NJEA Goes Off the Rails: PARCC, Pensions, and Camden School Choice
April 24, 2015Sunday Leftovers
April 26, 2015Christie on the Consequences of Parents Refusing PARCC Tests
“There’s nothing I can do to stop you,” said Christie, “But then don’t complain later that you’re not getting the money that you used to. I have no problem with people making declarations of independence. It’s a great country. But, those declarations of independence always have ramifications.”
That’s from today’s Star Ledger. The context was a town hall meeting in Cedar Grove where a parent said that she would never let her daughter take a PARCC test and Gov. Christie reiterated Ed. Comm. David Hespe’s remarks Tuesday (and U.S. Sec’y Arne Duncan’s the day before) that districts with below 95% participation rates would face corrective action plans and the possible loss of federal and state aid. NJEA then erupted with a panicky press release, and no wonder: the union, of course, is largely responsible for high opt-out rates in high-income suburbia. Both NJEA and SOS-NJ assured parents that there there were no fiscal repercussions on districts with high refusal rates. They were wrong.
Also on NJEA’s anti-PARCC propaganda site is this, by SOS-NJ founder Julia Sass Rubin:“So the NJDOE’s threat of Title I funding cuts at local schools seems premature at best given the past practice of the United States Department of Education to not sanction NJ schools’ Title I Funds for missing the 95 percent participation rate.” Oops.
5 Comments
Actually, Laura, the information that Chris Tienken and I provided and the information that Save Our Schools NJ gives to parents are all 100% accurate.
From Save Our Schools NJ:
5. If I refuse the PARCC tests for my child, will her/his school lose funding?
There is no federal or state law that requires penalties on schools if parents refuse to allow their children to take the PARCC tests. The federal No Child Left Behind (NCLB) law did include a mandate that required schools to have a 95 percent participation rate on state tests or face sanctions. However, missing the 95 percent participation rate at the school level has not been unusual in New Jersey. And no federal financial penalties related to Title I instructional funds have been imposed on any New Jersey school for missing that participation rate.
Since 2012, NJ has had a waiver to NCLB that replaces sanctions for missing the 95 percent participation rate with a new accountability system. Under the waiver, only schools designated “priority” or “focus” schools face direct intervention for missing state targets. Priority and focus schools can have up to 30% of their federal Title I funds re-directed by the NJDOE for specific “interventions,” but even these funds are supposed to be used for school improvement, not taken away. The overwhelming majority of the state’s 250 “priority” and “focus” schools are in high-poverty urban districts. See 2014 list here.
State law does give the Commissioner of Education broad authority over district budgets and funding, but this is not tied to participation rates on state tests. So far, there have been no reports of districts losing funding because parents opted their children out of state tests. Any effort to do so would face significant political and probable legal challenges, especially as more and more parents across New Jersey plan to refuse the PARCC tests for their children.
Source: http://www.saveourschoolsnj.org/parcc-faq/#5
The NJDOE and the USDOE are sabre rattling to try and intimidate parents, but we are not so easy to scare. Actually cutting funding to districts is very different from threatening to do so. The threats are long-standing. The reality is a lot more challenging to implement.
The day after Commissioner Hespe made his comments to the NJDOE, Senator Nia Gill sent him this letter:
https://www.facebook.com/SaveOurSchoolsNJ/posts/953225431377284
She and other Senators and Assembly members are introducing legislation to prohibit the NJDOE from cutting state funds to districts based on parental test refusals.
Hi, Julia. If it's just “sabre rattling,” then why would SOS lobby for a bill “to prohibit the DOE from cutting state funding due to prent test refusals”?
Laura,
We support Senator Gill's bill because no government agency should be allowed to bully people.
Those are our children, our public schools, and our tax dollars.
Government of the people, by the people, for the people.
How populist of you! Back in 1893 a Kansas senator defined populism as “equal rights to all, special privileges to none.” Don't you see that by lobbying parents to refuse tests, you are granting special privileges to some — families that are assured that their kids have access to great education systems — while denying equal rights to all — kids who fall through the cracks without annual standardized testing?
Yes, it's your children. But what about other children who rely on data for resources? Yes, it's your tax dollars, but should they only be used for your personal benefit? If a person was anti-choice, would he or she be justified in withholding tax dollars because he or she didn't believe in supporting state-sponsored women's health clinics?
Laura,
Despite all the data to the contrary, you seem to believe that high-stakes standardized tests are of benefit to low-income students.
These are the tests used to forcibly shut down public schools in low-income communities, ignoring community protests to the contrary.
These are the tests used to fire teachers and keep students from graduating.
These are the tests that cause a narrowing of curriculum and turn public schools into endless test preparation sessions.
These are the tests that have produced no positive outcomes, after 12 years of No Child Left Behind.
These are the tests that perpetuate inequality rather than correcting it.
Since you ignore the research data, I'll let Trenton Reverend and scholar Toby Sanders explain to you why he opposes the tests:
https://www.facebook.com/SaveOurSchoolsNJ/posts/954583044574856