The Department of Education is proposing changes in existing policies, called Chancellor’s Regulations, regarding promotion standards, and the way in which principals and assistant principals are chosen. It is also proposing a new regulation governing procedures for locating or closing schools or changing current building usage. The Panel for Educational Policy will vote on these measures at the Nov.12 meeting at PS 128 in Queens; in the meantime the public is invited to review the proposals and weigh in on them.

The revised state law governing NYC schools renewed mayoral control of the city school system, but modified it in an effort to increase parent input. The law explicitly requires announcement of PEP meeting agendas at least 10 days in advance. In this case, the DOE provided the information more than a month in advance. However, it is not clear how public comments (which are not actually being made public) will make a difference in the proposals or the outcome of the PEP vote. (more…)

On the front page of today’s New York Times comes the news that New York State’s 4th-graders did not fare as well on the federal math exams as they did the last time they were tested in 2007; 8th-graders scored only slightly higher than in the past.

We don’t yet know how New York City students scored on the National Assessment of Educational Progress test, which is given to a sampling of students every two years, but critics are already comparing the rather dismal statewide results to the much-heralded NYC gains on 2009 state tests and renewing their charge that the state exams are simply too easy.

GothamSchools covers the story, and asks, “If the state tests are easier, how did they get that way?”

Meanwhile, Merryl Tisch, chancellor of the New York Board of Regents, reiterated her vow to raise standards on the state math exams.  Both the math and ELA exams will be given later than in previous years.  According to the State Education Department calendar, the ELA exams are scheduled for late April; math tests will be given in May.

Has math test prep begun at your school?

For time immemorial, elementary school students have been pulled out of class for mandatory hearing tests — often administered by school aides in noisy hallways, or school closets. No more. The Department of Education announced this month that it has done away with hearing screening in elementary schools, following recommendations made by the United States Preventive Services Task Force, a group that advises the federal government on screening and preventive health services.

The reason for the reversal? Apparently there is no solid evidence that hearing screening at this age leads to better educational or social outcomes. In addition, many times the screenings showed a false positive - when actually the hearing loss was due to a temporary medical condition such as the build up of ear wax!

According to health officials, most severe hearing deficiencies are now detected in infancy, thanks to universal neonatal hearing screening.

While one screening in schools has been done away with, another has been added. Tuesday the Daily News reported that all students who attend publicly funded pre-kindergarten programs must undergo a mandatory screening for developmental delays. Last year some 56,000 kids attended public pre-K programs — this year there are even more enrolled, according to the DOE, although there is no final count as yet. (more…)

Today The New York Times reports that 7th-graders who correctly answered only 44% of the questions on state math exams were rewarded with a passing grade. After similar reports published this summer, this latest analysis doesn’t come as a surprise.

According to the Times, the threshold for passing was 60% in 2006, but now kids can get by with fewer correct answers on the math exam in every grade. And a passing grade (Level 3 or 4) isn’t required for promotion; a student only needs a Level 2 to move up. The Times says that the number of right answers needed to earn a 2 has dropped so low that on some tests, “a student could randomly guess and still stand a good chance of moving on to the next grade.”

And don’t forget, in August, the Daily News found that the number of right answers needed to earn a 2 on the 6th-grade reading test had “sunk so low” that a student could guess on the multiple choice section and leave the rest of the test blank. Perhaps that’s part of the reason why the number of 6th-graders who scored a Level 1 dropped from 10% in ‘06 to 0.2% this year.

While some state officials defend the tests and cutoff scores, State Board of Regents Chancellor Merryl H. Tisch, assured the Times that the Board understands the faults in its current system. “We are painfully aware of the fact that our tests do not align with the national tests,” she said. “We need to align new standards with a new set of assessments that are rigorous and dependable.”

Voters were divided in our last poll about testing preschoolers for admissions to gifted and talented programs. One thing appeared to be clear, though: you’re not happy with the status quo–only 2% of responses supported leaving the system as it is! We appreciate your feedback:

“Fed Up Mom” thinks G&T programs are a waste of money. According to her, G&T classes have substantially fewer students at her school. “My child would have benefited from a smaller class but couldn’t have it because they wasted a teacher on the G&T kids,” she said.

Parent Alexandria Gecin agrees that all students need smaller classes and quality education — not just those who do well on a test. She added, ” G & T doesn’t test for high artistic ablility, musical ability, high maturity, great spatial skills or anything other than an ability to pass what is essentially a little kid’s IQ test.”

One mom, however, shared that G&T classes were her son’s ticket out of a bad local school. Many more of you shared your thoughts on our initial post about testing 4-year-olds. Thanks for joining the conversation!

Now as we head into the second week of classes, we’re wondering how much of a dent new school supplies made in your family budget. The Daily News reported Wednesday that some parents are struggling to pay for back-to-school items in these tough economic times. How did your family fare? Vote now, and add your comments below!

Before the city released the 2008-2009 school progress reports Wednesday, the New York Post braced us for shockingly high results. But after the release, the Post had to update its statistics — quite a bit. A whopping 97% of the city’s elementary and middle schools received As and Bs, even higher than the 85% first reported. Just 27 schools citywide received Cs, Ds, or Fs.

Chancellor Klein wants to clarify what the good grades mean, according to The New York Times. To be sure, he says, they do not indicate that schools are stellar. Rather, the grades indicate that schools met their “progress target.” And the grading system mainly defines progress by how much student test scores improve from one year to the next.

But with state tests’ soaring scores already under fire, should we put any stock in a grading system guided by those scores? We’re not the first to ask that question. (more…)

The New York Post reports astonishing news today: more than 85% of elementary and middle schools earned an A or B on 2009  school “progress reports,” which are expected to be released today. Even more surprising is that only two schools received Fs.

Those stats have improved enormously in just two years, according to the Post. In 2007, only 61% of schools earned top marks and 35 schools received Fs. Many of the failing schools have since been closed or have new principals. (Learn more about the fate of failing schools in today’s Daily News.) (more…)

Most respondents to last week’s poll said that ARIS is a helpful tool, and only a few felt that it’s a waste of the city’s money. Unfortunately, a large chunk of voters didn’t even know what ARIS is. Thanks for your thoughtful comments!

On Wednesday, we highlighted criticism of the Department of Education’s gifted and talented admissions process. The authors of “Nurture Shock,” a new book that examines child rearing practices, argue that the city’s system of awarding G&T seats “flouts science.” Even though research shows that young children’s test results are not indicative of future academic success, the city administers tests to preschoolers to determine G&T program eligibility for kindergarten (when the highest percentage of G&T are open).

We’ve received a ton of reader feedback about the G&T process — on test prep, test results, placement, and more. With “Nurture Shock” expected to hit bookstores in September, we’d like to know if you think the system should be changed. Vote now and please add your thoughts below!

Though the city released the results of the ELA and math state exams this spring, the debate over the value of these standardized tests reignited this month. The latest argument on the table? The Daily News reported yesterday that, even with Bloomberg ‘raising the bar’ with his proposed promotion policy, 6th-graders can score high enough on the state English test to move onto the next grade simply by guessing.

In fact, says the News, the number of 6th-graders who scored at the bottom, Level 1 dropped from 10% in 2006, when twice as many points were required to pass, to 0.2% this year. And, according to the News, it’s not just lower standards on the reading test; a June article reported that Jennifer Jennings, a sociology doctoral student at Columbia University, found the state math exams are easier, too. (more…)

Arts education has taken a backseat in New York City public schools for the past few years. With emphasis placed squarely on improving reading and math test scores, the arts are too often considered “extras.” According to the non-profit Center for Arts Education, the city’s public schools are not even meeting state requirements that mandate a certain percentage of instructional hours dedicated to the arts - as much as 20% of time in lower elementary grades and a paltry one semester for the entire four years of high school.

CAE has been lobbying for dedicated arts funding for the schools  and now it wants to enlist parent advocates. As part of a “Parent Fellows” program, 8-10 parent leaders citywide will be trained  in arts education advocacy tactics.  Tasks will include  visiting schools and reaching out to parents  to increase awareness of the benefits of arts education.  Parent Fellows will be paid a monthly stipend, as yet to be determined, and will be trained in leadership skills. (more…)

At a midtown Chase Bank this morning, star-shaped mylar balloons heralded successful high school students who earned hundreds of dollars for top marks on their May AP exams. The students are participants in the two-year-old Rewarding Achievement, or REACH, program, a New York City pay-for-performance initiative that gives financial awards to students who pass AP exams.

The program operates at 31 high schools that serve low-income, minority communities. At these schools, participating students not only have financial incentives for taking AP courses. REACH also provides students with free study guides and Saturday test prep to support them throughout the academic year.

This “experiment in incentives and additional support,” as REACH’s Executive Director Edward Rodriguez described it, seems to be paying off. At the awards reception this morning, Schools Chancellor Joel Klein announced an increase in the overall number of students taking AP courses at REACH program sites, and a 21% increase in students passing AP exams. In particular, he highlighted a 35% gain among black and Latino students. (more…)

If you have a rising high school freshman  or sophomore and  moved to the city after Oct. 31, 2008, you still have the chance to apply to some of the city’s most sought-after schools. You teen can register now to take the specialized high school exam, or audition for LaGuardia High School for the Arts, for entrance in September.

The nine specialized high schools are highly selective: eight of them base admissions on the results of an exam while LaGuardia requires an audition to one of its six arts programs.  There is at least one specialized high school in each of five boroughs, and you may register for either an audition or the exam (or both!) at any of the Department of Education’s borough enrollment offices. The exam will be given on Monday, Aug. 31, and auditions for LaGuardia will be held on Friday, Sept. 4. The last day to register is Aug. 27.

There are also high school  seats available for rising juniors at another selective school:  Bard High School Early College II in Queens, which offers students the opportunity to graduate with a high school diploma and a two-year degree from Bard College. Bard requires applicants to take an entrance assessment and schedule an in-person interview. To find out more, call (212) 995-8479 ext. 2043, (212) 995-8479 ext. 2041, or (845) 546-0364.

Is your high school still accepting students for September 2009? Let us know whom to contact below!

The Daily News reported yesterday that five of the city’s schools that posted the lowest scores on state math exams this year had been  opened to replace  failing schools  closed by the Department of Education for poor performance. Additionally, the News reported, some of the schools slated for closure this year actually made test score improvements that were twice that of the citywide average . Other schools targeted for closure posted scores close to the citywide average when their student demographics (such as the special education population or number of English Language Learners) are taken into account.

The policy of closing schools is one of the most controversial initiatives launched since the state gave Mayor Bloomberg control of the city’s school system. What is your experiences with “replacement” schools in your neighborhood?  Do you support or oppose the policy?

Families of soon-to-be kindergartners or 1st-graders who are new to the city may request an application to test for gifted and talented programs. Applications are due July 16. Contact your local placement office for an application.

The Department of Education will not guarantee placement — even for students who qualify — because spaces are limited. All parents whose children are tested will be notified by August 31.

Note:  You must have proof that you did not move to the city before February 15 and proof of current NYC residence.

Update: The math scores are out and both state and city education officials have been busy touting the “steady, measured gains” (as opposed to the “steady, moderate” gains on the ELA exam). Across the state, 86.4 percent of students in 3rd to 8th grade have scored proficient, versus 65 percent in 2006 and 80.7 percent last year. In the city, 81.8 percent of 3rd to 8th grade students scored proficient, versus 57 percent in 2006 and 74.3 percent last year. The city press release touts the fact that the achievement gaps - between the races, the city and the rest of the state, and elementary versus middle school students - have continued to close, albeit slowly. See the Times and Gotham Schools for more analysis and see the press release from City Hall for the mayor’s spin on the scores.

Morning post: The New York State Department of Education will release 2009 math scores for students in grades 3 through 8 at 10:30 am today.

On the standardized reading exam this year, “steady, moderate” statewide gains mirrored citywide trends; 2008 math scores in the city, which historically have posted at higher levels than language scores, showed 79.7 percent of 4th graders at or above state proficiency standards, along with 59.6 percent of 8th graders. (The ongoing mayoral control debate, here and in Albany, will undoubtedly include much discussion on whether the grade-school to middle-school gap and the historic achievement gap between the races have narrowed or not.)

Break out the popcorn– it’s movie time in Advanced Placement classes around the city!

It’s common knowledge that after the AP tests, which take place in early May, AP classes become a total joke. At LaGuardia, stories are passed down about the dumbest, most irrelevant movies teachers have shown for the last month of school, or which AP teachers expect you to actually show up in class after the test. It would be a lie to say that some part of me does not enjoy this payoff for hard work, but I do think it reflects directly on the test-prep culture that we all have entered. Though APs are test-prep courses by nature, I’ve learned information and study skills that will be useful for life. And unlike most standardized tests and the SATs, I find the AP tests to be measures of real learning and understanding, not of a student’s ability to test well. Learning how to write essays or speak Spanish for the AP test are skills that I will need, and use, forever. But in these last few weeks of school, when all teaching and learning in AP classes ends abruptly, I wonder if my teachers feel the same way. If the AP skills are life skills, why do teachers stop teaching the day after the test?

It seems to me that when the focus of a year is a test, teachers do not push themselves to go beyond. A month of school is a lot of time to waste just because “we took the test.” We could still be learning: The AP Composition test is over, but I have hundreds of essays left to write in my life, not to mention the other ways I will to need to organize and present my thoughts. There are hundreds of good books left to read and analyze, and hundreds of countries I plan to visit where I will need my Spanish skills.

I think the time after the test should be prized teaching time. To me, it seems like every good teacher’s dream: with no test at the end, teachers can teach whatever they want , however they want, and at whatever pace the students need.

Students and teachers complain a lot about the limits of standardized testing, but why don’t we take advantage of the freedom that comes once the big test is over? I would encourage AP teachers and students alike to take advantage of this time of looseness to teach and learn in new, interesting and creative ways. It’s a luxury we can’t afford to squander.

Dear Judy,

How are ELA scores typically given to parents and students? Do they come over the Acuity site or are they handed out in paper? And are they really released school by school or only at the end of the year?

Impatient Parents

Dear Impatient Parents,

Standardized test scores are produced by the New York State Education Department and are in a state database called nySTART. It is separate from the Acuity system, which deals with New York City interim assessments. The DOE has an overarching database called ARIS, which includes information from Acuity and other sources. According to DOE spokesperson Andy Jacob, schools will be distributing login information to ARIS Parent Link over the next several weeks. “By the end of school year,” he said, “parents will be able to log on to ARIS to view information about their child’s academic progress.” Meanwhile, you can log into Acuity for interim assessment results, but it won’t include the results of the state tests. If you are unsure how to log in, check with your school.

According to Grace Pepe, Director of Assessment Operations at the Department of Education, principals can access scores about a week before their official release date but the information is embargoed until after a press conference to announce the results. This year’s scores were announced May 7.

What happens next is up to your principal. Some principals will respond to individual parents’ requests for their children’s scores before the whole school gets to know. Other principals release all the scores immediately, by letter home, while some others save the information until final report cards are given out at the end of the term. Obviously, for kids whose promotion is in doubt or have a very low score, the principal should share the score with parents right away. By the way, the New York State Education Department says that results of the state math test will not be released until mid to late June.

If you want to find out why your child did not perform up to expectations, you can ask to see the “item analysis” for your child’s test. The principal has that information and can go over it with you. But if what you really want is to find out whether there was a mistake in the scoring, or if you wish to take a look at your child’s tests, you should ask the school principal for a parent request form to see a copy of the test and the answer sheet. You’ll need proof that you are the student’s parents, so you may either get the principal to attest to that or you can have the form notarized. In either case, the form goes to the Office of Accountability-Scan Center, 44-36 Vernon Boulevard, Room #206, L.I.C., N.Y. 11101, Attention: Grace Pepe. It will take some time, but the process should result in an appointment to see the tests.

Judy

 Have a school question for Judy?  Search archives | Contact Judy

After days of scrambling and searching for about 60 missing gifted and talented program tests for students at PS 9 in Manhattan, Department of Education spokesman Andy Jacob said yesterday that the test company, Pearson, found the mis-marked box — but that the tests everyone thought were there, weren’t.

“We’re going to retest the students whose tests we can’t locate,” Jacob said after a letter went out to PS 9 families explaining the process. Do-overs will begin this weekend at the DOE headquarters, Tweed Courthouse, and continue through Thursday at PS 9. Department of Education officials will hand-score the tests and have promised that families “will receive score reports by Tuesday, May 26″ — with applications due Friday, the 29th. Jacob also said that “turning in their applications later won’t affect their chances of being placed in a particular program.”

“There’s nothing we can do to fully make up for the inconvenience and frustration of this situation for the affected families,” said Jacob. “The best thing we can do is retest the students and get them their results as quickly as possible.”

The students will not repeat the full OLSAT exam that was offered in the fall, but will instead take a “breach form of OLSAT,” according to the DOE’s letter to parents, which is the “alternate form used in all retesting situations.”

Parents at PS 9 wonder why their kids have to retest at all. Natalie Redmond, whose daughter’s test was lost, asks why last year’s test scores can’t be used in lieu of a new test. Redmond points out that DOE will use old tests to place some children in G&T programs – if it’s “good enough for kids in the outer boroughs,” Redmond asks, why isn’t the option of using last year’s scores open to PS 9 parents as well?

Whether the missing-tests kids will gain a competitive edge by repeating a familiar test hasn’t been broached. It seems clear, though, that the DOE could mandate practices to prevent this kind of crisis: Why aren’t schools required to photocopy test papers before they’re sent? Seems as simple as a fail-safe can be.

As the mayoral-control debate escalates here and in Albany, a parallel conversation is simmering locally, about the city’s recent rise in standardized test scores.

Two Daily News articles set a strong counterpoint: Last week, columnist Juan Gonzalez challenged the gains touted by the Department of Education, asserting that poor children lack the opportunity for achievement that many others have — and that charters, which enroll far fewer English language learners and special-needs students, benefit from their exclusionary policies. Gonzales concludes, “…when something looks too good to be true, it usually is. ”

Today, big jumps in reading scores are celebrated in the News — but a principal’s explanation of how her school improved test scores is chillingly revealing: “What really helped us was looking at our data and driving the instruction based on that,” Principal Lillian Catalano, a 23-year public school veteran, told the News. School officials “spent hours scouring” students’ work on previous assessments to figure out “where they needed help … on the statewide reading test,” the article explains.

Simply put, this principal and her faculty embraced the data — and upped their scores by ‘teaching to the test.’ They figured out what kids needed to know to do better, and they taught it. But teaching to the test necessarily takes time from other subjects; it limits what a school can offer, and what a teacher can teach. And it doesn’t mean kids are actually learning to think for themselves or master content outside the testing area. Historically, teaching to the test was universally considered a bad thing, but tables turn, and today, it’s lauded. Schools that do the best job of sussing out what the testers want gain the most praise and public recognition; progress reports, based largely on a school’s test scores, can determine a principal’s tenure and even a school’s survival.

It’s hard to argue with a principal who sees the importance of raising scores. The bigger question is what’s lost when the focus-field narrows — when data, scores, and testing outpace content in the classroom.

Parents of children who tested for 1st, 2nd and 3rd grade seats in district and citywide gifted and talented programs this year have faced frustration and confusion as they await news of test scores — and, for parents at one Upper West Side school in Manhattan, for evidence that their children actually took the critical tests.

Department of Education spokesman Andy Jacob confirms that “several parents at PS 9… have not received a score report even though their children took the admissions test.” He continues, “We are working with the school and the test company to locate the tests,” and adds, “We’ll obviously make sure that none of these students who took the test are at a disadvantage in the application process.” What he doesn’t detail is precisely how the students whose tests are AWOL will be evaluated; some parents have suggested using last year’s scores, others protest that using old tests will skew this year’s outcome (see below). To date, the DOE is silent on how it means to address any potential “disadvantage.”

We’ve also heard from many parents of children who were permitted to apply for citywide G&T programs based on last year’s scores — which contradicts what Jacob told us last week. In an email, he writes to correct “incomplete information” for students in the Bronx, Staten Island, and Queens — boroughs that, for the most part, did not have kindergarten-entry G&T programs last year. “The hardship of traveling to Manhattan may have dissuaded some families from applying,” says Jacob, which is why the DOE will permit eligible children to apply for citywide G&T programs based on last year’s scores. (Never mind that none of the new citywides will open in the Bronx or Staten Island.) So the bottom line seems to be, some students may apply for citywides on last year’s scores — provided they don’t live in Brooklyn or Manhattan.

The situation with PS 122 in Queens continues to evolve: (more…)

Quick catch-up for parents looking for 1st-grade gifted and talented program information; we have answers from the Department of Education to some general questions (thank you, Andy Jacob), and look forward to details on a couple of specific questions tomorrow or early next week.

First, Jacob says, “Applications were mailed to all kindergarten and 1st-grade students, including those who qualified as entering kindergarteners in 1st-grade-entry districts last year.” If you haven’t yet received word from the DOE about your child’s application, contact the DOE’s Gifted and Talented program office at (212) 374-5165 or (212) 374-5972.

Second, parents have asked if their child’s kindergarten seat is at risk if they choose to apply for citywide G&T (provided their child tested this year and meets eligibility criteria, of course). Concerns about risking a seat are unwarranted, says Jacob. “Unless a child actually accepts another placement, she keeps her current placement.”

Third, we raised a number of questions that have to do with particular districts or particular schools: Regarding Queens’ District 30, the DOE plans to offer G&T programs in three schools come September: PS 150, PS 122 (both in District 30) and PS 217 on Roosevelt Island (District 2). (We are going back to DOE with questions about the commute.)

Readers raised questions about PS 122, which historically began G&T classes in 2nd grade, wondering whether beginning next year’s program in kindergarten would jeopardize 122’s current 1st-graders, some of whom might enter the school’s established G&T program next year. Jacob was unfamiliar with the specific situation, but promised to follow up with G&T staffers; we’ll stay on this.

In District 28, where parents had concerns about too few seats for the number of children who qualified for district G&T programs, Jacob says two additional schools are listed on the application — at PS 220 and PS 55.

Additionally, we have heard from two families of current G&T kindergarten students in Manhattan’s PS 9 who told us that scores for the tests their children took this year are missing. Despite thorough searching at DOE by G&T office workers, the parents say, there is no trace of the test results — or any record that the children actually sat for this year’s test. These parents rightly ask, what happened to the tests their children took? They also want to know what’s next if the tests are truly AWOL — will the DOE use eligibility scores from last year’s test? And finally, in a DOE whose professed hallmark is accountability and transparency, how can there be no paper trail — no physical record of who took which test when? Jacob will, we trust, offer answers to these questions soon.

In the interim, if your child sat for the G&T tests and you have not received notice of her or his scores from DOE, let us know, contact your parent coordinator, and call the DOE to report your concern first thing Monday morning. And if you’re among the families of PS 9 whose children’s tests seem to be missing, please be in touch, so we can try to track down what happened.

Update: The scores for New York City schools and charter schools have been posted.

Mayor Mike Bloomberg and Schools Chancellor Joel Klein celebrated the city’s gains on English Language Arts test scores in Washington, D.C. yesterday even as the State’s new Regents head, Merryl Tisch, characterized the same gains as “moderate” — a perfect object lesson in how the same set of numbers can be used to support different points of view.

The biggest news, according to the Department of Education’s Jennifer Bell-Ellwanger and Deputy Mayor Dennis Walcott at yesterday’s press briefing, was an 11-point gain from 2007 to 2008 — the largest single-year gain since annual state testing of third through eighth-graders began in 2006. Rises in middle school scores were attributed by the DOE to its middle-school initiatives — in place for less than six months when the actual tests were taken. Officials also credited the abundance of data-driven analysis made available to schools, and the hard work of teachers, principals and the city’s parents.

Neither official could dismiss the role of test prep — which Bell-Ellwanger characterized as “test sophistication,” a term Walcott praised and adopted — in the rising test scores. “If they’re familiar with the [state learning] standards, they do better on the test,” said Bell-Ellwanger. “It’s about skills-building.” Walcott added. “Just because students know how to take the test — there’s nothing wrong with that. We all take tests in life. Now, more and more students, especially students of color, are becoming more sophisticated. We’re preparing them for the rest of their lives.” (Former DOE testing czar Robert Tobias, now an NYU professor, told the Daily News, “It’s kind of like how you get to Carnegie Hall - practice, practice, practice.”)

Statewide trends showed a similar rise in overall scores, as did scores in other big cities. Scores in Buffalo outpaced scores in New York, and scale scores — the actual number that places a child at the bottom, middle, or top of the four proficiency levels — showed more modest progress. As ever, girls outpaced boys on the standardized exams and younger students scored higher than middle-schoolers (even with the rise in middle school scores). The storied gap between the races, which had loomed at over 30 percent in years past, has lessened over time, to a 26 percent gap between black and white eighth-graders and 27 percent between Hispanic and white eighth-graders.

It’s hard to know how to receive news that proficiency scores for students with special needs and those who are English Language Learners have “tripled” since 2002. On first hearing, that’s great news — but looking at the stats, only about a third of children in each subgroup earned scores that were proficient or better (level 3 or 4), news that’s much less encouraging than it might first appear.

This afternoon the Chancellor is back in town, after joining the Mayor and strange bedfellows Newt Gingrich and Rev. Al Sharpton yesterday for a meeting with President Barack Obama, to announce ELA scores for New York City’s charter schools. Stay tuned.

News has been scarce for families of kindergarteners who tested for 1st-grade gifted and talented programs. While the numbers are far smaller than those for kindergarten-entry G&T, families have questions — and deserve answers. Here’s what we’ve learned.

Not only were fewer rising 1st-graders tested than kids entering kindergarten, the 1st-grade numbers this year are smaller than they were in 2007: some 11,300 students took the test in 2008, compared with about 15,500 in 2007. Despite the drop, the number of students who qualified for district or citywide G&T programs was comparable: 1,454 in 2007 and 1,429 in 2008, which suggests a proportionally stronger outcome with fewer students tested. Have a look at the spreadsheet to see how children in your district fared.

Andy Jacob, the Department of Education’s press officer, says the difference in the overall number of students tested is due in part to the change in entry grade for programs. Last year, G&T programs began either in kindergarten or 1st grade, but this year all programs begin in kindergarten. Children who tested into district programs in areas where G&T started in 1st grade, didn’t have to retest this year, and will be ‘grandfathered’ into this year’s 1st-grade district G&T pool.

Children who qualified for a citywide G&T kindergarten program last year, but declined the offer of a seat, will not be ‘grandfathered’ into citywide applicant pools. Some families declined seats last year due to distance from the programs, which were all located in Manhattan. This year two new citwide programs in Brooklyn and one in Queens will open, providing more opportunities for children who tested this year.

In terms of qualifying 1st-graders, District 2 still leads the pack: 29 percent of students tested are eligible for gifted programs. Even though other districts tested hundreds more students, District 2 also had the most 1st-graders to clear the citywide bar. Bronx District 5, however, showed the biggest percentage gains. Last year 2 percent of students qualified for citywide G&T, compared to 11 percent this year — a jump from two to 12 students. And 32 District 5 children, up from 12, qualified for district G&T programs.

This afternoon at 1 p.m., the Department of Education will present results of the State English Language Arts exam for New York City public school students in grades 3 through 8.

These scores help to determine a school’s Progress Report score — and, in some cases, its survival.  Principals and teachers can be rewarded handsomely for large gains — but outcomes for fourth- and seventh-grade students are higher still, as the standardized scores children earn in those grades help determine middle- and high-school placement.

We’ll post details after the briefing.  

This week, 8th-graders across New York City are taking standardized science tests, part of the battery of state tests public school students undergo every year. The National Assessment of Educational Progress, or NAEP, is the national yardstick against which state tests are measured; newly released ‘trend’ results from 2008 testing showcase nuggets of good news among a discouraging landscape. (The full report is available here; here’s a link to the Executive Summary. )

Overall, national averages show that younger students are making better progress in math than in reading, but scores for older students flatten to near-nil by the end of high school. For example, 9-year-olds bettered their math scores by 4 points (on a 500-scale, for context) since 2004, and by 24 points since 1973. Thirteen-year-olds have improved 15 points since ‘73 — but only 3 points since ‘04. Results are flat for 17-year-olds, from 1973 to 2008. (more…)

Q: What’s the deal with ‘Score Choice’? Can I really not submit some of my SAT scores? What about colleges that say they will not “honor” this policy?A: If you are totally confused about this “new” policy, join the club. High school juniors in the middle of test-taking season report that they are puzzled by the seeming contradictions of Score Choice. Is Score Choice good for students or not?The answer is: good, sort of. Read on.College Board — the company that brings you the SAT, SAT Subject Tests, and other standardized national exams — states: “Designed to reduce student stress and improve the test-day experience, Score Choice is a new score-reporting feature that gives students the option to choose the SAT scores by test date and SAT subject tests by individual test that they send to colleges, in accordance with each individual’s score-use practice.”Score Choice is an “option,” and a student must select this option, otherwise the scores will be listed on their score-reporting form. This is explained in the small print on collegeboard.com and in their printed literature. When students register online to take the tests, they will see this explanation — but it is easily overlooked. Students who take the SAT multiple times must mark the Score Choice option every time. If a students does not mark the Score Choice option, “the College Board will send all of your scores to the recipient institutions.” (more…)

 Have a question for Jane?  Search archives | Contact the College Counselor

Dear Judy,

What is the use of taking an Advanced Regents diploma? Do colleges even know what a Regents exam is? Wouldn’t it be just as well to take the five basic Regents exams and not bother with more? Or not take them at all?

– High school parent

Dear High School Parent:

For a long time, passing Regents exams was not the only way to get a New York State diploma. For many students, demonstrating competency in major subjects meant passing an easier Regents Competency test (known as the RCT). Then politicians began questioning the true value of a New York State high school diploma, and imposed Regents exams on all students to raise the standards. The New York State Education Department also offered an advanced Regents diploma to those students who followed a more rigorous curriculum. Take a look at Insideschools’ basics on diploma requirements for the specifics.

It’s true that Regents exams are unique to New York State, but in response to the No Child Left Behind law (NCLB) many states have now established exit exams to set standards for their diplomas. In that sense, New York has a leg up with college admissions officers, who have encountered Regents for a long time. Importantly, even if the colleges do not look at the Regents scores at all, and even if you never take the Regents exams themselves, the course load you take to qualify for an Advanced Regents Diploma includes exactly what college admissions offices look for: challenges and effort beyond the basic standard. Just read what City University says on its website to all its applicants: (more…)

 Have a school question for Judy?  Search archives | Contact Judy

E.D. Hirsch, Core Knowledge founder and longtime education advocate, asks good questions today in the Times about testing, even as he endorses ‘teaching to the test,’ provided the test is a good one.

Meanwhile, families are still waiting for results of an urban test without any bubble-in, multi-choice format: Parents of kindergarteners have written in to say they’re still waiting for results from lotteries, local elementary schools, charters — and gifted & talented programs and schools, whose calendar doesn’t square up with other kindergarten registration dates.

And a point of information for parents worried that the school vacation in April means they won’t be able to register their child for kindergarten: You’re right to be concerned. Even though the DOE website says April 13th is the last day to register, the last day of school before vacation is April 8th. (The discrepancy was pointed out to DOE this afternoon; a response is forthcoming — watch the blog.)

In the latest weekly poll, we asked whether you thought there was too much focus on test preparation at your school. The majority of you said yes, with 33 percent reporting “way too much” test prep and 20 percent responding that while there may be too much test preparation, the system, not the school, is to blame. Another 20 percent of respondents wished their school provided more coaching and feel the students were unprepared for the high stakes exams.

Just 26 percent of the respondents felt that their school hit the right balance, with strong enough academics to negate the need for much test prep.

This week, we wonder whether immigrant parents who don’t speak English are included in your school community. A report just released by Advocates for Children, our parent organization, suggests that many non-English speaking parents don’t feel welcome in the city’s public schools. What have you observed in your school community?

Most 6th-graders aren’t yet thinking about high school, but students who aspire to attend the city’s most selective high schools, should start planning now. The Specialized High School Institute, a free 16-month, tutoring and test-prep program geared to help kids prepare for the specialized high school exam, is accepting applications for its 2009-2010 program. Eligible students should have received an application from their school guidance counselor. The application due date is Monday, March 23.

To be eligible for the program, which is sponsored by the city Department of Education, students must be in the 6th grade, qualify for free lunch under the Federal Title 1 program, have scored a level 3 or 4 on the 5th grade state ELA and math tests, and have at least a 90 percent attendance rate. Last year 2000 students participated in SHSI. Sandy Ferguson, executive director of middle school enrollment, said he anticipates that about the same number will enroll this year.

The DOE pre-selects students based on the above criteria, and applications for those students are sent to the student’s school, said a Bronx middle school guidance counselor who asked not to be identified. At his school, where more than 90 percent of the nearly 900 students are poor enough to qualify for free lunch, only four 6th graders are eligible this year.

Admitted students will attend five-week summer sessions in 2009 and 2010. Breakfast and lunch are included, although the schedule is still being finalized, Ferguson said. During the school year students will meet on Wednesday afternoons and Saturdays.

In past years, some parents have complained that their school’s guidance counselor was unaware of the Specialized High School Institute application and thus their children missed the deadline. When asked if parents could submit their application directly to his office, Ferguson replied, “No, there’s a process and they should follow it.” Parents who haven’t received an application but think their children are eligible should contact the school’s guidance counselor. Non-public school students should mail their applications to the Office of Student Enrollment.

Got a question about the process? Contact Paul Shapiro, SHSI program director at PShapiro2@schools.nyc.gov or e-mail SHSI@schools.nyc.gov.

Starting next month, the DOE will test English Language Learners at every grade level to assess their progress toward English proficiency — measurements critical to each school’s Progress Report, and to non-native speakers’ success on Regents exams and eventual graduation. To date, the news is grim, with fewer ELL students graduating high school in 2007 (the most recent data available) than in 2005. Even then, only 26.5 percent, or just over one in four, language-learners graduated in four years. Less than one in ten 2007 ELL graduates earned a Regents diploma.

At a contentious hearing on Friday in the Bronx, services for language-learners took center stage — and earned the derision of Assemblywoman Carmen E. Arroyo, who accused the DOE’s Maria Santos of flat-out lying about increased resources for ELL students since the institution of mayoral control.

The New York Immigrant Coalition highlighted two dire ‘data points’ that deserve wider mention: First, only 5 percent of ELL 8th graders scored Level 3 — at grade level — on the statewide English Language Arts exam, a statistic that doesn’t bode well for high-school success. They also noted that the numbers of high schoolers plummet after 10th grade, when “nearly half of ELLs disappear from school rosters.” (Once students turn 17, they are not legally obliged to attend school. The NYIC says many are pushed out of school, drop out, or are redirected to GED and transfer/alternative high school programs.)

The Times‘ current focus on immigration in the nation’s schools and a report today on local success stories – that small fraction of kids who have made it to higher ed — should not mask focus on the 150,000 public school students who are not native speakers, or blunt attention to their profound needs, or the DOE’s responsibility to provide language, as well as academic, education.

Q: My son is a sophomore in high school. I have a few questions. 1) Should he begin test prep for the SAT this year? 2) How many times can he take the SATs? and, 3) if he takes it more than once, which scores do the colleges see?

A: These are important questions. Before I begin to preach, let me give you the short answers:

1. No, it’s too early.
2. As many times as he wants (but I recommend only twice).
3. Colleges will see only those scores that your son will “release” for them to see.

Now for the details: the SAT and the other nationally known test, the ACT, are important hurdles for students to clear on their way to college. But they are hurdles, not education itself. They are important, particularly when applying to the most selective colleges, but they are not the most important factor in college admissions.

The most important factor is the high school transcript, the record of which courses student has chosen to take and how he or she has done in those courses. College admissions officers are more interested in how students do semester to semester, year to year in high school, than they are in how well they do during a three-hour period on a Saturday or Sunday morning.

The SAT, while designed to be a fair test that would assess the ability of all test-takers, is not a fair test. It is culturally biased towards native speakers of American English, so if students are immigrants or live in a home where more than one language is spoken, the critical reading score will be affected. Students who are affluent can afford more coaching and prepping than their less affluent peers. The test is not a perfect instrument. It’s necessary, though, so we have to put up with it. But we should not over-emphasize it.

Prepping for the test is a good idea because students need to be familiar with the test format and need practice taking it. And yes, there are certain strategies and tricks that can be taught. But starting to do this too early can cause unnecessary stress. I say, wait until junior year to start any test prep program.

There are other ways to help your son to do well. Encourage him to study hard and take his high school classes seriously. If he does well in his math classes, chances are he’ll do fine on the math section of the SAT or ACT. The single best way to do well on the critical reading scores is to read! Encourage your son to read anything. Science fiction, sports magazines, a daily newspaper, mysteries, a biography. The more he reads, the better he’ll do in school and on the standardized tests. Simply memorizing random lists of vocabulary words doesn’t help. Over and over I have seen that students who practice reading on a consistent, daily basis do better on the critical reading section of the SAT than students who simply do test prep.

And I would limit taking the test to twice. Take it once, see how you do, then spend some months concentrating on improving your skills, and take it again. Three times, if you absolutely must. But more than that no. No one will stop a student from taking the test as many times as it is given. Some test-prep tutors actually recommend that students take the test every time it’s given!

That idea is very unhealthy. It over-emphasizes the importance of standardized testing over academic performance, extra-curricular involvement, creativity, and all the personal characteristics that make up the total human being who becomes a college applicant.

The colleges will see only those scores which the student wants to send. This is the policy called “Score Choice,” through which the College Board says it gives control over the scores to students. But some colleges say they want all scores, so can “Score Choice” be trusted? More on this in my next column.

 Have a question for Jane?  Search archives | Contact the College Counselor

Whatever you think of the myriad standardized state exams grade- and middle-schoolers take every year, the New York State Education Department wants to know — and quickly, too.

The state’s Board of Regents is considering changes to the elementary and middle-school testing program, and is asking all New York City public school parents to weigh in here with their thoughts.

The deadline to respond is this Friday, February 27. Completing the 10-question survey should only take a few minutes (although there’s space to elaborate on responses, if you so desire).

It’s a given that parents want to influence their child’s experiences with standardized testing. For what it’s worth, here’s a chance to speak out — please do, and feel free to forward as widely as possible to be certain that the greatest number of New York City parents make their opinions known.

Things have developed. I am now not only skipping SAT prep, I’m skipping the SATs entirely, in favor of the ACTs. For lots of East Coast schools, the ACTs are newer, less common and therefore less trusted than the SATs. However, almost every college in the country accepts ACTs in place of the SATs. Neither one is a “better” test. But many people who find themselves struggling with the SATs score much higher on the ACTs. When I took the practice tests, that’s just what happened to me.

The ACT is only around three hours long, as opposed to the six-hour SAT, and because it’s divided by subject and doesn’t jump back and forth like the SAT, there’s no gear-switching between writing, reading and math. The ACT also includes a science section, but I found I didn’t need a lot of memorized facts or reference information to do well. It mainly tests your ability to interpret graphs and tables and apply information to specific scenarios.

The math section of the ACT is not necessarily harder or easier than the SAT, but it is different. For the SATs, the key to doing well on the math section is familiarizing yourself with the wording of the test — the tricks that confuse test-takers — and the strategies you can use to decipher their questions. The ACTs, on the other hand, seem to me to be much for straightforward. They really measure your knowledge and learning without trying to mess you up. ACT math questions sound more like questions your teacher might give. You can answer them by thinking of topics you learned in school, rather than strategies you learned in a test prep class.

The reading section of the ACT is very similar to the SAT, though most people seem to find it easier. There’s an “optional” writing section, but most colleges (and guidance counselors) recommended taking it.

Clearly, I am biased: I’m one of those kids who did better with the ACT than the SAT, but everyone is different. I’d just like to remind any fellow SAT-strugglers out there that there are other options.

The best thing to do is take both practice tests; see which one best suits you. (Since the scores are not measured in the same way, it’s hard to do a direct comparison. To determine which one you scored higher on, you can check the ACT and SAT requirements of colleges you are interested in and see which required test score you come closer to — or exceed!) Good luck!

We asked readers to weigh in on test-prep for children who will take the OLSAT exam as part of the gifted and talented application process.

More than half of the poll’s respondents, 56%, supported preparing their young children for G&T testing, although as many people were enthusiastic (28%) as resigned (28%) to the test-prep reality. Another 26% rejected the very idea of OLSAT test-prep, while the balance, 16%, thought it an unnecessary (and entirely optional) part of the process. See the results here. We’ll be curious to hear how families feel their test prep (or lack thereof) affected their kids’ experiences at the actual test.

This week, we’re asking readers what they think of the deep education cuts Mayor Bloomberg outlined in his budget address: 15,000 DOE jobs at risk, including thousands of teachers. How will these cuts affect you?

Parents who initially opted out of gifted and talented testing but have reconsidered now have an opportunity to sign their child up for testing: The DOE just announced an extension in the G&T deadline. Requests for Testing forms will be accepted at public schools for students currently enrolled in public school pre-K classes and at Borough Enrollment Offices for kids in other programs through February 9, 2009. (The original deadline was November 19th.) Families who have already submitted a testing request should sit tight; those with questions can call (212) 374-5972.

The extension is due, at least in part, to a corresponding extension in the pre-K registration calendar, according to the DOE.

We’re still hoping that news on the new citywide G&T schools, planned in theory for Brooklyn and Queens, will be made available before the score reports and applications are sent to eligible families on April 6, but to date, DOE sources have been noncommittal.

Update: Kathleen Brannigan of the DOE wrote us to caution: “The G&T extension is just for children applying to Kindergarten, meaning those children born in 2004. The extension is not for children seeking entrance to 1st and 2nd grade programs.” We appreciate the clarification.

I always know when the New York State tests are coming up, and not because I hire tutors or visit the many websites that offer practice tests and tips, including the state education department.

It starts with my younger son’s sniffles. They become more pronounced in the days before the test. A sore throat is next, then complaints of a headache.

A visit to the school nurse follows. The whole body, it seems, is aching.

Later, I can count on a night-time visitor. I will be quizzed on how many hours of sleep are needed to be considered a good night’s sleep. (Answer: more than I got with so many interruptions). A request to stay home follows, and a new round of questions begins: “Do the sixth-grade tests count for high school?” the sixth-grader asks between sniffles.

After years of taking tests, he’s attuned to the concept that fourth-grade exams matter because middle schools see them. And because he has an eighth-grade brother, he’s overheard all the conversation about finding a high school in our household and knows that high schools do take into account scores on the seventh-grade exam.

So how do I answer? My first impulse is to be reassuring: relax, don’t worry, you’ll do fine, just do your best.

As a veteran New York City public school parent, though, I know the best schools are highly competitive.

There aren’t enough seats in the best schools for all who choose them. So as much as I’d like to downplay the tests, I do hope my sons will bring home high scores.

I know, too, that you can’t possibly fully prepare a child for the city’s specialized high schools and tell them their score isn’t important, when in fact the score determines who gets into prestigious and coveted institutions like Stuyvesant or Bronx High School of Science.

The annual tests our children begin taking in third-grade have not been without controversy: a coalition of parents, educators, and other state leaders have long called for a break and a review of what they call “excessive high stakes exams.”

The schools my children have attended have managed to balance test preparation with the rest of the curriculum, so it hasn’t seemed oppressive. (Well, to me, of course. The kids have complained mightily about vacation packets of practice exams.)

I think I may have dodged this year’s “do-they-count?” question with a promise to rent a movie or watch the mindless and annoying American Idol and by focusing on the good news that there’s usually no homework during test week.

I’m not sure it will quell my sixth-grader’s anxiety. I will ask how the tests went, but I’d still rather talk about what books he’s reading and what he’s learning in class.

And if he wakes me up again this week with a stomach-ache or sore throat, I’ll tell him the truth: High schools do not look at the sixth-grade tests.

Which means he can start worrying now about his seventh-grade exams.

Dear Judy,

Hi, I want to prepare my four-year-old for the OLSAT. We did not get a date, yet, but I heard it could be next month, and I would like to get him some test prep material or a tutor. Do you have any recommendations?

Nervous mom

Dear Nervous mom (and potentially nervous moms),

It seems to me a bad idea to put a small child through a cram sessions in the few days, weeks, or even months left before the OLSAT. It’s better to work on bringing a well-rested, calm, and happy child to the test. Your child will do much better if she does not feel the same pressures that you do. One school placement consultant we know advises parents to tell your child, just before the test, that “these people want to know what a four-year-old can do.” It sets the child up to perform well without involving her in high stakes.

That’s the immediate answer to the nervous mom question, but because there have been lots of questions from many anxious parents about this subject, and although testing for the gifted and talented programs is well under way, I thought it useful to discuss this issue further.

Here’s my best advice for now and for the future: continue to do what you probably have been doing since your child was born. Read to your child and talk about what you read, play with language through rhymes and riddles, count and sort while doing everyday tasks, cut way down on television, and instead, play games, go to children’s museums, performances, zoos, and the library. Discuss everything you do, leaving plenty of opportunity for your child to do the talking. These activities are fun ways for you and your child to spend time together, and will help him succeed in school, no matter what the program.

Don’t put inappropriate pressure or unrealistic expectations on your small child. Scores on the OLSAT and the Bracken School Readiness Test, like other tests, come from a child’s reasoning and abstract thinking abilities, level of academic readiness, and his ability to convey these qualities while sitting patiently, remaining attentive for a long time, and forgoing the sidetracks a curious child will take - especially in a strange setting.

If you are still determined to prep your child, start by trying out the sample tests in the information booklet that the Department of Education supplies. Piece of cake for your child? Stop there. Need some brushing up? Search the Web for Otis-Lennon School Ability Test or OLSAT, and you will find books, software, and advice - mostly for sale to parents who want to prep their children. Some parents have recommended tutors via our forum, so take a look at what others have to say. Private tutors and services can be pricey, depending on how many hours you sign up for. Some agencies say they will help talented kids who can’t afford the fees. Others offer discounted specials.

Remember, gifted programs are not the only alternative for your bright child. There are other options in many districts. Don’t neglect your local school. Chances are it’s well-worth putting your energies toward supporting and improving it. Check out all the possibilities in our Find a School section on Insideschools.org

If your daughter does qualify for G&T programs, consider becoming a member of AGATE, a statewide advocacy organization for gifted education.

Meanwhile, relax and enjoy your bright child.

Judy

 Have a school question for Judy?  Search archives | Contact Judy

Apparently neither rain, nor snow, nor sleet, nor hail shall keep potentially-gifted and talented tots from their testing. The Department of Education has announced that despite the foreboding weather forecast (there is a 90 percent chance that 1-3″ of snow will fall over the 5 boroughs tomorrow), “as of now, gifted and talented testing this weekend will proceed as scheduled.” The DOE urges families to leave extra travel time and call 311 for updates.

To the extent that parents’ voices are represented in the New York City education system these days, Community Education Councils are charged with representing them at the school district level. The Community Education Council of District 3 passed a resolution last June on mayoral control, saying that the system would be greatly improved with more transparency, checks, and balances.

CEC3’s specific recommendations — reflecting weeks of hearings, surveys, and discussions with parents and other community members in our district — include: more disclosure, transparency, and independent analysis of DOE data; a stronger and more independent Panel on Education Policy, with members appointed to fixed terms; and more high level decision making roles filled by professional educators, including a mandate that either the Chancellor or the top official in charge of teaching and learning be an experienced educator.

Other parent groups are also working on recommendations on how to improve the mayoral control law when it comes under review next June. The Parents’ Commission on Mayoral Control & School Governance, a group consisting of two dozen parent activists, has been working all fall on a legislative proposal set to be released next month.

Unfortunately, some seem to be taking a “with-us-or-against-us” stance on the law, rather than welcoming discussion on how it might be improved. Last week both the Post and the Daily News guffawed in a bullying manner at State Assembly speaker Sheldon Silver for saying that the mayoral control law will need to be “tweaked.” Leonie Haimson of Class Size Matters pointed out that the attacks, in which both papers made nearly identical points on the same day, seemed coordinated by City Hall.

The experiences of my children provide a sanity check for me on how well the system is working. The seventeen (17) school days on which my child will be taking standardized tests this year seems excessive. (The teachers and administrators at our school agree.) Our afterschool program funding for next year is uncertain. The amazing staff at our school put on a talent show last month. They danced and sang and told jokes to raise money to compensate for some of the mayor’s midyear funding cuts. I don’t know what they will do for an encore when further cuts are implemented next fall. We can hope, wish, and pray that the Department of Education spends less money on its testing bureaucracy and ensures that sufficient operational funding gets to the kids, but we have few avenues to influence these decisions. If the mayoral law is amended in a thoughtful manner, the system might be improved for all its participants.

While thousands of fifth graders will hand in their middle school applications on Friday, approximately 2,000 sixth graders will sit for the Hunter High School admissions exam. A recent Times article showed how seriously some of those students have been preparing for the exam: taking up coffee, reading the dictionary, and spending weekends and holidays at costly Asian-inspired test-prep boot camps. Meanwhile, another section of the venerable newspaper urges parents of 5 year-olds who are sitting for gifted and talented testing to “stay sane.” Sage advise but, as Liz Belkin wrote in a blog entry about the Obama girls first day at a new school, many (otherwise sane) parents still find it hard to drop their children off and then go home, wait, and hope for the best.

Some semi-heartening news this week: American students seem to be improving in math, according to the world’s largest survey of math and science achievement, the Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (Timss). Since the 1990s, Asian countries like Singapore and Japan, have dominated international reviews of math and science skills, which can predict a nation’s future economic and scientific health. But despite noticeable improvements in American math scores this year (U.S. 4th graders outscored 23 other countries and tied with students from the Netherlands, Lithuania, Germany and Denmark), the same 4th grade mathematicians lagged behind students from Hong Kong, Singapore, Taiwan, Japan, Kazakhstan, Russia, England and Latvia. And American science performance continues flat, with no improvements since the survey was last published four years ago. Science teachers are unsurprised: No Child Left Behind and local policies emphasize math and English performance, leading to diminishing classroom hours devoted to other subjects. In conversations about school performance in the city, science is rarely mentioned.

The Timss survey took a focused look at how 4th and 8th graders in two American states compared to their international peers. Students from Massachusetts and Minnesota outscored students from almost every other nation on both the science and math assessments, which officials from each state attributed to their respective education reform efforts. But while only students from Singapore and Taiwan topped students from Massachusetts in 8th grade science, the Timss study doesn’t uncover the nuances behind the numbers, like how particular schools, neighborhood, or demographics performed. Researchers from Massachusetts and New York’s own Eduwonkette are careful to remind that achievement gaps still persist, even within the high achieving super-states. Deeper analysis of these results will help drive substantiative conversations on curriculum emphasis, educational values, and performance.

Middle school families inclined to celebrate the next President’s inauguration in Washington D.C. faced a mighty calendar conflict, as the tests are slated to begin on January 20th, Inauguration Day.

The DOE has, in its wisdom, moved the middle-school ELA test dates back by one day, to commence on Wednesday January 21st. According to Assessment Implementation Director David Raphael, “the ELA exam is now scheduled for January 21-22 for grades 7 and 8 and January 21-23 for grade 6.”

In a climate where standardized tests are praised and vilified, depending on your point of view, comes a study from the State University of New York, showing a strong correlation between SAT score and eventual college graduation. Also notable is the graduation rate itself: At some schools, just over half of enrolled students completed their undergraduate degrees, even with grad-rate rises linked with more rigorous admissions policies. By raising the SAT bar, SUNY Stony Brook documented a grad-rate climb from 53.8 to 59.2 percent; at the regional college in Old Westbury, the grad rate nearly doubled — from 18.4 to 35.9 percent — when SAT requirements were raised, yet nearly two out of three students left school without a sheepskin. What happened to all the students who fell out of school along the wayside? The piece in today’s Times doesn’t ask or answer that question — but it’s a safe bet that it’s the source of some serious soul-searching among the State Regents, parents, college admissions counselors, and educators state- and citywide.

All the papers today cover the newly released high school progress reports. The Times has a good breakdown of grades and school size, the News highlights a significant bump in schools earning top grades this year, with 82% earning A’s or B’s, vs. 65% last year, and the Post recaps the high-scoring school, Brooklyn International, which serves new immigrants (and proudly lists a number of Peace Corps veterans as teachers), and the bottom-scorer, long-troubled Washington Irving High School. Higher grades were attributed to higher grad rates and increases in numbers of Regents exams taken (although it’s not entirely clear how many students took more exams).

From the city’s point of view, the high schools are doing well: 57% maintained an A for two years or moved up a letter grade, and of last year’s A schools, 86% held onto that top mark. Notably, the specialized high schools all got As (save for Brooklyn Latin, which has yet to graduate a class) — a big difference from last year — although small, ambitious Bard High School Early College’s B prompted Bard College President Leon Botstein to dismiss the grading process as “irrelevant…arrogant and misguided.” Because the progress reports reward gains made by the lowest-achieving students, schools that serve the city’s highest achievers, which enroll few low-level students, face particular challenges in demonstrating sufficient ‘progress’ to merit high marks.

For mystery-lovers, a note on the calculations: The grades are correlated with school scores, and school scores are determined, in large measure (3/4 of the grade, according to the DOE) by how the school compares with peer schools. So in practice, two schools could have identical numerical values for particular items — graduation rate, say, or student progress — and wind up with different grades, if they are part of different peer groups. And once again, an A here isn’t an A anywhere else in the academic universe: A’s start at 64.2 (of 100 points) and B’s, nearly 20 points lower, at 43.5.

Earlier this afternoon, DOE released progress report grades for the city’s high schools.

Here’s the link to the new set of grades. Unfortunately, the new set doesn’t show you what the schools scored last year — to compare grades directly, go to the DOE home page, click on Search for a School, add the school name, and then use the left toolbar to get to Statistics, where both years’ Progress Reports are archived (along with plenty of other material). It’s cumbersome and a little tedious, but it’s the best way to see a school’s growth (or regression) from year to year.

Watch the blog first thing tomorrow for more on the high school grades.

At a Manhattan Institute breakfast yesterday morning, held at the plush, posh Harvard Club, accountability bigwigs from the DOE, Columbia University and the Institute debated the effects of F progress reports on elementary and middle schools. For recaps of the meeting, see Gotham Gazette and GothamSchools; click here for the full report. A couple of salient points that emerged may be of interest to city parents.

For example, James Liebman, head of the DOE’s accountability department, related average “levels” on test scores to eventual high-school graduation. If a child’s 8th grade math and ELA scores average (add up the levels, divide by two) equals 3 — which the city defines as proficiency — that child has a 54.7% chance of graduating high school on time with a Regents diploma. (Seems disappointingly slim, for an academically proficient student.) The prediction rises steeply for those with higher average levels: 81.1% kids with 3.5 averages are predicted to graduate on time, as are 93.2 % of kids with level 4s. But the core question — what happens to nearly half of the proficient kids along the way? — wasn’t addressed by Liebman or the Manhattan Institute panel, which confined the conversation to the progress reports study. Still, it’s worth noting that proficiency, as ‘demonstrated’ by standardized test score, does not predict or guarantee graduation.

On the correlation of progress-report score and letter grade, Manhattan Institute scholar and report author Marcus Winters said, “anyone who’s been in school knows, you get an 89, you get a B” — but that familiar yardstick isn’t used for progress grades, where A’s begin at 64.0 of 100 (which looks like a C- from here). B’s begin at 49.9. and C’s at 38.8. And the skew is very much toward A’s and B’s — of the 977 elementary and middle schools for which progress reports were published last year, 599 were graded A or B, with 125 total F and D schools. Demographically, troubling trends persist: Schools with low performance grades tend to have more African-American students (45% in F schools, vs 35% across the city), and higher-graded schools have more Asian students (16% in A schools, vs <12% citywide).

Critics derided the report as self-congratulatory and overly selective of good results: Test-score increases were celebrated, while decreases at the top proficiency levels were minimized to near-invisibility. Even author Winters worried aloud about “no repeat Fs” from 2006-07 to 2007-08, adding that “a lot of them becoming A’s makes me worried.” Tellingly, Columbia economist Jonah Rockoff said, “Those aren’t magic numbers. They reflect the values of the people who create the system.”

Hundreds of parents lined up at PS 58 last night in Brooklyn for information on gifted and talented programs. Info booklets, which were in short supply, describe the application and testing process and include a short practice test. They’re available in bulk at local elementary schools and at borough enrollment centers, and they are posted on line here – minus the sample test.

Anna Commitante, head of gifted and talented at the DOE, walked parents through the basic process and took questions on testing and placement. (The PowerPoint graphics used to support her talk will be posted after November 6th, according to Commitante.) None of the questions raised had to do with the issues most recently in the press – fewer kids in g+t, less diversity, scaled-back outer-borough programs. Instead, most focused on the process going forward.

First and foremost, the deadline for Requests for Testing (in the booklets and also on line) is November 19th. “We won’t accept it on the 20th,” Commitante said. She urged parents to physically walk the request for testing into their child’s elementary school or a borough enrollment center, citing “many problems last year” with mail delivery.

Testing will take place in January and February at local schools. Four-year-olds, born in 2004, will test individually, with a tester “bubbling in” the answer sheet. Five-year-olds, though, will test in groups of five, with one teacher. Kids are expected to bubble in their own answer sheets (a fine-motor challenge that’s a test in itself for some kids), and they’re not permitted to ask questions during the test. Essentially, the tester reads each item aloud once and the children respond; no questions, no do-overs, no exceptions.

Children who score at the 90th percentile or above are guaranteed seats in a district g+t program, provided ALL district programs are listed on the child’s application. For citywide programs — including the two new programs planned for Brooklyn and Queens — children must score at or above the 97th percentile, and there are NO guarantees of citywide placement, even for high-scorers. There is no sibling preference in place, either, unlike general-education programs at local schools. Test scores determine eligibility, and the order in which schools are ranked on your child’s application determines placement.

All students who score at or above the 90th percentile are guaranteed seats in Kindergarten and first grade, Commitante said. If a surfeit of students qualify, the DOE will open new g+t programs to accommodate them; no inter-district enrollment will be permitted. Openings in grade 2 and beyond are scarce and sporadic; again, no guarantees.

There are also no wait lists. “We run this match one time only,” she said. “All offers are final.”

Watch the blog for an update (and answers to specific questions) later this morning.

At the NYC Student Union meeting today we discussed the somewhat obvious connection that education has with race, income and neighborhood. We talked about the way people are born onto education ‘tracks’ that are extremely difficult to change. We also found that the system works both ways.

Because I live in Park Slope and went to PS 321, I ended up at MS 51, Lab, and am now at LaGuardia. This succesion of good schools was expected of me– and I was kept well informed of these good options, all the time. Then, there’s the other side. Students who have never heard of specialized high schools because no one imagines that they would go there. And because they are not really prepared, they receive poor 7th grade test scores which then follow them and limit them, making it very difficult to get into these good schools.

We all know that living in a good neighborhood doesn’t make me smarter than anyone else. But it does give me the resources I need to have the highest level of education possible. As a small, relatively uncredible all-student union, we realize that it’s going to be close to impossible for us to do anything about this established norm. Instead, we’re launching a project where we’ll try to get into 7th grade classrooms around the city, especially in lower-income neighborhoods where expectations for students might be lower. We’ll explain to students how to apply to high schools, make sure students know about all the high schools, and offer tutoring for the 7th grade standardized test. Hopefully we can take this small step toward equal acess to quality education. As NYSCU member Hasanur put it, “We can’t get 1,000 kids to change their education paths. But if we can affect the lives of 10 students, we’ve made a difference.”

Just in time for this weekend’s administration of the SHSAT (specialized high school admissions test) — and perfectly poised to increase the anxiety of the nearly 30,000 students who’ll sit for the exam (and their parents), a new study says that variations in the high-stakes admission test, meant to prohibit cheating, scramble the results so significantly that many students who should have been offered seats in the specialized high schools were bounced instead. It also documented a preference for math and science whiz kids, over kids with across-the-board high scores — the kids college admissions counselors call BWRKs, bright well-rounded kids who are strong students if not prodigies.

DOE testing guru Robert Tobias, now an education professor at NYU, takes the long view: “If the issue is, could some kids who score lower on the test be successful at these schools, quite frankly the answer would be yes.” His circumspection is tepid comfort for the kids who will learn, come February, that they didn’t cut the SHSAT mustard. But it’s the honest truth, just the same.