Sometimes, events that occur far from our own reality have a direct impact on us. For example, in 1895, the State of New York passed a Substantial Equivalency Law, with the stated aim of ensuring that independent and religious schools follow a curriculum more or less equivalent to what is expected in public schools, particularly where English and math are concerned. Private schools are free to teach religion, foreign languages, or other idiosyncrasies provided their students can demonstrate a solid foundation in these core subjects.
That law lay gathering dust in the civil code for quite a while. Likely because it raises a crucial question in the US—one that few are willing to confront—the extent of the state’s control over religious education. However, following a relatively recent investigation by the New York Times, which highlighted that some schools were focusing almost exclusively on religious instruction to the detriment of basic academics, the State of New York responded by reactivating the Substantial Equivalency Law.
To that end, the relevant authorities proposed seven different pathways for nonpublic schools to prove their curriculum aligns with the required standards. In due course, the Department of Education contacted us to request that we choose one. The first five were not viable options for us—we’re not a high school (our students don’t sit high school exams), we don’t receive federal or state funding, we’re not an IB school, and our for-profit (technically-speaking) status prevents us from being a fully-fledged member of the accrediting bodies (we’re associate members of NAIS, which has served us well to date!) As for the fifth option, it only concerns one single school in all of New York State.
Of the two remaining options, the simplest for us would have been to submit our MAP Growth test results, which are, as you know, excellent. Unfortunately, MAP tests are not on the list of assessments approved by the DOE for Substantial Equivalency (one wonders why, but that’s a whole other matter). Not wanting to impose additional testing on our students, we decided to opt for the 7th and final option, which, at the end of the day, struck us as the best fit for us: to host a DOE visit. We are incredibly proud of the work we do in our classrooms and truly enjoy sharing it with visitors. So Pathway 7, it would be: local review!
While we were preparing the “review” with the team from the DOE it slowly began to dawn on us that it was the last option on the list for a reason–it was considered the last resort and was essentially intended for schools already seen as “complicated” or suspected of not being “substantially equivalent” at all. Once we came to terms with that realization, and after comparing notes with other heads of school, particularly our future neighbors Nord Anglia, who are in the exact same boat as us, I made the unilateral decision to change course and opt for pathway 6: standardized testing. I would like to thank Sara Weintraub, who took this project under her wing with the professionalism and expertise she’s known for, and did all of leg- and paperwork required so that everything will be ready in the coming weeks for our 3rd to 8th Grade students to take the required online tests.
The latest news is that the law may soon change, but in the meantime, let’s get this formality behind us and demonstrate that we’re not only “substantially equivalent” but far, far more than that.