I have some criticisms with regard to your July 1st Times Union article: "State test stumps private schools, too".
Your figures show that the number of students in private schools who failed to pass the Regents' new English exam was nearly 10% less than those in public schools. If these results were in relation to the victory of a Liberal candidate over a Conservative I have no doubt you would be calling it a landslide.

  Your article also misleads people into thinking that private schools are independent of state influence, that they have complete autonomy with regard to curricula. Private schools are compelled to comply with far too many state regulations and their level of independence is diminishing precipitously. I will suggest that the number of private school students who recently failed the fourth-grade English warm-up test indicate the level to which state influence has already infected them.

  Just prior to the release of these Regents test results, the State announced its intent to force private schools to comply with the Regents standards. That reminded me of the first Clinton/Bush Presidential debate when Clinton suggested more state control of health care and Bush replied that our nation's health care was the best in the world. Clinton's response was that Bush was pathetic and that we could do better.
(By emulating those who can't meet our standards?)

  I also made note that your report on the superior performance of students in private schools was filled with negative commentary by members of the public schools' teacher unions and bureaucracy. When you reported on the test results of public school students the week before, did you sprinkle it with negative commentary from independent teachers? Of course not.

  I also noticed that you never mentioned the fact that per pupil costs in the superior performing private schools are approximately half that of the public schools you compared them to. Public school boards and administrators from all over the state are telling voters that their massive borrowing for infrastructure and technology is necessary to meet the states' new standards. How can that be true? How in the name of objectivity can you avoid questioning this apparent dichotomy?

  I would also like to see your reporters question the State Education Department as to how many public school districts have requested and received exemptions or variances from Regents testing and why they feel participation variances are necessary. The answer I received from one school board member had to do with self-esteem. Big surprise there!

  Lastly I have to make a point about 'equality'. We are not all born with equal abilities. In the zeal of many well intentioned people for equal results, they are overlooking the fact that 'affirmative action' based attempts at equalization will only succeed to the degree that the potential achievements of some can be diminished or constrained to a lower common denominator. This applies to both students and schools

-DRC