March 23rd, 2015

Dear Saugerties Central School District Parents & Community,

In a letter to parents, Saugerties Superintendent Seth Turner recently conveyed his concern that the Saugerties Central School District would lose its recognition as a school district in good standing due to parent refusals of the NYS Common Core Tests in Grades 3-8. In his letter, Superintendent Turner indicates that test refusals will cause Saugerties CSD schools to be labeled as Local Assistance Plan (LAP) schools which would in turn lead to a loss of the districts good standing designation and furthermore, will lead to the label of Focus District. While anything is possible, this scenario is highly unlikely, reflects a mix of fact and fiction, and quite frankly sounds more like panic than pragmatism.

Before we begin, we would like to provide you with some background. In 2012, NYS received a waiver (known as the ESEA waiver) from some of the federal accountability mandates in NCLB in exchange for adopting Race to the Top and all of its mandates. In exchange, NYS was able to wipe the slate clean for all schools in NYS that were labeled as failing or in need of improvement, and then to implement a new, statewide accountability system. In 2012, NYS used specific criteria (mainly test scores and graduation rates) to identify 10% of school districts as Focus Districts, and the lowest performing 5% of schools as Priority Schools. According to the waiver, NO new Focus Districts or Priority Schools could be identified during the waiver period that ends in 2016. The waiver also indicates that Focus Schools may only be identified if they are already within a Focus District. Individual schools located in districts considered to be in good standing who have low performing subgroups of students or subgroups failing to meet AYP could be labeled Local Assistance Plan, or LAP schools, after three years of demonstrating weakness on the same indicator. NYS is currently in the process of renewing the ESEA waiver as it is set to expire at the end of the 2015-16 school year.

Since the Saugerties Central School District is not currently a Focus District, under the current waiver NO school within the district can be labeled as a Focus School. However, schools within the Saugerties Central School District can be labeled as Local Assistance Plan (LAP) schools should they fail to meet AYP (Adequate Yearly Progress) for the SAME subgroup of students for the SAME accountability measure for three consecutive years. This means that if a school were to fail to meet AYP for three years in a row for failure to meet the 95% test participation rate, the school could labeled a LAP school. If this were to happen, the school would be required to develop a plan describing how they will improve test participation. At this point, three years down the road, NO money will have been lost, re-allocated, or set-aside and Saugerties would maintain its good standing label. In fact, Saugerties currently has a LAP school for reasons unrelated to test participation.

According to the current ESEA waiver, a LAP school may be a LAP school indefinitely without earning the label of Focus School. However, in NYSs ESEA waiver renewal request, the state has proposed that, beginning with the 2016-17 school year, a LAP school may be labeled a Focus School after three consecutive years of being labeled a LAP school. Essentially, if the federal government approves NYSs ESEA waiver renewal, a school that failed to meet the 95% test participation mandate would not be labeled a Focus School for the next 6 years. The NYS Department of Educations website confirms this. According to page 4 of The Elementary Secondary Education Act (ESEA) Flexibility Waiver Renewal Request for the 2015-2016 through 2018-19 School Years Executive Summary:

Under the current waiver and the ESEA Renewal Waiver for 2015-19, New York defines other Title I schools as LAP Schools. LAP Schools are those that are not identified as Priority or Focus, but either have unacceptably large gaps in performance among groups of students; have failed for three consecutive years to make Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) for a group of students on an accountability measure; or are performing at a level that would otherwise have caused the school to be identified as Focus, if the school were located in a Focus District. http://www.p12.nysed.gov/accountability/documents/ExecutiveSummaryESEARenewalWaiver021315.pdf

Superintendent Turner writes, My analysis is that if left unchecked, our district has the possibility of beginning a trend of not meeting participation standards (there is a 95% participation rate mandated) for New York State. If we have several years of this, it would automatically drop our recognition as a District in Good Standing. A series of invasive and costly reforms would be the consequence, and eventually resources would be devoted to meeting State guidelines, rather than having local control.Consider that three years as LAP School leads to our district automatically becoming a Focus School.

Under the current ESEA waiver, test participation is NOT one of the criteria used to identify Focus Districts and Priority Schools. New York State makes it clear that in 2012, Focus Districts were identified as a result of their low performance and lack of progress in ELA and math or graduation rates for one of more accountability groups (racial/ethnic groups, low-income students, English language learners, and students with disabilities). Districts could also be identified as Focus if one or more Priority Schools were identified within the district. Again, once these schools were identified, no new Focus Districts or Priority Schools could be identified before the end of the 2015-16 school year. You can read more about that here, http://www.p12.nysed.gov/accountability/documents/ESEAWebinarJuly112012.pdf

So at the moment, no school district that is considered to be in good standing will be put at risk of earning this designation due to test participation. This would be impossible. Not only does the current ESEA waiver state that no new focus districts may be identified before the waiver expires at the end of the 2015-16 school year, test participation is not one of the criteria.

Referring to the future renewal of the ESEA waiver, Superintendent Turner asserts: If we have several years of this, it would automatically drop our recognition as a District in Good Standing. NYS offers guidance to the contrary of this statement:Under the proposed ESEA Renewal Waiver, after three consecutive years of identification as a LAP School, the school will be identified as a Focus School, and must have a DTSDE review. The identification of the school may also result in the district becoming a Focus District.http://www.p12.nysed.gov/accountability/documents/ExecutiveSummaryESEARenewalWaiver021315.pdf

As you can see, it will take three years of less than 95% test participation for any of the schools in the district to be labeled a LAP school and it will take three more years of a school being labeled a LAP school to earn the designation of Focus School and at that point, the district may or may not be labeled a Focus District. This document is referring to a potential consequence that cannot occur for six years. This notion that after several years, the school will automatically lose its good standing designation is clearly false.

Superintendent Turner goes on to write, Consider that three years as LAP School leads to our district automatically becoming a Focus School. Because we receive Title 1 money, we would be obligated to offer Public School Choice. Any parent could mandate that their child attend the elementary school of their choosing, regardless of where they live in the community. The transportation costs alone would require substantial resources. Where would the money come from?

We have previously demonstrated that the above scenario is highly unlikely to occur for the next six years and even then, it is highly unlikely that New York State would label a school a Focus School due to parents refusing NYS Common Core Assessments in grades 3-8. However, in the event that a Saugerties Central School District is labeled a Focus School due to test refusal, there is a clear answer to the question posed by Superintendent Turner. It is in fact New York State that funds Public School Choice through something called Section 1003(a). According the NYS Department of Education:Section 1003(a) of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) requires that State Education Agencies allocate funds to Local Education Agencies (LEAs) for Title I Priority and Focus Schools to meet the progress goals in their District Comprehensive Improvement Plan and School Comprehensive Education Plan(s) (DCIP/SCEP) and thereby improve student performance. These funds are to be used to support implementation of school improvement activities identified through the Diagnostic Tool for School and District Effectiveness (DTSDE) reviews or a school review with district oversight and included in the DCIP/SCEP. You can read more about that here, http://www.p12.nysed.gov/funding/2014-15-title-1-basic-sig-1003a/home.htmlConsider the fact that these funds are intended to provide support for schools with low performing, impoverished students. Do we really believe that NYS would allocate these funds to a school district whose only infraction--low test participation--is due to informed and involved parents making educational decisions on behalf of their children? Surely this would constitute misappropriation of public funding and resources. Superintendent Turner goes on to state, Further consider that at the same time Public School Choice would be mandated, so would the Diagnostic Tool for School and District Effectiveness process (sounds ominous enough). We would engage in annual review (by the State), and use the review as the basis for creating District Comprehensive Improvement Plans (DCIP) and School Comprehensive Education Plans (SCEP). So the State gets a greater say in HOW WE DO THINGS. The State actually says we would need to implement turn around principles or whole school reform models.This is a rather misleading statement. While acronyms like DCIP and SCEP may sound intimidating, in reality, these plans amount to paperwork and a district created plan. Since the only metric that the district will have failed to meet AYP on is test participation, the district need only create a plan to encourage greater test participation. That doesnt sound too onerous, does it? Furthermore, only schools considered Priority Schools are required to implement turn around principles or whole school reform models. Saugerties Central School District is not and cannot be labeled a Priority School. Currently, only schools that were awarded a School Improvement Grant in 2011-2102 or had Graduation rates below 60% for the 2004, 2005, and 2006 four year graduation cohorts are identified as Priority Schools and again, no new schools can be identified as priority schools during the term of the current ESEA Waiver. But what about the future? Looking ahead to NYSs proposed ESEA waiver renewal, NYS once again provides guidance:SED proposes to sunset the current list of Priority Schools and identify a new list of schools based on those schools that are amongst the lowest five percent in the State using 2014-15 school year assessment data. {The waiver will} Require Priority Schools to implement a whole school reform model, assess the capacity of school leadership to implement that model and take appropriate action based on that assessment, and offer extended learning time programs to students in Priority SchoolsYou can read more about this and view the list of criteria and metrics that NYS proposes to use to identify priority schools at the link below. Please note that test participation is not among them.http://www.p12.nysed.gov/accountability/documents/ExecutiveSummaryESEARenewalWaiver021315.pdf Not only is it impossible for Saugerties to be considered a priority school before the end of the current ESEA waiver, it is also highly unlikely that Saugerties will ever be in the lowest 5% of school performance statewide. Additionally, test participation is not one of the metrics used to identify a priority school. Therefore, any allusion to turn around models and whole school reform is mere hyperbole.Over the past few weeks, NYSAPE has received many emails from concerned Saugerties parents regarding the Saugerties CSD requirement that students refusing the NYS assessments in grades 3-8 Sit and Stare. Superintendent Turner has publicly stated that NYSED has failed to provide guidance on how to handle opt outs and that in the absence of the same, students are not permitted to opt out. However, Turner's advice to parents and educators in the Saugerties School District fails to consider that while NYSED has chosen to remain vague and indecisive about opt out, theNYC Department Of Education recognizes the right to refuse across and has codified in writing that students who refuse the test will be provided an alternate activity such as reading. According to the NYC 2015 ELA and Math Student Participation Guide, If a student is in school and refuses to take a State test, the school will make every effort to arrange for another instructional activity, such as reading or completing another project or assignment." It seems unlikely that the NYC Chancellor of Education would permit all 5 boroughs of NYC to break the law. http://schools.nyc.gov/NR/rdonlyres/FF39E667-D2CB-4B3E-BBCE-60B3B6B200EC/0/2015ELAMathStudentParticipationParentGuide030615.pdfOn prior occasions, Superintendent Turner has advanced a claim that allowing a student to engage in an alternate activity such as reading is illegal. It should be noted that Superintendent Turner's assertions run in contravention to the official opinion set forth by SAANYS (School Administrators Association of NYS) that: "There is NO requirement that students who opt out remain in the testing room with the other students who are taking the test. It is SAANYS position that such a procedure might be distracting to test takers and some may regard such a requirement to be uncomfortable for the students opting out." https://saanys.org/category/common-core-2/ At the end of the day, every parent and community must decide what they value in public education and if they are willing to take a stand to protect these ideals. The hope is that in the very near future parents will not feel a need to refuse state assessments, but in order for that to happen, something has to change. Thousands of parents have lobbied both their legislators and the Governor to heed their concerns regarding high stakes testing. However, despite hundreds of thousands of letters, phone calls, faxes, and emails, Governor Cuomo insists on doubling down on the very same policies and practices that parents have been crying out against. We hope that the above information will help your family to make an educated decision free from misinformation and fear-mongering. We suggest that individuals interested in verifying the above information go directly to the source by contacting the NYS Education Departments Office of Accountability. We did!

Learn more at nysape.org