View: False threats feed opt-out movement

An April 13 poll asked parents, "Will you still opt your child out of state tests, even if it includes consequences such as increased oversight or loss of state aid?"

The misleading question signaled that there are fiscal consequences for schools. It failed to account for the facts.

Any "fiscal consequence" will be less costly than the wasted resources of time, money and quality learning that districts have expended for test prep. There will be costs, but to children whose school experience has been ruined by a test prep culture and eventually to the districts whose legal funds will be exhausted when they must defend a legally indefensible and research-poor accountability system that New York's leaders have recklessly imposed upon the system.

On the matter of "real" fiscal implications for failing to make a 95 percent test participation rate because of student test refusals, the New York State Council of School Superintendents issued a statement that included the following:

• There are no provisions in law that would lead to a loss of state aid due to low test participation, unless district officials refused to administer the tests or actively promoted non-participation.

• Districts failing to make Adequate Yearly Progress for a single year, including due to falling short of 95 percent participation, lose eligibility for "Reward School" Grants. These are grants paid for by federal aid and awarded to districts with schools that either have high achievement or have made the most progress in the state and do not have significant gaps in student achievement between subgroups. Only 31 schools were eligible for these grants in 2014-15.

• Schools that fail to make the participation rate target for three consecutive years can be required by the State Education Department to develop a Local Assistance Plan to address low participation.

• The state's federal Elementary and Secondary Education Act Waiver eliminated the requirement that districts with schools failing to make adequate yearly progress for multiple years set aside Title I funds for specific purposes, such as professional development, extra academic help, or public school choice. Set-aside requirements remain for schools designated as Focus and Priority Schools under the state's accountability system. Failing to make 95 percent participation this year would not lead to designation as a Focus or Priority School.

• If the state as a whole drops below 95 percent participation in the grades 3-8 assessments required by the No Child Left Behind Act, the U.S. Education Department could impose sanctions on the state, including financial penalties that could filter down to school districts. However, there are no fixed rules to predict what penalties, if any, would be imposed. A consideration could be the extent to which the state acted to promote participation. According to NYSED, "The US Department of Education has made clear that when a district fails to ensure that students participate in required state assessments, the state education agency is expected to consider imposing sanctions on that district, including – in the most egregious cases – withholding programmatic funds. What sanctions to impose must be decided on a case by case basis, taking into account the degree and length of time the district has failed to meet participation rate requirements and the reasons for such failure."

Impervious state education officials and political leaders are the ones responsible for igniting these acts of civil disobedience. They have been irresponsible in their representation of the purpose of testing. When Regents Chancellor Merryl Tisch argues that, "Test refusal is a terrible mistake because it eliminates important information about how our kids are doing," she displays ignorance about effective assessment that is ongoing, embedded in instruction, authentic, and timely in the delivery of helpful information about learners. State officials' unwillingness to acknowledge that the real purpose of these assessments is to rate and rank teachers via a formula that lacks supporting research is dishonest and has led to an erosion of trust and an explosion of opt outs by parents wanting to protect their children.

The writer, who is retired as superintendent of South Orangetown schools, is an associate professor of educational leadership at Manhattanville College.