of the common core, and the cost 2 analyses of these. 3 They have the national cost analyses, and 4 also have a New York State cost analyses. 5 They call the first approach "Business as 6 usual." 7 We use text books, we have face-to-face 8 professional development. That will cost 9 New York State $583 million to implement common 10 core. 11 And this is, by the way, just for ELA and 12 math. This isn't for science. 13 The second option is the bare bones. 14 And you've heard folks talk about the savings 15 that we will have when common core when it becomes 16 virtual. 17 Well, there -- yes, with virtual materials, 18 webinars, there will be a saving of $72 million; 19 however, that does not include the technology costs. 20 And I will get to that. 21 I've heard folk allude to it. 22 We have specifics. We've broken it down into 23 classrooms, and into schools, how much it will cost 24 to implement the technology. 25 Then the balanced approach, which is a more 1 likely approach, is where we use a little bit of 2 virtual learning, bring in some computers, and we 3 also have some of the more traditional approach. 4 That will cost New York State $71 million. 5 Now, remember, this organization supports 6 common core. They want it to work. 7 There have been some other groups that have 8 talked about the common core. 9 They believe that -- the Fordham Institute 10 has underestimated common core. 11 For example: The Pioneer Institute out of 12 Boston believes that common core will cost us 13 $16 billion in seven years. That's nationally. 14 The Education Council in D.C., it's a 15 bipartisan group, and they specialize in public 16 finance. And they believe that there's a lack of 17 consideration for the technology upgrades: 18 servers -- 19 SENATOR FLANAGAN: Let me ask you -- excuse 20 me. 21 DR. KENNETH MITCHELL: Sure. 22 SENATOR FLANAGAN: Let me ask you a couple of 23 different things, because I'm very good at reading 24 numbers, so I can look at this stuff very easily. I 25 get that. 1 But, what we're really talking about is 2 testing. I mean, that's kind of the purpose of what 3 we're talking about here. 4 DR. KENNETH MITCHELL: Okay. 5 SENATOR FLANAGAN: Now -- so, just simple, 6 yes or no: Do you agree with implementation of 7 common core? 8 DR. KENNETH MITCHELL: I agree with the 9 implementation of common core, but common core is 10 the basis for the testing. 11 SENATOR FLANAGAN: Okay. 12 DR. KENNETH MITCHELL: That's what -- 13 SENATOR FLANAGAN: I understand. 14 But, we could have a philosophical and 15 practical debate at the same time about the cost of 16 common core. 17 So, I'm thinking about that, more in a 18 budgetary context, because that's something that 19 would be negotiated. 20 And one of the things that we had done in 21 this year's budget, partially in response to meeting 22 with Senator Ball in his district, and your 23 colleagues, we fought for inclusion in the budget 24 that there would be aid available for school 25 districts for demonstrated expenses, as it relates 1 to APPR. 2 Now, I'm not talking about, if we're looking 3 at the charts here, I am hopeful that State Ed will 4 look kindly upon the actual implementation of that, 5 and help provide the financial aid that districts 6 will, I believe, be entitled to, because we pushed 7 hard for that. 8 And I was clearly involved in that, and I 9 believe that districts not only are entitled to the 10 money, but they should get the money as well. 11 So, in relation to these testing pieces, are 12 you -- my guess -- part of my question is: Do you 13 think we should be getting rid of tests that we have 14 now? 15 DR. KENNETH MITCHELL: Get rid of the tests 16 that we have now? 17 We're in the process of building a testing 18 system, so, we haven't finalized the actual costs 19 and the actual impact of the testing on 20 New York State. 21 And your question that you had asked other 22 folks coming before you, had to do with rating 23 New York. 24 It's an incomplete. 25 We are in the process of developing slow 1 assessments. That's one the columns that I've also 2 presented in that spreadsheet. 3 And, the reason why I wanted to work through 4 the spreadsheets, is because numbers don't speak by 5 themselves, obviously. They're pretty loud in terms 6 of the discrepancy between the allocation versus the 7 projected costs, but, understanding what's behind 8 that. 9 And you heard folks talk about the slows? 10 The student learning objective assessments? 11 SENATOR FLANAGAN: Yes. 12 DR. KENNETH MITCHELL: One of the documents 13 that you have is a breakdown of one district's total 14 number of assessments, kindergarten through 15 twelfth grade, to be designed for the local 16 20 percent evaluation of slows. 17 That document indicates over 500 assessments. 18 And, the costs for those assessments have still not 19 been determined. And that's where districts are 20 pausing before they send in the information. 21 But, you see those districts that have done 22 the work, for example, have found initially, and 23 much of this work will take place this summer and in 24 the fall, $262,000. 25 So, I'm not sure if that answers your 1 question, whether I support the testing. 2 I support -- I support the State's move 3 towards common core. 4 I am concerned about the acceleration of the 5 process, and the failure of the State to do a 6 long-term cost projection, and to, in the middle of 7 this process, determine that we're going to survey 8 school districts to see how much it will cost them 9 to implement the technology that will support the 10 eventual online of Park assessments. 11 And we've begun to do that work. Again, I 12 have that information for you, broken out in more 13 specific numbers. I can give you a cost per school, 14 I can give you a cost per classroom, what it will 15 take to administer assessments, simultaneously, 16 using technology. We've broken that down. And, 17 again, we're expanding that. The cost is just so 18 much greater than the ideal. 19 And I was hoping that I'd be able to present 20 the pragmatic presentation -- a pragmatic 21 understanding of how this is impacting New York, 22 just looking at the dollars and cents. 23 I have to go to my board of education and 24 tell them that we're increasing these categories and 25 making changes in priorities. Or, perhaps, in some 1 districts, they're not going to be able to address 2 the mandates because they do not have the funding to 3 do that, even with the generosity of the 4 legislature. 5 SENATOR FLANAGAN: Yeah, and let me say this: 6 When we get involved in hearings like these, 7 sometimes time gets away from us more quickly than 8 we would like. 9 And it's not that I don't have a desire to 10 hear chapter and verse on the financial statistics. 11 But, it will be made part of the record, 12 everything that is being submitted here today. 13 And I know, having met you and spoken to you 14 before, that you have a penchant for detail, which 15 is -- it is very helpful, because that's the 16 real-life application of things that come from the 17 federal government, find their way through the 18 state, work its way through the legislature, get to 19 the Board of Regents and the State Education 20 Department. 21 And you're sort of giving where the rubber 22 meets the road, which is very help. 23 Just for the purposes of today, I'm trying to 24 get a sense on more as it relates to the testing. 25 I understand the cost factors. And, I 1 believe the information that is in what this 2 spreadsheet is, plus the written testimony, details 3 a lot of your concerns. So, I'm not worried about 4 that. 5 But, let me go back to my question, because 6 you said, the testing system, you would give it an 7 "incomplete." 8 If I had to -- pegged you to give it a 9 number, what would you give it? 10 DR. KENNETH MITCHELL: I would give it a "3" 11 for its concept, that, with resources, and with 12 time, could be a very powerful assessment system. 13 There are certain questions about the use of 14 the assessment that need to be answered. And that 15 takes place over time. 16 This is being rushed. 17 And when we rush, we don't do things well. 18 And so we are -- I give it a "3." 19 SENATOR FLANAGAN: In the concept of being 20 rushed, I've heard a number of people speak to this 21 issue, directly and indirectly. 22 How long do you think we should delay, or, 23 how much show it be slowed down? 24 DR. KENNETH MITCHELL: Well, there are so 25 many different elements. 1 First of all, we need to make sure that we 2 have the common-core curriculum in place. And we 3 need to make sure we have -- if we're going to 4 assess students, teachers, and administrators, we 5 need to make sure that the curriculum that will be 6 used to do is in place. 7 If we're going to require districts to 8 purchase assessments, or create their own 9 assessments, which that local 20 percent is 10 requiring us to do, we have to understand that 11 there's cost of doing that, and that it may need to 12 be phased in over time. 13 We need to analyze how much it costs to score 14 the assessments, to analyze the assessments. That 15 takes time. 16 You want specific years? I don't have those 17 specific years, because everything has been poured 18 onto the table, and we have -- within the last 19 two years, and we've been told: implement. 20 And we are haven't been given, not only 21 adequate time, but adequate resources, adequate 22 direction. 23 There are a lot of people -- people a lot 24 smarter than I am who are gathered around this 25 table, to help us to develop an implementation plan. 1 It's not going be done well. And there are 2 grave concerns that it will fail and we'll start 3 over again, and say: Remember when. 4 SENATOR FLANAGAN: Well, I certainly hope 5 that's not the case. 6 And I appreciate your time and your comments. 7 And, we can follow up on the, quote/unquote, 8 implementation. 9 And part of the reason I'm asking you is, 10 when we have people come in, if we're going to 11 advocate with SED and Board of Regents and the 12 Executive, "Here are some changes that we think need 13 to be made," having some level of specificity is 14 helpful, I think, to everybody. 15 So, I very much appreciate your comments. 16 DR. KENNETH MITCHELL: And I will follow up 17 with more specific documents. 18 Thank you for having us. 19 SENATOR FLANAGAN: All right, Doctor. 20 Thank you. 21 Mr. Dan. 22 And, Dan, take this respectfully; I'm not 23 going to even hazard how to properly say it. You 24 can tell me when you come down here. 25 How about this: Dan, friend of Robach. 1 Is that -- 2 DAN DRMACICH: And Maziarz. 3 SENATOR FLANAGAN: And Maziarz. That's true. 4 DAN DRMACICH: Well, thank you, 5 Senator Flanagan, for the opportunity to testify. I 6 know it was short notice, and we really appreciate 7 being here. 8 As you know, I'm a retired school principal 9 from Rochester City School District. 10 For 23 years, I worked as a performance-based 11 assessment school, which is a different pathway than 12 which the current Regents system goes. Even though 13 they do get Regents diplomas, it's a much different 14 assessment system. 15 And I would be happy to engage in a 16 conversation with you about that as well. 17 I'm also the chair of the Rochester Coalition 18 for Justice and Education, an advocacy group for 19 more fair treatment and education for kids, 20 especially those in urban areas. 21 I'm going to let Don Barlow, my colleague, 22 introduce himself. 23 DONALD BARLOW: My name is Donald Barlow. 24 I'm a lifetime educator. I've been working 25 in public schools for 48 years. 1 The last time I was in the classroom was 2 Friday. 3 And I want to thank you very much, Senator, 4 for staying to hear our remarks. 5 Of course, you have no choice. 6 SENATOR FLANAGAN: You are more than welcome. 7 DONALD BARLOW: Thank you. 8 DAN DRMACICH: Thank you, Senator Flanagan. 9 I think the other thing Don and I agreed 10 upon, as we came down here, was -- or, at least 11 within the past three hours, was that, maybe we 12 ought to use this opportunity to engage in a 13 conversation as opposed to us just reading our 14 testimony. 15 So, I think -- and maybe one way to get that 16 started, would be, we'll deal with your universal 17 question for all the guests here. 18 And I think what I'll do, in terms of giving 19 New York State a grade on the Regents exams, I'll 20 give them a "zero." 21 And, again, the reasons for that are outlined 22 in my testimony which I submitted, but, just a 23 couple of the items that I want to focus on with 24 that, is that: 25 One: The skills, the twenty-first-century 1 skills that kids need in order to be successful, as 2 scholar -- whether it's scholars in college, whether 3 or not it's workers in the workplace, or whether or 4 not it's as citizens, there's a common list of 5 skills that we can identify. And it's been done by 6 a number of people, including, Tony Wagner, out of 7 Harvard University, and -- as well as number of 8 other organizations, including ASCD. 9 That, these skills are neither emphasized by 10 the Regents curriculum, nor tested for it. 11 And, so, when we look at the rates of 12 failure, in terms of why only 54 percent of kids 13 graduate -- or, White kids graduate from college, 14 14 percent of Blacks and Latinos graduate from 15 college, the low number of voter participation in 16 local elections, the remedial tutorials that have to 17 go on for kids coming into workplaces, we know why: 18 Because, the skills aren't being taught. The 19 Regents tests don't emphasize them. 20 And there is a way to deal with that. 21 As I mentioned before, I'm with the New York 22 State Performance Assessment Consortium. 23 And, I've got -- this just came out 24 yesterday, so that's why I haven't mailed it to you, 25 but, I will e-mail this to you. 1 And it's got all the data in here, in terms 2 of how kids, in primarily urban school systems, are 3 outperforming other kids; and, how they're -- why 4 they're doing twice the success rate in college as 5 opposed to their counterparts from other traditional 6 urban schools. 7 The answer is, is that those 8 twenty-first-century skills are being emphasized 9 there. And it's a very unique situation, as opposed 10 to finding it anyplace, including in the suburbs. 11 Donald -- 12 SENATOR FLANAGAN: Excuse me, I'm sorry. 13 Are you talking about, in Rochester? 14 Or -- 15 DAN DRMACICH: Rochester has one school 16 that's a part of the consortium. 17 There's 30-odd schools in the consortium. 18 About 26 of them are in New York City. 19 Ithaca has one, and Rochester has one. 20 SENATOR FLANAGAN: So that group is 21 outperforming its peers, essentially? 22 DAN DRMACICH: Yes, yes. 23 And -- 24 SENATOR FLANAGAN: Is that -- excuse me. 25 Is that outperforming them on high school 1 graduation rates and performance in college? 2 Or -- 3 DAN DRMACICH: Yeah, yeah. 4 And you can look at the data when I sent it 5 to you. 6 SENATOR FLANAGAN: Okay. 7 DAN DRMACICH: And, actually, I mean, to 8 clarify that specifically: When we're talking about 9 comparison of students who are persistent in 10 college, succeeding beyond a two-year or three-year 11 graduation, or persistence within college, versus 12 those of their peers. 13 SENATOR FLANAGAN: Now, do these kids take 14 fewer exams? 15 DAN DRMACICH: They only take one, which is 16 the Regents English exam. 17 The other ones are all performance-based 18 assessment exams, which, students have to do 19 projects, keep portfolios, and review those. 20 As opposed to having one person review them, 21 they have to present those to a team of two 22 certified teachers, usually a college professor or 23 some other professional person in the community, 24 and, usually there's a student on that group as 25 well. 1 But, they have to have a unanimous vote that 2 they've passed it, and they get feedback as well. 3 So, it ends up being like a college dissertation as 4 opposed to anything else. 5 SENATOR FLANAGAN: Is that somewhat similar 6 to, like, the IB program? 7 DAN DRMACICH: Similar. 8 It's kind of like an IB program for everyone. 9 And what happens is, is that, the standards, 10 there's high standard for everyone, but what we 11 believe in is individualized standards, as opposed 12 to standardized standards. That makes the process 13 much more meaningful for every kid, in terms of the 14 expectations of what they can do, and how they're 15 going to do it. 16 SENATOR FLANAGAN: Is that -- would it be a 17 fair, but, perhaps, simple characterization to say 18 that, in essence, you have an IEP for everyone? 19 DAN DRMACICH: Yes. 20 Yes, I would say that. 21 Yeah, that's a very good way of putting it: 22 Every kid has an IEP. 23 SENATOR FLANAGAN: Which, frankly, should be 24 our goal, even if it's reaching for the stars. I 25 mean, that's -- 1 DAN DRMACICH: Absolutely. 2 Of course, you'll hear from, I think the 3 traditionalists, that every kid does have an IEP, 4 because, somehow, one way or the other, we're going 5 to get them through the Regents tests, and get them 6 to have a score of a "3" or a "4." 7 But, it all becomes much more meaningless 8 when we know that (a) the tests are directed at 9 lower-level thinking skill, and that, (b) that kids 10 are normally turned off with all of the test prep. 11 With our system within the consortium, every 12 kid gets the opportunity to pursue their interests, 13 and have all of the twenty-first-century skills 14 integrated within those courses, classes, or 15 individualized study that they deal with. 16 SENATOR FLANAGAN: Let me -- Dr. Mitchell 17 just talked with a lot of detail about the costs of 18 the implementation of common core. 19 DAN DRMACICH: Uh-huh. 20 SENATOR FLANAGAN: And I think he's, like, 21 dead-on, in terms of real-life application, even 22 though we may not see that effect today. I mean, it 23 will happen sooner rather than later. 24 But, how do you feel about common core? 25 DAN DRMACICH: I think common core gets a 1 little bit closer to the twenty-first-century 2 learning skills, in terms of the goals of what they 3 would like kids to do. 4 So, I think that's a good idea. 5 What I don't like, is the fact that it looks 6 like look being geared toward standardized tests for 7 common core. 8 If they were performance-based, a -- if they 9 were performance-based, in which a student has to do 10 a project or demonstrate something that they know 11 about, a particular skill, or how to do it, how to 12 apply it to the real world, that would make sense. 13 But, again, it should only be part of the 14 multiple measures of what a kid has to do in order 15 to graduate. 16 That wouldn't be the only thing that I would 17 require. And it's not the only thing that the 18 consortium schools require. 19 So they're on the right track, but they need, 20 I think, to be very cognizant of the fact that 21 standardization is going to -- is a slippery slope. 22 And that it's -- if they're really looking to 23 motivate kids intrinsically, as opposed to 24 extrinsically, then they've got to move more towards 25 student interests, and weave those skills into the 1 student's individualized curriculum. 2 SENATOR FLANAGAN: Well, going to -- 3 Dr. Mitchell mentioned that he would mark an 4 "incomplete." And, then, you came with a "zero." 5 It seems like, the longer we stay here, we're 6 getting right down to the bottom there. 7 But it's -- I'm actually glad that I had 8 asked that question early on, because it's 9 interesting to hear everybody's comments. 10 But you -- I had also asked another question. 11 If you could change -- within reasonable 12 constraints, if you could change something in this 13 area, what would you like it to be? 14 DONALD BARLOW: That's easy. 15 We've got our Ts mixed up: "T" for testing, 16 "T" for teaching. 17 What we have been doing, Senator, is 18 concentrating on reforming. 19 What we haven't been doing is improving. 20 What I would do -- by the way, I would give 21 it a "1," and I gave extra credit for intention. 22 The system does not pass my father's test of 23 common sense. 24 It makes no sense educationally. It makes no 25 sense personally. 1 I have four grandchildren. I'm in schools 2 every day. I've worked in these schools for 3 48 years. 4 We need to concentrate on improving the 5 methods. We are a country without a system for 6 improving teaching methods. 7 What we've done, is we've allowed testing to 8 become the vehicle for improving education. 9 It's not going to do it, anymore than a 10 mother or a father who measures their child every 11 day, and expects them to grow more just because 12 they're measuring them more. 13 I'm not trying to oversimplify. It upsets me 14 to no end. 15 We've waited all this time, and we cannot 16 thank you enough for listening to what we have. 17 This is not my first rodeo. 18 I have been in schools for 48 years, working 19 with students and teachers. 20 I currently develop instructional leaders. 21 You know what they're concerned about, 22 Senator? 23 They're not talking about the joy of 24 learning. They're talking about two things: 25 What it used to be like when we could do 1 projects, and the frustration they find having to 2 deal with raising the test scores all the time. 3 We've become a profession that looks backward 4 to see the good things we use to do in education. 5 I have four grandchildren in school, from 6 fourth grade to eleventh. I talk to them about what 7 they do. 8 They rarely do anything that I would call 9 exciting. 10 There's a B word. 11 If you ask most students what you think about 12 school, they will tell you -- 13 And she's laughing, because she knows what 14 the B word is. 15 -- "It's boring." 16 And that's what school has become. 17 I urge the Senate in the New York State to do 18 whatever you can to bring that out. 19 My testimony is based on the fact that we're 20 going in the wrong direction. 21 And if the American Dream is to put us, you 22 know, up against countries and for global economy, 23 we're never going to do it this way. 24 We need, not reform. We need a system to 25 improve, and the energy and the talent, and the 1 money. 2 I'll give you one example. 3 We should establish schools all over the 4 state, regional schools, in the summertime. 5 Take the $32 million that you give Pearson, 6 and fund those schools, and you tell them one thing: 7 "We're going to stay away from you. 8 "What we want you to do is this: We want you 9 to you work with a variety of students, and we want 10 you to come up with the best teaching methods you 11 can. And we're going to support you in doing that." 12 Look, it is the teachers' and the students' 13 and the parents' responsibility about progress. 14 It's not solely a State responsibility and 15 accountability. 16 That responsibility rests with the students, 17 the teachers, the school leaders -- I left them 18 out -- and the parents. 19 SENATOR FLANAGAN: You certainly don't lack 20 for passion. 21 DONALD BARLOW: Absolutely. 22 And I mean every word that I'm saying. 23 Thank you. 24 DAN DRMACICH: Senator, I'd like to add to 25 that, in terms of Don's reference to comparisons 1 with other countries, because I know that you 2 probably often hear this: Oh, you know, they're 3 25th in the industrialized world -- or whatever. 4 The interesting point about that, is that, if 5 you were to look at the poverty levels of the 6 United States versus that of Finland or South Korea, 7 you find a very distinctive difference in terms of 8 ours being between 20 and 25 percent, and Finland's, 9 for example, being less than 3 percent. 10 The point is, is that, if you were to 11 disaggregate and not count the kids who are stricken 12 with high poverty within the United States, then we 13 would move up into the top three in just about every 14 category. 15 So, the question becomes, you know, that when 16 we look at the performance of poverty-stricken kids 17 in all of the urban areas, which, of course, the 18 NCLB and all this testing was directed at, to try 19 and get kids to perform better, is that, the reality 20 is, is that the expectation that students who are 21 stricken with poverty-like conditions from that of 22 lead poisoning, with that of poor prenatal care, 23 poor nutrition, and so on -- we can name all of 24 those things, and go on forever with them -- 25 they're, generally, not going to perform well. 1 Heroically, there will be a few, but there 2 aren't going to be many. 3 What can with do about it? 4 And this has a direct impact on testing, 5 because if you do this, it will raise test scores: 6 We -- and this is very unpopular. Kiss of 7 death, in terms of politics. -- is that, if we were 8 to provide suburban schools incentives for working 9 with urban schools, to form more metropolitan or 10 regional schools, we'd see an increase in terms of 11 test scores, because of the socioeconomic values 12 that would be -- through osmosis, would get into 13 kids, as long as it's not more than a 60 percent 14 middle class and a 40 percent maximum on 15 poverty-stricken kids. 16 This has been proven, in terms of the work 17 that's been done in Wake County in North Carolina. 18 The book "Hope and Despair in the American 19 City," by Gerald Grant, professor emeritus of 20 education in Syracuse, documents all of this, in 21 which he compares Syracuse to that of Wake County. 22 So, there is reason for hope with that, but 23 it's a very difficult thing to do. 24 The other thing: If we can't do that, 25 because of the politics involved, if we can begin to 1 negotiate, in order to get more effective -- more 2 effective funding, equitable funding, for schools in 3 urban areas. 4 I think we've got to reduce the class size in 5 half if you're not going to integrate, 6 socioeconomically, to that of, maybe, a 7 1-to-10 ratio. 8 You'll see the test scores go up with poor 9 urban kids, but, not until you do that. 10 SENATOR FLANAGAN: I appreciate that. 11 And I'll just close on this point: 12 Senator Cathy Young has worked very hard with 13 a number of my colleague, but she, in particular, 14 will be an outspoken advocate for regional 15 high schools. Not necessarily in the pretext of 16 what you were speaking to, but, it's interesting. 17 I'm listening. 18 DAN DRMACICH: Another form of regional 19 school. 20 SENATOR FLANAGAN: Yeah. 21 DAN DRMACICH: Yeah. Right. 22 SENATOR FLANAGAN: All right, thank you very 23 much. 24 DAN DRMACICH: Thank you very much. 25 DONALD BARLOW: Thank you. Take care. 1 DAN DRMACICH: If you need anymore testimony, 2 information, we would be happy to come back to 3 Albany. 4 Thank you. 5 SENATOR FLANAGAN: Next is Jaye Bea Smalley 6 from Citywide Council on Special Ed. 7 Good afternoon. 8 JAYE BEA SMALLEY: Good afternoon. 9 Hi. 10 SENATOR FLANAGAN: Hi. 11 JAYE BEA SMALLEY: So my name is 12 Jaye Bea Smalley, and I co-chair the 13 Citywide Council on Special Education. 14 We are a statutory council. We're elected by 15 parents who have children in the New York City 16 public schools with IEPs, and we're non-elected 17 parents who have children with disabilities with 18 IEPs, and we have two public advocate appointees. 19 So, I'm here on behalf of approximately 20 160,000 students in New York City who have IEPs. 21 And, I want to start out a little bit by -- 22 where we are now, instead of where we're coming 23 from. 24 And, in 2011, in New York State, 9.4 percent 25 of eighth-graders were proficient or above 1 proficient in reading. 2 9.4 percent. 3 When you look at above proficient, it was 4 less than a percent. It was .1 percent. 5 So, I think that everybody could agree that 6 that is completely unacceptable, and there's a lot 7 of work to be done if all students in New York State 8 are going to be college- and career-ready, including 9 students with disabilities. 10 When you look at the assessments, and the 11 New York State ELA and math assessments for students 12 with disabilities, they are really inappropriate 13 assessments for students. They do not -- with 14 disabilities. 15 They don't look at the progress of specific 16 learning disabilities. They don't look at different 17 learning styles. And, you really need multiple 18 measures of progress for students with disabilities. 19 Also, when you look at the assessments that 20 they're developing right now for these common-core 21 standards, so, New York State is part of the 22 Park Consortium. 23 I recently went to Washington, D.C., where, 24 they had a meeting where they brought together a 25 number of people who were researching grants for the 1 assessments. 2 And they had both consortiums: the 3 Smarter Balance, they have Park. 4 And the general consensus is -- 5 SENATOR FLANAGAN: Which do you like better? 6 JAYE BEA SMALLEY: Pardon? 7 SENATOR FLANAGAN: Which do you like better? 8 JAYE BEA SMALLEY: They're very similar. I 9 don't -- you know, you look at what they're trying 10 to do. 11 And, I don't really have an opinion on one of 12 them. 13 I don't think that -- I don't think we're in 14 the wrong one, if that's what you're asking me. 15 But, the general consensus among all of the 16 participants, was that, they've done all of this 17 work to ensure that students with disabilities are 18 going to have access to these assessments, but, 19 still, very little has been done to make sure that 20 students are disabilities are getting quality access 21 to instruction, and curriculum. 22 So, when they start talking about -- 23 SENATOR FLANAGAN: Well, let me just 24 interject there. 25 Do you believe that students in that category 1 are getting what they need, today? 2 JAYE BEA SMALLEY: No, not at all. 3 Not at all. 4 I'll give you an example. 5 When you talk about the technology, and 6 you've heard a lot about where we are with 7 technology, and the fact that we're not going be 8 ready, that's one of the problems. 9 With the common-core standards, the 10 accommodations that students should get for testing, 11 they should really be getting very similar 12 accommodations now, to be accessing the curriculum. 13 It should be universally designed. 14 So, universal design has to do with, how you 15 are presenting material to students, how the 16 students are able to express them -- express their 17 knowledge, and then, also, how students engage. 18 And when you look at the waiver and the 19 plans, and how New York interprets universal design, 20 the only thing that I really see is, that they talk 21 about teaching -- enabling teachers to really be 22 able to differentiate instruction, which is 23 important. You know, it's -- differentiated 24 instruction is one component of the universal 25 design. 1 But a huge piece of the universal design is 2 also giving students the ability to use technology 3 to learn. Text-to-speech. 4 My child, he needs to use keyboarding for any 5 sort of written assignments. He uses them on a test 6 as well. 7 When I tried to get an evaluation for him, 8 first of all, it was very, very difficult to even 9 argue for an evaluation, because he didn't have some 10 sort of a physical disability. It -- I had to 11 almost go into due process over it. 12 So then, finally, when I was able to get the 13 assistive-technology team to come into the school 14 and do at the evaluation, the team is composed of a 15 physical therapist and an occupational therapist. 16 Well, my son has a learning disability. 17 He -- it really wasn't -- it wasn't the appropriate 18 team to do the evaluation. 19 And, as I look forward, and it's time to 20 do -- he's going to be going into middle school 21 soon, still, there is -- there's no plan in place to 22 really evaluate and provide assistive technology. 23 And the districts, as they are purchasing all 24 of this different equipment, I really am very 25 concerned that a lot of it is not taking into 1 consideration accessibility, how it will interface 2 with children who use devices. 3 There has not been any sort of professional 4 development around consideration for accommodation. 5 SENATOR FLANAGAN: You know, let me ask you, 6 and this is going to bring a smile to at least one 7 of the people sitting with us. 8 I had a very interesting meeting last week 9 with the group of behavioral analysts who work in 10 the area of special education and students with 11 disabilities. 12 So, that might be one group that you might 13 want to talk to. 14 But -- and I certainly don't mean to sound 15 ignorant, but, if you -- you speak to the concept of 16 universal design, it seems to -- when I think of 17 that: All right, you're going to design whatever it 18 is. There's going to be some universal application. 19 And, yet, now we're doing something 20 different. 21 So how do you match universal design with 22 particularized needs of, particularly, students with 23 disabilities? 24 JAYE BEA SMALLEY: Well, universal design and 25 learning is one of the -- is really one of the goals 1 with the common-core standards. 2 Not all of the common-core standards are 3 universally designed, but many of them are. 4 SENATOR FLANAGAN: Do you -- you think that's 5 a good thing? 6 JAYE BEA SMALLEY: I think that's good. 7 I mean, from the perspective of -- you know, 8 when looking at the common-core standards, the one 9 thing that I do think the common-core standards 10 brings to the table, is they do -- they are more 11 universally designed than current standards. 12 So, like when Senator Marcellino was talking 13 about leave -- Oh, leave school districts alone that 14 are doing well, I do feel that they are going to be 15 more accessible for certain students, because they 16 do enable students to have multiple means of 17 expression of -- for -- not for all of them, though, 18 but more so than some of current standards. 19 SENATOR FLANAGAN: All right, so let me ask 20 you, which is, I think slightly different, but, I'm 21 going to give you my understanding. 22 JAYE BEA SMALLEY: Okay. 23 SENATOR FLANAGAN: Part of what we did with 24 APPR was, obviously, 20 percent based on State 25 tests, 20 percent based on local, 60 percent to be 1 collectively bargained. But within that, and I've 2 had plenty of conversations on this subject, is the 3 implementation and adoption of student-learning 4 objectives. 5 So, there are students, maybe like your son, 6 or others similarly situated, who won't be taking 7 the, quote/unquote, conventional tests. 8 It will be other measures of assessment for 9 them, which I believe are incorporated in these 10 student-learning objectives. 11 So, do you view that as a good thing or a bad 12 thing? 13 JAYE BEA SMALLEY: I think -- for the 14 purposes of -- for the APPR purposes, I think it's a 15 bad thing, because you've heard a lot of testimony 16 today about the fact that, right now, teachers are 17 going through a major shift. 18 They are trying to learn new content 19 standards, and, at the same time, they're being told 20 that they're being evaluated, largely on criteria 21 that's really meant to evaluate students. 22 They're mutually exclusive. 23 I mean, ELA and math scores are meant -- are 24 for students, and then you also have ways to 25 evaluate teachers. 1 So, for the time being, I don't think that 2 it's a good idea. And I think that there's going to 3 be too much differentiation between different school 4 districts on how they're going to develop these 5 different SLOs. 6 I think that, right now, that what needs to 7 be evaluated, is how teachers are going to have the 8 right tools to be able to deliver the common-core 9 standards, with the right curriculum, and also be 10 able to deliver it with the universal design. 11 I think that that's really the most important 12 thing. 13 And I think until you have that, we're not 14 going to be able to effectively -- I don't think 15 those -- I don't think those sort of measures are 16 going to benefit students, because teachers have 17 to -- they have the tools to be able to provide 18 instruction. 19 And, right now, when I look at our State's 20 waiver, all that I really see, is I see a lot of 21 different turnaround models. I see that there's 22 going to be webinars for teachers. 23 There's no at-the-elbow professional 24 development for teachers. 25 The other problem is with the accommodations. 1 I mean, there's been no sort of professional 2 development, or even consideration for developing 3 professional development, to even talk about how to 4 deliver these accommodations. 5 So when I start seeing the different mandate 6 relief proposals: Oh, flexibility. They're not -- 7 you know, we're currently not using -- "We're not 8 getting bang for our buck," is what I hear. 9 We're not getting bang for our buck with all 10 of these additional above-the-federal mandates. 11 Well, I think that if we actually had the 12 right evaluations, and the teachers actually knew 13 how -- what was available, if we standardized 14 accommodations, and they were delivered through 15 instruction, it would be most helpful. 16 But, I don't think that we're going to be 17 able to -- I think we're putting the cart before the 18 house, as everybody else said. 19 I think we need to work on solidifying 20 delivering the content, and then worry a little bit 21 more about how we're going to be assessing it. 22 Does that make sense? 23 SENATOR FLANAGAN: It does. 24 DONALD BARLOW: I mean, it's really -- 25 it's -- you can't be expected to deliver a 1 completely new content standards, and they're saying 2 that you can differentiate, and not have any of the 3 technology to do that, and be worried about how 4 you're going to be assessed. 5 I mean, you should be assessing your students 6 every day. And I think that the good teachers are 7 doing that; they're assessing their students every 8 day. 9 SENATOR FLANAGAN: Yeah, I have two questions 10 for an end, but, just a comment: Part of my 11 concern -- 12 And you have a child in middle school; 13 correct? 14 JAYE BEA SMALLEY: Two children, with very 15 different issues. 16 Yeah. 17 SENATOR FLANAGAN: Okay. 18 -- the idea of slowing down implementation, 19 part of my reaction is, as a parent, is saying: Why 20 do I have to slow down and wait? Why can't they be 21 taking care of my kid properly right now? 22 So, that's a rhetorical question. 23 But, the same question that I asked everybody 24 else: If you were grading New York State's testing 25 system, what would you give it, and why? 1 JAYE BEA SMALLEY: Well, I would definitely 2 give it a "zero," because it really is not the right 3 assessment system to measure progress and students 4 with disabilities. 5 And that's the one that is used for 6 accountability purposes. 7 I think that what we really need, is we need 8 legislation that is going to provide for some sort 9 of a task force, like Maryland did, on universal 10 design, so we can make sure that all of this is 11 being implemented properly. 12 We need educators on that task force. 13 And that will, actually, I think all of these 14 cost concerns that are being brought up, all of that 15 can be addressed, and we can make sure that we're 16 not making any mistakes, in terms of how we're 17 implementing things. 18 And you can also -- one of the things that I 19 know they addressed in Maryland, is: What do you do 20 in areas where you have a lack of infrastructure and 21 technology, when you are rolling out these Park 22 tests that are available online? 23 So, I think we need to do that. 24 I think that we also need to give parents of 25 students with disabilities the right to opt out of 1 these tests, if they're not going to be appropriate 2 for the students, and they're not going be accurate 3 measures of what the students are learning. 4 If you can't -- if the test is not 5 accessible, and it's not -- if you have a child with 6 an intractable reading disability, and there's 7 nobody who can deliver the proper accommodations for 8 a New York State ELA test, math test, why should -- 9 why should you have to -- what -- why should your 10 child have to take that test? 11 SENATOR FLANAGAN: I'm going to assume that 12 yours is a rhetorical question, but let me ask you 13 one last thing, please. 14 Same thing: If you could change something, 15 within reasonable constraints, what would you like 16 that to be? 17 JAYE BEA SMALLEY: In reasonable constraints, 18 I would amend the APPR bill, to -- to not enforce 19 any of -- to not put the pressure on the educators. 20 To, basically, like a "hold harmless" for two years, 21 as we go through the implementation, so educators 22 can really be more focused on truly developing the 23 skills that they need, and, also, really focus on 24 implementing the right assessments, the right growth 25 models. 1 SENATOR FLANAGAN: Yeah, I completely agree 2 with you. 3 I think our move to common core is largely a 4 good thing, but, it is a work in progress. 5 And if we are going to be basing evaluations 6 ultimately on that, I think -- personally, I think 7 that three years is probably better. 8 But, I appreciate you coming here, and I 9 appreciate your patience very much. 10 And the last thing is: This goes to show you 11 can learn something new every day. 12 I don't know enough about universal design. 13 I will pay more attention. 14 And, I sit as the Senate's representative to 15 the Education Reform Commission, formed by 16 Governor Cuomo. So, I'm sure that could be made 17 part of our discussions. 18 But -- 19 JAYE BEA SMALLEY: Yeah, I would love to -- I 20 can -- I could give you a whole presentation on 21 universal design and learning sometime. 22 And, they have introduced the bill in the 23 Assembly, 8196. 24 And, when I submit all of my documents to 25 you, I'll make sure that you have that. Okay? 1 Thank you. 2 SENATOR FLANAGAN: Thank you very much. 3 JAYE BEA SMALLEY: You're welcome. 4 SENATOR FLANAGAN: Okay, last, but by no 5 means least, Lisa Edstrom, Parent Voices of 6 New York. 7 Hi, Lisa. 8 LISA EDSTROM: Thank you, Senator, for this 9 opportunity to speak. 10 SENATOR FLANAGAN: I married a Lisa, so I 11 have to listen to everything you say. 12 LISA EDSTROM: Good. 13 I'm here today -- I have 20 years' experience 14 as an educator, but I'm really here as a parent. 15 And, I'm part of an organization called 16 "Parent Voices New York," which started up 17 recently in Brooklyn, New York, but we welcome 18 parents from all over the state. 19 And we're really just trying to get parent 20 voices out there, so we really appreciate that 21 you're allowing me to speak as a parent today. 22 I'm not as an educator, and not as an expert, 23 in that respect, but as an expert on my children, 24 and representing parents who want to have more of a 25 voice in the conversation. 1 In thinking about where we've come from, and 2 where we are now, with testing, I have a lot of 3 concerns as a parent. 4 As an educator, I've experienced 20 years of 5 what testing has looked like in New York State. 6 I started off as a kindergarten teacher in 7 Mount Kisco many years ago. And, now I'm in teacher 8 education. 9 But as a parent, what I've seen in the last 10 five years or so, has really distressed me, as I see 11 it distressing my children, in terms of the stakes 12 that are put on. 13 I think the concern for parents is really 14 around the high stakes of testing. 15 We want assessments. We want to know what 16 our children are doing, what our children are 17 learning, what they need to improve on. 18 We want our teachers to have those tools. 19 And we think that assessment really should be 20 about helping improve children's learning in the 21 classroom, but our concerns, that these high-stakes 22 tests don't do that. That these high-stakes tests 23 that are being used to evaluate teachers, evaluate 24 schools, and school closures are based upon these 25 test scores, put too much pressure on our children, 1 and put too much pressure on the teachers. 2 And what we're seeing is, now, teaching to 3 the test. 4 One of the earlier speakers talked about how 5 four to six weeks, on average, is spent now in test 6 prep. 7 In New York City, in some schools that I 8 visit, more than that. Test prep start starts in 9 beginning of the year. 10 I have a child now in third grade. 11 When he was in first grade, he got homework 12 that was called "test-prep homework." And, there is 13 no test in first grade. This is getting him ready 14 for third grade. 15 These are the kinds of concerns that we've, 16 as parents. You know, what are the impacts on our 17 children? 18 My older child, who is now in high school, 19 when he was in seventh grade, developed a facial 20 tick around the time of testing. 21 And we realized, as soon as his testing was 22 over, the tick went away. 23 So, there are risks associated with the 24 pressures that are put on our children around these 25 tests. And I think that the pressure is put there 1 because the testing is now driving the curriculum 2 because there are so many -- the stakes are now so 3 high for our teachers in our schools. 4 When assessments were really about 5 understanding what our children knew, so that we 6 could improve what was going on the classroom level, 7 we didn't have that -- those kinds of issues that 8 we're having -- that we're seeing now. 9 I want to speak briefly to the field tests, 10 because I -- that did come up. And it wasn't 11 something that I originally had planned for my 12 testimony, but, I definitely was part of a group 13 that protested at Pearson last week, against the 14 field tests. 15 And, one of the concerns I have, as a parent, 16 with regards to field testing, is that, as a 17 professional, as an educational researcher, I'm 18 required to get informed consent. 19 But, field tests are, essentially, research 20 being done on our children, about tests, for 21 Pearson, for State Education Department, and nobody 22 is asking me, as a parent, for my informed consent 23 to use my child for that research. 24 Again -- 25 1 SENATOR FLANAGAN: Let me just interject. 2 LISA EDSTROM: Yeah, sure. 3 SENATOR FLANAGAN: I agree, to a certain 4 extent, but, if at some point we are going to have 5 reliable tests that do proper assessing, that the 6 field test is the precursor. 7 LISA EDSTROM: Well, I don't disagree with 8 this idea of the notion of field testing, but I do 9 think that parents should be informed. 10 And, in New York City, in most schools, 11 parents weren't even told that it was happening. 12 And it became -- 13 SENATOR FLANAGAN: But whose fault is that? 14 LISA EDSTROM: I would imagine school 15 administrators. 16 I mean, what happened within New York City, 17 is that, a network of parents informing parents, got 18 the word out to as many people as possible. 19 But, even in my own school, as I was talking 20 to parents, the parents in the grades that were 21 testing were saying: What are you talking about? 22 I've never heard of this. 23 So, again, I don't know whose fault that is. 24 But, as a parent, I want to know when my 25 child is being asked to sit for a test. 1 I know about the mandated State tests, but I 2 wasn't informed about the field tests from my 3 school. 4 And that's a concern to me. 5 And, again, like I said, there are risks 6 associated with this, in terms of doing the 7 research, because there are reactions that children 8 have, that parents have, that teachers have, around 9 these high stakes, that are stressful to our 10 children. 11 And we want to be able to say: Maybe I want 12 to opt out of this field test, because I don't think 13 that my child needs to be put through that stress 14 again, after having sat through the mandated State 15 testing for six days. 16 SENATOR FLANAGAN: Do you agree with the 17 implementation of common core? 18 LISA EDSTROM: I do agree with the 19 implementation of the common core. 20 What I don't agree with, is the high stakes 21 that are put on the tests. 22 SENATOR FLANAGAN: Okay, so which tests would 23 you get rid of? 24 LISA EDSTROM: If I had my way, I'd get rid 25 of all of the high-stakes testing, and I would go 1 back to local classroom assessments that are 2 designed by teachers, for teaching. 3 SENATOR FLANAGAN: So, you would get rid of, 4 virtually, all the New York State tests? 5 LISA EDSTROM: I would get -- I'm actually 6 not against the Regents. I think they're good 7 standard benchmarks, although, I, as a parent, only 8 just heading into that, because I have a 9 ninth-grader. 10 But, I really don't think that testing 11 grades 3 through 8, every year, for these standards, 12 and not to measure what my child knows in a way that 13 informs me as a parent, or my child's teachers, to 14 help improve the education that they're getting in 15 the classroom; but, rather, to judge the school, 16 externally, in a way that just puts pressure on my 17 kids. 18 I'd get rid of those. 19 If there was some way that they could be 20 tested earlier in the year, that that information 21 could be used by the teachers so they could say, Oh, 22 your child needs to work on X, Y, and Z, and we're 23 going to do that, I wouldn't be against that. 24 But, I -- 25 SENATOR FLANAGAN: Well, I had asked that 1 question early on. 2 The test, right in the beginning of the year, 3 as a diagnostic test. And then -- 4 LISA EDSTROM: That would be okay. 5 But, right now, what we're seeing is, way too 6 much time spent on test prep, not on good 7 instruction, for these tests that don't inform us of 8 anything, as parents or teachers. 9 SENATOR FLANAGAN: Okay, the other two 10 questions that I asked everyone, so you've now had a 11 chance to listen to everyone else's answers -- 12 LISA EDSTROM: I have. 13 SENATOR FLANAGAN: -- on a scale of 1 to 10? 14 LISA EDSTROM: On a scale of 1 to 10, I would 15 give the tests a "1." 16 And the reason I don't give them a zero, is 17 because I do think that the current state of the 18 accountability has raised at least more of an 19 awareness of the failures of our education system to 20 really address the needs of children of color and 21 low-income children, by -- 22 SENATOR FLANAGAN: Okay, if you could change 23 one thing? 24 LISA EDSTROM: I would ditch the system we've 25 got, and look at how we can really, maybe go towards 1 portfolio-based assessments that are asking children 2 and teachers to look, over time, at the improvements 3 that are being made. 4 Or, even what you suggested earlier, 5 pre-testing and post-testing. 6 But, not these tests that are really about 7 high stakes, and only judging teachers in schools. 8 SENATOR FLANAGAN: Okay, last, but by no 9 means least: If you had to pick out, what's the 10 best thing about education in the state of New York, 11 today? 12 LISA EDSTROM: Oh, that's a tough one. 13 I think it varies, but I think the best thing 14 about my children's education in the state of 15 New York, has been the diversity of the experiences 16 they've had. 17 However, I will add a caveat to that. 18 My younger child who is this third grade now, 19 is not getting quite the diversity of experiences 20 that my older child had, because of the focus on 21 testing now. 22 He's not getting as much science or 23 social studies. 24 He is getting a strong arts program, but 25 that's because it's an enrichment program that's 1 supported by the PTA. 2 SENATOR FLANAGAN: Okay. 3 Thank you very much. 4 LISA EDSTROM: Thank you. 5 SENATOR FLANAGAN: For those of you who are 6 still with us, I really appreciate your patience. 7 And, the room finally cooled down after a 8 long period of time. 9 But, as I had said in the beginning, we will 10 make sure that, ultimately, there's a record of 11 everything, including all of the comments that we've 12 gotten, that were submitted today formally, and 13 those that we've gotten in our office more 14 informally. 15 Thank you. 16 17 (Whereupon, the public hearing, held 18 before the New York State Senate Standing 19 Committee on Education, concluded.) 20 21 ---oOo--- 22 23 24 25