Monroe #1 BOCES ASI Group The Regents Education Reform Agenda: Updates, Priorities and What to...

Monroe #1 BOCES ASI Group

The Regents Education Reform Agenda:Updates, Priorities and What to Expect

Howard J. Goldsmith, Esq.(518) 701-2736

[email protected]

Country Club of RochesterMay 16, 2014

Howard J. Goldsmith, Esq.(518) 701-2738© Harris Beach PLLC 2014

Agenda: Open Discussion and Dialogue

Background and Developments

Most recent Legislative changes to the Regents Education Reform Agenda

The “12” changes in the Budget Bills

Assessments, testing, field testing, APPR, etc.

Possible additional legislation

What’s ahead for ASI to expect . . . Coming Attractions!

2


What is New York’s Education Reform Agenda?

The Regents Education Reform Agenda:1. Adopt standards (Common Core) and develop curriculum and

assessments aligned to those standards to prepare students for success in college and careers.

2. Build instructional data systems that measure student success and inform teachers and principals on how they can improve their practice in real time.

3. Recruit, develop, retain and reward effective teachers and principals.

4. Turn around the lowest-achieving schools.

These four elements are also the tenants of Race to the Top (RTTT).

3


Components of the Reform Agenda

A. Common Core standards adoption and implementation

B. New assessments aligned with the Common Core

C. Annual Professional Performance Reviews (APPR)

D. Statewide Educational Data Systems New curriculum and lesson plans Teacher Professional Development Parent and community understanding The Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and

Careers (PARCC)

4


So Why the Problems?

Despite good intentions, problems in the Reform Agenda were evident from the beginning:

RTTT had limited funding and was misunderstood by educators and the public

Bad timing given the economic climate New property tax cap and levy restrictions Decreased state aid and GEA Key players and stakeholders left out of development process Timeline drove the process rather than the process determining

the timeline Driven by mandates rather than shared vision Development of politically based legislation and regulations

5


So Why the Problems (cont.)

Poor policy development Lack of professional development Lack of good communication and public relations Too “high stakes” One size fits all approach never works! Missed opportunities All other innovative education reforms were put on hold

or dropped completely by the Regents Local initiatives put on hold or dropped due to new

Education Reform mandates which created animosity

6


Challenges on School Districts, School Boards, and School Administrators

Common Core StandardsTeacher professional development

Parent understanding/misunderstanding

Student confusion – Not all students are ready to meet the new standards

Phasing-in – SED implementation was unrealistic for all Districts

Resources too limited

7


Challenges on School Districts, School Boards, and School Administrators (cont.)

Board, parent and community training and understanding is essential

Educational materials must be available prior to implementation – “Building a plan while flying”

Curriculum, modules, and lesson plans need to be developed

SED issued materials while not required, were not timely and the only sources available to ensure test alignment

8


Challenges (cont.)

Annual Professional Performance Reviews (APPR)

Poor statewide level policy development (never piloted)Union control of the process and planDifficult to make timely adjustments to the approved planBalancing relationship with teachers and principalsUsefulness of Composite Effectiveness Scores (CES)Impact on employment decisionsResource and funding limitations

9


Challenges (cont.)

TIPs/PIPs and Appeals

Release of data and explaining scores

Disclosure Requirements and Restrictions

FOIL

Avoiding CES from being used to protect bad teachers and principals from employment actions

10


Challenges (cont.)

Common Core AssessmentsOpting-out – Mixed message from SED

Refusals/“Sit and Stare”

Board pressure to respond to public demands

Test administration challenges (new Regents tests)

Pressure from parents on low scores

Lack of support from SED for a single “statewide” approach

11


Challenges (cont.)

Public information and understanding of drop in scores

Disconnect gap between scores and student class performance

Impact of Common Core Regents tests

Threats by individuals and advocacy groups

Academic Intervention Services (AIS)

Did the State Standard Setting make sense?

SED announcement of drop in scores prior to tests even being administered – “No brainer”

12


Challenges (cont.)

Statewide Data CollectionOpting-outParent and community privacy concernsBoard optionsRefusal requestsFERPA issues and parental rightsPolitical pressure for changesinBloom and Data DashboardsStatewide delay in implementation – too much uncertaintyNO LONGER AN ISSUE as a result of legislative intervention!

13


Influences on the Reform Agenda

1. Regents Task Force.

2. Senate Education Committee Report – “Assessing” Our Progress.

3. Assembly Minority Report.

4. Bills in the Legislature – at least six have been introduced which were eventually included in the Article VII Budget Bill

5. Governor’s Education Reform Commission Report

6. Governor announced his own “Panel of Experts” to recommend “corrective action.”

14


Influences on the Reform Agenda (cont.)

7. Growing advocacy groups, NYSAPE, BAT, etc.

8. Speaker Silver’s letter urging delay of inBloom data collection “until we are confident that this information can remain protected.

9. NYSUT “no confidence” vote on Commissioner King and withdrawal of support for the Common Core standards. Call for three-year delay.

10. New NYSUT leadership elected in April 2014.

15


Influences on the Reform Agenda (cont.)

11. Commissioner King’s and the Regent’s statewide “Community Forums” were not effective.

12. Budget and education hearings in Albany.

13. First-year APPR results were not as effective as intended.

14. Joint statement by Assembly Democrats and Senate Republicans calling for a two-year moratorium on the use of “high-stakes” tests for teacher evaluations.

16


So what changes were made to the Reform Agenda so far?Legislative action implemented revisions through the 2014-2015 state budget. What does this really mean for BOCES and Districts?

1.Prohibits standardized “bubble” tests to students in PK-2nd grade

2.Prohibits grades 3-8 test scores from being placed on transcripts until December 31, 2018.

3.Tests cannot be used as sole measure to determine student promotion or placement.

4.SWD to be tested on instructional level and ELL to be tested on their respective English language development.

17


So what changes were made to the Reform Agenda so far? (cont.)

5. Sets time devoted to state tests at 1% of the annual instructional time and 2% for test preparation.

6. Requires the Commissioner of Education to issue a “Testing Transparency Report” by July 1, 2014 for each District.

7. Requires the Commissioner to expedite the review of APPR plans that eliminate student assessments. The Commissioner is also directed to reduce the amount of time spent on field testing.

18



8. SED is to provide “significantly” more sample questions for grades 3-8 ELA and mathematics assessments. The Commissioner is also to ensure teachers promptly receive information on test results to encourage instructional feedback and improvement.

9. Outreach by the Commissioner with non-profit organizations, libraries and other partners to promote better understanding of the Common Core and the Reform Agenda to parents and families.

19



10. Development of Common Core training programs for teachers and principals. Possible collaboration with SUNY, CUNY and independent colleges to provide enhanced professional development. Highlight regional examples of best practices.

11. Basically prohibits the Regents from contracting with a private third-party vendor to establish statewide student data trials. “Everything old is new again.”

12. Requires the Commissioner to appoint a Chief Privacy Officer (CPO) to prorate the implementation of sound information practices for privacy and security of student, teacher and principal data.

20


Where does the Reform Agenda go from here?

All previous reports, studies, and articles are irrelevant as compared to the 12 enacted points in the budget.

Recent Regents actions and more to follow. 7th and 8th grade advanced math students do not need to take grade level

mathematics tests, avoid double testing (BOR, February 3, 2014) Revisions to APPR plans to accommodate waivers are not “material changes”

needing SED approval Expedited change form aligns with statutory changes if the changes reduce

student testing Promotion and placement determinations align with statutory changes (BOR,

April 21, 2014) Prohibits traditional standardized tests in PK-grade 2 (BOR, April 21, 2014) Focus on RtI as a data driven instructional framework to support implementation

of the Common Core Learning Standards (BOR, April 21, 2014)

21


Where does the Reform Agenda go from here? (cont.)

Establish cap on testing time and test prep times aligned with statutory provisions (BOR, April 28, 2014).

Regents Report of February 10, 2014 Full Regents test implementation to the class of 2022 for passing

Regents test at “college and career ready levels” More test questions made available Better Professional Development Opportunities Reduce field testing. Redefine level 2 as “On Track for Regents Exam Passing for

Graduation” Add defense for teacher APPR appeal if District did not implement

Common Core (rejected by Governor and Regents) Other areas are Common Sense revisions/additions

22


Did these revisions meet public and stakeholder calls for change in the Education Reform Agenda?

Still missing Statewide Strategic Planning Creates or Continues the Disconnect Gap between testing and

classroom performance and APPR Misalignment continues APPR still unclear Still treating all BOCES and districts the same Does the Reform Agenda really improve education in NYS? “Show

me the data” Are “delays” the sufficient change needed for the Education Reform

Agenda? “Change is difficult.” Really?

23


Things to Expect in the Future

• Field testing push-back

• Disclosure of APPR scores, §3012-C(10) of the Education Law

• NYSUT positioning

• Legislative changes to APPR and expanded role in setting education policy

• Passing rate of Common Core Regents tests.

• Validity and reliability concerns of Regents tests if scores do not decrease

• Impact of growing opting-out movement on BOCES and Districts and teacher/principal evaluations

24


Things to Expect in the Future (cont.)

• Impact of low rate of return of field tests – undermines the validity of large scale testing programs

• PARCC and on-line testing

• Grades 3-8 test results this summer

• Value added tests in the future

• Can the Regents Reform Agenda be maintained?

• What would happen if there is a change in leadership?

25


Bottom Line

Where will all this movement and uncertainty on the Regents Education Reform Agenda eventually take New York State students, educators, administrators, parents and other education stakeholders?

26


Thank You!

Howard J. Goldsmith, Esq.677 Broadway, Suite 1101Albany, New York 12207

(518) [email protected]

www.harrisbeach.comwww.nymuniblog.com

27

Monroe #1 BOCES ASI Group The Regents Education Reform Agenda: Updates, Priorities and What to...

Documents

Transcript of Monroe #1 BOCES ASI Group The Regents Education Reform Agenda: Updates, Priorities and What to...