June 2001

BY STATE EDUCATION COMMISSIONER RICHARD P. MILLS

• Approval of regulations relating to multi-year cost allowances, requirements and calculations for Operating Standards Aid, summer school programs, extension of safety net for students with disabilities, career and technical education policy, and uniform violent incident reporting system
• Emergency adoption of regulations on pesticide notification procedures and reporting of child abuse in an educational setting
• Approval of Annual Report to the Governor and Legislature on the Status of the State’s Schools (Chapter 655 Report)
• Five charter school applications
• Approval of emergency regulations related to fingerprinting requirements for school district employees

• Implementation timeline for 55-65 passing score on Regents examinations
• Historical overview of New York’s education reform
• Draft legislation concerning Roosevelt School District
• Joint EMSC and HPE Committee discussion on implementation of school leadership initiative
• Progress report on standards implementation, including update on career and technical education policy
• State Aid Subcommittee discussion of goals and principles for the distribution of State Aid and paper on concepts underlying educational adequacy
• Ninth Horizon Issue: Expansion of the Licensed Professions

Since 1994, the Board has adopted significant policies to raise achievement for all students. With these decisions – each one crafted with long consultation and public involvement – the Regents built the foundation for vigorous work in schools across the state, and considerable improvement in student achievement. The building blocks are clear: standards and assessments, teaching and leadership, curriculum, accountability, extra help and safety nets, career and technical alternatives, and long-term commitment to funding high need schools.

As we keep moving, and as the Board continues to act on the policy issues that emerged from our November 2000 Statewide Standards Implementation Forum, it is useful to keep the whole policy framework in mind. Remember that there are new members on the Board, and new leaders in school districts who were not present for some of the earlier decisions. For that reason we must pause periodically to consider the road behind us.

At the June meeting, Regent Anthony Bottar and Deputy Commissioner James Kadamus will review the key educational reform events and policies.

The Regents EMSC Committee will discuss the schedule for transitioning from a 55 low-pass to a 65 passing score on Regents examinations. The District Superintendents have developed a proposal to extend the date for phasing in the 65 passing score and to set targets for schools to have more students achieve 65 or more on the Regents examinations. While Department staff will not advance a recommendation on this issue at this time, we will use the District Superintendents’ proposal as a basis for the Committee’s discussion.

The Regents are engaging this issue on the basis of the data as they always promised they would. And there are many questions to pose to the data. For example, what do we know about the students who perform in the 55 to 64 range? We know from the data that in the case of the English Regents, 67 percent are in the high need schools. What we don’t know is what is being done for those students.

We might also look at papers that represent a 55 level of work. Is that really good enough for the long term? If the Regents were to give schools more time, how would they use that time? Is there something else we might do to help students and schools improve performance? And one big question: When must the Regents decide this issue of schedule? With the schedule now in place, some exams don’t have to be passed at 65 until 2002. Is it better to decide soon or to pour on the support and see what further improvements are possible?

At the June meeting, the Board will act on this year’s Chapter 655 Report based on 1999-2000 data. The findings support the work of the Task Force on Closing the Performance Gap.

The signs of progress in closing the student performance gap are encouraging, but too many students and schools have not yet shared in these successes. These are schools educating large numbers of children who are at risk because of poverty and the inability to speak English well. Schools with the highest percentages of minority children who also have low-income backgrounds have the least experienced teachers, the most uncertified teachers, the lowest-salaried teachers, and the highest rates of teacher turnover. Ninety-two percent of all public school enrollment growth in the past four years has occurred in schools with a large minority population.

Rural school districts with high percentages of students in poverty and low wealth spend $3,900 less per pupil and pay their teachers $22,000 less annually than more advantaged districts. This annual statistical report keeps the challenge of the performance gap squarely before us.

Effective July 1, 2001 applicants for certification and prospective employees of school districts, charter schools and boards of cooperative educational services (BOCES), must undergo a fingerprint supported criminal history background check and review by the Department prior to issuance of a certificate and appointment to employment. The Regents Higher and Professional Education Committee will take emergency action on proposed regulations, Part 87, at the June meeting to implement these new comprehensive state-wide mandates.

The fingerprinting and clearance for employment statute raises critical issues such as time delays for the receipt of criminal history reports and the ability of districts to fill employment vacancies on an emergency basis.

The Department has proposed regulations that address some of these pertinent implementation issues to the extent possible under the law. However, with only limited flexibility permitted within the current statute, legislative amendments would be needed to address these issues.

We always put a very public spotlight on school performance. Now the spotlight is turned on our performance. Let’s demonstrate that we are just as serious about improving our results as the schools have been in improving local results.

In 1999, the Board approved our third strategic plan. Last year, we reviewed data about how well we were doing on the measures contained in that plan and agreed upon performance targets for 2001 and 2003. We are midway through 2001. So, this month I will report on our current level of performance compared to the targets. We met or exceeded the targets for almost half of the measures where current data are available. In most of the cases where we have not met the targets, we have made substantial improvements in performance compared to the prior-year results. With sustained hard work and close monitoring, we will continue to see progress in these areas.

There are, however, a few instances where our current levels of performance are unacceptable and will impede achievement of the Board’s policy goals if not improved rapidly. For each of these situations, we are implementing specific strategies to improve the results in the near term. I will monitor these strategies to ensure that they are effective and report back to the Board periodically. Meanwhile, we will take a hard, public look at our results in June.

The Regents have a clear policy goal to build capacity to recruit, prepare and support school leaders. This year we won a $3.9 million grant from the DeWitt Wallace-Reader’s Digest Funds. We launched a network of 10 Regional Leadership Academies and Urban Leadership Academies in the Big Five cities. We engaged the District Superintendents and local superintendents to issue a call to leadership that has brought hundreds of potential leaders forward. We have completed six in a series of eleven regional meetings to support local succession planning and to meet future leaders who have been tapped by currently serving school leaders. We are following the same path inside the State Education Department.

At the June Regents meeting, the Elementary, Middle, Secondary and Continuing Education and Higher and Professional Education Committees will meet in joint session to consider progress to date and the work ahead. Soon the committees will rethink the regulatory framework for certifying school leaders.

I have learned many things in the six regional meetings. Superintendents have a deep emotional commitment to the preparation of future leaders and they are devoting a lot of their scarce time to this work – often with strong board support. There are many regional leadership development networks already established, and the Regents interest has sparked their expansion. There is a lot of reflection among senior leaders and we must listen in on this. Many people are reading deeply in the literature of leadership in fields far beyond education. Experienced practitioners and scholars are rethinking the major elements of leadership preparation: theoretical foundations, mentoring, guided practice, and ongoing reflection about the work of leadership.

There really is no shortage of people willing to step forward when we ask them. We were wrong to think that there is a shortage of people willing to lead. We should be more concerned about the capacity to prepare them when they express an interest. There are many perceived barriers to entry to the profession – barriers that do not always guarantee quality. I am concerned that there is little common ground yet on the curriculum of leadership development. We ought not to have a single path, but it would help to see more public discussion of the set of experiences, both academic and practical, that would lead to a reliable supply of future leaders. It would be good to approach the regulatory process with particular care in this case. An astonishing number of our strongest leaders are already working on this problem and we don’t want to dampen their efforts but rather keep them engaged until the work is complete.

And one other thing: Let’s keep firmly in mind why we are engaging this issue. Leadership is indispensable to high student achievement and closing the gap.

Research in natural and human history has been at the core of the State Museum’s activities for 165 years. Museum research provides important practical benefits statewide. For example: Museum research has recently led to the award of a patent for a potential biological control of zebra mussels; is assisting in the exploration of natural gas deposits in New York; is helping to identify and control mold in "sick buildings;" and is changing the way we think about fish management. We will take a look at some of this research in June.

New York has the largest number of cultural institutions in the nation -- over 3,000. Virtually every community in New York has a connection with an archive, museum or library. New York is also a state with a wealth of institutions of higher education, as well as a strong network of over 1500 designated county, town and local historians. All of these entities are linked through the largest educational system in the world, the University of the State of New York. This connection affords New York tremendous opportunities for engagements among schools, cultural institutions, and teacher training programs. The State Archives' new publication, Erie Canal: New York's Gift to the Nation, is a model for such collaborations. The book demonstrates not only what cultural institutions offer our schools and what tools educators can employ to engage students, but also how expert educators and scholars and cultural institutions working jointly can produce materials that can help our children use history to explore and examine their world.

You will be asked to approve amendments to the Commissioner’s Regulations relating to the impartial hearing process for students with disabilities. The proposed amendments, which you reviewed in February, have been revised in response to public comment. The proposed regulatory changes are needed to improve the timeliness and consistency in the quality of impartial hearings.

The District Superintendents have ably communicated Regents policy for K-12 education and aided in its implementation for many years. Since the Regents made their New Century Libraries a priority for legislation, I charged the District Superintendents with the convening of meetings in their respective regions to educate their K-12 colleagues and their communities about its importance. Twenty-three of the District Superintendents have already held or are planning meetings in their regions specifically to inform the educational, governmental and business community about New Century Libraries.

Deputy Commissioner Gerald Patton used the last meeting of the Higher Ed Advisory Council to inform college and university presidents about NOVEL and what New Century Libraries would do for higher education.

During the Regents April 24^th meeting, Deputy Commissioner Johanna Duncan-Poitier presented a comprehensive report on the nursing shortage. To formulate solid solutions to this problem, Chancellor Carl Hayden announced the formation of a Regents Blue Ribbon Task Force to be led by Regent Diane O’Neill McGivern. The Board of Regents licenses and regulates over 300,000 nurses; this is the second largest nursing population in the nation. With its history of leadership and active commitment to public protection and enlightened professional regulation, the Board of Regents is uniquely positioned to lead New York’s response to this serious health care issue.

The Task Force will bring together major stakeholders who can bring about solutions to the shortage. This group will meet at the NYU School of Nursing on June 28 and September 7. The work of the Task Force will contribute directly to a larger more inclusive event, the Nursing Forum, dedicated to the future of Nursing this fall. The larger event will be held on Monday, October 29 at the Bar Association of the City of New York.

Undoubtedly the most significant event occurring before recess was the decision of Senator Jim Jeffords to become an Independent. His move gives the Democrats the majority in the Senate (50-49, with the one independent). This event has thrown Congress into an upheaval, making it impossible to predict the disposition of pending legislation.

The House completed work on its version of the ESEA reauthorization and now will await appointment of a conference committee to negotiate differences with the Senate. Floor amendments to create private school vouchers were defeated but a limited "Straight A's" program was created. The House also expanded the ability of school personnel to discipline students with disabilities. We believe this topic should have been left for debate on reauthorization of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, which is scheduled for the current Congress.

The Senate had a slow start in its ESEA deliberations with numerous amendments that had to be debated and the need to address the President's tax cut bill. The legislative process is now speeding up. The amendment to give governors equal status with state education agencies in the ESEA planning and application was defeated and the counterproposal to require consultation with governors was adopted.

A monthly publication of the State Education Department

Back to Report Home Page | Return to SED Home Page