This is why I like the Bush standards act. Before it, New York City would never have admitted the defects in the schools. Now, they have to.
40% of New York City Schools Do Not Meet U.S. Standards
By ELISSA GOOTMAN - [The New York Times] [Sponsored by Starbucks]
September 11, 2003
[S] tate officials today identified more than 40 percent of New York City schools, including most of its middle schools, as failing to meet new federal standards.
The new list, which cites 497 of the city's 1,200 schools, took into account more extensive criteria and a larger pool of schools than those reviewed in 2002.
Last year, the state looked only at schools receiving federal poverty aid and found 331 New York City schools were "in need of improvement." This year, the state looked at all schools, finding that another 123 city schools that do not receive such federal poverty money were below par. The state also named 43 additional city schools that do receive the money.
Release of the list, naming schools scattered throughout the five boroughs, coincided with the opening of schools under a sweeping reform plan put forward by Schools Chancellor Joel I. Klein and Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg.
"I think the most important lesson to be learned looking at these numbers is that a tremendous number of schools aren't making the grade," said Peter Kerr, a spokesman for the city's Education Department. "We're talking about hundreds of schools and thousands of families that are dealing with failure."
Under the new federal law known as No Child Left Behind, the state is obligated to take careful measure of student progress in many different categories. If no improvement is found, the school system is then obligated to take various actions, which could include everything from offering transfers and tutoring to replacing the management of the school.
Already, the transfer option provided under the law has caused problems as certain schools have been flooded with transfer students. The new list will allow students from another 43 schools ? those receiving poverty money ? to seek transfers.
This means that for middle schools, there are now more schools deemed to be failing than not. Of the city's 301 middle schools, 186 were on the lists released yesterday. Of those, 136 receive federal poverty money, meaning that their students should be eligible to seek transfers.
But even some critics of the city Education Department said the new list was more a reflection of the increasingly strict federal standards than of any catastrophic drop in the quality of the schools.
Nonetheless, Mr. Klein seized on the list as proof that the sort of monumental changes he has been rolling out are desperately needed.
Mr. Klein has begun an overhaul of the system that includes a remade bureaucracy, new curriculums in math and reading for most schools and a parent coordinator in each school.
"The list of Schools in Need of Improvement released today shows how dramatically the public school system in New York City needs change," he said in a written statement. "We are reviewing the new list to determine how best to proceed."
Mr. Klein also hinted at another issue: the burden that the new federal standards have placed on the already overburdened, overcrowded city schools.
Mr. Kerr, the spokesman, said: "If there are a large number of children who have to be transferred mid-year, it's something that we look to with anxiety. It's disruptive to the child, it's sometimes disruptive to the family and it's disruptive to the schools."
City and state officials said students at the 123 schools that do not receive federal poverty money are not eligible for transfers or for tutoring under No Child Left Behind. However, like their poorer counterparts, those schools ? designated as "requiring academic progress" ? are required to submit plans for improvement.
Last year, the state Education Department examined schools on the basis of English and math standardized tests. Schools that failed to improve two years in a row were placed on the list.
But this year, the criteria were more stringent. Science test scores were considered in elementary and middle schools; for high schools, graduation rates were taken into account. Schools at which fewer than 95 percent of students took the tests were also placed on the list, making it impossible for schools to, in effect, hide their lowest-performing students.
This year, unlike last, the state was also required by federal law to take into account subgroups within the student body. If, for example, student performance at a school improved overall but failed to improve among, say, disabled, black or Hispanic students, the school could appear on the list.
The lists can be found at www.emsc.nysed.gov.
Assemblyman Steven Sanders, a Manhattan Democrat who is chairman of the Assembly's Education Committee, called the federal government's criteria arbitrary, unreasonable and "screwy."
"You could have one small subgroup not doing well and every other subgroup doing very well, with 90 percent of the students in the school population passing their exams, and yet they would have to be on this list," Mr. Sanders said.
James A. Kadamus, a deputy commissioner of the state Education Department, said the lists include schools that are underperforming in some way. But many of the schools on the list are faring far better than the schools on another list the state has compiled for years: Schools Under Registration Review.
"These are schools that certainly have academic problems," Mr. Kadamus said of the 497 schools named yesterday. "But I wouldn't use the term failing, because you could be five percentage points from where the state standard is and still be on the list."
nytimes.com |
