TO:                                         The Honorable the Members of the Board of Regents 

FROM:                                   Richard P. Mills 

COMMITTEE:                       Full Board

TITLE OF ITEM:                  Four Policy Decisions on Assessment

DATE OF SUBMISSION:   October 2, 2003

PROPOSED HANDLING:  Approval

RATIONALE FOR ITEM:   Review of Regents Policy

STRATEGIC GOAL:           Goal 1

SUMMARY: 

Overview: Four Policy Decisions – Adjust and Press On 

We are nearly a decade into the effort to raise student achievement, and while we know how far we still have to go, the schools have succeeded in many ways. National and state assessments show our children are learning more than they were a decade ago.  Yet we have always known, and the Regents have often said, we would make changes along the way.  Five years ago, for example, I promised the annual meeting of the superintendents that we would adjust policies at some point, and I read those words to them again last month. The Regents have certainly revised policy in the past, when needed. We are now at a moment that requires mid-course adjustment. It is a two-part message: adjust in the light of the data, and press on.  

In recent months, the Regents have been discussing four important policy questions that are related. The four are the 55/65 passing score on the required Regents Exams, the extension of the existing alternatives for children with disabilities, physics, and Math A. At the simplest level, of course, the issues are related because they all deal with the standards and the tests and the goal of raising achievement for all. More precisely, all four issues can give us critical answers to two important questions, “What level of achievement should students be required to reach at this time as New York moves to higher standards?” And, second, “what level of support and help do students still need to reach the standards?”   

            The principles that should guide these decisions, I believe, are: 

·        Support children by ensuring that they are educated to higher standards; protect them by balancing the push for achievement with the support they need.

·        Make data-based decisions.

·        Build on the effective work of others in crafting solutions.

·        Keep the educational system moving forward toward the goal of higher achievement for all students. 

Decisions on these issues, taken together, will help support schools in building capacity while simultaneously keeping the momentum going toward higher standards and the closing of the achievement gap.   

You have the report of the Math A Panel and will meet with them. You will also hear from the Regents Work Group on Physics.  On the other two issues, the Board has received a lot of data to make its decisions.  The 55/65 passing score and the special education issues are scheduled for Regents decision in November and March respectively. Regents may want more committee discussion on the special education issue, and making a decision later may be appropriate. However, the Board has reviewed data, and noted the interdependence of performance issues in special education and general education. If the Board is satisfied that it has the data on several or all of these issues, there is no reason to delay. A combined decision now will bring renewed focus to the difficult work ahead on closing the gap, funding, improving the quality of the tests, and other issues.  Below are my recommendations, which provide a suggested structure within which you may want to respond to the data as well as the two reports just mentioned.  

My recommendations are in two parts. The first is a policy recommendation for the Board about the immediate issue. The second is a proposal for intense work to keep improving student performance and close the achievement gap. The recommendations reflect the data. They build on the accomplishments of the people in the schools who are applying what works. We know a lot now about what rapidly improving schools and districts do. Likewise, there are many BOCES-based and Teacher Center-based programs, and also successful programs in higher education.  We must craft statewide strategies that extend what they are doing.   

            Here are the four recommendations in summary: 

Recommendations 

1.      Keep 55 as a local option passing score to give students and schools more time to improve achievement. This provision will be in effect for all students now in high school and for those entering 9^th grade in the fall of 2004. During this time, generate a renewed, rigorous and relentless statewide effort (described below) to lift the achievement of all to 65 by building on research that shows what works and the accomplishments of the people in the schools who are applying what works. Concentrate on reading and mathematics, particularly in the high need schools, while investing available federal funds to build capacity. 

2.      Extend the existing alternatives for all students with disabilities entering 9^th grade through fall 2009. At the same time,  the Department will intensify the work to improve performance of urban districts by targeting federal aid and focusing on improving the achievement of students with disabilities, particularly in the Big 5 districts in cooperation with good efforts already begun locally. 

3.      Accept the report of the Independent Panel on Regents Math A. Adopt its major recommendations to revise the standards, curriculum, and exam. In turn, the Department will both implement the Regents decision and continue with improvements already put in place this summer that implement recommendations in the math report. 

4.      Accept the policy recommendation of the Regents Work Group on Physics concerning future Regents exams. In turn, the Department will implement the Regents decision by immediately convening a committee of practitioners to establish new scoring for the next Regents Physics exam.  

I.          A Passing Score of 55 or 65? 

Recommendation: Keep 55 as a local option passing score to give students and schools more time to improve achievement. This provision will be in effect for all students now in high school and for those entering 9^th grade in the fall of 2004. During this time, generate a renewed, rigorous and relentless statewide effort (described below) to lift the achievement of all to 65 by building on research that shows what works and the accomplishments of the people in the schools who are applying what works. Concentrate on reading and mathematics, particularly in the high need schools, while investing available federal funds to build capacity. 

Under the current schedule, the passing score on all five required Regents Exams will rise from 55 to 65 for those students who began 9^th grade in 2001. But the Regents have said their decision on this schedule will be informed by the data. For the past several months, the Regents have reviewed the data and discussed the issue in great detail. The question before the Regents is whether to change current policy and retain 55 as a passing score for now. What do the data tell us? 

First, they tell a story of rising achievement among students across the State.   When we started in 1996, many said students couldn’t pass the Regents Exams even at 55. Those critics were wrong. We have seen improvement across the board – in elementary, middle and high school. Tens of thousands have moved from having serious academic difficulties to meeting some of the standards and all of the standards. Many high need schools especially have improved tremendously in getting more of their students to achieve the standards. In high school, we have seen the vast majority pass at 55, even in high need districts and even as more exams were required for each class. Between 93 and 96 percent of general education students from the Class of 2002 passed with a score of 55 or above. Between 85 and 89 percent from the entire cohort, including many who were not yet seniors after four years, passed with 55 or above. 

We have many other reasons to be optimistic about continuing improvement in achievement:  

• In two years all teachers in New York will be certified.
• Higher standards for teachers, required by the Board of Regents, will ensure increasing numbers of more qualified teachers in the classroom.
• Requirements for extra help for all students, more English classes for ELL students, and exposure to a better curriculum for students with disabilities will all help to improve achievement.
• New York City has a new administration and new strategies and a will to achieve.
• More high need districts have put new strategies into place to emphasize the fundamentals, and they are working.
• The Court of Appeals has declared the State’s funding system unconstitutional with the expectation that more funding will go to the children who need it most.

The data also tell us another side to the story. Despite the success in bringing so many students to the passing score of 55, most of the urban high need districts have not yet brought enough of their students to passing the Regents exams at 65. Despite the progress, we still see an achievement gap for many minority students at 65. Generally, from 11 to 22 percent (and sometimes more) of the students in the high need districts passed with a score of 55-64 in the Class of 2002. This is something that should move the conscience of the entire State.  

I believe the Regents should not set a different policy for children in some districts than others. The overall results lead me to recommend that the Board of Regents retain 55 as a local option passing score for now. I propose that this be in effect for all students now in high school and for those entering 9^th grade in the fall of 2004. At the same time, it is unacceptable to leave so many of our children where they are now. 55 is not enough, because it does not represent achievement of the standards. We need a rigorous and continuing statewide effort to lift the achievement of all to 65. I also recommend that the Regents conduct a rigorous and detailed review of this decision before the fall of 2005  and determine what further actions should be taken.  

If the Regents adopt the policy change above, we will take the following actions that build on the successful work of others: 

1. Continue detailed reporting on schools that do and do not get to 65. Show what they do to succeed.

Use the Regional School Support Centers, BOCES, and the internet to promote the examples and practices of schools that achieve higher performance among needy students, such as improving instruction based on results of State exams, offering a rigorous, enriched curriculum for all students, getting middle school students ready to do high school work, and having strong teachers and leaders in neediest schools.   

2. Carry out partnership agreements between the State Education Department and the Big 4 districts and coordination with New York City to ensure that State, federal and local resources are focused on improving reading, mathematics and high school graduation rates.

New State initiatives in early reading and math will be concentrated in these districts. Regional School Support Centers will help schools farthest from the State standards.  A rigorous process is already under way to ensure that the $1.8 billion in federal funds is focused on instructional priorities in reading and math. 

3. Use the Statewide Reading First federal grants to provide $460 million in funding over six years to high need school districts to improve early grade reading.

The districts will be required to (1) adopt a “scientifically based” core reading program that meets the federal requirements, (2) give teachers more preparation in how to teach reading, and (3) give extra help to all the children who need it.  

4. Continue strategies to improve performance of students with disabilities with special focus on the Big 5 districts.

The focus will be on improving general education instruction for special education students, reducing the number of students with disabilities in full-time separate classes, and improving knowledge and skills of special education teachers.   

5. Improve performance of ELL students.

Recruit and train teachers of bilingual and ESL, provide more intensive English instruction for students, provide new curriculum guidance materials for bilingual and ESL instruction, and develop programs to better educate ELL students with interrupted formal education. 

II.         Alternatives for Students with Disabilities 

Recommendation: Extend the existing alternatives for all students with disabilities entering 9^th grade through fall 2009. At the same time, the Department will intensify the work to improve performance of urban districts by targeting federal aid and focusing on improving the achievement of students with disabilities, particularly in the Big 5 districts in cooperation with good efforts already begun locally. 

Since the Regents established the current policy on higher learning standards, they have provided an alternative for students receiving special education services which allows those students who do not pass Regents examinations to take Regents Competency Tests and, if they pass, to receive a local high school diploma.  The IEP diploma also continues to be an option for those students who have been identified for it in their IEP.  

            When the Board of Regents adopted higher standards in 1996, critics said that students with disabilities could not pass Regents Exams. We have continued to study the data.  There are many reasons for optimism: 

• The Regents requirement that special education teachers have more preparation in the major subjects is improving the quality of teacher training.
• More students with disabilities are passing Regents Exams. In the cohort of students who began 9^th grade in 1998, between 40 and 60 percent passed Regents Exams in English, math, history/social studies, and science; approximately 30 percent did not take them.
• More students with disabilities are receiving a Regents Diploma (requiring the passing of eight Regents Exams) and local diplomas.
• More students with disabilities are graduating.

Despite this steady progress in the number of students with disabilities taking Regents level courses and passing Regents Exams, there still is a significant gap between the performance of special education and general education students, and an even more significant gap for students with disabilities in high need districts versus other districts.  For instance: 

·        While 42.8 percent of students with disabilities in our State attend the Big 5 school districts, they make up only 31.5 percent of those students with disabilities taking Regents examinations. A similar result is true in other urban high need districts.  

·        When students with disabilities do use the Competency Tests as an alternative, 76.4 percent pass the reading test in districts outside of the Big 5 cities, while 43 percent pass those tests in the Big 5 cities.  

If the Regents adopt the policy outlined above, we will take the following actions:  

1. Target funding and support to urban school districts to improve student achievement.

Over $6 million annually in federal IDEA funds is being targeted to the Big 5 and other urban districts to improve curriculum and instruction. The New York City special education reform effort is focused on improving student achievement, and we will continue to support them.  

2. At the same time, focus VESID’s Quality Assurance and monitoring efforts to the Big 5 and other urban school districts.

This focused monitoring requires an in-depth review of data at the local level, an analysis of the root causes of poor performance, and the development of benchmarks and strategies to improve performance. This will be done by creating a local special education work group in each Big 5 district to help intensify efforts to improve performance and distribute information on what works.  The work groups will include leading urban educators who have improved performance of students with disabilities, as well as other students. 

3. Increase the number of highly qualified special education teachers in the cities by supporting the linkages between colleges and universities and the school districts, as well as through $5.3 million annually in targeted federal funding to provide scholarship programs, fully use alternate pathways to certification, and expand the colleges’ capacity to train teachers in the shortage areas.

4. Identify those schools that have helped students with disabilities achieve high performance and publish and disseminate research on these effective practices as demonstrated by the VESID Reading and Math initiative.

This initiative has already brought research-based reading instruction to 120 of the lowest performing buildings in 37 school districts. After four years, one-third of the buildings were named to the Department’s most improved list and two-thirds demonstrated significant improvement in comparison to the statewide average for students with disabilities. With a multi-year investment of approximately $10 million, districts are able to sustain these efforts because local capacity for instructional leadership has developed. In addition, the lessons learned here are being incorporated into the Department’s Reading First and Math initiatives. 

5.   Incorporate into the Middle Level Education reform effort strategies that address both the academic and youth development needs of students with disabilities. We will ensure that the $1.8 billion annually in federal funds are focused on instructional priorities in reading and math both for special and general education students. 

III.        Math A 

Recommendation: Accept the report of the Independent Panel on Regents Math A. Adopt its major recommendations to revise the standards, curriculum, and exam. In turn, the Department will both implement the Regents decision and continue with improvements already put in place this summer that implement recommendations in the math report. 

In June, I said the June 2003 Regents Math A exam was not fair. The Final Report of the Independent Panel explains why this is so and describes what to do.  The Panel report is wise and it is right. I propose that we implement many of the recommendations immediately and  study all of the recommendations and report regularly on follow-up actions to the Board. 

The publication of the Final Report of the Panel is the latest in a series of efforts to discover and correct any problems with the Math A exam: 

·        In declaring the June exam was not fair, I allowed districts to set it aside for juniors and seniors.

·        The Regents and I appointed an independent panel and gave them complete access to data, people, and other material related to the Math A exams.

·        The Panel recommended that the June results be adjusted statistically, and we did so immediately before the start of the new school year.

·        In September we took other actions including revised field test procedures, “whole test” quality checks involving expert teachers, more staff and better oversight, and a score validation process for the January exams.

·        We promised to publish the math panel report exactly as presented, and we do so now. 

The Report reveals a panel motivated by concern for children. They believe mathematics is essential to a child’s education, and to that end, children need clear and high standards, a curriculum to match, teachers who know what to teach, and tests that are fair. We agree. We thank them for their careful and constructive recommendations. Now we must do what they recommend and show that we have. The Report is direct. We asked them to be direct in creating the Panel and giving them nine hard questions to answer.  

While the Panel completed its work, we anticipated some of the problems, and acted to correct situations that presented potential risk. We announced and are implementing the following key actions: 

1. Use new procedures to improve the size and representativeness of the field test sample, heighten student motivation, and increase data on performance of the same students on field tests and operational tests so we can: (1) better equate test forms and (2) enable the Department to continuously re-validate the scaling of tests.

These new field testing procedures will include the participation of more schools and districts in administering mini-versions of the Regents exams to motivated students within weeks of the January or June exams.  The procedures will therefore remove any potential risk in ensuring field-testing and equating accuracy.  

2. Increase staffing in two major ways. First, we are re-assigning administrative staff to help with the operations of the Office of State Assessment. Second, we are establishing an Assessment Institute with additional experts to bring greater subject area and psychometric expertise to the Department. 

Improved oversight of the testing process will also be achieved by implementing a computerized project tracking system that will identify bottlenecks in the system and ensure the quality of exams. 

3. Conduct whole test reviews by teachers before any Regents exam is given. 

This process was used in August and resulted in no post-test errata on the Regents exam.  The process will now become standardized for all Regents exams. 

4. Employ a test results verification procedure that uses a representative sample of schools to provide the State Education Department with question-level data for students taking a particular exam immediately after the exam is administered.  These results can be used to confirm that the score conversion charts are accurate.

If the Board adopts the major policies recommended in the panel report, we will take these additional actions in response: 

1.      Revise the mathematics standards to make them clearer, more tightly focused on the essential knowledge and skills, and easier to apply in the classroom. 

The standards will remain high, as the Panel recommended. We will appoint a Mathematics Standards Committee whose members are mathematics teachers, mathematicians, and other users of mathematics to accomplish this. Some members of the Math A Panel will be included. The Mathematics Standards Committee will continue to meet periodically to advise the Regents and Commissioner. 

2.      Publish a suggested grade-by-grade K-12 curriculum, with scope and sequence, that matches the revised standards.  

We will appoint a Mathematics Curriculum Committee, which will include members of the Mathematics Standards Committee to ensure consistency. Their work will include a review of existing curricula because elements of what is needed may already be available. 

3.    Establish a new Regents Math A exam.  

            We will use improved field-testing and equating methods and establish new cut scores. This exam will be appropriate for the typical student after one year of high school mathematics as defined in the standards. 

4.      Pending the creation of a new Regents Math A exam, restructure the existing exam along the lines suggested by the Panel.   

Members from the Panel will review the exam. We will use the score validation system announced in September to ensure that the results are fair before the scores become final.  

5.      The Regents Committee on Higher Education and Professional Practice will continue to review teacher preparation, certification, and professional development in consultation with the higher education community and elementary and secondary school practitioners, as well as members of the public.  

(The Regents anticipated some – but not all – of the Panel’s recommendations for teacher preparation in their recent policy decisions, and there has been follow through in the colleges.) 

6.      Develop a network of math training for teachers.  

The Regents and the Commissioner will fund local and regional discussions among school mathematics practitioners, mathematicians in higher education and users of mathematics in other fields. The purpose will be to share curriculum, increase professional development for teachers, and build support for strong mathematics programs. This statewide math initiative will bring together resources from EMSC and VESID to ensure that both general and special education students get better math instruction. We will incorporate the best practices and research in mathematics into on-line training, math institutes, and on-site help to schools. We will also invite mathematics experts to Regents meetings to begin these discussions and draw attention to the work already going on in high performing schools, higher education institutions, and BOCES. We will include public television and libraries in this effort.

IV.       Regents Work Group on Physics Recommendations 

Recommendation: Accept the policy recommendation of the Regents Work Group on Physics concerning future Regents exams. In turn, the Department will implement the Regents decision by immediately convening a committee of practitioners to establish new scoring for the next Regents Physics exam.  

            The Regents Work Group on Physics has recommended that the performance level expected on the Regents Physics Exam should be comparable to other Regents science exams. If the Board adopts these recommendations, a new standard setting will be conducted for the Regents physics exam in order to set a new performance level.  However, we will ensure that the core content of the physics standards and curriculum is rigorous and prepares students for further study in the sciences. 

            The Department will implement the standard setting recommendation by calling together a new committee of physics teachers and other physics experts who will set a new performance level for the exam consistent with the Regents subcommittee guidance.  This process will take six to eight weeks.  The results will be used for the next exams and beyond. 

            In addition, we will use the existing network of physics mentors and the on-line  internet system to disseminate information on the new performance levels and curriculum content in physics.  This network will conduct regional information and training sessions to make sure all physics teachers have current information. 

V.  VOTED: Recommendations 

VOTED: Keep 55 as a local option passing score to give students and schools more time to improve achievement.  This provision will be in effect for all students now in high school and for those entering 9^th grade in the fall of 2004. During this time, generate a renewed, rigorous and relentless statewide effort to lift the achievement of all to 65 by building on research that shows what works and the accomplishments of the people in the schools who are applying what works. Concentrate on reading and mathematics, particularly in the high need schools, while investing available federal funds to build capacity. 

VOTED: Extend the existing alternatives for all students with disabilities entering 9^th grade through fall 2009. At the same time, the Department will intensify the work to improve performance of urban districts by targeting federal aid and focusing on improving the achievement of students with disabilities, particularly in the Big 5 districts in cooperation with good efforts already begun locally. 

VOTED: Accept the report of the Independent Panel on Regents Math A. Adopt its major recommendations to revise the standards, curriculum, and exam. In turn, the Department will both implement the Regents decision and continue with improvements already put in place this summer that implement recommendations in the math report. 

VOTED: Accept the policy recommendation of the Regents Work Group on Physics concerning future Regents exams. In turn, the Department will implement the Regents decision by immediately convening a committee of practitioners to establish new scoring for the next Regents Physics exam.

 

PowerPoint Presentation on Four Major Policy Decisions on Assessment