June 2020 Statement on admissions policy post-COVID 19

ANIMATING VALUES: Our thoughts and suggestions regarding admissions are predicated on the following values.

  • All youth are valuable and should be respected; we should be creating admissions and grading systems that demonstrate that.

  • We should not be measuring children via snapshot; we should build a system that assumes every child is capable of growth and learning.

  • Admissions screens contribute to segregation and should be eliminated to comply with the law.

  • The cancellation of state tests this spring and the problems surfaced by remote learning should be viewed as an opportunity for the department to re-envision and improve upon current practices.

ELIMINATION OF STATE TEST SCORES IN SCREENS

  • Because state test scores are highly inequitable and problematic* they should never figure in admissions.

  • In the absence of 2020 test scores, NYCDOE should absolutely not default to using scores even more removed from students’ recent experiences (scores from 3rd and 6th grade as opposed to 4th and 7th). To do so would invalidate a year’s worth of teaching and learning efforts and growth.

TALENT SCREENS

  • For issues of public health safety, in-person talent auditions will likely need to be re-envisioned next year.

  • As currently practiced, these auditions mirror inequitable access to materials and arts instruction.

  • We should not aim simply to replicate the audition system virtually; this would not only recreate current inequities, but exacerbate them by enhancing the digital access divide.

  • Instead let’s consider ways to let children communicate their interest in, and passion for, various programs (theater, dance, art, music, etc.). This would demonstrate faith in children and their potential, rather than over-valuing the polish of shiny end products.

MIDDLE SCHOOL

Eliminate all screens for middle school admissions and replace with a D15-style weighted lottery system (including weights for economic diversity, ELL, and special needs students).

AND…

We refuse to be distracted by, or prioritize, the SHSAT debate. Only 1% of all NYC public school students are in seats where state law requires that test for admission. Let’s focus instead on the schools that serve 99% of our children.

*Why do we say test scores are “problematic?” So many reasons! Among them:

  • Campbell’s Law: When undue weight is put on a quantitative criterion (in this case, test scores), that criterion becomes susceptible to corruption. What might have at one point seemed a “true” or “objective” measure is in fact deformed by gaming--teaching to the test, outside test prep, and more

  • When test scores are used to measure student success, or teacher success, or indeed school or district success, the pressure to teach to the test crowds out more valuable teaching and learning experiences, such as project-based learning, deep research, or student-led inquiry

  • The tests, which are produced for profit by commercial testing companies, cost a lot of money to create, administer, and score. At a time of severe budget crisis, they are not a justifiable expense.

  • Test score results, year after year, show correlation to family income, race, language learner status, and disability. In fact, it is nearly impossible for a low-income or special needs student to score a 4 on the state ELA. The charts below show 3rd and 4th grade performance on the 2019 NY State ELA and math tests. (source: https://data.nysed.gov)

image2.png
image1.png