Perdido 03

Perdido 03

Friday, April 17, 2015

Newsday Survey: 43.6% Of Students On Long Island Opt Out Of State Tests So Far

From Newsday:

Nearly 65,000 students in Long Island elementary and middle schools refused to take the state English Language Arts test this week -- 43.6 percent of those in grades three through eight eligible for the exam, a Newsday survey of more than 80 percent of districts Islandwide found.

United To Counter The Core updates the numbers statewide:

Over 150,000 with 52% of districts reporting. Estimated 357 of 384 will not make 95% participation. Right now our numbers come from news reports, administrators, union representatives, teachers, and other individuals inside the schools who are willing to give us information. We will verify these numbers by FOIA letters beginning immediately after the math tests.

Watch… for these headcount totals to rise throughout the week, and keep an eye over the next month or so for the FOIA numbers to come in!

Complete data here:…/1skCRo8-KlZpeu8APQlTMU7L0lp…/edit…

The puhsback from those supporting the Endless Testing regime?

Sure, there have been a lot of students opting out of the tests, but there are still more students taking the tests than opting out:

While the “opt-out” movement gained strength this year in New York, more children are taking the tests this week than are not.

In the end, we will see hundreds of thousands of parents opt their children out of the state tests.

The testing data will be suspect at best for all the things the state educrats want to use it for - like school ratings, teacher evaluations, district comparisons, etc.

Those supporting the Endless Testing regime, who for years have said the opt-out movement was "fringe," can no longer call it "fringe" with these numbers.

Nor can they minimize the damage to the data by saying, "Well, more kids took the state tests than didn't."

Because the truth is, more kids barely took the ELA state tests than didn't - and we haven't even gotten to the math tests yet.

This is a huge revolt from the grassroots against an unpopular agenda imposed by the politicians and the educrats.

And the effects will reverberate for a long time to come no matter how the Endless Testing regime supporters try to minimize it.


  1. Mulgrew not encouraging opt out directly to blame for more parents in NYC not opting their kids out

    1. Get on his case right now about being on the wrong side of history...this is a vulnerable moment for him out. Give other a chance to get behind your public demands for real leadership!

    2. The key is starving the data beast. Mulgrew knows that. Why not help his members??

  2. Assembly Dems in NYC getting Mulgrew's blessing to vote yes. Does it get any more obvious who the guy is batting for ??

    What did he promise Dems in return for that vote ? Money, endorsements during election time ?

  3. The key is to drive the numbers higher for Math. We should also be calling for Cuomo and Tisch to cancel the Math exam as we are now forcing districts to waste huge amounts of money for tests that are defective--and cannot be used for teacher evaluations. I know it is a long shot--but even Tisch and Cuomo might have enough sense to walk this nonsense back in the face of huge opposition to their testing regime.

    1. It would be nice to just get back to instruction--helping kids to learn!

  4. The UFT is sending out bu**sh** threats that we will lose funding if we support the opt out. They imply that it is racist to do so a la the Gates people. "testing is a civil right" etc etc

    1. Well, now we really know whose side their on, don't we?

    2. If that is true maybe we can sue them. Break the unity monopoly and turn the UFT to an organ of workers struggle...

  5. There was talk on this blog yesterday about Cuomo "isolating" retirement tiers and cutting benefits, etc., to get back at teachers.

    That is utter nonsense. A constitutional convention is not being called in 2017. There will be a ballot question and a statewide referendum in November 2017 to determine if the people want such a convention called. It would actually occur at a later date.

    Any such convention is not limited to a pre-planned agenda. The entire document is open to change. Let's remember that the Assembly and Senate members are also in the retirement system and their benefits mirror those that we have. I seriously doubt it would pass federal muster if the benefits of one group of government employees was cut and not another. Not going to happen.

    Organized labor as a whole helped produce a resounding No vote on the last constitutional convention referendum. It can be expected that those on the right and left will both come out to turn it down. For example, the convention could try to outlaw abortion, enshrine provisions of the Dream Act, enact term limits on the state legislature, provide for initiative and referendum or for the recall of elected officials, etc.

    The last thing that any politician wants is a constitutional convention. With the general low regard the public has for politicians, there could be some really "bad stuff" coming out of any such gathering when it comes to politicians.

  6. The Newsday numbers are low. Some of the largest districts, which had very large opt-out numbers did not submit data to Newsday, i.e. Commack. (There are many others, including the largest suburban district in NYS.)

    For some reason, certain districts with huge opt out numbers do not want to see them highlighted. Newsday noted that 25 districts did not report (and some that reported only indicated a percentage, not a gross number.) When all is said and done, I stand by my belief that the opt out number is in excess of 100,000. My home district saw 55% of students opt out of the ELA exam and officials said that last year the math opt out figure was 30% higher than the ELA. They expect even more to opt out next week.

  7. In 1997 the constitutional convention referendum lost 62-38.

  8. By Gerald Benjamin - 2002

    The Mandatory Constitutional Convention Question Referendum: "No" in New York in 1997

    Voters expressed little confidence in government; turnout at the polls was consistently abysmal. Legislative elections rarely offered real choices; incumbents almost never lost. Gridlock was the norm in a state legislature that featured the most persistent divided partisan control in the nation. The state budget had not been passed on time in thirteen years. 1 The state personnel system was sclerotic. A torturous local government web - a "system" in name only - diffused accountability and drove up costs. State and local taxes, especially local property taxes, were among the highest in the nation. 2

    The result of all this was a state and local service delivery system that was expensive, inequitable, and often inadequate. Education is the best example. Mean per pupil education spending was very high. 3 Children in the suburbs were well served, or at least had a fighting chance. But most children - especially minority children in urban centers - were simply not being educated. 4

    Yet, when asked in 1997, in the midst of these conditions, to vote on the question "Shall there be a convention to revise the constitution and amend the same?" New Yorkers responded with a resounding "No." The vote was 929,415 in favor of a convention, to 1,579,390 against. 5 Perhaps even more tellingly, a plurality of citizens who came to the polls in that year - 1,693,788 of them - simply ignored the question entirely! 6