BY STATE EDUCATION COMMISSIONER RICHARD P. MILLS
The Regents Public Policy Conference will bring together experts from around the State and country as well as individuals representing associations, schools, colleges, professions, and the public to help us examine important issues. One change this year is that two of the sessions will focus on action that the Federal government has taken or will take in the near future.
This Conference provides us an opportunity to hear from others, consider their ideas, and make informed decisions on the policy directions we will take.
Proposed amendments to Commissioner’s Regulations relating to standards for licensing qualifying social work programs
State Museum Memorial Exhibit
In late November the State Museum will open a memorial exhibit to those lost in the attack on the World Trade Center. This opening will coincide with the opening of the new 25,000 square foot gallery that introduces visitors to the regions of New York. The memorial, visually simple but powerful, features a silhouette of the twin towers composed of thousands of small burnished squares that represent the individuals lost. Names and possibly pictures will slowly scroll on a computer at one side. We are seeking permission to use certain materials and are collecting a few artifacts emblematic of New York's response to the catastrophe. They will be in a case flanking the towers on the other side. Light sources from below will illuminate the towers and make them visible at night from outside.
Regent Tisch, Kenneth Jackson of the New-York Historical Society, and staff of the Governor's Office have been exceptionally helpful in providing access to New York City institutions and organizations.
The Museum has secured pro bono services from the Hadley Exhibits that is fabricating the other exhibits for the new space. The projected opening date for the memorial and for the new gallery is November 23rd, the day after Thanksgiving.
Toward Policy on Leadership Education
There is no shortage of people willing to answer the call to leadership. Eight regional meetings have demonstrated that. What we need is new strength in our leadership education programs. Current policy requires little more than the accumulation of course credits, and does not yet reflect what we heard in our discussions with local leaders and community members over the last two years. However, we see new models emerging in the regional leadership programs. Future policy decisions can build on those programs, as well as on the best of the traditional programs.
Here is what we saw in the leadership education program at the most recent regional meeting:
This was only one regional program. We have seen several, each one with its own strengths.
What we need now, and quickly, is a draft statement of doctrine on leadership education -- that is, a statement of what we know and believe about the preparation of leaders. Such a statement in draft form will crystallize the debate and support Regents decisions on new policy for leadership education. A good way to develop the statement is by seeking answers to the list of questions about leadership education that are before the Regents. The best sources of initial answers are those who have responded to the Regents leadership initiative by thinking anew about this problem.
Results for elementary-level State tests administered in 2001 demonstrate that our educational reform initiatives are working. In English language arts, particularly, there have been dramatic improvements in performance.
In public schools statewide, the percentage of fourth-graders meeting the standard (that is, scoring at Levels 3 and 4) has increased from 48 to 60 percent since 1999.
New York City improved from 33 to 44 percent.
Large City Districts improved from 29 to 41 percent.
Students with disabilities and students in every racial/ethnic group demonstrated improvement.
In each year of test administration, more students have met the standard on the elementary mathematics test than any other. Since 1999, fourth-graders have demonstrated some improvement in mathematics.
Students with disabilities and students in every racial/ethnic group improved performance.
We will discuss these improvements at the Regents meeting and distribute lists of most-improved schools.
The Federal Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) requires that students with disabilities have access to the general education curriculum and participate in statewide assessments. IDEA also requires the State to establish "goals for performance of children with disabilities in the State that…are consistent, to the extent appropriate, with other goals and standards for children established by the State."
For students with severe disabilities who cannot participate in State and local assessments, we developed an alternate assessment to ensure that all students with disabilities are accounted for in the statewide assessment program.
Regents will receive a report on the implementation of the New York State Alternate Assessment, which will occur in the 2001-02 school year.
Recruiting and preparing teachers and then convincing many of them to teach in the lowest performing schools is the most important thing we can do to close the gaps in student achievement. But here is the problem: We need thousands of new teachers within the next two years. The initiatives in place now are not producing enough teachers.
State Education Department staff predicts from existing supply and demand data that New York schools may have a teacher shortfall of more than 20,000 teachers in the next two to three years. Here are some other provocative findings:
Given the need, we should ask some question based on those findings. For example, what could we do to raise the percentage of those who remain in New York from 50 percent to 55 percent? Can we ensure that every teacher candidate receives a compelling recruiting message?
Could we give teacher candidates the facts about supply and demand before they commit to fields with fewer prospects while ignoring those with greatest need? Can we conduct exit interviews on a sample of teachers to find out why they leave and then build the next iteration of policy measures on their answers? Nationally, I am told, the most frequently cited reason teachers leave is they do not feel supported by school administration. If that were true here, what exactly would schools and state policy leaders have to do to cause teachers to stay? How can we create alternative certification programs in regions where they are needed most? How can we support a massive recruitment program to fill those programs?
Are there other elements of the Regents policy that merit another look? For example, in a time of economic downturn, could we make it even more attractive for career changers to enter teaching, provided they have a strong background in the subject they want to teach? Are we sure that the master’s degree remains a critical element? Can we give selected school districts the capacity to do more of their own teacher preparation?
Closing the gaps in student achievement is more important now than before the events of this fall, and also more difficult. The Regents maintain their focus on this issue, but in an environment with fewer resources for the short term. That circumstance compels us to look for the most productive actions.
Those actions probably include the following: holding fast to higher standards for all students, then providing every child with a well-prepared teacher, effective school leaders, and a challenging curriculum. Other strategies are important and have their place in the overall framework, but these four done right are indispensable. They are also under challenge.
Even when the funding was abundant, many people freely claimed that some students could not meet these standards. We do not yet have the teachers we need, and the children in the lowest performing schools still are not getting the best-prepared, most experienced teachers. We have in hand a good strategy to find and prepare leaders, but the results are still in the future. And I don’t yet see a strong curriculum in action in every school.
Look in particular at the middle grades results. For the third year in a row the results on average have been flat at best. Fortunately, the averages mask high performance in some individual schools. That represents an opportunity. In February we will convene regional meetings of middle grades educators and put the spotlight on the practice of those whose children do meet the standards. We will be able to see first hand what high standards, capable teaching and leadership, and rigorous curriculum – all acting in concert – look like. Then the task is to support everyone else in learning how to do those things in their own situation.
Last week I spent a day with a group of British educators, including leaders of their national mathematics and literacy initiatives. They use a core curriculum (organized in grade clusters like ours, not grade by grade), model lessons, continuous guidance on good teaching practice, expert teacher consultants, and a stiff accountability system that includes tests, targets, and reporting. The results are going up steadily. The point: People have already worked the problem that is before us. We cannot say that it cannot be done, nor can we excuse failure to succeed with our children.
Working in partnership with the New York State Library Association, the State Library produced a tool kit to inform public library users throughout New York about the New Century Libraries proposal.
At the November meeting Carole Huxley and Janet Welch will report on the outcomes achieved with the tools kits and options for revising the materials to communicate the role of libraries in a time of crisis.
There is no agreement yet to resolve the combined problems of governance and funding in Roosevelt, although both houses have tried in recent weeks. Unresolved issues make it uncertain whether any funding will actually flow to Roosevelt.
Roosevelt still has to reduce spending below the contingency level of $39.6 million. I have described before the extraordinary spending reductions that will be required, including many staffing reductions.
There is still time for the Legislature to resolve the governance and financial issues even after the reductions begin. We must therefore support local decisions to reduce the budget and if local decisions are not forthcoming, we will order those reductions, doing as little harm as possible under the circumstances. Once those actions are in place for the second semester of this year, the long-term survival of the Roosevelt School District will be in doubt.
The State aid recommendation this year is on wholly new ground. The adoption of the base line budget in August followed by a limited adjustment in October makes it impossible to define a Present Law figure as we have in the past. The adopted budget departs from the previously existing State aid formulas. And finally, the Legislature has adopted a budget that no longer continues with prior year decisions that were, of necessity, part of our starting point in developing a budget recommendation. The link with previous formulas is broken. That means that the Regents can think about State aid differently.
The State Education Department work group developed a statement of the problems and this was the focus of the Regents State Aid Committee discussion in October. Now we put the new reality and the renewed statement of the problem together.
The new starting point is to think not about the increment to State aid as in the past, but the whole amount. How can the entire $14 billion be allocated to support the goals of adequacy, equity, accountability, transparency, cost effectiveness, and sustainability? Consider these basic elements:
In response to questions raised by members of the Regents VESID Committee during the October meeting, we will provide a follow up report to the Committee on marketing activities that VESID has undertaken to improve employment opportunities for people with disabilities. A few critical functions of VESID’s Marketing Team are to:
The number of people placed in employment for FFY 2000-2001 increased by 2%, for a total of 16,669. Annualized Earnings for this FFY were $230 million, compared to $216 million in FFY 2000. The District Offices are commended for a job well done.
The State budget has been decided and State aid to schools has been determined. Last week the Regents Priority proposal that assured that students with disabilities have equal access to the same textbooks and other educational materials as their nondisabled peers was signed by the Governor and is Chapter 377 of the Laws of 2001. The proposal that would establish a Teacher Education Accreditation Account has not yet been sent to the Governor for his consideration.
This is the second year of a two-year session so many of the priority proposals have already been introduced by the Senate and Assembly, and we will continue to advocate for those.
Despite the closed congressional office buildings and continued terrorist threats, there has been some progress on legislation for both education appropriations and the reauthorization of elementary and secondary education programs.
As noted in your October 19 report, the full House and the Senate Committee on Appropriations passed education funding measures with large increases. The Senate will take final action on their bill soon.
The four House and Senate education conference leaders met twice last week to iron out differences between the pending bills. A meeting of the full conference committee is imminent to approve several additional sections of that legislation. They report progress on some of the more contentious issues but there are no details.
While time is growing very short in this congressional session (despite no firm end date having been set) the main negotiators still say they will finish the reauthorization. Without a bill the large proposed education funding increase might not be passed since both appropriations bills are structured on the reauthorization, and congressional Republicans (and probably the White House) likely would not approve a final measure with the increase and no education program reforms.
A monthly publication of the State Education Department
Back to Report Home Page | Return to SED Home Page