Published: June 15, 2005 | By MICHAEL WINERIP | New York Times

STEPHEN M. SALAND, chairman of the State Senate Education Committee, is a conservative upstate Republican, and Steven Sanders, chairman of the Assembly Education Committee, is a liberal New York City Democrat. But when it comes to education, they have much in common. Neither is a fan of the federal No Child Left Behind Law and its extensive testing mandates. Both say that standardized tests are too dominant in public schools today.

That has at times put the two education chairmen in conflict with the state education commissioner, Richard P. Mills. During his 10-year tenure, Dr. Mills has turned New York into one of the most test-driven public systems in the nation, requiring students to pass five state tests to graduate.

For months now, the legislative leaders and the commissioner have been locked in a little-noticed fight over the future of 28 small alternative public high schools, a fight that may well be the final stand for opponents of standardized testing in New York.

Senator Saland and Assemblyman Sanders are doing their best to protect these schools in New York City (Urban Academy, Manhattan International), Ithaca (Lehman Alternative) and Rochester (School Without Walls) and help them retain their distinctive educational approach. Instead of the standard survey courses in global studies, American history, biology and chemistry pegged to state tests, these schools favor courses that go into more depth on narrower topics. At Urban Academy, there are courses in Middle East conflicts, world religions, post-Civil War Reconstruction and microbiology.

In the mid-1990's, the former education commissioner, Thomas Sobol, granted these 28 consortium schools (serving 16,000 students, about 1 percent of New York's high school population) an exemption from most state tests. That permitted a more innovative curriculum, and students were evaluated via a portfolio system that relies on research papers and science projects reviewed by outside experts like David S. Thaler, a Rockefeller University microbiology professor, and Eric Foner, a Columbia history professor.

The Gates Foundation, which has given hundreds of millions of dollars to start small high schools nationwide, is so impressed with these schools, it regularly sends educators to New York to see how they're run.

But the testing exemption for these schools is about to expire, and Commissioner Mills does not want it renewed. He believes that all students, without exception, should take every test.

Recently, Senator Saland defied the commissioner. He shepherded a bill through the Republican-controlled Senate that passed 50 to 10 and would continue these schools' waivers for four years. Senator Saland's bill does require that students pass the state English and math tests to graduate, letting the state gauge the alternative schools' performance versus mainstream schools.

On the Senate floor, Senator Saland noted that while 61 percent of consortium students qualified for free lunches and three-quarters were black or Hispanic, 88 percent went on to college, compared with 70 percent at mainstream schools that give state tests. He said that the dropout rate was half the rate at mainstream schools and that on the one statewide test these students took regularly, English, they scored an average of 77, outdoing mainstream students by 5 points.

Senator Kenneth P. LaValle, a Long Island Republican, said the alternative schools were needed because not everyone learns the same way. "Our education system must accommodate those differences," he said.

Senator Eric Schneiderman, a Manhattan Democrat, pointed out that private schools were exempt from state tests. "The children of the rich have a lot of alternative schools available to them," he said. "There is no rich kid who doesn't test well who can't find some fancy prep school."

Senator Liz Krueger, a Manhattan Democrat, said: "I empathize with the State Education Department's desire to have a one-size-fits-all system. It's easier to administer. It's easier to measure. But it does not reflect the reality of the fact that our children are not one-size-fits-all."

Dr. Mills was not moved. His spokesman, Alan Ray, wrote in an e-mail message that exempting these students from state history and science tests would create "an unworkable system and would lower educational standards." A state position paper says that making everyone take state tests is crucial for monitoring local schools. "The public demanded it, saying a local diploma often meant a poor education. Our students must compete with the rest of the world in science. They must understand the history of their own country and of the world around them. We will not ensure this if we effectively lower standards by making this bill into law."

The bill would also require Dr. Mills to develop a state portfolio assessment in history and sciences that could be an alternative to state tests. State officials say this would be too hard and too expensive. (Dr. Mills estimates $8 million; the Senate, $5 million.)

WHICHEVER, says Mr. Sanders, it's a fraction of the cost of the dozens of state tests given yearly. Supporters of alternative schools say creating a portfolio system shouldn't be any harder than developing the current testing system, which had many setbacks.

In 2002, nearly half the students who took the physics test - the smartest pupils in New York - flunked, and after insisting for a year that all was fine, Dr. Mills was forced by his own Regents board to rescale the scores. In 2003, scoring of the state math test was so far off - two-thirds failed - the results were thrown out. An oversight panel identified major flaws in state procedures, the testing director left and Dr. Mills pushed on, taking aim at his last testing opponents, the alternative schools.

Mr. Sanders says Dr. Mills has lost perspective. "There's a fear if there's a single exception that this whole policy of student evaluation will be undermined," he said. "It's almost irrational."

In the Democratic-controlled Assembly, the bill's fate will probably be decided by the speaker, Sheldon Silver. "He doesn't feel as strongly about it as I do," said Mr. Sanders. "He has political considerations. These days, if you're against high-stakes testing, it's like being soft on crime. People are afraid of appearing soft on standards."

Indeed, Charles Carrier, a spokesman for Mr. Silver, said: "He has concerns about the bill. He believes strongly in standards."