More than half of Nyack’s 8th graders failed to pass the New York State math tests last year. Over 40% failed the English exams. These new State tests are supposed to predict if students will be able to get high school diplomas.

Nyack’s Assistant Superintendent called the results a “disaster.” But what exactly do these scores mean? The tests are supposed to measure “critical thinking.” So, does that mean our children can’t think? Are uneducated? Stupid? Badly taught?

These results are only a “disaster” because Nyack has no other way to talk about what an education means. Without strong leadership or a clear educational vision, the district is susceptible to the idea that tests are all that count. As an article in the April 5th edition of Education Week put it: “Many school systems and schools have yielded their educational destinies to their states.”

In Nyack’s case, the “new standards” have begun to dictate not only how the Nyack/Valley Cottage communities measure the value of their schools, but what Nyack students learn and how Nyack teachers teach.

Before we discuss how this attitude hurts our schools, it’s worth noting the value of testing. As a rough indicator of how children are doing, standardized tests can offer useful warnings. The State tests indicate that Nyack’s Middle School education needs immediate attention. In the same way, the NAACP/PIE report brought forward test score differences (as well as other factors) to underline racial inequalities in the district. But the diagnostic tool becomes the disease when testing begins to rule what happens in class.

What are the symptoms of “test fever” in Nyack? Fourth grade classrooms where students practice taking state exams seven and eight times. High school English classes where Shakespeare is taught in terms of how students are expected to respond on the Regents. Secondary math instructors being judged “bad teachers” because of the percentage of their students reaching Level 2 instead of Level 3 on State exams.

“Test fever” attacks both students and teachers in specific ways. It undermines the ability to think creatively and claims that all things educational can be measured. Proposed “new standards” for art courses is just the extreme example of this. Hyper-testing establishes our schools as places where students see each other as competitors, not team players or colleagues. Finally, the emphasis on test results has the potential to cut the joy out of both learning and teaching. Good teachers (and Nyack has plenty of them) enter the profession because they want to reach children and pass on a certain excitement about their subject. Test fever threatens to define a teacher as “that person who transfers information and techniques dictated by the State.”

Testing needs to be put in perspective, and the responsibility falls on all levels of the Nyack school system. The school board, instead of rolling over to state requirements, should help lead the discussion on what this community thinks an education should include. When our Administration insists that, in the case of State exams, teaching to the test is a good idea, it gives up local control and smothers individual creativity. Teachers and parents also need to

This summer, Nyack PIE was invited to present a workshop at the bi-annual conference of the National Coalition of Educational Activists (NCEA) in Los Angeles.

The four-day conference -- entitled “Breaking Barriers: Working Together for Justice in Schools” -- was held on the UCLA campus and featured hundreds of educators from across the country discussing topics from anti-racism to teacher training.

PIE members Rich Guay, Johnsie Valdez, and Daniel Wolff offered a workshop called “The Impossibility of School Reform: How We’re Doing It” and also participated in a panel discussion on the subject of collaboration with teachers’ unions. Both were well attended and enthusiastically received.

For more information on the NCEA, call 914-876-4580 or e-mail rfbs@aol.com.

stand up to the tendency to make testing the be-all and end-all of the school day.

What are the alternatives to “test fever?” There are many. An article elsewhere in this newsletter on Nyack’s plan for teacher review offers an example. If it were suggested that teachers were either hired or fired based on a single, end of the year exam, there would be understandable outrage. Yet, Nyack has essentially caved in to State mandates that treat students that way. Instead, teachers are “tested” through classroom observations. How well they do isn’t measured in comparison to or in competition with their colleagues. The review is a positive thing, starting with what they’ve done in the past and checking on what progress they’ve made. Don’t our children deserve a way of measuring their “critical thinking” that takes into account individual differences and inspirations?

Education Week may be right that the reason for the new emphasis on testing is “a growing public dissatisfaction with the quality of schools and the performance of students.” But instead of addressing that dissatisfaction, test fever is almost certainly going to lead to more students being left back and more teachers wondering about the value of their profession. We can do better.

***

Nyack PIE was pleased to be part of this Fall’s Readyfest celebration sponsored by the Family Resource Center. Held outside at the Middle School, Readyfest provided parents and children with a mini-fair featuring free school supplies, hot dogs and hamburgers, and informational tables.

PIE’s area featured a reading tent and hands-on projects: tin smithing and taking apart machinery from computers to table fans. Special thanks to Rich Guay, Mark Walter, and Marta Renzi.

As Family Resource Center director Julie Kassel wrote: “Your tables and tent were fabulous as was evidenced by the huge mob that was consistently clustered in your area. I guess I also have you to thank for my son’s new hobby of taking apart every working machine in my house!”

***

Again this year, Nyack PIE is offering free tutoring for your children.

PIE began running this program because we noticed how many families who could afford to were hiring private tutors. We wondered if providing the same kind of service free might not even the academic playing field.

An article from a recent issue of the Los Angeles Times provides some interesting data. After a year of tutoring at nine of the northeast San Fernando Valley’s poorest elementary schools, the percentage of students reading at or above grade level tripled. For sixth graders, the number quadrupled. This is in an extremely underfunded district and the results are preliminary, but it still offers food for thought.

If you can help by tutoring a child -- or if you need tutoring -- give us a call.

Nyack PIE is happy to help you with your problems in the school system. But if you need specialized, expert help with Special Education, we recommend Student Advocacy, Inc.

PIE has been involved in a number of cases where Student Advocacy has provided experts who have gone to meetings for Special Education students (or those recommended for Special Education) and helped them obtain the services to which they are legally entitled.

Last year, Student Advocacy helped over 1500 kids in Westchester, Rockland and Putnam, including 25 Nyack students and their parent/guardians. Improved educational services were obtained for 95% of the children.

If you needs some help understanding Special Education Law or navigating the system for your child, feel free to call Nyack PIE or call the Student Advocacy Helpline directly at 914-347-3313.

If you have a child in school, you get a report card sent home four times a year. It should let you know how your child’s education is going. But how does the district decide if teachers are doing their job?

In September of this year, the master draft of Nyack’s state-mandated teacher review plan was made public. Essentially what it says is that a supervisor (often, the principal) should come into the classroom and make an on-the-job observation. For a first, second, or third-year teacher, that’s supposed to happen three times during the school year; if a teacher has tenure, it’s once a year.

The observation is done with what amounts to a checklist. For example, under the category “Students work together to achieve course or class goals,” the principal can check off anywhere from “Exceeds the Standard” to “Unsatisfactory.” If a teacher gets an unsatisfactory or “Needs Improvement,” the principal is asked to explain why. And if the teacher’s overall rating is low, the district and the teacher work out a plan for improvement.

The point, as stated in the draft plan, is “to ensure continuous growth and professional development.” (Tenured teachers can choose an alternative: to propose their own plan for development, complete with stated goals that the principal signs off on.) The strength of this program is obvious: professionals get a chance to review other professionals, opportunities are offered to learn more about the art of teaching, teachers are given a chance to be “reflective and responsive.” The potential weaknesses are also obvious. Principals and teachers can become so friendly (or unfriendly) that reviews are automatic and unhelpful. Or, a review may be detailed and informative, but teachers may resist suggestions. The proposed system is essentially what’s in place, now - which leaves a lot to be desired.

How will you, as a member of the community, know if teacher review is working? You won’t. Understandably, the actual reviews are kept private. But we think parents and taxpayers have a right to know in general how the professional staff is doing.

Under the proposed plan, the school board will receive regular reports on teacher reviews. The Board needs to find a way to inform the public without naming names of both success stories (examples of excellence in teachers’ growth and development) and the umber of teachers in need of improvement. The resulting profile of the staff would be helpful not just to the public but to the teachers and the teachers’ association.