Dilbert Knows Ed Deform

Now that the ed deformers are using the "business model", Dilbert becomes even more apropos. Today, the part of Joel Klein is being played by the pointy-haired boss:

Bring Back the Traditional, One-Hundred-Point Exam?

Much of the dismay over the recent downscaling of students' ostensible proficiency and academic readiness has come from parents, community leaders, and others who were not intimately familiar with the underlying metrics of the NYSED and Regents tests.

What does a "Level 2" or "Level 3" really signify? What is a 618 ELA score, or a 650? If a child is a 578, what does it mean and what is a parent supposed to do, if anything? How can a child's one-day exam end up with a score of 780? What does a raw score of 28 mean? If a child brings home a 70 on his/her Algebra I Regents exam, isn't that a good thing?

For probably most if not all of the last century, most public school grades have been measured on a scale of 1 - 100, with 65 being the normal "cut score" for passing (i.e., content proficiency, albeit rather minimal at 65). This system has been the height of simplicity, easily understood by virtually one hundred percent of the public. If a son or daughter brought home a test score of 78, every parent know EXACTLY where the child stood on the material tested.

Ask the typical NYC/NYS parents of elementary or middle school children today how their kids are doing as measured by the NYS Math and ELA exams, and many have no honest idea beyond, "He's a 2" or "She's a 3." Not only are these reductionist numbers short of meaning, far too few parents have any idea how they were derived. At the high school level, the 1 -100 scoring scale appears on its surface to have been retained, yet how many parents have no idea that their child's 70 on the June 2o10 Algebra I Regents exam was really a 41% (36 raw score points out of 87 possible)? Up until the late 1990s, that 70 really was a 70%, and every parent of every student I ever taught at that time knew EXACTLY what it meant. Then NCLB came along, and with it endless obfuscation and obscure manipulation.

Present rethinking of the NYS examinations could have provided, and perhaps still could provide, an opportunity to bring some much need simplicity and clarity to these measurements. The necessary action is disarmingly simple:

SCORE EVERY STANDARDIZED EXAM ON A 100-POINT SCALE, WITH 65 AS PASSING WHERE SUCH A CUTOFF IS NEEDED (AS IN HIGH SCHOOL EXAMS).

Even the proficiency levels would no longer be necessary, since parents already know their child's achievement level if he or she socres an 82, honestly measured. If a four-division proficiency scale is still required to satisfy President Obama and Arne Duncan, set those levels once and keep them there: for example, Below 65 is Level 1, 65 - 79 is Level 2, 80 - 89 is Level 3, and 90 - 100 is Level 4. At the high school level, all scale scoring of Regents exams should be eliminated and replaced with direct grading of exams on a simple, 100-point scale.

Yes, I admit that it's simplistic and perhaps even a bit naive, but why should simple and/or naive necessarily be bad? As things stand now, what parent can put any faith in the current measures? What parent doesn't believe that, following the latest round of changes announced by David Steiner(here and here), the same march toward inflated test scores and grandiose claims of progress won't simply restart, just using a different baseline?

Making it more difficult for "test experts" and other educrats to hide behind Wizard-of-Albany (and Wizard-of-Tweed) curtains while playing games with massive statistical databases no more understandable than Wall Street credit default swaps is certainly a worthy goal. Even more worthy is bringing public school parents back into the process by measuring their children's progress (at least as assessed in these instruments) in terms we all understand, relate to, and even respond to in the same, shared way. Giving parents honest, stable, and understandable diagnostic feedback on their children's academic progress would go a long way towards turning a much maligned, politically misused assessment system into a more useful and meaningful process.

Press conference protesting Klein's "emergency" expansion of Girls Prep Charter school

Good video of Manhattan BP Stringer and Councilmember Rosie Mendez, both leaders in the battle to recognize the rights of public school parents and their special ed children at PS 94, in the face of Klein's illegitimate and illegal "bulldozer" tactics.

The tangled web of influence behind Klein's decision to allow the expansion of Girls Prep charter to go forward

Last week, Joel Klein disclosed he would invoke “emergency powers” to enable Girls Prep Charter School to expand within PS 94, even as it pushes out a program for autistic kids, contrary to the ruling of the NY State Education commissioner, David Steiner.

Steiner had held that Klein's actions violated state law, as Klein had refused to recognize that the autistic program was a school, any change to which required a public process occur beforehand, including informing the parents of the children who would be affected. Klein's actions in invoking emergency powers to displace a school for autistic children on behalf of a charter school has provoked much outrage from parents, elected officials, and special education advocates alike.

Mike Klonsky has pointed out that hedge fund maven Ravenel Boykin Curry IV, subject of a recent NY Times profile, is on the board of Public Prep, the charter management organization (CMO) that operates Girls Prep. But this only scratches the surface of this massively connected charter school.

Also on the board of Public Prep is Eric Grannis, husband of Eva Moskowitz, operator of the Harlem Success chain of charter schools, who has provoked her share of controversy by aggressively expanding within public school buildings, also with the aid and assistance of Joel Klein, to the extent of letting him know which public schools to close for her benefit. Grannis is a founding member of Girls Prep board and former counsel of the board:

Sarah Robertson is also on the Public Prep board and remains head of the Girls Prep board. Sarah is the wife of Spencer Robertson, the founder of PAVE charter school, installed by Klein in PS 15 in Red Hook, Brooklyn. PAVE is the subject of another complaint to the Commissioner, charging that its expansion will have damaging effects on the students with disabilities at PS 15, impacts which were omitted from the DOE's Educational Impact Statement. Unfortunately, in that case, the Commissioner did not see these effects as important enough to require them to be mentioned in the EIS.

Spencer Robertson, husband of Sarah, is the son of the hedge fund billionaire, Julian Robertson, who controls two influential and deep-pocketing foundations, the Tiger Foundation and the Robertson Foundation, both of which support Bloomberg's agenda to the tune of millions of dollars, through the Fund for Public Schools and other vehicles.

The Robertson Foundation is also among the largest contributors to Education Reform Now, the aggressive pro-charter school organization, and is one of the main funders of the NYC Charter Center, on whose board Joel Klein sits. The head of the board of the NYC Charter Center is Phoebe Boyer, the Executive Director of the Tiger Foundation and Interim Executive Director of Robertson Foundation.

Julian Robertson is in the news recently, not about his efforts on behalf of NYC charters, but because he took the Gates/Buffett billionaire’s pledge to give away most of his money to charity. Why that couldn’t include finding space for the charter schools run by his son and daughter-in-law, so that they wouldn’t have to push out autistic and other high-needs kids from critical space in their public schools is hard to figure out.

Perhaps contributing to his reluctance is the fact that these billionaire hedge fund privateers are intent on “leveraging” their private contributions as much as possible, as one of them, Whitney Tilson, pointed out in the NY Times article:

“It’s the most important cause in the nation, obviously, and with the state providing so much of the money, outside contributions are insanely well leveraged,” he said.

Julian Robertson is also a philanthropist who is awfully good at avoiding to pay NYC taxes, even to the extent of hiring a social secretary to keep track of how many days he should stay out of the city each year.

Why did Girls Prep want to expand in the first place? See the SUNY charter center fiscal dashboard, which shows that this school had recently moved into dangerous territory fiscally speaking, and most likely wanted an infusion of taxpayer funds generated by higher enrollment, without having to dip into the hefty pockets of their board members or Spencer’s generous father.

Joel Klein Hires His Very Own Andrew Breitbart

In a spectacular flameout on her first attempt as a blogger columnist for Huffington Post, new NYCDOE Director of Communications Natalie Ravitz has already demonstrated herself a worthy disciple of the Andrew Breitbart school of unprincipled journalism.

In her inaugural HuffPost column, Ms. Ravitz replies to criticism from historian, author, former Assistant Secretary of Education and now NYU Professor of Education Diane Ravitch regarding the drastically reduced 2010 NYS Math and ELA achievement levels of NYC's public school students. While she does not state the specific source of that criticism, it seems likely that Ms. Ravitz was responding primarily to Diane Ravitch's August 4 guest posting, "Mayoral Control Means Zero Accountability," on the Washington Post's "The Answer Sheet," moderated by Valerie Strauss. Regardless, Ms. Ravitz's first effort is distinctly amateurish and vindictive, astonishing for the low road it takes in attacking Ms. Ravitch personally, and establishes Ms. Ravitz less as a Director of Communications than as Joel Klein's pit-bull-style attack dog.

In her blog posting, Ms. Ravitz accuses Ms. Ravitch of "oppos[ing] testing and accountability systems -- demonstrably not true from Diane's own writings. She asserts that Ms. Ravitch and others are "falling all over themselves to trumpet our kids lower scores," as if those of us who oppose the Bloomberg/Klein "education reforms" are actually celebrating failures by our city's children -- not even worthy of a reply. She selectively excerpts a three-year-old piece Ms. Ravitch wrote for the NY Sun to suggest that Diane views NYC public school kids as "slackers" -- again, not to be dignified by a responses. She asserts that Ms. Ravitch wants to do away with all tests -- ridiculous. She argues that Ms. Ravitch "continually chooses to disparage their [the students'] accomplishments" rather than recognize that far too much of those supposed accomplishments as measured by the NYS exams has long been known to be bogus. And on and on and on ad nauseum in a way that truly merits the nausea part of that term.

The most delicious irony in Ms. Ravitz's embarrassing screed comes in her fourth paragraph: "It is easy to hurl insults from the sidelines." Well said, Ms. Ravitz, and even better demonstrated from your six-figure seat on those sidelines. What Ms. Ravitz has also demonstrated most effectively is her willing adoption of the long-standing Klein policy of attacking the few critics they can't afford to ignore, either personally or by warping their supposed positions into outlandish and unrecognizable sound bites.

Ms. Ravitz, painfully new to her job as a replacement for David Cantor, brings no observable educational qualifications to her position beyond perhaps once been a student in a school somewhere. She did work in press secretary and communications capacities for Senator Barbara Boxer, and prior to that for Senator Paul Wellstone's re-election campaign. Yet despite working with two of the Senate's most renowned and respected liberals, remarkably little of their honesty and respect for others seems to have rubbed off on her.

Ms. Ravitz's chief career notoriety prior to this appears to having been one of the twenty lucky folks who made Politico.com's "D.C.'s Most Eligible Singles" list last September (along with Maureen Dowd and Janet Napolitano!!). Here's Politico's gag-worthy description of Ms. Ravitz's qualifications:

Perhaps no other Senate staffer turns heads as frequently as Natalie Ravitz. Even so, this blonde California native has yet to find Mr. Right. As communications director for Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.), Ravitz combines a smooth, cat-like demeanor with all the toughness demanded of a Capitol Hill communicator ... and the mixture is potent enough to drive her male colleagues dizzy.

Even better, check out the D.C. "P.R. babes"(one of whom is indeed Ms. Ravitz) in the story "DC is full of hotness. Especially in PR!" at the appallingly unprofessional DC This Week. Just what the NYC public schools need most right now. By the way, how does a girl from New Jersey (as stated in the DOE press release announcing her hiring) become a "California native?"

Ms. Ravitz's first noticeable effort here in NYC, a shameless diatribe on Huffington Post, is a hideous mix of Andrew Breitbart's duplicity, Ann Coulter's hysteria, and Sarah Palin's cluelessness. It also shows quite clearly that she is nowhere close to ready for prime time in the Big Apple. Perhaps she should take her "eligible singles" status back to D.C. where Michelle Rhee could hire her to carry her infamous broom for her.

For another take on Ms. "Andrea Breitbart" Ravitz's HuffPost fiasco, check out Gary Babad's satire on this site. Be sure also to read the many comments (49 as of this writing, unanimous in support of Diane Ravitch) on HuffPost following Ms. Ravitz's screed.

It is important to note here as well that neither Ms. Ravitz (however entertaining) nor Ms. Ravitch are the real issues or the real story. THAT continues to be the abject failure of, and prospectively irreversible injury from, the educational policies, programs, and actions of this schools chancellor under this mayor, and their incessant, spare-no-expense effort to spin fool's gold out of educational straw.

What’s in a Name?

August 7, 2010 (GBN News): A controversial Huffington Post article criticizing the noted educational historian Diane Ravitch has caused quite a stir in the educational community. The article, by Natalie Ravitz, has reminded many readers of the recent treatment of Shirley Sherrod, in that statements made over three years ago by Dr. Ravitch were seemingly mischaracterized and taken entirely out of context.

A number of readers have wondered, who is Natalie Ravitz, and why was she hired by the DOE? GBN News investigative reporters have learned that the general lack of knowledge about this particular DOE employee may actually be intentional.

Ms. Ravitz recently replaced the departing David Cantor as Director of Communications for the NY City Department of Education, after serving as chief press aide to Senator Barbara Boxer. There are a number of theories as to why she was hired. Some say Schools Chancellor Joel Klein hoped that her attractiveness would help win over some of the male critics of the Department. Others have postulated that her lack of experience in education – inexperience is a prerequisite in a department headed by an attorney who had no prior educational experience, and which has practically no professional educators in its top ranks - was a larger factor.

But GBN News has now learned the prime reason for hiring Ms. Ravitz – her name. A source high up in the DOE told GBN News, on condition of anonymity, that Chancellor Klein hoped the public would confuse the unknown Ms. Ravitz with the similarly named Diane Ravitch. He reasoned that if readers thought Dr. Ravitch had written the article and was criticizing herself, she would lose all credibility. Paradoxically, the Chancellor also apparently hoped to gain credibility for the press office by counting on the fact that confused readers would think his spokesperson was actually one of the most respected figures in the world of education.

By all accounts, the Chancellor’s “dirty trick” appears to have failed. As of this writing, all of the comments at the end of Ms. Ravitz’ piece have savaged the article and have unanimously supported Diane Ravitch. But as a service to our readers, just to avoid confusion, GBN News will heretofore only refer to Natalie Ravitz as “Andrew Breitbart”.

Revised NYSED Grade 3-8 Math Exam Cut Scores: Say WHAT?

NYS Education Commissioner David M. Steiner made waves last week by announcing a new, toughened regime for the state's annual Grade 3 - 8 standardized exams in Math and English Language Arts (ELA). Through an NYSED press release, Steiner assures the public that future exams and their "proficiency" (i.e., Level 3) cut scores will be set at a level to "indicate whether a student is on track to pass Regents exams and to go on to higher education prepared to do college-level work." As one mark of that new standard, a separate NYSED press release defines the new Grade 8 cut score as "being set at a level that offers students a 75% chance that they will score at a college-ready level (75 in English and 80 in Math) on their Regents exams in high school." New cut scores at Grades 3 - 7 will be developmentally supportive of achieving this Grade 8 objective.

Before we all jump for joy at this new level of academic rigor, sure to put us on an internationally competitive footing with Singapore, China, Korea, Finland, Germany, etc., let's step back a minute and consider what this standard actually means, at least for Math.

First, the only Regents math exam required for students to pass in order to graduate high school is the Integrated Algebra I test, generally taken by ninth graders but frequently taken by middle- to advanced-level eighth graders before leaving middle school. The level of math involved is typical of that found in seventh or eighth grade in most of the countries mentioned previously. So we are predicating our NYS public education definition of and target for college readiness as ninth grade math, the only one actually required by the state for a high school diploma. Not on Geometry (10th grade) or Algebra II/Trigonometry (11th grade), or pre-calculus (12th grade), just on 8th/9th grade math. How many high school math teachers in NY State would classify a student as mathematically "college ready" based on the state's Integrated Algebra I curriculum?

Second, and even more disheartening, is Mr. Steiner's assurance through NYSED that such readiness is based on the student achieving a grade of 80 on the Integrated Algebra I exam. In the most recent such exam, in June 2010, NYS public school students needed to achieve a raw score of 53 points from a maximum of 87 to be awarded a scaled score of 80. In other words, in the NYS Regents' world of today, a 60.9% (53 out of 87) is an 80. Thus, what most sentient adults would consider a failing grade of 61 on an eighth/ninth grade math exam is being touted as the NYS definition of college readiness. Maybe for Monroe Business College or the online University of Phoenix, or perhaps Faber College -- home campus in the movie "Animal House" -- but hardly for the university image most of us conjure from the word "college."

To illustrate just how perverse this Regents' addiction to raw-score-to-scaled-score conversion really is, consider the following. A student taking the Integrated Algebra I Regents exam in June 2010 received a final (scaled) score of 80 by earning 53 points out of 87 (60.9%). To receive a final score of 85, however, that same student would have had to earn not just five or six more points, but fifteen more!! That's right -- a raw score of 53 out of 87 points possible netted the student an 80, but he/she needed a raw score of 68 (78.2%) to get an 85! The raw score difference between a student with an 80 and one with an 85 is thus 17 percentage points, a 61% versus a 78%.

Most working high school math teachers in NY State today would probably vouch that this last level, 68 out of 87 on the Integrated Algebra I Regents exam, forms the minimum baseline for any sort of real readiness in math, whether at the college level or simply for the next higher levels of high school math.

While it's laudable for Mr. Steiner to raise the previous low bar for the state's gateway math exam, it's a shame that he has elected to couch the new one in the equally misleading and dishonest terms of "college readiness." Parents who accept this claim on behalf of their eighth and ninth grade children are going to be sorely surprised four or five years later when many of those same children are taking remedial math classes in college.

Klein Declares Martial Law

August 5, 2010 (GBN News): Schools Chancellor Joel Klein, whose planned escape to the United Arab Emirates was thwarted yesterday by the UAE’s ban on Blackberry service, was forced to revert to Plan B and declare martial law under NY State’s emergency powers act. The Chancellor’s first move was to displace a school for autistic children by moving a charter school into PS 94 in Manhattan, despite a court order forbidding it. But GBN News has learned that this action is only the first of many under a law that purportedly lets the Chancellor take any action he sees fit to “preserve student health, safety, or general welfare”.

The martial law declaration came as a surprise to those who had expected the Chancellor to resign in disgrace after the huge gains in test scores under his regime were exposed as wildly inflated. But a defiant Mr. Klein was said to believe that the emergency powers law would buy him six months during which he could legally circumvent the laws and the courts. With the full support of Mayor Bloomberg, the Chancellor reportedly plans to use that window to “finish the job” before the law finally catches up with him.

“He’s blowing the whole wad,” a DOE official told GBN News on condition of anonymity. “To save time, he’s going to make each school use all four of Arne Duncan’s turnaround strategies simultaneously. Fire the principals, fire the teachers, close all the schools and turn them into charters, merit pay, the works. And when he’s done, in three months he’s going to do it all again. He’s calling it ‘the most creative destruction ever’.”

Education Secretary Arne Duncan was effusive in his praise of the Chancellor’s martial law declaration, calling it “even better than Katrina”. And surprisingly, there was no immediate objection from the teachers’ union. “We want to make sure that we still have a seat at the table,” a UFT spokesperson told GBN News, explaining the union’s decision to reserve judgment. But the official added, “Of course, that’s assuming there’s still a table, or any of us left to sit at it.”

Our schools are held hostage by an outlaw

So let’s get this straight:

Chancellor Joel Klein violates state law by ordering 19 school closures and countless co-locations, without going through the mandated public process and preparing adequate educational impact statements.

When Justice Joan B. Lobis of State Supreme Court in Manhattan blocks the closures, finding “significant violations of law,” Klein ignores the court order by refusing to assign students to these schools.

When the city is sued by the UFT, Class Size Matters and others, charging that Klein failed to comply with the law requiring them to reduce class size, despite taking nearly a billion dollars in state funds in exchange for a promise to do so, the city argues that the courts have no jurisdiction over this matter.

When Justice John A. Barone of the State Supreme Court says the courts indeed have jurisdiction over this issue, Klein says he will appeal Barone's decision, and insists that only the NY State Education Commissioner has the authority to determine whether he is following the law.

When the same NY State Education Commissioner David Steiner forbids him from moving autistic kids out of PS 94 on the Lower East Side, so that Girls Prep charter can expand within the building, saying that the city failed to carry out the mandated public process for significant changes in school utilization, Klein ignores the ruling, invoking “emergency” powers, and goes ahead anyway.

1.1 million schoolchildren (and their parents) are being held hostage by this outlaw. Are there any limits to Klein's open contempt for the rule of law?

More importantly, what can be done? Are state legislators listening? Is anyone?

Let the Public Advocate advocate for a new direction for our schools

As one of only three citywide elected officials, the Public Advocate can play an important role in articulating alternative policies from those carried out by the Mayor In perhaps no other area would this be more important than for the NYC school system. because it consumes 1/3 of the City budget, and because the Mayor has untrammeled statutory control to run the schools.

The current Public Advocate, Bill de Blasio, is especially qualified to play such a role, as a public school parent and a former school board member in District 15 in Brooklyn, who considers himself a progressive, community based activist.

Unfortunately, nine months after his election, he has not presented a systematic vision for our public schools, nor a program around which to mobilize change. Recently he released a report criticizing the Department of Education's school co-location policy that has negatively affected dozens of schools by taking important space within them.

Yet even more significant are the threat of budget cuts that threaten to undo the financial gains from the nearly twenty-year struggle of the Campaign For Fiscal Equity lawsuit and the false assertions of the Mayor and Chancellor of immense progress under their regime. These claims have obstructed the adoption of measures which could truly make a difference in the quality of education, such as building more schools, lowering class size, ensuring a broad based curricula, mentoring teachers and principals, and cultivating the civic values of creativity, imagination, and peaceful conflict resolution.

While the reality of little improvement has been apparent to knowledgeable parents and activists for many years, few political figures on the city or state level have been willing to challenge the administration’s assertions of improving student performance and rising graduation rates The recent acknowledgement by the state that their exams and their scoring have become far too easy may provide an opening to change the widespread official perception. It is time for all of us to agree that the gains in test scores were illusory, and that policies such as "credit recovery" which lift graduation rates are just a new name for the social promotion of unprepared students. At best 50 percent of NYC students graduate from high school in four years, and those who do graduate are vastly unequipped for college work or citizenry in a democratic society.

An alternative vision for our schools would begin with support of the policies mentioned above, and would provide structures to train and involve parents, communities, and educators in crafting that vision. It would involve the kinds of recommendations made a year ago by the Parent Commission in its report issued during the legislative debate over mayoral control. (http: parentcommission.org)

These recommendations offer a new direction for democratic participation and ---through the adoption of an Education Constitution --- mandate a vision for the NYC public school system along with the resources needed to implement that vision for all students. The recommendations include a real role for districts, and the formation of a Parent Union.

Such a vision was presented to the Public Advocate's office by activists from three districts at meeting in April, which was organized by him to begin a process of involving parents in defining the salient educational issues facing their families. However, the response at that meeting by the Public Advocate's staff was dismissive, and there has been no follow-up since.

The challenges facing our schools long predate the Bloomberg-Klein administration. Experienced parents, community members, and educators have addressed these issues for decades. Yet the administration’s reliance on lawyers and business executives rather than educators and parents have brought about few valuable changes, much heavy handed disruption, and the waste of billions of dollars in experiments without any basis in research or experience---such as closing schools, firing teachers, narrowing curricula, and expanding the number of charter schools. They have failed to lower class sizes to the levels the city committed to in the CFE settlement, or to eliminate pervasive overcrowding that prevents adequate space for arts, sciences, and physical education, or to develop an effective program for mentoring teachers and principals.

The Public Advocate could be a galvanizing spokesperson to highlight these failures and present an alternative vision. He would best be able to do so by involving those who have been left out of the discussion. Let him convene a citywide education summit, and establish working committees comprised of parents, community activists, and educators, many of whom have retired because of their disagreement with the current regime.

Collectively such a group could formulate a new direction to replace the mayor’s current, discredited policies. The Public Advocate could use the resources of his office to promote this alternative vision in communities throughout the city. That would spur the kind of debate about education policy which has been missing from this city for too long. ---

Josh Karan has been engaged for 30 years in organizing communities to promote democratic public educational excellence. He has been a parent activist for the past 15 years in District 6, Washington Heights/Inwood, in support of the Campaign For Fiscal Equity lawsuit begun in his district.

UAE Blackberry Ban Hits Home

August 3, 2010 (GBN News): A controversial move by the United Arab Emirates to block most Blackberry services in the country may have repercussions in the New York City area. While the official claim is that the ban is for “security reasons”, Emirati sources told GBN News that the real reason for the ban is the fear that disgraced NY City Schools Chancellor Joel Klein might try to enter the country and take over the school system.

While Mr. Klein has tried to put a positive spin on recent revelations that his highly touted schools reforms are a fraud, Emirati intelligence sources have learned that he secretly plans to flee the U.S. to avoid repercussions over his disastrous educational policies. The decision to block all Blackberry access was largely made in the hope that Mr. Klein, a notorious Blackberry addict, would reconsider moving to a country in which his device would be all but useless.

There are signs that the panic over Mr. Klein’s plans to take his reforms abroad may be spreading. Both Saudi Arabia and India are now threatening to cut off Blackberry services as well, also citing security concerns. But sources in both countries say that, like the UAE, they are also trying to thwart a possible move by the Chancellor.

The fact that a Blackberry ban could cause disruptions to these countries’ economies points up the seriousness of the planned actions. “We are willing to take a significant short term hit to our economy,” one Emirati official told GBN News, “because if Klein managed to take over our schools, the impact on our kids’ education could harm our country for generations.”

So what's the story? Have NYC schools made progress in test scores, or not?

Today's Daily News reports on how NYC parents are reacting in the Bronx and in Manhattan to the revelation that the great progress claimed by Bloomberg and Klein in the past was a fraud: "The scores make you want to cry," said Monica Major, a Bronx parent and president of School District 11's Community Education Council. "For years, we've been bamboozled and lied to."

Or as as Diane Ravitch writes in an oped, "When the [state] scores were released, there was a sound of bursting bubbles across the state. What once were miracles turned into mirages.”

Yet in recent days, Bloomberg and Klein have tried to argue that the evidence is still strong that city students have made "dramatic progress" under their leadership.

First, they have repeatedly claimed that since the city's average scores on the state exams have been rising over time, the fact that the proficiency cut scores have now been drastically lowered is irrelevant.

Yet the city's average scores on the state exams are likely just as unreliable as its proficiency levels, since the questions on the test have gotten easier over time.

See an earlier posting, in which Steve Koss discusses a 2007 Daily News expose showing how the increase in "P" (or "probability) values on the field test questions indicated that the state tests had become simpler between 2002-2005. (The chart to the right was originally in the Daily News.)

To prove this, intrepid reporter Erin Einhorn even gathered a bunch of children to take both the 2002 and 2005 math exams, and out our 34 kids, 24 of them did better on the 2005 exam.

As one of them said, "the 2002 questions were more complicated than in 2005... In 2005, they kept it short, simple and sweet.”

Really, the only semi-reliable measure we have of student achievement over this period is the city's performance on the national exams known as the NAEPs. Klein has also made questionable claims in recent days in relation to the NAEPs.

Here is what he said to the Wall St. Journal: "In both fourth-grade math and reading, New York City now performs at the same level as the nation overall," the schools chancellor said."

Is this true? No. In no subject or grade does the achievement level of city students match that of the nation as a whole, including 4th grade reading or math; though the gaps are smaller in that grade than in 8th.

A more meaningful comparison would be to look at in the change in NAEP scores compared to other large cities from 2003-2009, to see whether there has been exceptional progress during the Bloomberg/Klein era .

First I looked at the change in the percent of students at or above basic over this period, in NYC compared to other large cities and to Atlanta, which has made exemplary progress.

Note that compared to other large cities, NYC has done a bit better on average in two categories and worse in two: 8th grade reading and 8th grade math.

In all subjects, however, NYC's gains have been far less than those of Atlanta, (which incidentally has neither mayoral control nor has it been awarded the Broad prize.)

I also analyzed NYC's record in 8th grade reading, to see how our schools have done compared to other large urban districts.

This is what I found: NYC comes in dead last among the ten cities tested since 2003 in this subject -- the only city to make absolutely no progress.

Then I looked at the achievement gap issue between racial and ethnic groups, which Bloomberg and Klein's repeatedly claimed to have narrowed over the past few years. At one point, Bloomberg even went before Congress and boasted that he had cut it in half. Is that true?



No, of course not; In NYC schools, according to the NAEPs, the achievement gap is still very substantial, in all subjects and grades, from 23 to 35 points depending on the category.

But have these gaps narrowed over time? Well, the black-white gap has shrunk by one or two points in 4th grade reading and 8th grade math, which is relatively small in relation to the overall size of the gap; and the gap has increased slightly in the other two categories.

In terms of the white-Hispanic gap, Bloomberg and Klein's record is even worse. In three out of four categories, the gap has increased; and it has grown much larger in 8th grade reading and math.

So, when you look at the NAEP scores, the progress made in NYC under Bloomberg and Klein compared to other large cities is only a little better in some areas, and in some areas, like 8th grade reading or the Hispanic achievement gap, far worse.

Diane Ravitch and Leonie Haimson on Democracy Now

Interviewed by Amy Goodman and Juan Gonzalez on June 30, we discuss NY State's admission of test score inflation over the past five years, and how the lack of progress in NYC schools reveals the failure of test-based accountability policies to improve schools, even as these policies are being forced on the country as a whole by the Obama administration.

For the full segment on this issue, including clips of the Obama's speech before the Urban League, see the Democracy Now website.

Er-r-r, Um-m-m, Well, Hm-m-m: Mayor Dissembles in Blagojevichian Style

Attempting to respond to the recent, politically cataclysmic decline in the academic proficiency measurements whose "gains" he has insistently touted for the past six years, Mayor Bloomberg resorted in his news conference last week to the sort of double-talk dissembling we have come to associate with Rod Blagojevich. In so doing, he managed at one and the same time to refute the validity of the very measurement system upon which he has built his claimed education record, disparage those who aspire to a college education, and assert that it doesn't really matter what you measure or how you're measuring it as long as the numbers get better.

As reported by Maura Walz in "Going Gaga" at Gotham Schools (in far greater depth and detail than any of the missing-in-action local mainstream media), the Mayor first sought to defend himself using an "it's all relative, anyway" argument.

"Everybody can have their definition of what it [proficiency] means," the Mayor argued lamely. Later in the press conference, he even took the audacious step of asking reporters to stop referring to students who score a 3 or 4 on the NYS standardized (3 - 8) exams as "proficient"! Chancellor Klein, parroting the new party line of relativism, chimed in that "Level 3 is simply a single line," conveniently ignoring the thousands of press releases and millions of dollars the DOE has spent under his watch jerking schools over that "line in the sand" under threat of student retentions, teacher and principal dismissals, and school closures.

No doubt sensing that the relativism argument was not sufficiently convincing, the Mayor tried the Alfred E. Neumann, "What, me worry?" defense by suggesting that academic success (i.e., proficiency) was really not all that it was cracked up to be anyway. "The last time I checked, Lady Gaga is doing fine with just a year of college." Mr. Mayor, you might have noted that LeBron James is doing even "finer" with no years of college. Why should parents worry about education and college when they can aspire to the likes of Lady Gaga and LeBron James? With inspiration like that from their mayor, NYC kids should be taking to the city park basketball courts and music clubs in droves! Perhaps it's time to start creating report cards based on hoops talent and on-stage performance audacity.

Finally, the Mayor fell back on what might be called the "longitudinal data" defense, declaring along with Chancellor Klein that what has really mattered all along was improvement over time. In other words, the validity of the measurements are irrelevant as long as the numbers get better every year. Putting aside for the moment the data-corrupting impact of the Mayor/Chancellor's relentless mix of incentivizing principals and teachers while threatening job loss and school closure over those very measures, the sheer illogical senselessness of this argument is intellectually breathtaking. It's as if we spent eight years teaching students how to empty the ocean with teaspoons, finally realized that it wasn't working, but argued for continuing on the grounds that we've gotten better at it each year and our students are now spooning out 21.47% more water (ever so precisely measured to create more credibility) than they were eight years ago.

Of course, every bit of this is founded on the demonstrably false premise that being a "3" or a "4" in math and reading at any and all points between Grades 3 and 8 somehow defines one as being educated. All it actually appears to signify so far is that one is adequately proficient at taking the NYS standardized Math and/or ELA exams. No known positive correlation exists between being a "low 3" and being successful on the NAEPs, the SATs, high school graduation, college acceptance, or anything else. To the contrary, recent data on required freshman remediation of incoming NYC public school students from SUNY/CUNY suggest that the correlation, if it exists, could just as well be negative, that focusing so intently on a single pair of exams and a single pair of success measures deprives students, as one might reasonably expect, of a genuine education.

The bottom line from last week's news conference? Don't expect to see any changes forthcoming. In true George W. Bush style, today's politician never questions him/herself, never rethinks his/her approach, and never admits he/she might have made a mistake. Dissemble, obfuscate, and rationalize -- no matter the continuing cost and damage done to the city's children. After all, one of them could just be (ugh!) the next Lady Gaga.

Klein's confidential email blasting the Times

In an email received by accident today, and sent me by a friendly source, Joel Klein blasts the NY Times coverage of the test score scandal this way: “NYT is outrageous.“

Interesting how he says the Times article is “outrageous.” I thought today’s article was relatively mild myself. Or perhaps he meant yesterday’s piece?

In any case, Klein then adds: “There will be pushback (in addition to today’s DN edit) ahead but the oppos are trying to move their agenda with this.” You bet we are!

When the entire Bloom/Klein agenda has been revealed to be a failure, we’d be fools not to point that out.

The Daily News editorial that he is referring to is even more ridiculous than

ever. These guys have lost all sense of reality. Entitled Way to Go, Kids! it still maintains the fiction, with a straight face, that the progress under Bloom/Klein has been terrific, while ignoring how their house of cards has completely fallen apart.

Klein's email message is

addressed to Whitney Tilson. Tilson is a charter school/ hedgefund privateer, founder of the

pro-charter group Democrats for Education Reform, and writes one of the silliest blogs on the planet (amusingly lampooned by Billionaires for Educational Reform).

Here is their entire exchange.

__

JK wrote:

Put together stuff for him re scale score re ros, big 4 from 02, etc, s-chart stuff, the chart

showing whichever cut scores we moved up, and the naep stuff. Let me see.

From: Whitney Tilson [mailto:wtilson@t2partnersllc.com]
Sent: Friday, July 30, 2010 4:57 PM
To: Klein Joel I.
Subject: RE: test data

Thx for the heads up on the Daily News editorial – I’ll include it in my next email.

Please send me whatever you have on the results.

Thx!

From: Klein Joel I. [mailto:JKlein@schools.nyc.gov]
Sent: Friday, July 30, 2010 4:43 PM
To: Whitney Tilson
Subject: RE: YPO dinner on March 8, 9 or 10th?

Btw, thanks for the shout out today. NYT is outrageous. There will be pushback (in addition to today’s DN edit) ahead but the oppos are trying to move their agenda with this. If you ever want details regarding the results, including strong results in 3 or 4 naeps, i can get to you. Enjoy the weekend.