Regents table vote on mandatory field tests after outcry

In response to a barrage of criticism from parents and educators about excessive testing, the Board of Regents is tabling a vote on a resolution that would have made standalone field tests in grades 3-8 mandatory.

The resolution would have prevented school districts from refusing to administer the controversial tests, which try out questions that may be included on future exams. The measure was scheduled to be voted on Feb. 25.

Instead, the board is requesting $8.4 million in the state budget to enable the Education Department to print more versions of the regular tests with the field test questions embedded in them.

"Pending action on that request, the board will not act on the proposed regulation at this time," said Education Department spokeswoman Jeanne Beattie.

The proposed regulation, making the standalone field tests mandatory, caused a public outcry, and thousands of letters were sent to the Education Department in opposition to the plan during the 45-day public comment period, which ended Jan. 20.

"A more reliable approach is embedding all field test questions in the actual tests that count," wrote Hasting-on-Hudson PTSA co-presidents Lisa Eggert Litvin and Jacqueline Weitzman in a letter to the Regents last month. "New York needs to acquire greater capability printing technology, rather than force hundreds of thousands of school children to sit for more standardized exams and miss even more valuable instructional time."

Some 26 districts across the state, including at least a half-dozen districts in the Lower Hudson Valley, refused to administer field tests in June, saying the additional exams were eating into instructional time.

According to the Education Department, field tests are the only way to make sure that questions actually measure the knowledge and skills they were designed to measure.

"The Department requests funds to implement state-of-the-art printing and distribution processes for the Grades 3-8 tests," wrote the Regents in their budget pitch. "These upgrades will enable the Department to substantially reduce the number of questions that need to be field tested."

The Regents also sought to address another criticism by educators that the tests, which are not publicly released, don't inform instruction. They said the additional funding will help them release "significantly" more test questions.

Carl Korn, spokesman for the New York State United Teachers union, said that educators around the state had "loudly and clearly" made the point that standalone field tests were wrong. More than 16,000 emails and faxes had been sent to the Regents opposing the move within the space of one week, he said.

"We are pleased that the Regents have temporarily put this on the back burner," he said. "Standalone field tests exist only to benefit Pearson and other private testing companies."

Anna Shah of the NYS Allies for Public Education, an advocacy group that includes about 50 parent and educator groups, said she found the tabling of the resolution problematic.

"Once filed and posted, the Regents were obligated to either vote on the proposal at the February meeting, revise the proposal or withdraw the proposal in its entirety," said Shah. "The Regents and/or (Education Department) apparently discussed and decided to table the matter pending results of the budget but the discussion was not put on the record. In fact, it appears that this discussion took place behind closed doors. This completely lacks transparency."

Shah said the Education Department had made no effort to post the public comments or respond to inquiries from the public on any of the their concerns.

Asking for a large amount in funding from the state is just a way for the Education Department to avoid answering questions, she said.

"The $8.4 million is a pipe dream," said Shah. "They are just making a show of a good-faith effort."

Lisa Rudley, an Ossining parent advocate and co-founder of NYS Allies for Public Education, said she was troubled by the lack of transparency by the Regents and the unanswered questions.

"How many different versions of the tests do they need?" Rudley asked. "To me, $8.4 million sounds excessive."

Twitter: @SwapnaVenugopal