YEAR 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
Change-36%-46%-43% -45% -61% -64% -61% -50% -31% 1% -5% -3%
P 0.84%0.13%0.25%0.14% 0.00%0.00%0.00%0.05% 2% 54% 38% 41%

In other words, what people want us to believe is that Hoboken randomly saw less than 1 in 100 event 8 years in a row, and a rarer than 1 in 1000 event 3 years in a row. Oddly, after the event occurred, these numbers returned to where we would expect them to be if nothing was going on.

Of course, there are more rigorous ways of testing all those years together, that would make it seem even more unlikely.

Word is that they have been ordered off the internet. Their constant nasty negativity is turning off all but their locked down OLD GUARD politico vote to their frontmen.

To be clear, I am decidedly non-partisan (unless being on the side of public schools counts). I wrote this in response some recent poorly conceived analyses and one dimensional reviews of the high school and broader Hoboken district. As a voter and taxpayer I, too, think about who was responsible for past mismanagement. But, after 2+ satisfied years at the high school, I am far more interested in the present and the future.

In my view, the current administration is making the hard and (mostly) right choices in how they manage the curriculum, the staff and the students. I have met with a number of our current educational leaders (as I would encourage all parents to do). I've discussed personal/kid issues and inquired about broader plans for the school, etc. Even though I have disagreed with some past decisions, there is no doubt in my mind that they have but one goal: the well-being and betterment of the students of this district. And I also happen to think they have the right game plan for getting us there.

In any case, my target audience for this article is not voters; it is the parents who would be doing themselves and their children a real injustice by not considering well the many advantages offered by the Hoboken public schools and Hoboken High School.

Move (the OLD GUARD politicos ) Forward - from the wondeful people who brought you Peter Cammerano. :-)

Selling zoning variances would have reduced the influence of Ray Lesniak on our elections. Dawn dropped the ball on this one.

Total control from Union County, crumbling schools, failing infrastructure - Dawn's legacy.

Not sure Beth Mason would like your sarcasm, as she is reportedly trying to strike a political contributuion deal with Union City Brian Stack to put her on his slate to get her out of Hoboken. :-)

Well, let's see... Dawn was elected in the most corrupt election ever in 2007. Next next thing you know... I completely agree with what your research reveals about Dawn's role, PDQ ;)

Missing students, fewer Krispy Kreme locations, lawsuits laughed out of court - Dawn's legacy.

Students from Hobken High School attend Wharton, Stevens, Penn State, Michigan State, Florida, the University of Miami, University of New Hampshire, Rutgers and various other colleges.

We have all see the achivements of Hoboken students showcased here on Patch.

However some who are running to try to unseat KIDS FIRST feel the need to distort reality to trash Hoboken schools any way they can.

While most of the OLD GUARD haters have been orderd off the internet to try to reduce the negativity that surrounds their frontmen BOE slate some still insist on trashing Hoboken's schools.

Hoboken deserves better than the OLD GUARD politicos back on the BOE.

It's a good question, Steve. Unlike the SATs, which publishes explicit scores by quartile, HSPA results simply reflect the thresholds Partial Proficient, Proficient, and Advanced Proficient as % of total tested. However, I assume the school could, internally, look at the Honors students, for instance, and see what the percentage breakout of Proficient/Advanced Proficient is. As you suggest, it would be interesting to compare those numbers to that of the selection/admission-based schools.

Hobbs- let's not forget the Original Trasher of the Hoboken Public Schools, then Kids First Board President Theresa Minutillo. Recall are claim in Fall 2007 that "we are failing out students" (Hoboken Reporter article: http://tinyurl.com/97lqpqj).

Back then according to the Hoboken Reporter "The average SAT scores for Hoboken High School were 428 math and 421 verbal, out of a possible 800 per subject." [note: Currently, the averages are 380 and 382. ]

...Minutillo added, "We're failing our students, their parents, and the entire community we serve." (same Hoboken Reporter article)

Further, watch Minutillo's arrogance when the Teachers Union President complained about her remarks as causing moral problems in the schools (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gsi97HrjyQg).

People who have been around awhile know Kids First rose to power TRASHING the public schools AT EVERY OPPORTUNITY THEY HAD. Now, anyone who mentions NJ Monthly's rankings, the Wall Street Journal, or the Commissioner of Education of New Jersey is a "hater"???

The original hater of the Hoboken Public Schools was Kids First and it was led by Theresa Minutillo. Video from BOE meetings and newspaper reports PROVE it.

Care to provide the numbers of students taking the SATs back then, versus now? How about responding to the evidence of abnormally low numbers of 11th graders being tested, as provided above? Kids First is trying to improve the district. You're trying to give it back to the gangsters.

I went to my first Hoboken BOE meeting some twenty years ago, and I've witnessed vast improvements in the past few years. CG is full of cr*p.

Ms. Curious Gal,

Did you read the article which you provided ( http://tinyurl.com/97lqpqj )?
This article was regarding: "fiscal management, instruction and program, and governance", and "the lack of a curriculum and data collection not being used."

"However, School Board President Theresa Minutillo discussed specific problems that Raslowsky agreed will need a closer look.

The QSAC or Quality Single Accountability Continuum is used by the state to assess and monitor each of New Jersey's approximately 600 school districts...
While the district has shown improvements over the years in some areas, school board members noted problems with curriculum and with a lack of evaluation of various student data in order to make district-wide improvements.
According to the report, the school district scored below 50 percent in three of the five categories (fiscal management, instruction and program, and governance), while scoring at or above 80 percent in the remaining two categories (personnel and operations)... Minutillo added, "We're failing our students, their parents, and the entire community we serve." (same Hoboken Reporter article)

A hater of public schools?

pdq- yes, Minutillo was the original hater of the Hoboken Public Schools and used the QSAC scores as a way to attack Superintendent Raslowsky- the superintendent she did not vote for and sabotaged during his 2 years in office (even writing a letter against him in the Hoboken Reporter). The scores Minutillo was so vocal about were the scores Raslowsky inherited 2 months into his term(!)

In 2 years Raslowsky brought the scores in curriculum and instruction from 34% to 87%; fiscal management from 41% to 65%; operations and personnel stable at 83%; and governance from 33% to 89%. Those are the facts.

If Minutillo felt the public schools were failing then, what does she think now given the district is now officially a DISTRICT IN NEED OF IMPROVEMENT, 90% of students attend a school that failed to make Adequate Yearly Progress, a high school with average SAT scores in the 380 range?

Minutillo and Kids First used the QSAC scores for political advantage and to motivate their base for support. Plain and simple. She had no problem bashing the public schools EVEN WHEN THE TEACHERS UNION PRESIDENT asked her not to do so.

So no comment on the abnormally low number of 11th graders? Seems to me, if there was any funny business going on (and the statistics clearly reject the hypothesis that this was ordinary course), any scores are pretty much worthless, and we were failing our students. Anyone who "trashed" the schools under these circumstances was probably doing a public service.

cg- as alwasy- nothing but lies and spin.

Iam sorry I just cannot let this one go- You blatently lie when you say raslowki brought up those numbers. It was Davis who brought up the numbers. And btw- the latest 4/5 numbers were in the high 90's.

Your people were long gone when those numbers were brought to passing levels. Their highest increasing score was 70%.

Raslowski and petro began were in charge of the district from 07-fall of 09.
qsac scores in: 2/5 passing in 08- 3/5 passing in -09

According to Petrosino himself:
instruction and programming
Spring08-was 34% and spring 09 was 54%
Fiscal Management
SPring 08-41% and Spring 09-70%
Governance
Spring 08-33% and Spring 09-66%

Even Petrosino says there was an overwhelming improvement for 2010.

*note:there were 2 other segments that make up the 5/5- both 80% range for 08 and 09.
**those segments turned into high 90s, (like most other areas) when raslowki and Petrosino left.

Ms. Curious Gal,

She was not criticizing the schools as failing- she was criticizing board for failing.

Though, I am not sure what she has to do with this article.

Regarding the SATs, in the school year referenced below the average scores were, indeed, 428 for Math and 421 for Verbal but these scores reflected only 53% of students. The highest average scores reported during the decade were actually for the 2000-2001 school year when only 36% of students took the SATs.

As I indicate in the report, test performance as measured by averages can easily be gamed by cherry-picking the best students and excluding the weaker ones. In my opinion, the current higher participation rate in SAT testing reflects a goal of college placement for more students...despite the 'risk' of lower overall scores (and the scrutiny on educators and admins that this brings). cont..

(continued from my comment immediately below)
To the claim of "sugarcoating" below, I very much acknowledge our test levels and explicitly referred to them multiple times, including my view that current scores are "unacceptably low." However, a key implication of the report is that our school test performance has actually *remained* low for at least the last 10 years. Any suggestion that there was progress on this front as evidenced by NJ Monthly rankings (or historical SAT scores) is misplaced. Testing selectively but claiming improvement for all students is wrong. Lots of districts do it and I am glad that we are no longer one of them.

Our core challenges are deeply rooted and shared with most urban districts. Real solutions will take time and a consistent, long-term strategy. But we will never be able to measure progress if we don't have honest and accurate benchmarks.

Mr. Sinatra,

Might you provide the years that Mr. Gagliardi was Superintendent of schools for Hoboken?

To your first question above, you might get some additional color on my Patch profile and a bit more here: http://bit.ly/WsGhX0 .

I'm not sure why my family's years at a charter school -- preceding the 2+ years we have been at the high school -- undermines my "credibility". If anything, I would say it gives me some perspective; a point of reference against which to judge our current experience in the public district. I see below that you had kids in the public schools "for almost 10 years"...that's commendable. Did you ever have a kid in a charter school? On what do you base your claim that the charter schools are "demonstrably inferior in every way" with "generally second-rate teachers "? Anyway..if charter school experience calls into question one's sincerity, commitment or legitimacy of opinion, then, according to you, three of the current candidates for school board have "little credibility". Is that your view?

We do seem to agree that competition is ultimately good for the schools. I sometimes liken it to a regional division in sports...and I think it's quite clear which team I play for. As noted in my first comment above, I am interested in the present and the future and I would consider anyone else (regardless of political affiliation) that truly has the betterment of the public school district kids as their single-minded and *exclusive* goal to be my team mate.

Over the ocurse of it's lifespan, the district averaged 1-2 diplomas a year from the IB program.

Note:There were a few years where 0 students had received an IB diploma, which is the reason for the switch to AP. AP opened the door to many students who have strengths in different areas. IB diploma requires 100% participation, in all areas.

Wasn't that during the years of the great variations of student populations taking the tests(listed in this very article and graph)?

Wasn't this also during the period of the 2005 audit noted by many (on this site)?

So Frank,

Does it make you a hypocrite to attack someone the way you have attacked Jason?

Lets see, he had children not in the public school (for unknown reasons, maybe non-public schools is how he was raised, one often repeats the parenting choices of their parents) and now they are in the public school.

You had kids in the public school and now don't.

I have a child in the public school. My parents sent me to public school. My parents attended public school. We are public school family.

I will never vote for someone that Raia supports. I will never vote for someone the Russos support. If those were only other choice I would write in "the devil".

"Let us now all pay close attention to the current district level administration and Board majority leadership (Kids First) as they attempt to maintain and surpass the current QSAC levels of district quality. Nothing less should be expected." -Hoboken Reporter Letter

"nothing less would be expected"---Looks like someone predicted that KIDS FIRST would take the district into DINI status, 90% of students attending a school that failed to make AYP, a high school in the bottom 40 in the state, or that according to the State of NJ's Dept. of Education, Hoboken ranks last in Hudson County for the percent of students who graduated by passing both sections of HSPA (H.S. Proficiency Assessment (bottom 10% in the state), legal fees 3X state average, owe $750,000 to food service a few years ago. Scoundrels are easy to spot for some people, for others it takes a little longer. But, eventually, everyone sees the scoundrels for what they are.

Yes, EXACTLY, fellow Curious person. Eventually everyone sees the scoundrels for what they are. You said a mouthful! But with tuition at $16400 at Stevens Cooperative, this angry mom is in a bind.

Scoundrels revealed, crumbling infrastructure, lawsuits failing to pay tuition - Dawn's legacy.

Ms. Curious Gal,

Mr. Hendrick's article shows that large percentages of students taking tests, for some 10 years, were inaccurate.
You seem to be saying the schools are horrible and Mr. Hendrick's article, along with his positive experience of having a child currently enrolled in Hoboken High, seems to be saying don't buy into the hype, investigate Hoboken HIgh for yourselves.

I am not sure what role your political dislike of person has in this arena nor what experience you have in the schools.

Might I ask, have you any positive thing to say about the Hoboken schools?

But since that group had let it happen so long, I wonder what outside forced their hand to make the change.

Just a note that the 2008-2009 school year was the final year in which an anomalous drop in 11th grade enrollment was reported. Using my earlier methodology, the size drop experienced this year was a twice in a century event with an over 30% drop. Therefore, it seems outright incorrect to claim that the October 2008 or 2008-2009 testing numbers show any sort of correction, with the corrections actually appearing in the 2009-2010 school year.

Good one, Prosbus! Frank Raia is definitely an expert on where the money goes. You, sir, are a character! Braaaaaavoooooo!

I'm thinking that I'll keep flogging Kids First even though I'm putting the Little Replacement in Stevens Cooperative. What's your take on it? Ethical schmethical, right? I agree completely.

Public school critics forced to use private schools - Dawn's legacy.

The "outside force" Journey wonders about was Dr. Cella who was a first year principal in 2007-08 when she found out about the practice and wanted to put an end to it. The district administration and Board supported her. It ended the next school year of 2008-09. In November of 2009 with Raslowsky gone, Dr. Cella was told by Kids First hand picked interim superintendent Peter Carter that the Board would not be offering her tenure and suggested she leave the district. On February 12 of 2010 she came to work and was asked to immediately vacate her office (http://www.hudsonreporter.com/view/full_story/6417915/article-Fear-and-loathing-in-the-Hoboken-schools-Some-upset-with-manner-of-principal%E2%80%99s-dismissal--others-support-move-?instance=lead_story_left_column)

@Passkey.

1. Understanding that the practice ended in the 2008-2009 school year, this year is still tainted in the data. Therefore, in my consideration which is STRICTLY data driven, Dr. Cella was unable to stop the practice in her first year.

2. You mention that Kids First "hand picked" Carter. Is there a better way to select a superintendent? Pulling names out of a hat?

puzzledone- Dr. Cella stopped the practice. The "BC" district administration stopped the practice. The pre-Kids First Board majority stopped the practice.

Passkey, I pointed out that the numbers do not suggest a correction in 2008-2009, following your statement that Dr. Cella had identified and was determined to fix the problem. If you believe the numbers suggest anything differently, I will refer you to my above statistical analysis, which noone has yet challenged.

Prosbus above tried to put the fix in 2008-2009, which is clearly incorrect, and I pointed out (and she did not respond). Kids first won their election on April 21, 2009, during the 2008-2009 school year, during the year the numbers still showed problems.

It's nice that you can speak with such authority, but I had ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with the school board, have never been to a meeting, and I'm looking at this and saying that the data doesn't support your point.

puzzledone: "Accuracy and transparency in district enrollment and test data reporting was restored in 2008-09 school year"- JasonYH

Its pretty clear. Don't try to confuse the issue.

Mr. Passkey,

What is your opinion of Mr. Hendricks comments?
Do you agree with his assertion?
Regarding the SATs, in the school year referenced below the average scores were, indeed, 428 for Math and 421 for Verbal but these scores reflected only 53% of students. The highest average scores reported during the decade were actually for the 2000-2001 school year when only 36% of students took the SATs.

As I indicate in the report, test performance as measured by averages can easily be gamed by cherry-picking the best students and excluding the weaker ones. In my opinion, the current higher participation rate in SAT testing reflects a goal of college placement for more students...despite the 'risk' of lower overall scores (and the scrutiny on educators and admins that this brings).

OK, well, maybe JasonYH was either incorrect or he was referring to the fact that this accuraccy took place in 2008-2009 when Kids First came in and was reflected in the 2009-2010 years. I don't know, because I'm not JasonYH, and I would have stated it differently.

I believe that my analysis firmly shows that 2008-2009 was a year wherein an anomalously low number of students attended 11th grade, conditional on being in 10th in 2007-2008. However, if you want to rely on the statement of this blog as an unambiguous fact in support of your position, be my guest.

One other sticky question that I cannot seem to get an answer to.

Why weren't all of the students tested for some 10 years?

Also, regarding your comment, might I ask one more question?
Mr. Raslowski (and the "majority board" her served with) was a sitting board member for quiet some time before he became Superintendent in 06, why weren't the testing issues corrected prior to 08 or 09?

It seems Mr. Hendricks has eloquently explained determinants effecting testing outcomes, wouldn't you agree?

Pardon, correction: 07

How does the board and district justify the years they used this gimmick?

So the outside force was an educator that was against, so did they fear if they didn't support her she would blow the whistle.

I will never support anyone that was on the board during this practice.

It seems Puzzledone is absolutley correct. There were 64 students who went missing from 10th grade to 11th grade in 2008.
208 students enrolled in 9th grade (2006), 206 sutdents in the following year (2007)and only 142 students took the 11th grade HSPA test, the following year (2008). A loss of 64 students.
I think what Mr. Hendricks is referring to is the noticable consistency of 10th graders (2008) becoming 11th graders and being tested in 2009, for the first time is 10 years.

Which again supports the issues relating to culling student populations and its effects on testing outcomes.

It is illogical to say that Raia and his circle had nothing to do with starting it.

Passkey, clearly the the "practice didnt come to an end" in 08. There were 64 missing students in 08.
The only" Practice that came to an end" was in 2009, which also happens to be the year the test scores went down.
Your post maintains that Cella, (who currently has a lawsuit against the district, similar to Mr. Texas) engaged in this scheme with consent of the board and the superintendent and was only able to change it with their consent.

Really? Knowing all of this, you still maintain that the same board, superintendnet and Principal who allowed this scheme to occur for years, is as great as you say.

Bear in-mind, this obviously began in 1999 and didnt stop until 2009.

@Passkey:
Cella quit ..... "She was not forced out of Hoboken, contrary to what some sources had claimed. She said she decided to start a job search last summer, the day former Superintendent Jack Raslowsky resigned his position." Hoboken Reporter

http://www.hudsonreporter.com/view/full_story/6417915/article-Fear-and-loathing-in-the-Hoboken-schools-Some-upset-with-manner-of-principal%E2%80%99s-dismissal--others-support-move-?

Dr. Cella was told in November of 2009 by a very high level interim district administrator that the Kids First Board would not be renewing her contract for the following year (her tenure year).

Dr. Cella's lawsuit centers on harassement.

CG,

Better demand a retraction from the Hudson Reporter then.

"She was not forced out of Hoboken, contrary to what some sources had claimed. She said she decided to start a job search last summer, the day former Superintendent Jack Raslowsky resigned his position."

Read more: Hudson Reporter - Fear and loathing in the Hoboken schools Some upset with manner of principal’s dismissal others support move

http://www.hudsonreporter.com/view/full_story/6417915/article-Fear-and-loathing-in-the-Hoboken-schools-Some-upset-with-manner-of-principal’s-dismissal--others-support-move-

I'm sure during her frivolous lawsuit it will come out when she excepted the new job.

Thank the gods that this is not the good old days of fired employees seeing and the city settling. Now that the city is winning maybe they will realize this is not the underhanded way of getting a pay out.

Oh good, CG, you're done using Passkey's ID for the time being. I need to use it for a while. I'm getting holy hell for trashing Kids First while putting my little darling in Stevens Cooperative to the tune of $16,400.

Can you believe people are questioning our ethics over this? One has nothing to do with the other. How I live my curiously private live should have nothing to do with what I tell other people to do in my curiously public life. Right?

Private school moms taking a big ole dump on the BOE - Dawn's legacy.

It's called juking the stats.

"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics."

-Mark Twain

Seems that this statistic is fully revealing the lie it was. And pdq, you act surprised that I am correct...

Not surprised one bit-the discussion gave me the opportunity to provide data to further support your position, which I am in total agreement with.

@Jason, thanks. I am more concerned with the drops of students than the replacement, as the district seems to have found many ways to get rid of the students. Seems taht the statement that prosbus and passkey latched onto was indeed not a statement of their point that the old board fixed everything in 2008-2009.

@pdq, I'm just having some fun, don't take it personally. I'm fairly confident that noone has challenged the numbers or statistics which say in black and white that something was wrong is proof positive for my position.

I'd like to point out one simple fact, to clear the air on this issue.

The 12th graders (from 08 11th graders) weren't on roll until *October of 2009. Thus the "pop back up" didnt stop until Oct. 2009.* Oct is the date the state uses to register accountability numbers for every district.
Coincidently, A new superintendent (Carter) began in Sept 2009.

JasonYH- The Hoboken School Board of education first approved the NJ School Choice Program in April of 2009 (http://www.hudsonreporter.com/view/full_story/2247672/article-Board-okays-budget-Public-can-vote-on--59-1-M-in-school-spending-April-21-). The first academic year it was in operation was the 2009-2010 school year. If any unsavory cherry-picking was going on and School Choice was involved, it was happening under the Kids First majority since they took control in May 2009.

Speaking of the NJ School Choice Program, when Superintendent Raslowsky introduced the resolution in April 2009 it was to include 20 students. Kids First member and Raslowsky hater Theresa Minutillo was quoted as saying "schools were basing their decision on finances, not educational benefits" and she voted no to the resolution. Recently Theresa Minutillo voted in favor of a resolution from the current superintendent to raise the number of out of town NJ School Choice in the district to 240 by 2014-- a big increase from 3 years ago when she was against the issue.

School choice was implemented long before Spring09 and was halted due to the very issue that jasonyh discusses.
This issue was discussed publicly in the spring of 09. It was a well known issue, throughout the community and the reason many of the board members had concerns with re-implementing school choice. Some of the harshest critics citing concerns during the debate were Farina and I believe it was, Rhodes Kearns.

pied piper- sorry, you are wrong. There was confusion about School Choice and there was misinformation about kids from jersey city attending hoboken public schools-- but it was misinformation. The confusion centered around families from jersey city being relocated to Hoboken in the 1990's.

No Passkey, Iam not wrong- I had children in the district back then and I and everyone else knew exactly what was going on. You can view Farina and others concerns on video should you like- I believe it was the Feb 09 BOE video.

Passkey seems mistaken on this and pied piper appears correct. School Choice was first introduced in NJ during the 2000 school year. The bill was reauthorized in 2010. Raslowsky DID try to revitalize the program in 2009 and was successful in doing so despite NO votes from a number of Board members- including Theresa Minutillo who did make a statement to the press stating that School Choice seemed like a financial decision more than an educational one. Since Rasloskwy left the district, School Choice has expanded from 20 students to approval for 240. No doubt this is due to the decline in families from Hoboken seeing the public schools as a vialble option for their children.

This also means that 240 families think Hoboken scores are better than their own schools.

Now give some facts that say any change in Hoboken enrollment has to do with the school, or any other factor. A decline with no factual context is just a decline.

So to recap, Theresa Minutillo said the schools were bad (we're failing our students) in the Fall of 2007 when she didn't have students enrolled in the district. 10r's were stopped before Kids First took majority control. And it seems that Kids First have not done proper oversight of the NJ School Choice program ("cherry picking") according to JasonYH.

No Passkey. The man said he believed a clean up occurred a few years ago. A few is usually defined as between 3 and 5. That implies he believed the improper recruiting he thinks happened occurred prior to KF running the schools. Nice try at a smear job though.

Here is a thought. If you want us to take you and your candidates seriously, ditch the dishonesty, the Mason political operatives who have suddenly decided to reappear from their holes, everyone connected w/ vote farming, vote buying & most definitely ditch the Russos. Until you do that and you completely refute those people and their tactics, none of us are going to take you seriously. Actually I doubt any of us will take you seriously even after all that but at least then we will know you aren't in the same corner as a bunch no integrity out for themselves hacks who care nothing about the schools and just are motivated by power and greed.

Passkey, we have established this several times. 2008-2009 was the last year that 10R occurred based on the numbers. April of 2009 is when KF came in. In 2009-2010, the change in count from 10th graders to 11th graders is not close to statistically significant. Either you can't read, can't do basic math, or you have something to gain if KF loses.

Goal #1 of Move Forward is to replace the leaders of the district.

Mr. Texas has a job to gain.

Oh and Passkey, as pdq pointed out- Minutillo NEVER said the schools were bad, she said the BOARD WAS FAILING. She's been volunteering in the schools since 2003 and put her money where her mouth is.

Let's save us all a little time: We get it- you (and cg, prosbus and all the other alias) absolutely despise Ms. Minutillo. Now can we get back to the topic at hand.

10r stopped in fall of 2009- if kids first was in majority in may 2009, how is it that 10r stopped before?

Give it up on the school choice issue- you know full well what Jasonyh is talking about as does most any student , parent and teacher who knew anything about the public schools in the late 90's(?)- mid 2000's.

Honestly, I didn't expect you to go the way of CG and company- while you are a great spin artist, I never thought you'd go with the blatent, easily provable lies. tsk tsk.

pied piper-- so why was Minutillo against School Choice when Raslowsky proposed it in SPG '09 but has approved it everytime since? Was it simply trying to undermine the efforts of the superintendent she did not vote for or was she ignorant? You seem to be the defender of Mintuillo--- ;-) Her ignorance and arrogance have set this district back a decade. That's not my opinion, there's more than enough independent and objective data to support my claim.

pied piper- you REALLY do not know what you are talking about. Not that that has ever stopped you before. We both read that accuracy and transparency in district enrollment and test data reporting was restored in 2008-09 school year. Dr. Cella was the principal then (2008-09) as well as for the start of the 2009-10 school year (up to Feb 2010). Kids First had NOTHING to do with ending the practice. Carter had NOTHING to do with endingt he practice.
And yet, you and the other KIDS FIRST supporters are referencing this non-issue rather than dealing with the test scores and independent evaluations completed in the successive 3 years. "At least we now have honest scores"-- seeems to be the mantra rather than accepting responsibility for things like the DINI status, AYP issues, drop out rates, and the revolving door of administrators for the past 3 years.

In the words of Theresa Minutillo, "we are failing our students"--

As to your deep hatred and OBSESSION with Ms. Minutillo:
Minutillo is on the record for voting against school choice b/c it was presented as a revenue stream...and just maybe she thought that the gagliard/raslowsky/board pissed away enough money... it never went back into the classroom!! That was likely her beef..and gee-didn't the audits proved her right.
But then again, I wonder if it were Raslowsky's degree in Zoology that disturbed Ms. Minutillo or maybe his lack of experience in a public district or as a superintendent...
or his lack of a superintendent certificate (yes, he had a eligibility cert that required him to get the proper licence- which he never did)... or the fact that he needed to be mentored while on the job... pick anyone of the above...
It was all money taken away from the kids. Check the audit for yourself.

But it didn't stop her from saying that Raslowsky needed the tools and staff necessary, I remember her voting for Raslowsky's requests,questioning and hoping that he would be successful. She even voted for Raslowski's Petrocino guy who took a full time salary from the HBOE while he worked full-time in Texas and when he was let go, sued to get more of the kids money, .
He lost his lawsuit but it still cost the district money to fight the suit- money that could have been used for the kids .

Do you own a mirror?

3months into Raslowsky's administration Minutillo was bad mouthing his efforts at BOE meetings. Less than a full year into his administration she put a letter in the Hoboken Reporter against him. And he was a licensed superintendent. The State would not have allowed ANYONE to lead a school district without the proper license and certificate. Your accusations against Raslowsky (Harvard educated, former St. Peter's Prep Principal, current Presdeint of a prestigious school in NYC) are baseless, without merit, and dishonerable. If only he was from Newark, Keyport, or Plainfield instead of Hoboken, right?

CG,

If he was so qualified, lacking nothing that the state required, why did the district have to hire a mentor for him?

The job he was doing was undermining his position, she merely pointed out his short comings.

Raslowsky had a certification of eligibility which allowed him to take the job but also required that a mentor be hired to oversee him. That sort of certification is akin to a learners permit for superintendents. I don't believe he ever got his full certification or we ever were relieved of the burden of having to pay for a mentor.

Fair enough, raising a topic you only hear about second-hand and not independently validated can be probelmatic. Still-- thank you for the effort in putting together the data about attendance scores. A great deal of hard work. Finally, I have no desire to clarify your work and apologize if any remarks I made suggested such.

Beyond the primary objective of drawing attention to the schools' current strengths and challenging many of the critiques leveled at them, I also wrote this report to generate intelligent discussion (as naive as that might sound) on the real challenges we face. It's about the schools and the people in them. That's it.

So, drawing conclusions from the report was part of the point and while I cannot stop someone from referencing it however they like, I am asking, again, to stop attaching my name to your politically motivated comments. "If I want to associate my name with any other people or position I'll do it myself, thank you."

Pied Piper said in a previous post, "10r stopped in fall of 2009- if kids first was in majority in may 2009, how is it that 10r stopped before?" IMHO, She/he is the one making this a political issue by referencing the political group KIDS FIRST. I referenced your analysis to point out the error in her statement as when I or anyone else says anything, it gets disregarded and attacked personally. Perhaps inadvertently, perhaps deliberately, you and your analysis have now entered into the narrative about the so called "10R" practice in the district.

So, when Pied piper or anyone else tries to misappropriate credit for ending the "10r" practice to KIDS FIRST and blame things on the so called "OLD GUARD" you can be assured I will reference your work as it has the air of objectivity about it. I make no assumption-- nor do I care-- of your political or non-political affilation or support. Its literally immaterial to me.

However, I would rather not get you upset or feel your work is being co-opted. So, I will reference the PATCH url to this post and not your name as per your wishes. I trust that is reasoanable and acceptable to you.

The very same years the culling existed.

You acknowledge that the culling of students ocurred for some 10years. You acknowledge that 142 (69%) out of 206 (prior year's 10th grade)students took the 11th grade HSPA in 08, which,as has been pointed out, likely had a great effect on testing outcomes.

The reason the timing matters is because of the variance in the 09/10 test outcome . In 08/09 there were 147 10th graders. These 147 10th graders became 149 11th graders in 09/10 (the first time in 10 years that the student numbers were consistent and nearly mirrored the prior year)-Thus ,in 09/10 there were 149 (100% plus 2 new kids) out of 147 (prior 10th graders) taking the 11th grade test . Indicating that the first testing year, which did not have student culling was 09/10. This is significant because it also coincides with a lowering of the hspa testing avgs.

Clearly, there is a correlation among the ceasation of culling and lowered testing averages. Conversely, as pointed out in jasonyh post, the highest testing averages occured when the fewest (53% of the student population) took the test.

It is unconscienable that you (&buds) claim to be disturbed by the lowering of the testing outcomes knowing full well the student population was culled prior to a new school board majority and that such culling ceased after the new board majority took their seats. This is where it gets political for you. You need it to be 2008 and not 2009 because the prior Raia etal majority was from 1996- 2008.

How better to distract everyone from the fact that the faction backed by Mason, Raia & Russo for years artificially inflated test scores by using the 10r scam than to pretend they are responsible for getting rid of the 10r scam just before they lost power over the BOE.

No amount of pretending will change the fact they hid how poorly the schools were doing by juicing the test scores or will change that 200+ page audit that lambasted the financial controls and management practices over at the BOE when they ran things. And no amount of pretending will make me think they don't fully intend to return to the poor practices of the past if they get back in power. The only question I have is how many dozens of clerks, janitors, administrators & other make work jobs will they rehire if we are ever unfortunate enough to see them in control over at the BOE ever again.

Quit picking on CuriousPasskeyGal will ya? I'm pretty sure your comments are defamatory by the way. For enough money my lawyer will think so too.

Lawsuits as a political weapon - Dawn's legacy.

Liz, how is it that a MANDATORY test wasnt given to all of the 11th grade students in 11th grade?
This is a-okay with you?
A school board candidate BELIEVES that it is okay NOT to give MANDATORY tests to students. Pathetic!

You're not seriously thinking of lecturing anyone, are you?

How many votes did YOUR ticket buy this time? 700? That, in addition to YOUR ticket's unacknowledged use of the Nazi truck and midnight fliers.

Congratulations. You have cast your lot with the worst political element in town. Enjoy their company.