N.J. commission urges school districts to reduce testing
JANUARY 23, 2015, 5:22 PM LAST UPDATED: FRIDAY, JANUARY 23, 2015, 5:35 PM
BY HANNAN ADELY
STAFF WRITER |
THE RECORD
Gov. Christie’s commission on student testing on Friday called for school districts to review and to consider cutting back their own exams amid rising concerns about too much testing in schools.
But it appears unlikely that New Jersey will drop out or delay new standards-based state tests as other states have done amid public furor over a testing culture that critics say takes away from classroom learning. The commission, in its initial report released Friday, instead urges a larger look at the whole body of tests and quizzes that students get on a daily basis.
“We want every district, school and classroom to engage in this review to make sure all assessments are high quality and efficient and not redundant,” said David Hespe, the commission of education.
Hespe, who is leading the nine-member commission on student assessments, said there is far more local testing than state testing and that districts, schools and parents need to review and establish testing policies to suit their communities. That includes evaluating how they use tests in schools, the purpose of each test, and whether any are redundant.
“If that means a school might have to roll back assessments, by all means we would support that,” Hespe said.
Nothing Is Going to Save the Housing Market
Jan 23, 2015 8:00 AM EST
By A. Gary Shilling
U.S. housing activity remains weak despite six years of federal government aid, strong interest from overseas buyers, rock-bottom interest rates and massive purchases of mortgage bonds by the Federal Reserve. Does this mean housing may never spring back to its pre-recession levels? Many signs point to yes.
Don’t blame the Chinese, who are showing an abundance of interest. Their share of foreign purchases leaped to 16 percent in the year ending March 2014, from 5 percent in 2007. They paid a median price of $523,148, higher than any other nationality and more than double the $199,575 median price of all houses sold.
The value of home sales to all foreigners rose 35 percent last year to $92 billion, up more than 50 percent since 2007 and accounting for 7 percent of all existing home sales. Foreigners view U.S. homes as safe investments and U.S. schools as good places to teach their children English.
RHS wrestling: Wins keep coming as tough tests loom for Ridgewood
January 23, 2015 Last updated: Friday, January 23, 2015, 12:31 AM
By Matthew Birchenough
ASSISTANT SPORTS EDITOR |
The Ridgewood New
RIDGEWOOD — On the cusp of embarking upon an unforgiving schedule against some of the area’s top teams, the Ridgewood High School wrestling team delivered a message that it’s ready to take on all comers.
The Maroons put together a dominant effort Wednesday night, defeating Ramapo, 54-13, in a Big North Freedom showdown to maintain their perfect record within the division.
The win extended Ridgewood’s win streak to four and helped to further remove the disappointment of a 39-24 defeat at Old Tappan last Friday.
“We applied all our mistakes [from the Old Tappan match] to this match,” said junior Julian Bangash, whose 3-2 decision over Sean O’Connor at 138 pounds extended his personal winning streak to nine matches. “No one messed up today. Every person that wrestled today wrestled the best that they could have wrestled. That didn’t happen against Old Tappan, and that’s not going to happen again.”
Nick Saglimbeni (152), Kyle Inlander (182), Kiel Pechko (195) and Aaron Delvecchio (220) all pinned their opponents to help the Maroons run away in the match and improve their record to 10-2 overall (3-0 in the Freedom Division).
The win also gave Ridgewood positive momentum heading into a stretch in which they will face three teams in the top six of The Record Top 25 rankings.
JANUARY 23, 2015 LAST UPDATED: FRIDAY, JANUARY 23, 2015, 12:30 AM
THE RIDGEWOOD NEWS
‘There is room for beneficial change’
To the editor:
For four years now – two as a resident observer and two as a consultant to the Enclave development – I have been following the dialogue around developing luxury residential units in Ridgewood’s downtown. The process will conclude in the next month or so with a vote at the Planning Board on amending the master plan to allow greater density for residential on four underutilized sites including two former car dealerships.
It has been fascinating to see this process unfold in my town after providing services to developers in similar scenarios over the last 30 years. The most common opposition to these plans comes under the umbrella of “Ridgewood is Different.” Yes, we’ve somehow persuaded ourselves to say it with a capital “D” and that is why this process, which should have taken no more than six months and been an exercise in information and logic, instead has dragged in for six years and tangled us in an unnecessarily wrenching dialogue.
The testimony from the developer’s side has been about what you’d expect – perhaps more intense in response to the opposition, but professional and comprehensive. The testimony from the village planner has been conclusive as to the planning issues: there is not better solution for these sites than what has been proposed if benefits are measured against impacts and if professional planning standards are imposed. Truly a masterful job was performed that the village should take pride in.
Where this process has had its breakdowns is not in its structure, which is part of well-established law. The hallmark of this process has been disingenuousness and political messaging – neither of which is appropriate when such critical issues as the village’s strategy to protect the viability of its downtown and its affordable housing obligation are at stake.
Our school populations are falling and even the most dire predictions of added school children have been called a non-issue by the school superintendant. The traffic consultant assures us that impacts from the proposed developments are less than previous uses and less than other options. The planner has worked to prevent additional sites from being subject to unwanted development.
And yet my friends – on the podium and in the audience – who don’t want the development are accusing developers of lying and village professionals of malfeasance. And they also are intimidating my other friends, who would like to move a parent into a nice apartment downtown or move there themselves when their housing needs change – from expressing their opinions by intimating social consequences.
Really people? It’s time to accept that on the edges of our own “Ridgewood is Different” visions and biases – and despite some downright racial prejudices that we very unexpectedly saw emerge – there is room for beneficial, if imperfect, change. When the Planning Board asks for your public comment, try and not use the capital D to Denigrate or Destruct; it should mean Distinguished.
For those of you who still believe that luxury apartments in Ridgewood’s Central Business District would not attract families with school aged children, this word from Board of Education officials in Edgewater regarding the number of school aged children living in the fire scorched Avalon apartment complex.
From nj.com:
“Of those displaced, school officials said Friday approximately 165 students in pre-kindergarten through grade 12 resided in the Avalon complex.”
Michael Kaminski’s response to the 1/20 @NJSBA memo
Michael Kaminski is a high school history teacher with 23 years of teaching experience. He is also the president of the Delran Education Association.
I’ve read the January 20, 2015 release from the New Jersey School Boards Association, “Your Local School Board, Your Students and PARCC: Frequently Asked Questions” and quite frankly, it’s not worth the internet bandwidth that it takes up. I’m still trying to figure out why you’re speaking up now – on this issue – in support of PARCC and sit and stare, when your silence has been deafening on so many other important educational issues. Nevertheless, your FAQs require some more appropriate answers, so here they are.
Are school districts required to administer the PARCC assessment?
NJSBA says yes, and on that lone point we can agree. Unfortunately, no one in educational leadership seems to understand what the term “administer” means. Does it mean “manage the operation or use of,” “to provide or apply; to put something into effect,” or even “to give ritually?” Apparently, the NJSBA believes that the term means “to force children to take” and if they don’t take it the first time, “to give habitually and repeatedly until they finally submit and take the darn test” because that is precisely what the majority of school administrators across the state are intending to do come March and May: administer and then re-administer the PARCC for as long as it takes to achieve compliance.
Must students participate in the PARCC assessment?
NJSBA says yes. Interesting enough, they correctly assert that state regulations contain the following provision: “…all students at grade levels 3 through 12…shall take appropriate Statewide assessments as scheduled.” Interesting because the Supreme Court has weighed in on the use of the term “shall.” In Cairo & Fulton R.R. Co. v. Hecht, the US Supreme Court sated: “As against the government the word “shall” when used in statutes, is to be construed as “may” unless a contrary intention is manifest. In George Williams College v. Village of Williams Bay, the Supreme Court of Wisconsin stated that “shall” in a statute may be construed as “may” in order to avoid constitutional doubt. In Gow v. Consoliated Coppermines Corp, a Delaware court stated “If necessary to avoid unconstitutionality of a statute, “shall” will be deemed equivalent to “may.” I think this sufficiently makes the point – but let’s see if a “contrary intention is manifest.” Even Commissioner Hespe stated in his September 30 memo that “…these advanced students are not expected to take a PARCC End-of-course assessment in mathematics, but must still demonstrate competency in mathematics to receive a state-endorsed diploma.” So, the Commissioner has acknowledged that “shall” is “may” and not “must” – at least in this case. But how about in others? According to his October 8 memo, the Commissioner said that “The NJDOE is not requiring students to take any commercial test as a condition of graduation but will allow schools to determine graduation readiness in a number of different ways.” Doesn’t sound like “shall” means “must” to me… But let’s pursue one other avenue. From that same memo: “Is a student who does not pass a PARCC end-of-course assessment required to retake the assessment”? Hespe’s DOE says “No. A student is not required to retake an assessment or retake the course.” Huh? So you “shall” take this completely meaningless test that you’ll only be “required” to retake if you refuse to respond to the questions. But no one else will. It doesn’t sound like the NJ DOE meant “must” when they said “shall.”
Do statutes, regulations or court decisions permit students to opt out of the state testing program?
NJSBA says no. But that’s not the whole truth. While there is no provision for “opting out” in New Jersey, other states do have such provisions. Somehow, those states are able to violate the conditions of the federal NCLB Act (Elementary and Secondary Education Act) and the 95% that the NJSBA refers to later in its document with impunity, but in New Jersey, they want us to believe that we cannot. So…we can’t opt out. Technically true. But WE COULD REF– USE.
What action should a school district take if a student refuses to participate in PARCC?
NJSBA cites Hespe’s memo that says that districts are “not required to provide an alternative educational program for students who do not participate in the statewide assessment.” So they are not required to…but they can. Here, the Commissioner clearly understands the concept that “shall” means “may” but not “must.” Districts absolutely can provide an alternative educational program. Just ask Bloomfield, Delran, Robbinsville, Milburn, Woodbridge, West Orange, Little Egg Harbor, Mahwah, Berlin Borough, Union Township, Waldwick, Washington Township, Swedesboro, Montville, and Princeton. Even the NJSBA admits that “districts have the discretion on how they will address situations” related to test refusal. Clearly. Thank you.
The NJSBA goes on to state emphatically that “the Spring 2015 PARCC Test Coordinator and Test Administrator Manuals provide guidance on what NJ school districts should do when a student refuses to take the state assessment.” No doubt they do. I completely agree with you. Pearson has stated that test refusals are “non-tested students” and the PARCC manual clearly states that non-tested students are prohibited from even entering the testing environment. So, on this issue, we agree. Students who refuse cannot enter the testing environment, meaning that they cannot be forced to “sit and stare.” Doing so would be a violation of testing security and would put school administrators at risk of losing their certification – since they are the ones who are insisting – on the behalf of the DOE – that students must “sit and stare.”
What is the impact on the school district if students do not participate in PARCC?
According to the NJSBA, the sky will fall. They cite the Commissioner’s October 30th memo and claim that districts must meet the 95% requirement. For some reason, both he and the NJSBA fail to mention that NJ has an NCLB waiver. School districts that do not receive federal Title I monies have NO OBLIGATION to meet the 95%. See FairTest.org’s piece on this. We are under NO obligation to meet those testing requirements. Even schools that receive Title I funds are not at risk of LOSING funding for failing to meet the magical “95%” – they would simply be told to re-direct a small percentage of their Title I funds for “remediation” purposes. So, let’s not get fooled by them holding funding over our heads, because honestly, even if this were true – if we’re only testing because we’re afraid of losing funding, what does that say about the testing itself? Threaten – Test – Punish. What a wonderful educational climate we’re living in.
But what about the Average Daily Attendance? Well, the NJSBA got it right. Schools could be adversely affected if their average daily attendance over a three-year period falls under 96%. All I can say to this is – perhaps the NJSBA and Commissioner Hespe and some of the more heavy-handed Superintendents in our state should not be suggesting that we keep our children home from school during testing days unless they want to risk losing funding as a result of their own advice. Better yet, maybe test refusals should consider keeping their children home during testing as leverage against Draconian “sit and stare measures.” You want my child to sit and stare? My response will be to keep them home and then you might actually risk losing your precious testing dollars. Race to THAT top.
NJQSAC? Low participation rates “may” negatively affect your QSAC outcome. There are too many variables here to consider…and the NJSBA took a page out the Hespe playbook here. They were so intentionally vague you can’t even tell if there’s any shred of truth to this. Well played, NJSBA. I challenge you to offer proof that districts will lose funding for failure to meet PARCC participation levels specific to QSAC. As a matter of fact, I challenge you to offer proof that ANY DISTRICT ANYWHERE IN NEW JERSEY will lose funding under ANY of the conditions that you mention in this portion of the document. (Waiting patiently…)
What is the impact on students who do not participate in PARCC?
NJSBA wants us to believe that there’s some “valuable information about his or her academic progress and needs that will not be available.” Um…like what? What is PARCC going to provide that your child’s teacher cannot provide? What is PARCC going to provide that is any different or better than what Hespe’s last failed attempt at standardized testing (NJ ASK/HSPA) provided? And while I’m on that point – why should we believe that Hespe can suddenly get this testing thing right when he admitted during his presentation at the NJEA Convention that ASK and HSPA failed to provide us with the data we needed to really assess how we’re doing. So we tested for a decade based on his recommendation and now he returns to the big boy seat in the DOE to tell us all he was wrong all that time – but, seriously, this time he really knows that he’s gotten it right? Or, that PEARSON has gotten it right? Sorry. I just cant buy that.
Then, NJSBA adds a threat about “excessive absences.” You’re the one telling us we should be absent to avoid testing. Just you – and the Commissioner – and his cronies.
May a school board adopt an opt-out policy?
NSBA says “there is no explicit statutory or regulatory prohibition against such a policy.” Thank you. Good day.
But what about the “Code of Ethics for School Board Members?” I’m pretty sure that treating both tested students and non-tested students compassionately is in direct alignment with the Code of Ethics. Our schools are entrusted to care for our students – every single one of them – whenever they are in their care. It’s incomprehensible to me that this could somehow mean that school boards “can’t” or “shouldn’t” create opt-out/refusal provisions, but SHOULD enforce sit and stare policies. I challenge the NJSBA to explain to me how “sit and stare” jives with the Code of Ethics.
There’s no reason to discuss the remainder of the NJSBA document. But, I would make some recommendations to the NJSBA:
Start attending the DOE open public testimony sessions. There, you’ll come to the realization that NJ residents are NOT happy with the PARCC and are not pleased with the Commissioner’s response to test refusals.
Attend the PARCC Study Commission open public testimony sessions. There will be hundreds of citizens testifying about how bad the PARCC is – and about how they want the Commissioner and school boards across this state to come up with non-punitive, educationally sound responses for test refusals. It will be overwhelming. Trust me.
Listen to NJ 101.5. I can’t believe I’m suggesting anyone listen to this station which has been notorious for its bashing of public school teachers, but even they get it. This test is bad. Sit and stare is bad. Pearson is the devil.
Ask your members…your own local BOE presidents. Ask them what’s been happening in their own districts. They’ll tell you the same thing. People want answers. And they are not the answers you’re giving them. They’re not the answers in your January 20 document.
New Jerseyans want responsible, student-centered, educationally-appropriate activities for test refusers, and while that’s the most immediate concern connected to the upcoming PARCC administrations, New Jerseyans also want to have a say in what has been a completely one-sided conversation on testing. I believe that they, like me, are fed up with the over-testing of our children and they want it to stop.
________________________________
*Adding: In response to a number of public posts–primarily from parents–criticizing the 1/20 memo, the NJSBA posted this response on its Facebook page:
Governor’s student testing commission sets up three public forums
JANUARY 21, 2015 LAST UPDATED: WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 21, 2015, 1:20 AM
BY HANNAN ADELY
STAFF WRITER |
THE RECORD
The governor’s study commission on student testing will hold three forums next week to get public feedback about the use and impact of high-stakes tests in the classroom.
The nine-member commission, established by Governor Christie in November, will review and make recommendations about the quality and efficiency of testing. It will look at the volume, frequency and impact of tests, including those given for college admissions, for college credit and for student knowledge of academic standards.
The commission also will make recommendations about the use of the academic standards known as Common Core, which New Jersey adopted in 2010. The standards have been taken up by dozens of states and are widely viewed as more rigorous than what New Jersey had in place.
Many parents and educators say they support the standards but criticize the new tests that go along with them. They argue that the tests, to be given online starting in the spring, are too long and stressful.
The public is invited to provide comment at these sessions:
* Camden County College, 200 College Drive, Gloucester Township, 10 a.m. Tuesday.
* Franklin Williams Middle School (School 7) auditorium, 222 Laidlaw Ave., Jersey City, 4 p.m. Jan. 28.
* At Jackson Liberty High School Auditorium, 125 N. Hope Chapel Road, Jackson Township, 6 p.m. Jan. 29
Anyone interested in testifying must register by calling 609-984-6024 or online at state.nj.us/education/studycommission.
90 RHS Students qualify for the next round of competition at NJ DECA State Conference held in Cherry Hill in February
On January 7, 196 RHS students competed in the NJ DECA Regional Competition at Ramapo College; about 90 of these students qualified for the next round of competition by placing in the top 18 of all students competing in their event.
Some outstanding First Place overall performances included Abigail McKenna, for Apparel & Accessories Marketing Series; Elisabeth O’Neill, for Buying and Merchandising Management Team Decision Making; Rebecca Tomilchik andSamantha Constant, for Financial Services Team Decision Making; Madeleine Phillips and Shea Darienzo, for Marketing Communications Team Decision Making; and Grace McCormick, for Principles of Marketing. These students, along with the others who placed, will move on to the State Conference held in Cherry Hill in February.
As New Jersey Governor Chris Christie moves toward a decision on whether to run for president, he is touting his education success stories, including tenure reform and more charter schools. Yet one victory has eluded him – the Opportunity Scholarship, a voucher program for students in the worst-performing public schools. (Sullivan/Forbes)
R.H.S. Sports: Ridgewood bids farewell to Director Nick Scerbo and administrative assistant Maureen Grieco
JANUARY 16, 2015 LAST UPDATED: FRIDAY, JANUARY 16, 2015, 12:31 AM
BY GREG TARTAGLIA
SPORTS EDITOR |
THE RIDGEWOOD NEWS
RIDGEWOOD — At the end of last year, the New York Yankees said goodbye to a captain that wore No. 2. Meanwhile, the Ridgewood High School Athletic Department bid farewell to two captains.
Director Nick Scerbo and administrative assistant Maureen Grieco announced their retirement at the end of 2014 and were formally honored by their RHS peers Monday night with a dinner at the Ridgewood Elks Lodge.
Scerbo, who was hired to the newly-created position of Athletic and Wellness Director in 2010, will remain at that post until the end of the month. Starting Feb. 1, Ridgewood swimming coach and social studies teacher Keith Cook begins his term as interim AD, while RHS Principal Dr. Tom Gorman will oversee the Wellness Department until a permanent replacement is hired.
“Originally, I was going to go at the end of the [calendar] year,” Scerbo said. “This way will make the transition smoother, since Keith still has swimming going on and is still teaching.
In February, “the semester will end, the dual-meet season will be over, so it’ll make things easier.”
A new report focuses on how schools are using federal incentives to add more learning time.
Emily Richmond Jan 17 2015, 9:00 AM
In a union vote Wednesday, Boston teachers approved the school district’s plan to add 40 minutes to each instructional day for kids in grades kindergarten through eight at more than 50 campuses. It’s a move experts say could help improve the quality of classroom teaching, boost student learning, and yield long-term benefits to the wider community.
But the plan, which goes next to the Boston school board for approval, isn’t without controversy. Earlier in the week The Boston Globe published its own review of a pilot program in the city that expanded learning time at about 40 campuses, finding mixed results. From the Globe’s story:
For many schools, a longer day has failed to dramatically boost academic achievement or did so only temporarily. The uneven results prompted school district officials to scrap the extra minutes at some schools and the state to pull funding or pursue receiverships at others.
But other schools have successfully used an extended day to boost MCAS scores or expand offerings in the arts and other electives. “I think there are lessons to be learned,” said John McDonough, interim superintendent. “We know time matters, but it only matters if it is used well.”
Ridgewood BOE to Discuss New School Calendar at Meeting Monday, January 26 at 7:30 p.m
Ridgewood NJ , According to Superintendent of Schools Daniel Fishbein, Ed.D. “Developing a school calendar is a delicate balancing act that requires much thought and input.
The process involved my submission of five different calendar options to a committee of
parents, students, teachers and administrators. This committee then makes a final
recommendation to the Ridgewood Board of Education, which can endorse it, select another of the drafts, or choose to develop its own calendar.
What I have heard is people want to start the school year after Labor Day, have the customary federal day holidays off, and include full breaks for December, February and April while ending the school year as early in June as possible. Such a calendar is certainly ideal but it an almost an impossible mission to accomplish. Therefore, the committee is tasked with proposing a calendar that is based on a compromise of all stakeholders’ priorities and needs. It is important to remember that the goals of the school calendar are to meet academic and state requirements while addressing our students’ need for family time.”
The Ridgewood Board of Education will be discussing – and hopefully approving — the 2015- 2016 calendar at its meeting on Monday, January 26 at 7:30 p.m. Soon thereafter, the committee will begin working on the 2016-2017 calendar. I encourage you to come to the Board meeting at the Education Center, 49 Cottage Place, or to watch the meeting from home via the district website at www.ridgewood.k12.nj.us, FiOS channel 33 or Optimum channel 77.
Readers Comment ,”Graduation last year was on June 26th….a ridiculous date. Almost July for godsakes.
Start in August and finish up early.
Next question….”
“Why not cut back on the various breaks?”
“Many colleges start orientation programs in June. Our kids are still having exams and senior events.”
Majority of U.S. public school students are in poverty
By Lyndsey Layton January 16 at 5:00 AM
For the first time in at least 50 years, a majority of U.S. public school students come from low-income families, according to a new analysis of 2013 federal data, a statistic that has profound implications for the nation.
The Southern Education Foundation reports that 51 percent of students in pre-kindergarten through 12th grade were eligible under the federal program for free and reduced-price lunches in the 2012-2013 school year. The lunch program is a rough proxy for poverty, but the explosion in the number of needy children in the nation’s public classrooms is a recent phenomenon that has been gaining attention among educators, public officials and researchers.
“We’ve all known this was the trend, that we would get to a majority, but it’s here sooner rather than later,” said Michael A. Rebell, the executive director of the Campaign for Educational Equity at Columbia University, noting that the poverty rate has been increasing even as the economy has improved. “A lot of people at the top are doing much better, but the people at the bottom are not doing better at all. Those are the people who have the most children and send their children to public school.”
The shift to a majority-poor student population means that in public schools, more than half of the children start kindergarten already trailing their more privileged peers and rarely, if ever, catch up. They are less likely to have support at home to succeed, are less frequently exposed to enriching activities outside of school, and are more likely to drop out and never attend college.
January 15, 2015 Last updated: Thursday, January 15, 2015, 2:53 PM
By Laura Herzog
Staff Writer |
The Ridgewood News
Two developers proposing high-density multifamily housing in Ridgewood were the final witnesses in a year-long master plan amendment hearing
At Tuesday’s Planning Board hearing, they discussed their personal Ridgewood connections, the scant number of schoolchildren living in their other existing properties, and what makes their proposals “luxury.”
Garden Homes Development’s principal Scott Loventhal said his 1,000- to 1,800-square-foot units, proposed for a South Broad Street complex that could feature high-end appliances, WiFi café common areas and a doorman, would go for $3 per square foot, plus utilities.
Proposing a more-than-100-unit development at the old Brogan site (The Dayton) that could incorporate affordable housing, Loventhal was the first speaker of the night.
He said more than a dozen homes are currently for rent in Ridgewood, most between $3,000-$4,000 a month.
“They can rent a single-family home if their goal is to place their children in the school system,” Loventhal noted, adding that his expensive, small apartments “are simply not a place where families are going to go.”
Upcoming monthly meetings: March 12, April 9 and May 14 at 7:30 p.m. in the RHS Library.
Dues are due. Make $165 check payable to “RHS Class of 2015” and mail to Sharon Walker, 94 Sherwood Road, Ridgewood, NJ 07450.
Baby pictures are needed by January 15. Click here for the flyer.
Class of 2015 Project Graduation Representatives
Chairpersons Tara Callaghan 201-803-7778 and Rosie McCooe 201-602-8097
Chairpersons email: [email protected]
Treasurer Sharon Walker [email protected]
Communications Jeff Coster [email protected]
