NYC Private Schools to End Use of Controversial Admissions Test

We were very pleased to see the announcement in today's New York Times that most private schools in New York City will soon phase out the admissions test many of the City's elite private schools have administered since the 1960's to applicants as young as four years old.

Kevin Jarrett

The Independent Schools Admissions Association of Greater New York (ISAAGNY) advised its approximately 130 members by a letter dated on September 18th that a review of admissions practices for kindergarten and first grade concluded that the Wechsler Preschool and Primary Scale of Intelligence (WPPSI), which is administered by the nonprofit Educational Records Bureau and is universally referred to by New York parents as the "ERB", indicated that, "high-stakes testing of young children (under 8 years old) provides only a narrow assessment of their cognitive abilities and may not be predictive of future academic success." The group went on to note that, "due to the increased prevalence of test prepping, the results of the WPPSI are tainted and their credibility is in question due to coaching."

Dr. Yellin stated that he was heartened by this announcement and commented, "Today's announcement that private schools are likely to abandon the ERB is a positive development and a change for which we have advocated for some time. The reason stated is that the results have been compromised by widespread coaching and test preparation. The truth, as many educators have expressed to us, is that the system was misguided and flawed from the start. ERB's use portions of IQ tests that were never intended for this purpose. We strongly recommend Dr. Carol Dweck's wonderful book Mindset to provide perspective on this important issue." 

Assessing Kindergarten Readiness

New York's Board of Regents, the governing body for the state education system, is considering a proposal at its meeting today that would include assessing all children entering kindergarten to determine their readiness for school. This would move beyond the basic assessments that are now done to look at whether a child may have a disability or limited English language.

We think this is a fine idea, so long as the more extensive assessments are used as a starting point to guide interventions with appropriate follow-up. We already know that all children learn differently, and that young children, in particular, have a wide range of abilities. By identifying early readiness skills schools can provide teachers with helpful data. According to the proposal before the Regents, this assessment would look at language and literacy development, cognition and general knowledge (including early mathematics and early scientific development), approaches to learning, physical well-being and motor development (including adaptive skills) and emotional development. It would not be used to postpone entrance into kindergarten. According to Newsday, this new extended assessment process would affect about 190,000 entering kindergarten students each year and the funding would be provided as part of a package of federal grants designed to broadly benefit early childhood education.

Testing Young Children

A fascinating and important new book, Nurture Shock: New Thinking About Children, by Po Bronson and Ashley Merryman, explores common assumptions about children and the science that shows that many of these assumptions lack validity.

Hopefully, their work will raise everyone’s awareness about the limitations of standardized cognitive and academic “testing” particularly with regard to young children. In fact, for decades, the limitations of these instruments in identifying short-term educational needs and predicting long-term outcomes have been well-documented.

As we learn more about neuroplasticity, resiliency, and brain development throughout childhood and life, the assessment landscape will undoubtedly change. While this knowledge may not offer immediate comfort to parents frustrated by their children’s rejection from a selective school or competitive program, it is my hope that it will help them temper their disappointment with a broader, long-term perspective of their children’s futures. Having worked with many parents who are devastated by disappointing results on early testing, like the ubiquitous ERB’s, it is my hope that this book and the conversations it generates will offer reassurance that all is not lost.