NYSED Continues To Make It Easier To Pass The Algebra 1 Regents Exam.

When does a 30% correct response equals a 65% passing rate?  Only in New York State.  It seems that every year the New York State Education Department (NYSED) reduces the cut scores so that more students can pass the Algebra 1 Regents.  This year NYSED reduced the amount of answers a student needs to answer correctly to 26 out of 86 questions, that comes out to a 30% rate. The lowest since the State has been using this version of the Algebra 1 Regents exam.

The reason for the NYSED's lowering the cut scores is to achieve a minimum passing rate in the Algebra 1 Regents.  Not that the exam was made harder but because the State is under pressure to reduce the academic/racial achievement gap and to increase the graduation rate.  Therefore, the NYSED must increase the curve to a point where educators question the academic merit of the Algebra 1 Regents exam's  minimum passing rate.

Here are the cut scores necessary to achieve a minimum passing rate from 2014, when the present day Algebra 1 Regents exam was introduced to New York State students.

Year..................Correct Answers.........Percentage

2014..........................31...........................34.6%
2015..........................30...........................34.9%
2016..........................30...........................34.9%
2017..........................27...........................31.4%
2018..........................26...........................30.2%

For every 1 point drop in the cut scores, it's estimated that an additional 10% of students will attain the minimum passing grade of 65%. That means since the Algebra 1 Regents exam was changed in 2014, approximately 50% more students passed the test.

You can read more about this in the New York Post. You can also read my post last year on the lowered cut scores Here. 

Why Teaching In The New York City Public Schools Under The Charlotte Danielson Rubric Is Hurting Student Achievement.

When I first started teaching 20 years ago, my Assistant Principal was there to assist me as I struggled through classroom management problems, curriculum issues, and the stress of controlling 150 different incomplete teenage personalities on a daily basis.  When I had a problem, my assistant principal would offer helpful hints, she would tell me stories how she struggled in her early years of teaching, and how the students have told her how they liked me, even with all my faults.  With her supportive guidance I went from a terrible "newbie" teacher to a quality teacher five years later.

During my early years of teaching I never had to worry about a "gotcha observation" and the administration would give me a "heads up" when they intended to come in.  Moreover, the school administration allowed me to teach the way I felt most comfortable with and the result was many of my students exceeded expectations.  To the school  administration it was what's best for the students not going after teachers or using a "one-size-fits-all" rubric to satisfy DOE Central.

Unfortunately, for most teachers those days are long gone.  Now we have Leadership Academy Principals with little or no classroom experience who think of themselves as CEO's of their school rather than as an instructional leader.  Furthermore, we also have assistant principals who ended up in their position by connections and not teaching ability.  Their job has morphed from respected educational role models to feared bosses.

The main weapon the school administration uses is the Charlotte Danielson rubric that forces teachers to follow a scripted format to be rated "effective".  Combine the Charlotte Danielson rubric with poor school administration and you have a recipe for disaster when it comes to teacher satisfaction and more importantly, student learning. Many studies have shown a strong correlation between effective leadership, teacher satisfaction and student academic achievement, yet the Chancellor and her DOE managers rather concentrate on terminating teachers than improving the hostile classroom environment and until that changes all the DOE claimed academic improvements are all smoke and mirrors.

Will things change?  I hope so but I do not believe that the pendulum will swing back until we have a change at the top and a new Chancellor is appointed, until that time look for a continued emphasis on a punitive teacher evaluation system and low teacher morale in the New York City public schools.

Common Core Is A Disaster For Special Needs Children.

Most classroom teachers know that Common Core has been a disaster and the "junk science" in the form of high stakes testing that goes with it has resulted in most students not meeting the standards and adversely affect teacher evaluations with unjust terminations.  Unfortunately, from the Obama Administration, to Cuiomo, to De Blasio and his disappointing Chancellor, Carmen Farina, all have supported the Common Core.  Worse, our union President Michael Mulgrew has threatened to punch anyone in the face   if they take away his Common Core.  Until Common Core collapses like a "house of cards" and it will, expect it to stay for the next couple of years and destroy the lives of students and teachers alike. One bit of good news is that Andrew Cuomo is forcing out NYSED Commissioner John T. King and maybe things will change for the better (don't bet on it)  However, that's for another day.  This post is about the collateral damage that Common Core and its rigor is doing to our most neediest of children in the school system and nobody in charge seems to care. 

I have a very close friend who works in District 75 and with the most severely disabled children who are classified as being both autistic and mentally retarded. She is a teacher in the most restrictive 6:1:1 classroom and has spent almost two decades teaching these children life and fundamental skills so that they can be productive adults and contribute to society.  Many of her students stay with her for up to three years and by the time they move on she has taught them many social and fundamental (life) skills that allow them to become functional adults.  However, because Common Core and its associated rigor has infiltrated even to the Special Education District 75, she finds herself being forced to teach them geometry and social studies rather than the skills they really need like using money to buy items in stores and teaching them social cues.  Worse, the Common Core and its associated rigor requires even autistic students to communicate and work cooperatively with their peers despite the fact that these students struggle mightily to do either one and frustrates them to the point they shut down and become uncooperative. 

My friend is clearly frustrated herself as she has seen her mission change from teaching them coping skills and civics to questionable academics that have little or no impact on their life, or ever will be.  Instead of taking her students on field trips to stores and have them buy items, given a limited amount of money and going over a shopping list of what to buy and not to buy.  She finds herself giving her students Common Core Math workbooks that makes little sense to her and makes her students unhappy.  Furthermore, she used to walk her students around the neighborhood and go into the local stores while teaching them appropriate behaviors as they interact with the general public and go over what each traffic and parking sign meant. Now she gives them Common Core workbooks on our country's history and about the Presidents and worries what will happen to her students when they become adults?

In a job she loved and took pride in making the most developmentally disabled students functional citizens of this country, she finds herself counting the days until she retires as she wastes her time doing outrageous amount of paperwork using the SESIS program, day and night without payment and giving out useless Common Core workbooks while defending her teaching skills to meet the ill-defined rigor demanded by her administrators.  To her, Common Core is an unmitigated disaster and hurts the very students who need the help the most.

The New Recipients Of My 2013 Golden Turkey Award.

Yes, its Thanksgiving and the time for me to issue my annual "Golden Turkey Award".  Who are the most deserving recipients of the award this year?  There was quite a bit of competition this year.  Christine Quinn, Chancellor Dennis Walcott (past winner), President Obama, Meryl Tisch, the idiots at Tweed, and of course Mayor Bloomberg's failed education legacy (past winner).  However, I have identified the three most deserving individuals that are my recipients this year because of their failure to understand the New York City Public Schools.

First, and foremost is the Commissioner of the State Education Department, John T. King who has proven to be inept at his position and alienated everybody he encounters, except the Governor.
Mr King has imposed an unworkable "teacher evaluation system" complete with "junk science" and was bitterly disappointed when only 1% of the teachers statewide were rated "ineffective".  To ensure that doesn't happen in New York City, he imposed a more stringent "teacher evaluation system" and to make sure that more teachers are rated "ineffective", the "junk science" scores alone can be used to determine a teacher's rating.

Now he has tried to impose high stakes testing throughout the State from Kindergarten to high school and demands the use of "common core" even when the materials and teacher training are lacking.  He tried to impose restrictions at public meetings that backfired in his face.  Moreover, his "I'm always right" attitude has even turned off many of his allies.  Finally, his insistence in keeping inBloom inc. has made him a "laughingstock" of the country as all the other States have either dropped or are dropping the company.

Second, is the Federal Education Secretary, Arnie Duncan, the basketball playing buddy of the President, who has shown to speak out of both sides of his mouth and in his latest gaffe has complained that "white suburban soccer moms are discovering that their children are not as brilliant as they think".  Only to apologize the next day. 

Arnie Duncan's education legacy as head of the Chicago School System was of failure and his tenure as the Education Secretary is no better.

Finally, I bring you the clueless Campbell Brown who falsely claims that teacher's found guilty of "sexual misconduct" are being allowed to teach in the classroom.  Of course what Campbell Brown either fails or doesn't want to understand that accusations of "sexual misconduct" is not evidence.  Therefore, in the warped world of Campbell Brown any accusation that an investigator substantiates must be true and no damn evidence is needed.  In other words "due process rights" and the assumption that a teacher is "innocent until proven guilty" that is part of our country's history is foreign to Campbell Brown's assumption that any suspicion of "sexual misconduct" is good enough for her to have the teacher terminated.

I guess Ms. Brown would be happier if our justice system was more like Nazi Germany's or the Soviet Union under Stalin.

Why Experience Counts When Hiring Teachers.

It's time for the Open Market Transfer System (OMTS) when teachers look for positions that better suit them or just looking for a change of scenery. Unfortunately, in the last two terms of the Bloomberg Administration few experienced teachers were considered by principals for their vacancies and "who can blame them"?  Since experienced teachers cost more money to the school, thanks to the unfair "fair student funding formula" imposed on the schools by the DOE. However, these principals are being "short sighted" and  doing a disservice to the students of their school when they practice "education on the cheap" by hiring inexperienced or "newbie teachers" instead of the "best teachers" to meet the ever increasing academic requirements such as "Common Core".

Why is it important for principals to hire experienced teachers?  Let me count the ways.

First, it's important for a teacher to have a deep knowledge of the curriculum he or she is teaching.  Without this understanding of the topic, the teacher can only scratch the surface and make it more difficult for the students to succeed academically, especially with "Common Core" being implemented in the schools.

Second, An experienced teacher has a track record and any Principal who cares to investigate the teacher's ability in the classroom can easily do so and decide if that teacher is appropriate for their school.  Inexperienced and "newbie teachers" do not have such a track record and when a Principal hires an inexperienced teacher for their school it's a "crap-shoot" to say the least and a good 50% of the time it will be "snake eyes" with th students losing...

Third, the most difficult part of teaching is "classroom management" and it takes years for inexperienced teachers to master the skills necessary to maintain discipline in the classroom. On the other hand, experienced teachers have "been their and done that" and are usually proficient in the difficult art of "classroom management".

Fourth, no Principal wants their students to become "guinea pigs" as the inexperienced teacher struggles through an unfamiliar curriculum and try to maintain classroom discipline at the same time. This steep learning curve for the teacher puts the students at a disadvantage academically to their peers who are fortunate to have an experienced teacher.  However, many principals do just that by hiring the inexperienced teacher, usually becuse of their school's budget.

Finally, an experienced teacher brings maturity and stability to the school and their experience can be used to mentor the inexperienced teacher in the many complicated skills it takes to run a classroom.

To New York City principals, the question I ask you?  Do you want the "best" or "cheapest"  teachers to lead the school's students and which would you want for your own children?  Ponder my question carefully when you are tempted to hire an inexperienced  teacher to save a few shekels.  Remember the saying "penny wise dollar foolish" when you play the game that will result in hurting student academic outcomes, known to all as  "education on the cheap"

Common Core Will Cause Academically Struggling Students To Fail Without Strong Parental Support.

During the past two days I have hearing about the new "Common Core Standards" and how it will allow students to reach the high standards that will make them productive citizens of our country.  However, it is one thing to" reach for the stars" and another to have the means to do so.  In many of our urban areas students struggle academically every day as poverty, family, and community problems interfere with student learning.   In  fact numerous studies have shown that family and poverty are major factors in impeding student academic achievement. Now the nation is implementing CCS in the curriculum on an unprepared student population that suffers from poverty and single or no parent households.

Simply stated CCS allow a student to go deeply into a particular topic and substitutes memorization with understanding and in theory, would improve student learning.  However, for CCS to work, it will take a village.  That means parent involvement, social and academic interventions, otherwise, known as wraparound services,as well as school support.Without the entire village, many students will be unable to have the tools necessary to achieve academic success.  Education reformers can lay the blame on the schools with their "no excuses" argument but the reality is that without parental support and addressing the child poverty issue, the schools can only make a small impact on the child's life.

The Achilles heel for successfully implementing CCS is the lack of parental involvement and without parental participation, the necessary tool for their child to reach for those higher standards is lacking.  Too many children have no academic stimulation at home. Their homes have no books, or even a quiet place to read and do homework.  Instead they are texting, playing video games, hanging out in the street, or watching cartoons, Is it any wonder that under the existing and easier curriculum these children struggle academically?  How do you expect them to succeed when CCS makes the curriculum more difficult without addressing the existing problems?

 While CCS has a lot of promise, it can be a death sentence for students in poverty and have no parental support.