"If the new standards had been in place for the class of 2009, the city’s graduation rate would have been roughly 45%, instead of the nearly 60...

Jenny Medina has a pretty good piece in today's Times. Titled "New Diploma Standard in New York Becomes a Multiple-Question Choice" it lays waste to some of the BloomKlein distorted stats. Here are some highlights:

The new requirements do not take full effect until the class of 2012 graduates. What is clear is that if they were in place today, New York City’s graduation rate would almost certainly drop after years of climbing steadily.

Currently, the state awards two basic kinds of diplomas. The tougher one, called a Regents diploma, requires scores of at least 65 (out of 100) on five Regents exams: in English, math, science, global history and United States history. The other type, called a local diploma, requires a 65 on three of those tests, and a 55 on the other two. In two years, the local diploma will cease to exist. Students who want a diploma but have not passed all five tests by the end of senior year will have to retake the missed tests in a following year or seek a G.E.D.

And now the most telling points (my emphasis added):

If the new standards had been in place for the class of 2009, the city’s graduation rate would have been roughly 45 percent, instead of the nearly 60 percent that city officials boasted of, according to city statistics. Among black and Latino students, barely more than one-third would have qualified for diplomas.

A Regents diploma is supposed to signify that a student is prepared for college. Today, most New York City graduates who enroll in an associate degree program at a City University of New York college need to take remedial courses there.

Read it all because it is an important article that over time undercuts the ed deformers - and their enablers in the UFT /AFT - which I will get to on a follow-up post.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/28/education/28regents.html

Now, add this piece from Chaz on credit recovery, which Leonie posted on her listserve (the most influential ed listserve in existence) and you get the bigger picture of the ed deform scammers.

DOE's New Idea For "Credit Recovery" Double Credits For Summer School.

In the DOE's never ending quest to artificially raise the graduation rate of the high schools, Tweed has come up with the idea of splitting summer school into two three week sessions and giving the students double credit if they take both sessions. It is bad enough that many of the students don't have to show up during the year and are given "credit recovery courses" to artificially inflate the high school graduation rate. Now the DOE has quietly approved "credit recovery" for summer school by allowing students to get full credit for a semester by showing up for just three weeks. Students that show up for the entire six week course will get credit for both semesters or double the credit that summer school had previously allowed.

Over the years the DOE has approved the "credit recovery program" without so much as a guideline on what is "credit recovery". Principals, who are under pressure to raise graduation rates have gone to great lengths to use whatever means that are necessary to push out students to artificially raise the graduation rate and increase not only the school grade but to receive a financial bonous to the Principal as well. For example, the Principal at Lehman High School was accused of doing just that. I am sure every struggling high school in New York City can look at their own school and see abuses of the "credit recovery program". While the State has promised to look into the practice in New York City, So far the State has done little or nothing about these abuses. It is more important to artificially raise the graduation rate then to give a student a meaningful education. It is all about the numbers not about the quality of education.

Tweed's "children last" continues.