Comments on: Test monitoring offers look into city’s efforts to preempt cheating

By: CUNY Graduate School of Journalism » Clips of the Week

CUNY Graduate School of Journalism » Clips of the Week — Tue, 05 Feb 2013 19:59:24 +0000

[...] Decker, working for GothamSchools, reported on efforts to prevent cheating on standardized [...]

By: Guest

Guest — Thu, 23 Aug 2012 20:30:00 +0000

Geoff, excellent journalism on a touchy subject. It’s screamingly obvious that elementary schools – while having the least teacher attrition when compared to NYC middle and high schools – ‘endured’ the most significant losses when test monitors visited. Come to think of it, I’ve never seen a DOE elementary school on the list of “failing schools” considered for closure. Either the NYC elementary teachers are far more skilled than the rest of our teaching force in middle schools or high schools, or —> we middle school folks could really learn a thing or two from them about how to administer the New York State exams!

By: GGW

GGW — Thu, 23 Aug 2012 13:33:00 +0000

Good effort at reporting a complicated story.

Quick statistical question for one of your researchers — what kind of change would you estimate would be associated simply with plain ol’ regression to the mean?

Ie, one would assume each year that a few schools will spike or decline, without any hijinks, just laws of probability. We’d then expect those schools to return to their “natural” levels.

By: GUest

GUest — Thu, 23 Aug 2012 12:03:00 +0000

This is ridiculous because the results assume that the test is equal from year to year. On Regents Exams in particular there are clearly easy tests and ones that are more difficult. If the “monitors” visit on a difficult test day, results will slip.

By: Philip Nobile

Philip Nobile — Wed, 22 Aug 2012 19:38:00 +0000

When I read stories about the DOE’s (and NYSED’s and the Regents’) shotgun conversion to test security, thanks only to the Wall St. Journal, I think about the people who did nothing to stop Regents tampering and inflated graduation rates throughout mayoral control. Naming names, they are Richard Mills, Meryl Tisch, John King, Joel Klein, Shael Polansky, David Walcott, Randi Weingarten, Michael Mulgrew, et al. None dare say they did not know or claim they did something, anything, to end the crime spree in a timely fashion. Such is the corrupt culture at the top that they have dodged culpability.

The next 65 bulge to be officially ignored protrudes for all to see in course grades. As long as principals and teacher are forced to live and die by pass rates, it follows that cheating will flourish. And don’t count on city or state for hard-hitting investigations. There is a teacher in Brooklyn close to me who reported credit recovery fraud in writing to OSI Director Candace McClaren and in person to Chancellor Tisch. He had the suspect student portfolios in hand and wanted to turn them over. Without asking to see the evidence, McClaren put him under investigation for “employee misconduct” (OSI Case # 11-6732).Tisch beckoned him to sit beside her at a St. Francis College town hall on the subject of credit recovery. But when he tried to give her the portfolios she turned her back and walked away.

By: Geoff

Geoff — Wed, 22 Aug 2012 17:01:00 +0000

Thanks, Tim (and I fixed the typo — thanks for pointing out.)

I have asked for an official response about the charters exemption, but people have told me that they think that test security in charter schools, to some extent, is left up to the authorizer. Not clear if that means there are any standards, though. That will be worth following up on.

By: I noticed that...

I noticed that... — Wed, 22 Aug 2012 16:50:00 +0000

I don’t see on the form where administrators quietly tell untenured teachers to make sure that their students do “well” on their exam. Wink, wink!

The following lines should be included on the form if they want to deter cheating.
21: Did administration privately threatened the granting of your tenure by making suggestions on how your students can do well on their exam?

22: Has administration given you indirect suggestions several weeks prior to the exam on how your year-end evaluation is based on the students’ performance?

By: Tim

Tim — Wed, 22 Aug 2012 14:32:00 +0000

Nice piece, Geoff.

“Monitors did no(t) visit charter schools in 2012.” What a shock! Did the DOE explain why charters weren’t visited?

And it remains incredibly frustrating that the simplest, potentially most effective barrier to cheating — having teachers from a different school administer the exams — is off-limits for some reason.