"Why are we reliving issues of 1964 in 2004?"

Following a Community Forum at the Central Church of Christ on October 21, 2004 --- titled "Why are we reliving issues of 1964 in 2004?" --- the letter below was sent to New York State Assemblywoman Susan John. <!--break--> <div align="justify"><font face="Arial" color="#ff0000" size="2"><strong><u>An Open Letter To Assemblywoman Susan John</u></strong></font></div><div align="justify"><strong><font face="Arial" color="#0000ff" size="2"></font></strong> </div><div align="justify"><strong><font face="Arial" color="#0000ff" size="2"></font></strong> </div><div align="justify"><strong><font face="Arial" color="#0000ff" size="2"></font></strong> </div><div align="justify"><strong><font face="Arial" color="#0000ff" size="2">Dear Assemblywoman John:</font></strong></div><div align="justify"><strong><font face="Arial" color="#0000ff" size="2"></font></strong> </div><div align="justify"><strong><font face="Arial" color="#0000ff" size="2">I believe your presence at the &quot;Why are we reliving issues of 1964 in 2004?&quot; Candidates' Forum held at Central Church of Christ on October 21, 2004 is evidence of sincere concern about socioeconomic issues impacting the Rochester Community in general, and the African American Community in particular. </font></strong></div><div align="justify"><strong><font face="Arial" color="#0000ff" size="2"></font></strong> </div><div align="justify"><strong><font face="Arial" color="#0000ff" size="2">I am also convinced that, as a member of the New York State Assembly's Education Committee --- you are committed to working in the best interest of students within New York State in general, and those within Monroe County and the Rochester City School District in particular.</font></strong></div><div align="justify"><strong><font face="Arial" color="#0000ff" size="2"></font></strong> </div><div align="justify"><strong><font face="Arial" color="#0000ff" size="2">Even though the October 21st Forum was much-needed, and to some degree informative --- such events are almost always problematic in the sense that they allow so little time relative to in-depth discussion of complex issues, such as the issue of Regents Testing, and so-called high academic standards. This is the reason why I felt compelled to write this letter.</font></strong></div><div align="justify"> </div><div align="justify"><strong><font face="Arial" color="#0000ff" size="2">As you probably recall, near the end of the forum, discussion surrounding the issue of Regents Testing became very heated. During that particular portion of the discussion --- you clearly articulated your position against one-size-fits-all, standardized testing, and current requirements that all New York State High School graduates must pass a series of so-called &quot;high-stakes,&quot; standardized, Regents Exams prior to graduation. I am in basic agreement with your position. However, I do have some concerns, which I will elaborate on below.</font></strong> </div><div align="justify"><strong><font face="Arial" color="#0000ff" size="2"></font></strong> </div><div align="justify"><strong><font face="Arial" color="#0000ff" size="2">You also had expressed surprise because, according to your statement to the audience --- your New York City colleagues in the Assembly support standardized, Regents Exams for all students. Of course, I am in no position to speak for your New York City colleagues. However, as I attempted to articulate during the Forum --- I suspect that they might be concerned about the possibility that if select students are exempted from requirements of passing Regents Exams in order to graduate --- we could end up in a situation in which academic standards are drastically lowered for such select students. This is a real and legitimate concern shared by many. It speaks to the need for a legal guarantee that, if select students are exempted from current graduation requirements --- high academic standards will still be maintained for all graduates.  </font></strong></div><div align="justify"><strong><font face="Arial" color="#0000ff" size="2"></font></strong> </div><div align="justify"><strong><font face="Arial" color="#0000ff" size="2">You also made a statement to the effect that students' inability to pass Regents Exams, and therefore inability to graduate --- could mean that they are deprived of opportunities for vocational and/or technical employment. On its face, this seems like a reasonable statement or idea, but it is not a simplistic issue. For example, it is critical to understand that in <u>many, many cases</u>, particularly for urban students, it is predictable, with a high degree of certainty, that students who fail to successfully complete Regents Exams --- would also fail to qualify for vocational and/or technical employment opportunities. What's really critical to understand is that in both cases --- the fundamental problem includes lack of adequate basic skills (reading, writing, computing, critical and analytical thinking, oral communication), as well as lack of that which some refer to as adequate &quot;habits of mind&quot; (attentiveness, punctuality, motivation, self discipline relative to behavior etc.). </font></strong></div><div align="justify"><strong><font face="Arial" color="#0000ff" size="2"></font></strong> </div><div align="justify"><strong><font face="Arial" color="#0000ff" size="2">As it relates to the very serious, deep-seated, urban education crisis, discussion of whether or not passing Regents Exams should be a requirement for graduation --- only represents the &quot;tip of the iceberg.&quot;  In order to significantly improve academic achievement within most urban schools of New York and the nation --- there are far more important issues than Regents Testing that must be effectively addressed. One such fundamental issue involves the critical question of why so many urban students are arriving at the Middle and High school levels without necessary, adequate basic skills, which are essential in order for them to even understand the curricula? This is a major reason why so many urban students in particular are not able to pass (not only Regents Exams), but  classroom-level tests and Local Exams as well.  For the most part, we find that (without a doubt) when students have acquired grade-appropriate, adequate, basic skills, they are able to do well on tests and exams (whether they are Local or Regents level). This is the issue that explains (more so than any other purely academic factor) why there are such huge discrepancies (so-called &quot;gaps&quot;) between overall academic performance of suburban and urban students in New York and  nationwide. </font></strong></div><div align="justify"><strong><font face="Arial" color="#0000ff" size="2"></font></strong> </div><div align="justify"><strong><font face="Arial" color="#0000ff" size="2">In terms of academic performance, another critical issue is the necessity of assessments (tests) and curricula alignment. This is the issue that has been repeatedly raised recently by suburban districts in particular. The main reason why we have witnessed noticeable declines in suburban test scores recently (since implementation of so-called higher academic standards, via new, mandatory, Regents Exams) can be mainly attributed to this factor, i.e. massive failure relative to alignment of curricula (content and skills taught at the classroom level), and assessments (content and skills tested via Regents Exams). Where urban districts are concerned, in the main, performance was dismal prior to implementation of so-called higher standards. Obviously, it is much worse now.</font></strong></div><div align="justify"><strong><font face="Arial" color="#0000ff" size="2"></font></strong> </div><div align="justify"><strong><font face="Arial" color="#0000ff" size="2">Thus, one very important point that I was attempting to make near the end of the October 21st Forum is that, if we are to help all of our students improve and become academically successful --- then it is vital to delineate issues/problems and present clear dichotomies relative to specific issues/problems that impact the potential and possibilities for substantial progress and improvement. In other words, in order to arrive at effective solutions --- we must necessarily have a crystal clear and full understanding of the objectively true nature of issues/problems. </font></strong></div><div align="justify"><strong><font face="Arial" color="#0000ff" size="2"></font></strong> </div><div align="justify"><strong><font face="Arial" color="#0000ff" size="2"> As it relates to technical/vocational employment opportunities --- I support the concept one-thousand percent. However, if this is a specific direction that we want to steer some of our young people toward --- then there is a need to (again) raise the fundamentally critical issue of what (specifically) should curricula and assessments for this particular group look like? Another very important, basic, question is what should &quot;classrooms&quot; or learning environments look like for such students?</font></strong></div><div align="justify"><strong><font face="Arial" color="#0000ff" size="2"></font></strong> </div><div align="justify"><strong><font face="Arial" color="#0000ff" size="2"> With regard to any academic model that is based on logic --- assessments (content and skills that are tested) are driven by curricula (content and skills that are taught at the classroom level). Currently, to a large degree and extent, the exact opposite is occurring. That is, classroom teachers are expected to use every available means to discover the specific content that is most likely to appear on Exams, and then, (since the curricula usually contains two or three times more content than the amount that will be assessed) they must sort through curricula, and make sure that what they teach is narrowly tailored --- in order to expose students to the &quot;right&quot; information. As it relates to this thoroughly backward process, I have witnessed teachers, especially new teachers, who are not necessarily familiar with content, nearly drive themselves crazy. After all, the sole measure of success or failure (for both students and teachers) hinges on whether or not students' have the ability, or are lucky enough to pass Regents Exams --- regardless of the amount and depth of knowledge that they have or have not mastered in the end. What a way to &quot;educate&quot; !  Now, having said that, I would like to reiterate that if students possess adequate basic skills, ( in addition to knowledge --- based on the existence of a reality that includes thorough alignment of curricula and assessments) then passing Exams becomes a secondary, as opposed to central academic issue.  </font></strong></div><div align="justify"> </div><div align="justify"><strong><font face="Arial" color="#0000ff" size="2">As I mentioned at the outset, events such as the October 21st Forum are almost always problematic in the sense that they allow so little time relative to in-depth discussion of complex issues. Thus, I was very pleased to hear the conveners of the Forum mention that October 21st should be viewed (not as the end), but rather as the beginning of an ongoing dialogue. I look forward to opportunities for those of us who are genuinely concerned about academic success for all of our students to sit down, role up our sleeves, properly and thoroughly develop a clear and common understanding regarding the specific nature of the issues and problems that we are facing --- so that we can develop effective and lasting solutions. This way, 40 years from now, we won't have to ask the question: &quot;Why are we reliving issues of 2004 in 2044?&quot;</font></strong></div><div align="justify"> </div><div align="justify"><strong><font face="Arial" color="#0000ff" size="2"></font></strong> </div><div align="justify"><strong><font face="Arial" color="#0000ff" size="2"></font></strong> </div><div align="justify"><strong><font face="Arial" color="#0000ff" size="2">Sincerely,</font></strong></div><div align="justify"><strong><font face="Arial" color="#0000ff" size="2">Howard J. Eagle</font></strong> </div>

<p>Following a Community Forum at the Central Church of Christ on October 21, 2004 --- titled "Why are we reliving issues of 1964 in 2004?" --- the letter below was sent to New York State Assemblywoman Susan John.</p> <!--break--><div align="justify"><font face="Arial" color="#ff0000" size="2"><strong><u>An Open Letter To Assemblywoman Susan John</u></strong></font></div> <div align="justify"><strong><font face="Arial" color="#0000ff" size="2"></font></strong> </div> <div align="justify"><strong><font face="Arial" color="#0000ff" size="2"></font></strong> </div> <div align="justify"><strong><font face="Arial" color="#0000ff" size="2"></font></strong> </div> <div align="justify"><strong><font face="Arial" color="#0000ff" size="2">Dear Assemblywoman John:</font></strong></div> <div align="justify"><strong><font face="Arial" color="#0000ff" size="2"></font></strong> </div> <div align="justify"><strong><font face="Arial" color="#0000ff" size="2">I believe your presence at the "Why are we reliving issues of 1964 in 2004?" Candidates' Forum held at Central Church of Christ on October 21, 2004 is evidence of sincere concern about socioeconomic issues impacting the Rochester Community in general, and the African American Community in particular. </font></strong></div> <div align="justify"><strong><font face="Arial" color="#0000ff" size="2"></font></strong> </div> <div align="justify"><strong><font face="Arial" color="#0000ff" size="2">I am also convinced that, as a member of the New York State Assembly's Education Committee --- you are committed to working in the best interest of students within New York State in general, and those within Monroe County and the Rochester City School District in particular.</font></strong></div> <div align="justify"><strong><font face="Arial" color="#0000ff" size="2"></font></strong> </div> <div align="justify"><strong><font face="Arial" color="#0000ff" size="2">Even though the October 21st Forum was much-needed, and to some degree informative --- such events are almost always problematic in the sense that they allow so little time relative to in-depth discussion of complex issues, such as the issue of Regents Testing, and so-called high academic standards. This is the reason why I felt compelled to write this letter.</font></strong></div> <div align="justify"> </div> <div align="justify"><strong><font face="Arial" color="#0000ff" size="2">As you probably recall, near the end of the forum, discussion surrounding the issue of Regents Testing became very heated. During that particular portion of the discussion --- you clearly articulated your position against one-size-fits-all, standardized testing, and current requirements that all New York State High School graduates must pass a series of so-called "high-stakes," standardized, Regents Exams prior to graduation. I am in basic agreement with your position. However, I do have some concerns, which I will elaborate on below.</font></strong> </div> <div align="justify"><strong><font face="Arial" color="#0000ff" size="2"></font></strong> </div> <div align="justify"><strong><font face="Arial" color="#0000ff" size="2">You also had expressed surprise because, according to your statement to the audience --- your New York City colleagues in the Assembly support standardized, Regents Exams for all students. Of course, I am in no position to speak for your New York City colleagues. However, as I attempted to articulate during the Forum --- I suspect that they might be concerned about the possibility that if select students are exempted from requirements of passing Regents Exams in order to graduate --- we could end up in a situation in which academic standards are drastically lowered for such select students. This is a real and legitimate concern shared by many. It speaks to the need for a legal guarantee that, if select students are exempted from current graduation requirements --- high academic standards will still be maintained for all graduates.  </font></strong></div> <div align="justify"><strong><font face="Arial" color="#0000ff" size="2"></font></strong> </div> <div align="justify"><strong><font face="Arial" color="#0000ff" size="2">You also made a statement to the effect that students' inability to pass Regents Exams, and therefore inability to graduate --- could mean that they are deprived of opportunities for vocational and/or technical employment. On its face, this seems like a reasonable statement or idea, but it is not a simplistic issue. For example, it is critical to understand that in <u>many, many cases</u>, particularly for urban students, it is predictable, with a high degree of certainty, that students who fail to successfully complete Regents Exams --- would also fail to qualify for vocational and/or technical employment opportunities. What's really critical to understand is that in both cases --- the fundamental problem includes lack of adequate basic skills (reading, writing, computing, critical and analytical thinking, oral communication), as well as lack of that which some refer to as adequate "habits of mind" (attentiveness, punctuality, motivation, self discipline relative to behavior etc.). </font></strong></div> <div align="justify"><strong><font face="Arial" color="#0000ff" size="2"></font></strong> </div> <div align="justify"><strong><font face="Arial" color="#0000ff" size="2">As it relates to the very serious, deep-seated, urban education crisis, discussion of whether or not passing Regents Exams should be a requirement for graduation --- only represents the "tip of the iceberg."  In order to significantly improve academic achievement within most urban schools of New York and the nation --- there are far more important issues than Regents Testing that must be effectively addressed. One such fundamental issue involves the critical question of why so many urban students are arriving at the Middle and High school levels without necessary, adequate basic skills, which are essential in order for them to even understand the curricula? This is a major reason why so many urban students in particular are not able to pass (not only Regents Exams), but  classroom-level tests and Local Exams as well.  For the most part, we find that (without a doubt) when students have acquired grade-appropriate, adequate, basic skills, they are able to do well on tests and exams (whether they are Local or Regents level). This is the issue that explains (more so than any other purely academic factor) why there are such huge discrepancies (so-called "gaps") between overall academic performance of suburban and urban students in New York and  nationwide. </font></strong></div> <div align="justify"><strong><font face="Arial" color="#0000ff" size="2"></font></strong> </div> <div align="justify"><strong><font face="Arial" color="#0000ff" size="2">In terms of academic performance, another critical issue is the necessity of assessments (tests) and curricula alignment. This is the issue that has been repeatedly raised recently by suburban districts in particular. The main reason why we have witnessed noticeable declines in suburban test scores recently (since implementation of so-called higher academic standards, via new, mandatory, Regents Exams) can be mainly attributed to this factor, i.e. massive failure relative to alignment of curricula (content and skills taught at the classroom level), and assessments (content and skills tested via Regents Exams). Where urban districts are concerned, in the main, performance was dismal prior to implementation of so-called higher standards. Obviously, it is much worse now.</font></strong></div> <div align="justify"><strong><font face="Arial" color="#0000ff" size="2"></font></strong> </div> <div align="justify"><strong><font face="Arial" color="#0000ff" size="2">Thus, one very important point that I was attempting to make near the end of the October 21st Forum is that, if we are to help all of our students improve and become academically successful --- then it is vital to delineate issues/problems and present clear dichotomies relative to specific issues/problems that impact the potential and possibilities for substantial progress and improvement. In other words, in order to arrive at effective solutions --- we must necessarily have a crystal clear and full understanding of the objectively true nature of issues/problems. </font></strong></div> <div align="justify"><strong><font face="Arial" color="#0000ff" size="2"></font></strong> </div> <div align="justify"><strong><font face="Arial" color="#0000ff" size="2"> As it relates to technical/vocational employment opportunities --- I support the concept one-thousand percent. However, if this is a specific direction that we want to steer some of our young people toward --- then there is a need to (again) raise the fundamentally critical issue of what (specifically) should curricula and assessments for this particular group look like? Another very important, basic, question is what should "classrooms" or learning environments look like for such students?</font></strong></div> <div align="justify"><strong><font face="Arial" color="#0000ff" size="2"></font></strong> </div> <div align="justify"><strong><font face="Arial" color="#0000ff" size="2"> With regard to any academic model that is based on logic --- assessments (content and skills that are tested) are driven by curricula (content and skills that are taught at the classroom level). Currently, to a large degree and extent, the exact opposite is occurring. That is, classroom teachers are expected to use every available means to discover the specific content that is most likely to appear on Exams, and then, (since the curricula usually contains two or three times more content than the amount that will be assessed) they must sort through curricula, and make sure that what they teach is narrowly tailored --- in order to expose students to the "right" information. As it relates to this thoroughly backward process, I have witnessed teachers, especially new teachers, who are not necessarily familiar with content, nearly drive themselves crazy. After all, the sole measure of success or failure (for both students and teachers) hinges on whether or not students' have the ability, or are lucky enough to pass Regents Exams --- regardless of the amount and depth of knowledge that they have or have not mastered in the end. What a way to "educate" !  Now, having said that, I would like to reiterate that if students possess adequate basic skills, ( in addition to knowledge --- based on the existence of a reality that includes thorough alignment of curricula and assessments) then passing Exams becomes a secondary, as opposed to central academic issue.  </font></strong></div> <div align="justify"> </div> <div align="justify"><strong><font face="Arial" color="#0000ff" size="2">As I mentioned at the outset, events such as the October 21st Forum are almost always problematic in the sense that they allow so little time relative to in-depth discussion of complex issues. Thus, I was very pleased to hear the conveners of the Forum mention that October 21st should be viewed (not as the end), but rather as the beginning of an ongoing dialogue. I look forward to opportunities for those of us who are genuinely concerned about academic success for all of our students to sit down, role up our sleeves, properly and thoroughly develop a clear and common understanding regarding the specific nature of the issues and problems that we are facing --- so that we can develop effective and lasting solutions. This way, 40 years from now, we won't have to ask the question: "Why are we reliving issues of 2004 in 2044?"</font></strong></div> <div align="justify"> </div> <div align="justify"><strong><font face="Arial" color="#0000ff" size="2"></font></strong> </div> <div align="justify"><strong><font face="Arial" color="#0000ff" size="2"></font></strong> </div> <div align="justify"><strong><font face="Arial" color="#0000ff" size="2">Sincerely,</font></strong></div> <div align="justify"><strong><font face="Arial" color="#0000ff" size="2">Howard J. Eagle</font></strong> </div>

"Why are we reliving issues of 1964 in 2004?" http://rochester.indymedia.org/node/2124

"Why are we reliving issues of 1964 in 2004?" http://rochester.indymedia.org/node/2124