Transcript Slide 1

Contracts for Excellence:
New York City’s failures and violations of law
as regards class size
November 15, 2011
Leonie Haimson, Class Size Matters
Contracts for Excellence
•
In April 2007, NY State settled the Campaign for Fiscal lawsuit by passing
the Contracts for Excellence (C4E) law. State agreed to send billions in
additional aid to NYC & other high needs school districts; which they would
have to spend in six approved areas, including class size reduction.*
•
In addition, NYC had to submit a plan to reduce class size in all grades.
•
In fall of 2007, the state approved DOE’s plan to reduce class sizes on
average to no more than 20 students per class in K-3; 23 in grades 4-8 and
25 in core HS classes.
•
In return, NYS has sent $2.4 billion in C4E funds to NYC since 2007.
*other allowed programs include Time on Task; Teacher & Principal Quality; Middle & HS
Restructuring; Full-Day Pre-K; & Model Programs for English Language Learners
Yet despite city’s promise, class sizes have risen
sharply in K-3; this year, the 5th year of CSR plan, by
one student per class, far above C4E goals
NYC class sizes K-3
actuals vs. C4E goals
25
24
23.9
23
22.9
22.1
22
21.4
21
21
20.9
20.7
20.5
C4E goals
20.3
20
20.1
19.9
Citywide actual
19
18
Baseline
2007-8
2008-9
2009-10
2010-11
2011-12
This year’s class size data at http://schools.nyc.gov/AboutUs/data/classsize/classsize.htm
K-3 Class sizes largest since 1998
(data sources: IBO 1998-2005; DOE 2006-11)
26
25
24.9
24
23.9
23.2
23
22.9
22.4
22
22.1
22.1
21.7
21.6
21.3
21
20
19
18
21.4
21.1
21.0
20.9
Also in grades 4-8,
class sizes have continued to increase
far above C4E goals
NYC class sizes 4th-8th
actuals vs. C4e goals
27
26.6
26.3
26
25.8
students per class
25.6
25
24
25.1
24.8
C4E target
25.3
24.6
23.8
Citywide actual
23.3
23
22
21
22.9
Also in HS: average class sizes
have risen far above goals
HS core class sizes
actuals vs. C4E goals
27.5
27
27
26.6
students per class
26.5
26
25.5
26
26.1
25.6
25.7
26.2
Actual
25.2
25
C4E targets
24.8
24.5
24.5
24
23.5
23
2007-8
2008-9
2009-10
2010-11
2011-12
Why is class size important?
• Class size reduction one of 4 reforms proven to work through
rigorous evidence, acc. to Inst. Education Sciences, research arm of
US Ed Dept. *
• Benefits especially large for disadvantaged & minority students, very
effective at narrowing the achievement gap.
• NYC schools have largest class sizes in state; in 2003, NY’s highest
court said students denied constitutional right to adequate education
as a result of excessive class sizes (Campaign for Fiscal Equity
decision).
• 86% of NYC principals say cannot provide a quality education
because of excessive class sizes.
• Smaller classes are top priority of parents on DOE learning
environment surveys every year.
•
*Other three K-12 evidence-based reforms, are one-on-one tutoring by qualified tutors for at-risk readers
in grades 1-3, Life-Skills training for junior high students, and instruction for early readers in phonemic
awareness and phonics.
2011 average K-3 class size by Borough
25
24.7
24.7
24.5
24
23.7
23.7
23.5
23
22.6
22.5
22
21.5
Brooklyn
Manhattan
Queens
Bronx
Staten I
2011 average class size 4-8 by Borough
29
28.5
28
27.7
27
26.2
26
25.8
25.3
25
24
23
Brooklyn
Manhattan
Queens
Bronx
Staten I
No. of Kindergarten students in very large
classes has increased sharply
• This year 42% (29797) of Kindergarten students in
classes of 25 or more (25 is UFT contractual max);
• Last year, for 1st time since 2000, there were more K
students in classes of 25 or more than in classes of 20 or
less;
• This year, for 1st time since 1999, there were as many K
students in classes of 20 or less (C4E goals) than in
classes HIGHER than 25.
% Kindergarten classes, large, very large &
small since 1998
70%
60%
58%
58%
50%
40%
30%
41%
39%
42%
40%
38%
30%
24%
23%
20%
17%
16%
0%
20%
20%
8%
9%
% at 20 or less
27%
26%
27%
10%
% over 25
33%
33%
31%
16%
11%
11%
7%
6%
6%
8%
% at 25 or more
16%
Why is this important?
• When Bloomberg first ran for office,
promised that he would reduce class size
in grades K-3 to 20 or less.
• Recent study shows that students in
smaller classes in K are more likely to
graduate from college, own home and
have 401K3 more than 20 years later.*
*Raj Chetty et. al. “How Does your Kindergarten classroom affect your earnings? Evidence from Project Star,” NBER Working Paper 16381
What happened to the C4E
program?
• Despite more than $2 billion in C4E funds and higher
overall spending, city has cut school budgets about 14%
since 2007.
• Maintenance of effort provision in C4E law was ignored
(city cut funding to schools when state increased
spending despite prohibition of supplanting)
• Overcrowding in many schools worsened by growing
enrollment & damaging co-locations.
• C4E state funding never reached full level & has now
flat-lined or slightly decreased.
But even when state C4E spending
increased; class sizes grew !
$700
23.5
645
645
$600
23
22.9
22.5
22.1
$500
531
21.5
21.4
$400
21
22
21
20.9
20.5
$300
258
20
$200
K-3
average
class
size
19.5
19
$100
18.5
$-
C4E
spending
(in
millions)
0
2006-7
18
2007-2008
2008-9
2009-2010
2010-2011
2011-2012
C4E
goals
Why? administration had other
priorities
• Between 2002-9, while out-of-classroom positions grew
by over 10 thousand, general ed classroom teachers
shrunk by more than 1600.*
• In 2010, there were 2,000 fewer teaching positions and
18,000 more students.
• This year, there are 2,500 fewer teachers and 20,000
more students.
• Spending on testing, contracts, consultants, and more
bureaucrats have all risen sharply.
•
(including principals, secretaries, APs, literacy coaches, etc. NY Times, “With More Money, City Schools Added
Jobs,” June 30, 2009).
But can we afford to reduce class size?
• In 2009, DOE estimated that it would cost $358
million per year to achieve average C4E class size
goals across the city;
• DOE estimated it would cost $448 million per year in
staffing to achieve class size goals in ALL schools;
plus more in capital costs for school construction.
• This year, NYC is to receive more than $530 million
in C4E funds.
Other questions re city’s plan
• State ed allocated $530.8M in C4E funds to city this
year. Yet city’s plan only includes $348M; what
happened to rest of these funds?
• Why did the city choose not to centrally allocate a penny
of C4E funds to class size reduction, given they had a
legal obligation to lower class size ?
• Only C4E district-wide initiative that DOE claims as
“class size reduction” is to expand CTT classes, which
does not lower class size.
Problems with public process
• This year, C4E meetings happening too late in the school year;
supposed to happen before money spent, so public can have input.
• This yr., SED asked to “pre-approve” plan; but state law says city’s
plan should be submitted to state only after public hearings
occurred, so that public comments can help guide decision as to
whether plan needs changing.
• C4E law requires for borough hearings as well as CEC
presentations; but DOE has refused to do this since 2008.
• See letter to Commissioner King from CSM & UFT, pointing out the
many violations of law in public process this year.
Contractual limits vs.
C4E class size goals
UFT Contract limits
Kindergarten
1-3 grades
4-5 (Title 1
Schools)
4-5 (Non-Title 1)
6-8 (Title 1
Schools)
6-8 (Non-Title 1)
9-12 (core
classes)
C4E Class Size goals
by 2011
25
32
32
19.9
19.9
22.9
32
30
22.9
22.9
33
34
22.9
24.5