GothamSchools — daily independent reporting on NYC public schools

Leadership, Law, and Policy

Testing-Gate: The Case for Reparations

Consequences are an essential component of accountability. Recent revelations of inflated state test scores require consequences, not just for those public officials responsible for false claims of math and reading proficiency but to make whole the students who for years were denied legally required help.

This case for reparations depends not only on elemental fairness and the oft-cited need for improved student outcomes but on mandated Supplemental Educational Services under Section 1116(e) of the No Child Left Behind Act and Academic Intervention Services required by New York State Education Commissioner’s Regulation §§ 100.1(g) and 100.2(ee). If children’s test scores had been properly determined, hundreds of thousands more students would have received extra help. It is insufficient to now say, in effect, “too bad.”

Students were denied their legal right to instructional services because of State policies that were known or should have been known to be deficient. Unfortunately, at least under No Child Left Behind, individuals do not generally have a right to sue the federal government, states, or school districts for noncompliance. But the federal government itself can sue the state, and the state’s attorney general can sue the State Education Department and districts to repair the harm. The state can also address the problem legislatively.

The recent movie “Waiting for ‘Superman’” argues that state governments and school districts constitute a “Blob” that cares more about adults’ concerns than children’s. In October, the State Board of Regents compounded its strategy of denial by voting to suspend its own requirement that districts provide remediation to students lacking academic proficiency. Once again, the State Education Blob undercut its own rhetoric about high standards leading to improved student performance by acting in a manner that subverts progress of our most vulnerable youth. When push comes to shove, the new education elite abandons its civil rights sound bites to reduce its tax bite.

There can be no clearer example of the Blob at work than denying instruction to needy students. The government is directly withholding instructional assistance needed to compensate students for past wrongs. Our children, our future, and our law demand that our leaders make good on their unfulfilled responsibilities to supplement the instruction of those students unfairly denied this entitlement.

  • Dm

    Highlights of parents, students and educators strongly confronting Chancellor Klein at the Panel for Educational Policy Meeting about the Department of Education’s pattern of data manipulation and the drop in test scores.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=roSDxs16NPU

  • Michael M.

    Fantastic post.

    Individuals don’t have “standing”? The kids at issue need a Campaign for Assessment Equity case.
    And no eight years of appeals.
    And no back-room deals between Tweed and SED to re-direct the ensuing funds.

    Still waiting, not for Superman, but for a Sound. Basic. Education.

  • John Beam

    David,

    Thanks for keeping this issue from dying with the goldfish brained newscyle.

    Too bad there wasn’t any support from other corners of the silo when the Campaign for Educational Justice was working to head off the Regent decision. The architect of their policy shift, by the way, is the Deputy Commissioner and player in the charter-scape, John King.

  • John Beam

    David, thanks for trying to keep this issue alive past the goldfish brained news cycle. Too bad there wasn’t any support from other corners of the silo when the Campaign for Educational Justice was working to head off the Regents’ decision. The architect of their policy shift, by the way, is the Deputy Commissioner and player in the charter-scape, John King.

  • Roget

    The lowering of the cut scores from 2006 to 2009 resulted in the denial of services to kids who dearly needed them–because it shrunk the number of Level 1s. In 2010, after the grossly inflated 2009 election year results came out, SED and its experts felt it was safe to raise the cut scores in the name of “higher standards”. This meant thousands and thousands of kids wound up in Level 1. But instead of providing mandated services, SED sought a waiver. So once again the aim has been to deny our most vulnerable learners the support and interventions they are entitled to. If ever there was a solid case for reparations, damages, educational neglect, etc.–to be forcefully made by someone who believes in accountability and justice–THIS IS IT. And while we’re at it let’s go after the millions that were wasted on a test instrument that–if it ever were subjected to independent review–would be found to be a defective product. Time for payback and recovery from profiteering CTB. The knowing misdoings of SED and CTB and the harm they caused must be exposed to the light, and the full weight of the law must be brought down on them before they collaborate on more deplorable ways to injure the kids.

  • Michael Fiorillo

    Excellent points, well presented.

    The issue then becomes how to bring this about in and Age of Impunity, when accountability is just for the little people.

  • Lisa Donlan

    Thanks, David, for keeping front and center the issue of the DoE’s disguised practice of “Social Promotion” of hundreds of thousands of NYC students for many years, via inflated test scores/dumbed down predictable tests.

    Did you know that the Tweddledums/dees are telling us that, even with the SED waiver that gives districts a bye on their obligation to support struggling students, schools are nonetheless ACCOUNTABLE for AIS and expected to provide the services anyway?

     With no funding.

     And after two years of continued, serious, budget cuts.

    Mayoral control was traded for increased accountability- removing any levers of power for any body outside of DoE.

    If SED and DoE collude to pass the accountability buck down to individual schools, and their individual teachers, (on this and so many other matters) what recourse do we have to exact these “consequences”? 

     Can you point, in fact, to ANY consequences that are, or have been, exacted in the Mayoral control/accountability  schema?

    (Booing at parades better not be one of them!)

    I’ll go you one better:

     where in the whole “free market/end the Union monopoly” paradigm do you see any of these “consequences as an essential component of accountability”at work?

    I’d love to know if there are any!

Tips, questions, feedback?

Contact us at .

Word from Our Sponsor

Follow GothamSchools

RSS
Subscribe to the daily email digest:

Chalk It Up

Recent Comments

0 comments so far today

Archives

May 2013
M T W T F S S
« Apr  
 12345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
2728293031