July 11, 2006
U.S. Says Language Exam Does Not Comply With Law
By DAVID M. HERSZENHORN, NY TIMES

LINK

The federal Department of Education has found that New York State’s methods for testing the annual progress of disabled students and students with limited English proficiency do not comply with the No Child Left Behind law and that the state must correct the problems within a year or risk losing $1.2 million in federal school aid.

The finding was issued in a letter late last month to the state education commissioner, Richard P. Mills. In the letter, Henry L. Johnson, the assistant secretary for elementary and secondary education, told Mr. Mills that the New York State English as a Second Language Achievement Test (NYSESLAT)]New York State English as a Second Language Achievement Test (NYSESLAT) “is not sufficiently comparable to the regular English language arts assessment” for use as “a substitute language arts assessment.”

Mr. Johnson also said that tests for special education students were not suitable for their grade or age.

State officials said they were already working on the problems related to testing special education students. But they said the finding could have serious consequences for the state’s nearly 175,000 non-English speaking students, including about 145,000 in New York City, by requiring them to take the regular annual state reading exam.

A large number of these students would likely fail the test and, as a result, hundreds more schools could be branded as needing improvement under provisions of No Child Left Behind. The law requires annual testing and schools can be sanctioned if groups of students, like racial minorities or disabled children, fail to make adequate progress.

To help formulate its response to the federal government, the state education department later this week is convening a group of experts on bilingual education.

Other possible solutions include forcing non-English speakers to take both the regular test and the test they have been taking, or for the state to devise an entirely new test, which could cost millions of dollars. In the school year that just ended, 173,434 non-English speaking students statewide took the existing exam, known by its acronym, Nyseslat. Students are typically required to take the regular state English exam after three years in school in New York.

Mr. Mills, in a statement, said that it was too soon to describe specific remedies but that he expected to address regulators’ concerns. “We are going to resolve these issues,” he said. “We will work with educators from across the state to arrive at a solution. This will include members of the bilingual and special education communities.”

David Cantor, a spokesman for Schools Chancellor Joel I. Klein, said it was premature for the city to comment.

New York was one of 36 states whose accountability systems under No Child Left Behind were found by federal reviews to have substantial problems and deemed “pending approval.” Only 10 states won approval, while two, Maine and Nebraska, had their testing systems rejected.

Local experts on bilingual education said the federal government’s complaint was just the latest example of non-English speaking children being an afterthought in American school systems.

Maria Neira, a first vice president of the state teachers’ union, New York State United Teachers, said it was “unfair” of the federal government to expect newly arrived immigrant students to take the same exam as native English speakers.

“Of course, the tests are not comparable, they are not comparable because they are not developed to measure the same skills,” she said. “One is language acquisition, the other is English language skills. What’s going to happen is you are not going to have our English language learner students showing any progress. This is a big dilemma for us.”

Lillian Rodríguez-López, the president of the Hispanic Federation, said the government should focus first on the programs offered to non-English speakers.

“What they really need to look at are the resources, the funding that they put into No Child Left Behind,” she said. “There are not enough certified teachers, the curriculum is not strong enough. We need a solid set of standards that are being followed across the state.”

New York Assessment Letter
June 27, 2006
LINK

The Honorable Richard P. Mills
Commissioner
New York State Education Department
111 Education Building
Albany, New York 12234

Dear Commissioner Mills:

Thank you for your participation in the U.S. Department of Education’s (Department) standards and assessment peer review process under Title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (ESEA), as amended by the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB). I appreciate the efforts required to prepare for the peer review. As you know, with the implementation of NCLB’s accountability provisions, each school, district, and State is held accountable for making adequate yearly progress (AYP) towards having all students proficient by 2013–14. An assessment system that produces valid and reliable results is fundamental to a State’s accountability system.

I am writing to follow up on the peer review of New York’s standards and assessments, which occurred February 15-16, 2006. The results of this peer review process indicated that additional evidence was necessary for New York to meet the statutory and regulatory requirements of Section 1111(b)(1) and (3) of the ESEA. At this time, the need for that evidence remains.

As you will recall, the Department laid out new approval categories in the letter to the Chief State School Officers on April 24, 2006. These categories better reflect where States collectively are in the process of meeting the statutory standards and assessment requirements and where each State individually stands. Based on these new categories, the current status of the New York standards and assessment system is Approval Pending. This status indicates that New York’s standards and assessment system administered in the 2005–06 school year has at least one fundamental component that is missing or that do not meet the statutory and regulatory requirements, in addition to other outstanding issues that can be addressed more immediately. These deficiencies must be resolved in a timely manner so that the standards and assessment system administered next year meets all requirements. The evidence New York submitted indicates the State can address the outstanding issues by the next administration of its assessment system, that is, by the end of the 2006–07 school year.

New York’s system has one fundamental component that warrants the designation of Approval Pending. Specifically, we cannot approve New York’s assessments for students with disabilities (SWD) or English Language Learners (ELL). The New York State English as a Second Language Achievement Test (NYSESLAT) is not sufficiently comparable to the regular English language arts assessment to use the English language proficiency assessment as a substitute language arts assessment for limited English proficient students. New York’s current practice of administering an out-of-level assessment to ungraded special education students who are not eligible for the alternate assessment based on alternate achievement standards is not approvable. Under NCLB, all students must participate in either the regular assessment based on grade level achievement standards or the alternate assessment based on alternate achievement standards for students with the most significant cognitive disabilities. New York must cease including the results from ungraded students taking out-of-level assessments when calculating AYP. Finally, the New York alternate assessment for students with the most significant cognitive disabilities is not linked to grade level content standards. Please refer to the enclosure for a detailed list of evidence New York must submit to meet the requirements for an approved standards and assessment system.

Accordingly, New York is placed under Mandatory Oversight, pursuant to 34 C.F.R. §80.12. Under this status, there will be specific conditions placed on New York’s fiscal year 2006 Title I, Part A grant award. New York must provide, not later than 25 business days from receipt of this letter, a plan and detailed timeline for how it will meet the remaining requirements to come into full compliance by the end of the 2006–07 school year. Beginning in September 2006, New York must also provide bi-monthly reports on its progress implementing the plan. If, at any time, New York does not meet the timeline set forth in its plan, the Department will initiate proceedings, pursuant to Section 1111(g)(2) of the ESEA, to withhold 10 percent of New York’s fiscal year 2006 Title I, Part A administrative funds, which will then revert to local educational agencies in New York.

I know you are anxious to receive full approval of your standards and assessment system and we are committed to helping you get there. Toward that end, let me reiterate my earlier offer of technical assistance. We remain available to assist you however necessary to ensure you administer a fully approved standards and assessment system. We will schedule an additional peer review when you have evidence available to further evaluate your system. If you have any questions or would like to request reconsideration of the conditions, please do not hesitate to contact Abigail Potts (abigail.potts@ed.gov)or Sue Rigney (sue.rigney@ed.gov) of my staff.

Sincerely,
Henry L. Johnson

cc: Governor George E. Pataki

Summary of Additional Evidence that New York Must Submit to Meet ESEA Requirements for the New York Assessment System

2.0 – ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT STANDARDS
Cut scores (grades 3-8 English language arts and mathematics) recommended to the Board of Regents and the process for setting them, with evidence that diverse stakeholders were included in the standard setting activities.
Performance level descriptors in English language arts and mathematics (grades 3-8) that specify student knowledge/skills associated with each performance level within each grade.
Regents approval of the final achievement standards in English language arts and mathematics, grades 3-8.
Empirical data showing that achievement levels on the NYSESLAT are comparable to achievement levels on the regular test in terms of content covered and level of challenge.
3.0 – FULL ASSESSMENT SYSTEM
Documentation showing that results from translated versions of the assessments are sufficiently comparable to results from the regular assessment to permit aggregation of results across assessments.
Documentation showing that results from the NYSESLAT are sufficiently comparable to results from the regular English language arts assessment to permit aggregation of results across assessments or evidence that the State will use the NYSESLAT only as a test of English proficiency in future.
4.0 - TECHNICAL QUALITY
Evidence of internal consistency and other validity characteristics of all new assessments with regard to scores and subscores for the new assessments in English language arts and mathematics, grades 3-8.
Evidence of reliability of all assessments across form, across years and for relevant subgroups (similar data required for Regents) for the new assessments in English language arts and mathematics, grades 3-8.
Equating details and quality assurance procedures used for all assessments.
Procedures for developing, scoring, and reporting accommodated assessments for LEP students for the new assessments in English language arts and mathematics, grades 3-8.
Validity data supporting inferences made from accommodations (for LEP students, SWD, and Section 504 students) used during testing for the new assessments in English language arts and mathematics, grades 3-8.
5.0 - ALIGNMENT
More information about test development (grades 3-8), particularly the procedures for assembling test forms to ensure alignment with the content standards.
A description of the ongoing system of improvement to improve alignment when gaps are noted, i.e. the NYSESLAT.
Evidence of alignment between the NYSAA alternate achievement standards and the newly adopted grade level expectations.
Documentation that NYSAA datafolio contents are consistent with the API tasks and the NYSAA scoring rubric.
6.0 - INCLUSION
Test participation data, including the number of students enrolled, the number who took the regular test, the NYSAA and the NYSESLAT in grades 3-8 for English language arts, mathematics and science.
Updated policy on how “ungraded” students will be included in AYP calculations and the number of students involved.
7.0 – REPORTS
Sample item analysis report at the classroom level.

Students speak out on 'too easy' English test

LINK

Several foreign-born students at Brighton High are confident that they handily passed a state exam measuring their grasp of the English language.

But instead of rejoicing, they've written letters to the state Education Department, demanding to know why the test wasn't more challenging.

A couple of their comments:

"How can you give us this easy test? Do you think I'm stupid or something?"

"Please change this test. Make it fair and honest to help us."

State officials rolled out the New York state English as a Second Language Achievement Test in 2003 to assess reading, writing, speaking and listening skills for an increasing number of foreign students in prekindergarten through 12th grade.

Once students reach proficiency on the test, they no longer are eligible for translation dictionaries and extra time on exams. Even more importantly, they are moved into mainstream classrooms and no longer work regularly with teachers trained to help them learn in an unfamiliar language.

So, if the proficiency test is too easy, many students could lose their special instructional help too soon.

The concern is acute at the high school level, where students must pass the rigorous English Regents exam to graduate. Some argue that students who are relatively new to the United States are put at a disadvantage as they try to score as well on the Regents exam as their peers born and educated in this country.

"There shouldn't be that much of a gap," said Annalisa Allegro, coordinator of the Bilingual/ESL Technical Assistance Center in Spencerport, which helps area districts educate students learning English. She has fielded concerns about the test from more than half of Monroe County's 18 districts.

"The current test is very weak," Allegro said. "It's insulting, it's demeaning and it's not what we expect of our New York state students."

A turnaround

As proof of a gap, some point to a booklet of sample questions from Harcourt Assessment Inc. of Texas, which took over developing the proficiency test last year. In one example, students in grades 9-12 are asked, "Which word goes with the picture?" and are given an illustration of a plane next to the words "plate," "plane" and "place." Another question: "What time do you usually get home from school?"

The test has been described as a turnaround from previous, more difficult versions.

Critics of the test worry that students leaving the English as a Second Language program will be woefully unprepared for the two-day, six-hour English Regents, which presumes that students can analyze passages, make points using evidence from those passages and make those points in a logical sequence.

Kai Sheng Hu, a Brighton High senior who moved from Taiwan in 2001, characterized the proficiency test as "about a fourth- or fifth-grade test compared to the Regents" and "irrelevant to what we're learning."

As coordinator for the Brighton district's summer school program, Mike Noto said he has noticed a higher-than-usual number of former ESL students preparing to take the English Regents for a second time after failing in June. The test will be given Aug. 16 and 17.

"Students are getting ready for the exam, and we can clearly see the lack of success that some of them will be facing," he said. "We've got really dedicated, quality teachers trying to get them through — and we know they're not going to."

Brighton is one of the most diverse suburban districts, with students from 45 countries speaking 26 languages.

Other districts report problems, too.

Chojy Schroeder, an ESL teacher in the Rochester School District, said she is "extremely disturbed" about the proficiency test being too easy. Educators must realize that competency in English is crucial for all types of courses, such as math, she said.

The proficiency test "was so vague that it was hard to score," said Michelle Turner, director of curriculum for the Brockport school district. "If they put together a good, high-quality test, that would be helpful. But this one isn't helping us."

Local educators also questioned the appearance of stereotypes. An illustration of boys at a track competition ran above one of girls dressed in choir robes. In one district, students wrote that boys are athletes who like to be outside, while girls like to sing and stand indoors so their hair doesn't get blown.

Janine Sadki, coordinator of world languages for the Greece school district, said the state and Harcourt worked hard to align the proficiency test with state learning standards. Greece sent ESL teachers to Albany this year to help determine cutoff points in scoring the test.

The cutoffs — which will determine how nearly 200,000 students fared — are expected to be announced Wednesday. Sadki said that makes it premature to talk about a gap between what ESL students should know and what the test measures.

Howard Goldsmith, operations coordinator for the state Education Department's Office of State Assessment, defended the test as offering a full range of ease and difficulty.

"I do not foresee a mass exodus from (ESL) services as a result of this," he said.

All ESL students are entitled to three years of special services; those not declared proficient by the third year can apply annually for an extension of no more than three years.

Five to eight years

Research varies on how long it takes to become proficient. According to Virginia Collier, one of the country's foremost researchers on second language acquisition, non-English-speaking students need five to eight years of education in their primary language — while they learn English — to become as successful academically as their English-speaking peers.

Districts routinely go out of their way to help students who have completed the ESL program, even though they no longer get state money to do so. But if the proficiency test proves so easy that many students exit the program, "then it's going to drastically reduce the state aid we get in the coming year," said Kim Ganley, who coordinates ESL programs for the Webster district, where students speak about 20 languages.

Several Brighton students who wrote protest letters, while not yet knowing their scores, believed they aced the test and described it as much easier than the English exams they'd taken in their homelands.

"This was an opportunity for them to voice their opinions as new immigrants," said their ESL teacher, Jennifer Wheeler.

Noto said school districts can do only so much.

"This test is going to limit the success of some of these students — not because of effort and not because of intelligence. Too many are going to fall through the cracks."

— Robin L. Flanigan
Democrat and Chronicle

2005-08-06


English Language Learners: Off the Charts
Susan Ohanian

LINK

First, the good news: New York City public charter schools students are successfully swimming against the current as they improved their scores on both fourth grade and eighth grade standardized reading tests. Their dual success stands in stark contrast with the city’s traditional public schools. Now, the bad news: one important group of students is mostly missing from the charter schools’ findings, namely, English language learners (ELLs).

English language learners (ELLs) made up approximately 15% of the total public school population in the 2003-2004 school year. An analysis of the six city charter schools with 8th grade populations indicates there were only 66 ELLs or 3.2% among their 2059 students. Excluding Renaissance Charter School in Queens, which alone enrolled 51 ELLs, leaves only 16 ELLs in the remaining five charter schools or less than 1% of the total student enrollments.

The 6 charter schools with 8th grade classes ranged from K-8 schools to an 8-12 school. Most likely there were fewer than 10 ELL students among the 8th graders taking this year’s English Language Arts test. It is possible that some of them, if they were recent arrivals in city schools, were exempted from the ELA and, instead, took the New York State English as a Second Language Achievement Test (NYSESLAT) exam.

Thus, both the New York Times May 27, 2005 analysis and this week’s report by the New York City Center for Charter School Excellence on eight grade scores in city charter schools must be taken with a big grain of salt. In addition to the reasons already given for the strong performance at the eighth grade level, is the relative absence of ELL students from New York City’s charter schools. In fact, 19 out of the 24 City charter schools with available enrollment data for 2003-2004, enrolled no ELL students (17 schools) or one ELL student (2 schools).

As immigrant and ELL student populations continue to increase in city public schools, charter schools must open their doors to them. The success of charter schools cannot be built on intentional or unintentional exclusion of ELL children. The very promise and premise of public charter schools is that they are open to all students. Certainly, African American and Latino students are more than adequately represented in the now 32 charter schools today. If the public charter school bus is en route to academic success, as it certainly appears to be, then school officials and policymakers must ensure that there is room on the bus for New York City’s English language learners. ¡No faltaba más!

Luis O. Reyes, Ph.D.
CEEELL Coordinator

-------------------------------------------------------------
New York Times
May 27, 2005
Charter School 8th Graders Outdo City Public School Pupils, Data Shows

Eighth graders in charter schools in New York City are more likely to be reading and writing at grade level than their counterparts in traditional public schools, according to an analysis of test results performed for The New York Times.

In the six charter middle schools in the city, 49.8 percent of eighth graders met the state standard on the English Language Arts exam, which was given in February, the analysis by Andrew A. Beveridge, a demographer at Queens College, showed. In contrast, only 32.8 percent of eighth graders in the public schools were reading and writing at grade level, according to test results released last week by the state Education Department.

And while the number of eighth graders in city schools reading at grade level declined this year by 2.8 percentage points compared with last year, eighth grade students in charter schools improved by 1.4 percentage points, Mr. Beveridge's analysis showed.

"This is a highly encouraging outcome, and we are looking for it and believe it will continue," said James D. Merriman, executive director of the Charter Schools Institute of the State University of New York.

Charter schools, whose creation was authorized by the State Legislature in 1998, are subject to considerably less regulation than are public schools. Charter schools are taxpayer financed, but privately operated.

The issue of how well students in charter schools perform on standardized tests compared with their counterparts in public schools has been the subject of heated debates. In December, an analysis by the federal Department of Education found that nationally, fourth grade charter school students scored lower than comparable public school pupils in 2003 on standardized math exams and on reading tests when the performance of public school special education students was excluded.

The performance by fourth graders in New York City charter schools in 2004 on the reading test mirrored more closely the reading levels of comparable students in city schools. Fourth graders in public schools made major gains in the test results, with 59.5 percent reading at grade level this year, an increase of 9.9 percentage points over last year.

Fourth graders in New York's charter schools also made significant gains, the analysis indicated. The number reading and writing at grade level improved this year by 13.8 percentage points.

Over all, however, fourth graders in the city's 16 charter elementary schools performed only slightly better than those in city schools, with 62.4 percent of them meeting the state reading standard.

Around the state, the performance of public school students on standardized reading tests tends to decline from fourth to eighth grade, Mr. Merriman said. Charter middle schools have tried to counteract this decline by giving more instructional time, extending the school day or the school year and concentrating on rigorous instruction, he said.

"What you see in the charter schools is continued strong performance, if not stronger performance," Mr. Merriman said, referring to the test results for eighth graders. "Almost every middle school that's succeeded has felt the need to provide that additional instructional time."

The analysis performed for The Times on test results for charter school students produced results that were similar to those released this week by the New York City Center for Charter School Excellence, a nonprofit group that advocates for charter schools. A higher proportion of fourth graders scored at grade level in 11 of the 16 charter elementary schools than did fourth grade students in the surrounding public school district, the group's analysis determined, as did eighth graders in 5 of the 6 charter middle schools.

Among the reasons for the strong performance of charter school students are the schools' flexibility on scheduling and instruction, their ability to hire and fire staff based on performance "and a relentless focus on student outcomes," said Kristen Kane, chief executive of the office of new schools in the city's Education Department.

The reading tests' results for both the fourth and eighth grades indicate "that having charter schools as an additional option for children and families is really valuable," Ms. Kane said.

"The results we're seeing so far are indicating that this option is a very powerful one," she said.

— Luis O. Reyes, Ph.D. and Alan Finder
New York Times, with analysis

2005-05-27

NYC DEpartment of Education Public Promotion of their tests

NY State United Teachers "Helping English Language Learners"

2003 Letter to NYS Commissioner Mills from US DOE Eugene Hickok