Class Size Versus Teacher Raises in Chicago

A parent leader in NYC wrote:

Rarely is the choice between salary and class size presented in such a stark manner.

I truly hope that the CTU rejects the raise in favor of sticking by class size limits that are still too large, but as many of NYC teacher friends remind me, I am not a teacher…. I would like to hear from teachers on the list about what they would choose if confronted with such a decision, and why.

Here is my semi-coherent stream of conscious reply:

Let's be careful here.

Incoming President from CORE Karen
"Lewis urged the board to first cut expensive curriculum created by outsiders, high-stakes testing and a long line of pricey vendors and consultants. "I would implore you to reconsider,'' Lewis said. "This is a nuclear option.''

Yes there are other choices and we must not let the people who have run these systems into the ground manipulate events to pit parents against teachers - the goal here.

Of course framing things this way puts the CTU - due to change hands on July 1 - between a rock and a hard place. If they accept this premise of givign up a contractual raise under such a threat it would be like cutting their throats in their first act. Sometimes a union must make its case that budgets are purposely manipulated to create this choice - remember that the people running Chicago are the same ilk as NYC. Do we trust BloomKlein?

IN Chicago I believe they can't negotiate class size in contracts and one of the planks of CORE is to get that right. Let's look into the future: CORE gives in now on the raise but loses enough internal power that the long-time fight for class size is harmed. I believe they are committed to fighting for salary and class size - not like the UFT - see below.

Do they really fear a strike? Would they in NYC from the UFT which would lose dues checkoff and everyone know they will never strike no matter what happens. Neither would the old guard in Chicago. But with CORE being more militant, there is some doubt.

We must be clear who is framing the choice. If a body like the DOE signs a contract and wants to get out of it the use the class size issue to turn the public against the teachers. BloomKlein tried to do the same thing here in not giving teachers a raise - but there is no contract so they can get away with it.

By the way - I got a call from Chicago yesterday and they tell me there is talk of furloughs - up to 10 days.

We can't keep falling for this tactic.

What is to stop them from making other claims? Books and supplies or class size?
Bus service or class size? It is extortion.

In NYC take the 42 minutes that many teachers think is a waste. Would they be happy losing the money if they cut these minutes?

Remember in NYC in 1975 they cut the school week by an hour and a half - 2 periods and the teachers gave up 2 preps a week in the fiscal crisis. Teachers also took a pay freeze for years.

We would hear screams of outrage. So why if Chicago teachers are due a 4% raise do we fall for this ploy?

We face a similar issue in the UFT when we want class size included in contract negotiations and the UFT always says it will come out of a raise. Now if we had a democratic union this issue would be debated and we would see where teachers really stand on the issue. UFT surveys often put the same issue in stark terms without nuance.

Subject: [nyceducationnews] Chicago choice between pay freeze and class size increases; what would you choose?

“During a dramatic emergency meeting, board members also blocked any chance of a teacher strike over pay by indicating they expect to honor the 4 percent pay raises promised to teachers and seven other school unions -- an increase valued at $135 million.

….Although the Civic Federation has questioned the board's decision to raise class size by five students to save $125 million rather than take on the union over pay increases, Bobins {Chicago school board president] said, "We signed a five-year contract three years ago. . . . I believe we must honor it…. Huberman [CEO of the Chicago schools] said, he could not risk any chance of a strike over the promised 4 percent pay raises. A class size increase that could displace 2,700 teachers and 300 non-teachers, Huberman said, was "not the first place we turned, it's the last place we turned.''

Rarely is the choice between salary and class size presented in such a stark manner.

I truly hope that the CTU rejects the raise in favor of sticking by class size limits that are still too large, but as many of NYC teacher friends remind me, I am not a teacher…. I would like to hear from teachers on the list about what they would choose if confronted with such a decision, and why.

http://www.suntimes.com/news/education/2397688,CST-NWS-skul16.article

Chicago School Board opens door to 35 in a class

Board expects to honor 4% raise, but hopes teachers union will back concessions

Comments

June 16, 2010

BY ROSALIND ROSSI Education Reporter

Chicago School Board members Tuesday tackled their worst fiscal crisis since Mayor Daley's 1995 school takeover by granting school officials the power to raise class sizes to up to 35 students for the next two years.

If Schools CEO Ron Huberman acts on that new power, he's sure to anger hundreds of teachers laid off in the process and potentially the parents whose children they serve.

» Click to enlarge image

Outgoing Chicago Teachers Union President Marilyn Stewart (left) speaks Tuesday, joined by incoming president Karen Lewis.
(Brian Jackson/Sun-Times)

During a dramatic emergency meeting, board members also blocked any chance of a teacher strike over pay by indicating they expect to honor the 4 percent pay raises promised to teachers and seven other school unions -- an increase valued at $135 million.

At the same time, the board agreed to give Huberman the authority to take out a line of credit of up to $800 million. The short-term bridge, Huberman said, is needed to cover more than $400 million in late state aid payments and pump up a reserve fund that will soon dwindle to the equivalent of one week's operating costs.

Facing a packed chamber, seven school board members unanimously approved every emergency measure brought before them to help plug an estimated $427 million deficit. Rookie School Board President Mary Richardson-Lowry called the moment "extraordinary.''

The veteran of the bunch, LaSalle Bank chairman emeritus Norm Bobins, said he was casting "the most difficult vote'' of his 15 years on the board.

Although the Civic Federation has questioned the board's decision to raise class size by five students to save $125 million rather than take on the union over pay increases, Bobins said, "We signed a five-year contract three years ago. . . . I believe we must honor it.''

Forgoing pay increases would only get the district a third of the way out of its financial hole, Bobins noted. Nevertheless, he said, "I hope we can come to some consensus with the union and meet each other halfway.''

Huberman cautioned that the board's budget was "fluid and changes by the day'' because of uncertain state funding, and he was merely asking for the authority to raise class sizes if needed.

However, Huberman said, he could not risk any chance of a strike over the promised 4 percent pay raises. A class size increase that could displace 2,700 teachers and 300 non-teachers, Huberman said, was "not the first place we turned, it's the last place we turned.''

It came after 800 nonunion workers lost their jobs, and those left behind endured pay freezes and furlough days that ate up 6 percent of their paychecks, Huberman said.

District officials have given the teachers union "a menu of possible concessions,'' and "we remain hopeful that [the union] will share in recognizing the challenges almost every district across the country is facing,'' Huberman said.

San Diego teachers, he noted, have agreed to five furlough days to avoid layoffs; Las Vegas teachers are swallowing a pay freeze and increased medical co-pays.

In an unusual display of solidarity, at one point both incoming Chicago Teachers Union President Karen Lewis and outgoing President Marilyn Stewart stood together at the podium as Stewart railed against the class size increase, calling it "educational malpractice.''

"I am ashamed of the Board of Education,'' Stewart said. Lewis hugged her afterward.

Lewis urged the board to first cut expensive curriculum created by outsiders, high-stakes testing and a long line of pricey vendors and consultants. "I would implore you to reconsider,'' Lewis said. "This is a nuclear option.''

Afterward, Burley School parent Wendy Katten, who helped organize a parent rally against class size increases and the state education-funding system, predicted that North Side parents who have raised huge amounts of money for their neighborhood schools will bail out if their children wind up in packed classrooms.

"There are parents who are saying, 'I'm done working this hard when you're saying 35 kids,' " Katten said. "People are saying they'll sell their house at a loss. They are out of here.''

Daley tried to shift the political blame to Springfield, saying, "It's the state of Illinois that basically is cutting [education] funding . . .

"The Board of Education is not the enemy,'' Daley said. ". . . They don't want big classes. No one wants any big classes.''

Contributing: Fran Spielman

Britain's Nick Clegg on Class Size and Micromanagement

From Ann Kjellberg on the NYC Education News listserve:

Liberal Democrat Nick Clegg was declared the winner of last Thursday's leaders' debate in the current UK elections. Read what he had to say about small class sizes and other issues pertinent to issues here (see bold):

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/bsp/hi/pdfs/16_04_10_firstdebate.pdf

AUDIENCE MEMBER: I'm in my final year of school. I found that the system is incredibly

grades-driven, so much so, that often education for its own sake is

at sacrifice. We are over -examined and under-taught. What will the

party leaders do to improve education?

GORDON BROWN: I want to see our education improve as it has done over the last few

years. We need teachers with better qualifications. We need young

people with the aspiration to succeed, and we need to give people

the chance to start education early, that's why nursery education

starts at three and be able to go through to 18. That's what we are

saying in our manifesto, education will be part-time or full-time till

the age of 18. As far as grades and standards are concerned, I

myself believe in the highest of standards. I believe if we don't

search for the highest of standards, then we will not in the end get

the best pupils coming out of our schools. Yes, we've got to look at

the different types of exams and we will do so. But I think it's

important to realise we're in this new world where we are competing

with Asia, as well as America and Europe and our young people

have got to have the grades, the qualifications to be able to meet

the best in the world. That's what I want to achieve and I hope I can

work with you to do so.

DAVID CAMERON: I have every sympathy with what you say because education is

important, that, as well as getting good grades that actually we're

opening young people's minds to all the best things that have been

written and all the best things that have been said and to really

excite people about education. I think there is a danger that our

education system has become terribly bureaucratic. We send 4,000

pages of information to schools every year. We spend £300 million

on educational quangos. We're not getting enough to the frontline,

following the child into the school. As someone who has got two

children, one of whom started at a state school in London, and

hopefully another child to come, I'm passionate about getting as

much money into the school as possible, rather than wasting it in

Whitehall. In terms of exams, we've got to have good external

marking, done properly, and high standards. I think that's absolutely

key. I wouldn't want to see that change. But let's set the schools

free, so we trust in the vocation of the teachers who do what they

want - they're there because they have a vocation they care about.

NICK CLEGG: John, I think everyone will recognise what you're talking about, this

feeling that you have to constantly jump through hoops. The

symptoms are everywhere. Our National Curriculum is 600 pages.

The curriculum in Sweden, which has generally got a fairly good

education system, is 16 pages. I just read the other day that head

teachers now by e-mail over the last year, have received - get this -

4,000 pages of instructions from on high from Whitehall. This is

crazy. We've got to let head teachers teach, we've got to let

teachers teach. We've got to reinstil a sense of enthusiasm and

creativity in the way that you are taught. That's why we want to do,

the Liberal Democrats, is to put on to the statute book an Education

Freedom Act which literally bans government from micromanaging

what happens every minute of the day with every single test in every

classroom in the country. That's what I'd like to see. I think it would

make a big difference to you and other people who are at school.

GORDON BROWN: But every school has got to be a good school. We've got to insist on

the highest standards for every school. Since 1997, 1,600

underperforming secondary schools in 1997 went down to 250. Next

year, down to zero, as a result of the fact that we're allowing

federations, academies, to take over underperforming schools.

That's the way forward, to insist on the highest standards, to make

sure an underperforming school is taken over, to make sure we

invest enough in the education system to ensure our children are

properly taught. What I'd be very worried about is if in this difficult

and straitened time, we were to cut our budgets for education at this

point in time. I think that would put our children at risk for the future,

and it's very important that we continue to invest in the education of

every child in this country.

DAVID CAMERON: What I'd say in terms of what I care about most in education with my

own children going through the system, I want what every parent in

this country wants, and it starts with something that actually doesn't

necessarily cost money, and that is good discipline in our schools.

In a typical year now, you get 17,000 teachers being attacked by

students. We've got a real problem here. There was a case in

Manchester once where a child produced a knife in a school, got

excluded, and then the appeals panel put that child back into the

school. Imagine what that does to the head teacher that's trying to

keep order. So we say head teachers should be able to exclude

difficult pupils and not be overruled by appeals panels. We say

you've got to change the rules so teachers can keep order in class.

Right now, we seem to be treating the teacher like children and the

children like the adults. We've got it topsy-turvy, the wrong way

round, and we really need to change that so that we have proper

discipline and order. Then people can learn.

NICK CLEGG: I think discipline is important, of course. I think creativity, which I

think is the point you're saying, Joel - I'm not allowed to ask you

questions, that's against the rules, but just nod if - good! I think

creativity is important in the classroom, and think freedom for

teachers and head teachers. One thing which I think would really

help in all of those things - discipline, creativity, freedom for

teachers - is quite simply good old-fashioned smaller class sizes.

We have 8,000 infants in this country now between the ages of five

and seven who are in classes which are so big, they're illegal,

technically illegal. It's just logical. If you're a teacher, friends of mine

who are teachers say they can't really keep an eye on the

troublemakers, but they also can't support the brightest children if

the classes are huge. That's why we've got a plan, fully costed, to

provide schools with additional resources so that they can bring

down the average class size in a primary school, for instance down

to 20, and the average class size in a secondary school down to 16.

DAVID CAMERON: Again, we mustn't confuse what goes in in terms of money with what

comes out. I spoke about the fact that we spend £300 million on

educational quangos. The Department of Children, Schools and

Families - a lot of teachers actually call it the Department of Curtains

and Soft Furnishings because it's so beautifully done up - they

recently spent £3 million improving their own building, and putting in

a - I'm not making this up - a contemplation suite and a massage

room. As a parent of children at state schools, I want every available

penny to go with the child into the school so the teacher can actually

provide great education for our children. There is a lot of waste, and

it needs to be cut.

GORDON BROWN: Creativity, discipline, standards in schools, but we can't evade this

question: if we're going to have the best education for our children,

we do need the teachers and the teaching assistants. If you cut

money out of the education budget now, you'll be cutting the

numbers of teachers and teaching assistants. We say it's so

important for our country that while we cut the deficit, we will

maintain our investment in education per pupil. Now, the

Conservatives cannot say this, and I think we need an answer this

evening. Again, it's the risk, the risk to our health service, the risk in

crime if you have less police. Now it's the risk to education.

ALASTAIR STEWART: Mr Cameron.

DAVID CAMERON: What Gordon Brown isn't telling you is that he's putting up National

Insurance contributions on every single job in 2011. The biggest

cost schools have is teachers. So he's going to be taking money out

of every single school in the country, primary school, secondary

school, FE college. We say stop the waste in government now so

we can stop the lion's share of that National Insurance increase and

jobs tax next year. That's the best way to make sure we keep the

money going into the school.

GORDON BROWN: But be honest about the risk. You're going to take one billion at least

out of the schools this year.

DAVID CAMERON: It's simply not true.

GORDON BROWN: If you were elected, in a budget in July, you've got to take six billion

out of the system, other than health and defence. Where does that

money come from? You've promised you'll take six billion out. It can

only end up with the loss of thousands of jobs, including teachers.

You will not back us and support us on keeping education. Why

won't you support educational spending, as we do?

DAVID CAMERON: I think people can hear that this is a complete invention of a figure

plucked out of the air. We're saying the government could save one

pound out of every hundred it spends. Now, what small business,

what large business, what family, frankly, hasn't had to do that

during this difficult recession?

ALASTAIR STEWART: Mr Clegg now.

GORDON BROWN: You're going to take money out of the school system.

NICK CLEGG: I'm not sure if you're like me, but the more they attack each other,

the more they sound exactly the same. Look, Joel's question - let's

go back to the question. Joel asked, why are you being tested so

much? How can all pupils in our schools feel they're being

supported and getting the best out of education? I come back to this

need to combine two things: firstly, more freedom for teachers and

head teachers. Remember this crazy thing I told you about head

teachers getting 4,000 pages of instructions by e-mail, and

secondly, smaller class sizes, more one-to-one tuition, Saturday

morning classes, evening classes, so that you can help those

children in particular who perhaps aren't being supported at home

as much as anybody else. I know from my two sons, who go to an

excellent local state-funded school in my area, if a whole class can move together, then that enriches all children. I think what goes wrong is when classes get so big and classes actually fall apart.

ALASTAIR STEWART: Mr Brown.

GORDON BROWN: We've got to be clear about this. I, too, want freedom for schools,

and that's why where a school is failing, it will be taken over by a

federation or an academy so that it can work, usually a local

federation or a local academy. I want the best discipline in our

schools as well, and I'm tough on what head teachers have got to

do to ensure there's discipline not just in the school itself, but

around the school as well, but we've got to face up to the fact about

spending.

NICK CLEGG: Well, Gordon Brown mentioned spending - absolutely, too right. I

don't think we're really going to get those smaller class sizes, that

one-to-one tuition that I think Joel agrees is necessary, the catch-up

classes, unless we find the money from savings elsewhere. We've

spelt that out in our manifesto, so we can provide under our plan

£2.5 billion extra to our schools.

ALASTAIR STEWART: I'm going to stop you right there, because I know what the questions

are and you don't, but the next question continues that debate. Your

answers are entirely a matter for you, and your rebuttals as well, but

I think you may find that the next question will continue that

discussion. It's Robert Lewis, a senior manager in healthcare. Mr

Lewis, your question.

Letter to Richard Mills on DOE Violations of Class Size

Commissioner Richard P. Mills

New York State Education Dept.

Education Building

Albany NY 12234



December 22, 2008



Dear Commissioner Mills:



On Friday, Dec. 12 the NYC Department of Education released class size figures nearly four weeks past the November 15 deadline. [1]



Instead of reducing class size, as required in its Contract for Excellence plan, the data reveals that class sizes increased at all levels this year – for the first time in ten years. (See Chart and data table A: Reductions in class size 1998-2008.)



Increases occurred in grades K-3, grades 4-8th, and grades 9-12th. (See Chart B: Class size averages and class size reduction targets 2006-8). As a result, the city failed to achieve its state-mandated class size targets, by a considerable margin.



DOE claims that class sizes will be lower by the end of January, by about 1.25%, because by then LTA (long term absent) students will have been discharged from the registers – and others will have dropped out. We object to the notion that the DOE would try to claim credit for reducing class size that results from high discharge or dropout rates. Moreover, in previous years, significant declines between Oct. 31 and January have occurred primarily in high school, where these rates remain unacceptably high – not in the early grades, where decreases are minimal.



Yet even if 1.25% is subtracted from averages in all grades, as the final column in Chart B shows, class sizes will have increased at all levels except grades 4/5, and average class sizes will remain far above the city’s class size reduction targets.



The increases in class size this year have occurred despite more than $378 million in additional state Contract for Excellence funds that could have been used to reduce class size, and DOE’s pledge to use $146.5 million for these purposes. [ii]



According to this data, increases in class size have been particularly large in grades K-3, where classes rose to an average of 21.4 students, instead of falling as promised to 20.3 students per class. In grades 6-8, average class sizes increased to 26.3, instead of declining to 24.3, as promised.



Moreover, the only grade in which non-special education classes appear to have been added compared to last year was Kindergarten, where there were fifteen new classes over last year’s figure. Overall, there were 143 fewer classes in grades K-3 and 183 fewer classes in grades 4-8th, despite the infusion of new funds supposed to form new classes so that class sizes could be lowered. [iii]



In September, the NY State Education Department admonished the city for failing to meet any of its class size targets for 2007-8, though citywide, class sizes did decline fractionally, from between one tenth and one half student per class.



Instead, as the Department noted, class size or pupil-to-teacher ratio increased in 53.9% of schools, 40% of elementary schools with the largest class sizes failed to lower class size, and for 70 schools that received over nearly $20 million in class size reduction funds, both class sizes and student/teacher ratio increased.[iv]



And yet, as the Department also pointed out, DOE’s enrollment targets and hiring decisions had been made before its Contract proposal was submitted in July 2007, and thus DOE’s “ability to fully implement the 2007-8 class size reduction plan was impacted.”



Accordingly, the Department warned, the city would be “required to improve implementation of the second year of its class size plan.”



Now we have seen the results, and the city’s record in the second year of its plan is far worse that last year’s– with no decline in class size at any of the grade levels.



Given these disturbing facts, it is critical that the state require DOE to improve its internal class size monitoring and ensure that the city has procedures in place to achieve its mandated targets. Currently, we do not believe that such a plan really exists.



We see several major flaws in the city’s current class size reduction proposal:



1. The city has failed to allocate specific funds towards class size reduction.



Instead, it has left it up to principals to decide whether they would like to use a portion of their share of the total C4E funds for these purposes. Even then, there is little or no oversight on the part of the DOE to see that schools have used the funds appropriately.



2. There are no specific class size targets that any school is supposed to achieve, making it unclear why any citywide declines should be expected.



This is true even for those limited number of schools in the DOE’s “class size coaching” program, causing more than half of these schools to remain in the top quartile of class size, according to the DOE’s own figures.



3. The city continues to communicate to principals in ways likely to discourage them from attempting to reduce class size.

Throughout the class size memo sent to NYC principals last spring, for example, there is an overwhelmingly negative tone: “Implementing reduced class size requires complex tradeoffs and decisions. The purpose of this memo is to help you to weigh these tradeoffs as your school conducts its comprehensive planning …. we hope that you find the following to be a useful framework for weighing the benefits and constraints associated with class size reduction as you develop your overall education plans and priorities.”[v]

Nowhere in this memo or in any other document provided by DOE to principals is class size reduction encouraged or stated to be as citywide goal, no less explained to principals as a legal mandate that the city is required to achieve.

4. The city is continuing to pursue policies that conflict with the goals of class size reduction.



For example, the administration continues to place new schools and charter schools in buildings where this decision interferes with the ability of the existing school or schools, already housed in these buildings, to reduce class size to the appropriate levels. In a recent survey, more than one quarter of all NYC principals said that overcrowding had increased because of new schools or programs moved into their buildings in recent years.[vi] Moreover, many principals reported that when they tried to reduce class size, DOE’s Office of Enrollment Planning and Operations simply sent them more students, undoing all their efforts



5. The city has mandated that CTT (collaborative team teaching) classes be increased to their maximum size.



While substantially increasing the number of inclusion classes, DOE has also issued a directive to principals, mandating that the size of these classes be increased to their maximum contractual level, or else funding for the unfilled seats will be subtracted from the principal’s budget.[vii] If enforced, this will likely prevent the city from meeting its class size targets in the future.



6. The city has failed to align its capital plan with its class size reduction goals.



According to state law, NYC is required to have a capital plan in place that would provide the space necessary to achieve its class size reduction goals. A few weeks ago, the city submitted a proposal for its next five-year capital plan for the years 2010-2014. This plan has only 25,000 new seats. The administration projects that another 33,000 seats will be carried over from the current plan, and completed by 2012.[viii]



Based on estimates made by adjusting the DOE’s own 2006-7 utilization figures, these seats will provide only about 35% necessary to eliminate overcrowding and reduce class size to the goals in its class size reduction plan.[ix]



7. The city has failed to align its formula for estimating school capacity and utilization or its reporting of new seats with its class size reduction goals.



In the DOE’s “Blue Book”, that contains estimates of school capacity and utilization for each school, the city continues to assume significantly larger “target” class sizes of 28 students per class in grades 4-8, and 34 in high school. The fact that the DOE refuses to align its school capacity estimates to the class size goals in its Contract for Excellence plan is yet another indication of a lack of commitment to follow through on its proposal to reduce class size. As pointed out in an October 29 letter from NYC Council Speaker Quinn and CM Robert Jackson, chair of the Council Education committee to the Mayor and Chancellor Klein:



“In determining the need for new capacity, it is a priority of the Council that the DOE address the class size reduction goals for K-12 as laid out in the contract for Excellence….The Council requests that the Blue book “target” methodology be immediately updated to reflect the Contract for Excellence target of 23 students per class for grades 3-12.”



In its reporting on how many seats will be created in new schools, the DOE assumes even larger “historical” class sizes of 25 in Kindergarten-3rd grades, 29-31 in 4th and 5th grades, 28-30 per class in middle schools, and 34 in high schools. Thus, even in new schools, it is evident that the DOE does not intend to reduce class size to the targets in its plan.



9- The city has failed to adopt a C4E complaint process.



As part of the Contract for Excellence requirements, approved by the Legislature in the spring of 2007, all school districts were supposed to adopt specific grievance procedures, so that parents and other stakeholder groups could complain to district administrators and/or the Chancellor, with an appeal to the State Commissioner of Education, if their school had not properly implemented smaller classes or other approved programs. Not only has DOE failed to adopt any such process, more than a year following the law’s passage; we have yet to see a draft proposal that parents and others might comment upon.



10 -The city continues to report inaccurate class size data.



For the purpose of this analysis, we have assumed that DOE’s class size data as reported to be accurate, although there still appear to be numerous errors, especially in the reporting of high school classes which would tend to make the data for these classes smaller than they really are.



In many high schools, each CTT class is still reported as two separate classes, one composed solely of general education students and another of special education students. This approximately halves the actual size of these classes. The DOE claims to have adjusted these figures by subtracting a certain number of general education and CTT classes, and adding back half the number, but it is unclear to us as to whether this adjustment yields accurate figures. To a lesser extent, there also continue to be serious errors in the elementary school data, in cases where mixed age groupings are reported as separate classes. Finally, according to DOE officials, class size data is missing from as many of one third of all middle schools.



The NYC Department of Education has placed great emphasis on accountability in the form of test results and other outcome data, and is intent on closing schools that do not perform up to its standards. Accountability also means abiding by its legal obligations, particularly when it comes to reducing class size, one of the primary determinants of student achievement.





Conclusion: What the state should require



We urge you to require that the city improve its performance and immediately develop a real plan to reduce class size in all grades, and see that this plan is followed.



Specific class size goals by school should be adopted, sufficient to achieve the citywide targets. Enough funding should be allocated to carry out this plan, and careful oversight employed, to ensure that the funds are spent appropriately and new classes are formed. DOE policies that conflict with class size reduction, such as mandating maximum class sizes for CTT classes and/or placing new schools in buildings should cease, where the existing school will be prevented from reducing class size to the citywide goals.



The city should be obligated to adopt a capital plan that creates the necessary space to achieve its class size targets and it must also be required to align its capacity estimates and reporting of new seats with the targets as well.



And finally, the city should be required to improve the accuracy and the breadth of its class size reporting so that all public schools are included.



Until and unless this occurs, the Department of Education will continue to fail in its legal and moral obligations to provide NYC children with an equitable chance to learn.



Yours sincerely,



Leonie Haimson

Executive Director, Class Size Matters



Randi Weingarten

President, United Federation of Teachers



Lillian Rodriguez Lopez

President, Hispanic Federation





CC: Deputy Commissioner Johanna Duncan-Poitier, the Board of Regents, Speaker Sheldon Silver, AM Cathy Nolan, Senator Malcolm Smith; Speaker Christine Quinn, NYC Education Chair Robert Jackson, Chancellor Joel Klein and Garth Harries, Chief Portfolio Officer, NYC DOE.











Endnotes:





[1] The excel files showing class size averages by school, district and citywide are posted on the DOE website are here: http://schools.nyc.gov/AboutUs/DOEData/ClassSizeReport/classsize.htm

The City Council approved legislation in December 2005, requiring the Department of Education to report on average class sizes per school, district , and citywide, twice annually, on or before November 15 and February 15 of each year. This legislation was signed into law by the Mayor on December 29, 2005, and is now is contained in § 522. c of the city’s consolidated laws. The DOE’s November 15 class size report is supposed to contain data on class sizes as of the audited October 31 register.



[ii] More specifically, $46.3 million of these funds was allocated by principals for class size reduction proper, $37.9 million was allocated by principals for team-teaching, and $62.3 million was allocated centrally by DOE to create more CTT classes; the latter two programs do not actually reduce class size. See NYC’s 2008-9 Citywide Proposed C4E Plan., Approved NYCDOE 5-Year Class Size Reduction Plan, (November 8, 2007) posted at http://schools.nyc.gov/NR/rdonlyres/5C60C0BA-F6E4-456E-8762-CAF02609E69E/40021/NYCDOEClassSizePlan_111907_final.pdf



[iii] We have not tried to calculate the overall number of classes in high school, since the data is presented in too confusing a manner. More specifically, the DOE has attempted to adjust for overcounting of actual CTT classes by subtracting a portion of them and readjusting the class size figures, more on this on p. x.



[iv] See NY State Education Department, “State Education Department Complete Contracts for Excellence Monitoring; Vast Majority of Districts Implemented Contract Provisions, but Exceptions Must be Corrected,” Sept. 15, 2008; also NYSED, “Contracts for Excellence–Monitoring Report,” Sept. 8, 2008, http://www.oms.nysed.gov/press/C4EMonitoring.htm and http://www.regents.nysed.gov/2008Meetings/September2008/0908emscd4.htm In April of 2008, the UFT released a report with many of the same findings, showing that nearly half of the elementary and middle schools that received state class size reduction funds did not lower class sizes, and in 34% of these schools, class sizes increased. See “Class Size and the Contract for Excellence: Are we making progress in NYC’s public schools?” The United Federation of Teachers, at http://www.uft.org/news/issues/press/state-mandated_class_size/



[v] NYC DOE, “2008-09 Class Size Reduction Guidance Memo”, memo to all NYC principals from Garth Harries, dated May 28, 2008.



[vii] See NYC DOE, "Resource Guide to School Budgets," pp.42- 44 at http://schools.nyc.gov/Documents/FSF/NYC_FSF%20Guide_052208.pdf;



[viii] NYC DOE, “PROPOSED 2010 – 2014 FIVE-YEAR CAPITAL PLAN,” November 2008; at http://source.nycsca.org/pdf/capitalplan/11-08_2010-14_CapitalPlan.pdf.



[ix] “A Better Capital Plan”, October 2008; a report from A Campaign for a Better Capital Plan, the Manhattan Taskforce on School Overcrowding, Class Size Matters, the United Federation of Teachers, and The Center for Arts Education; http://www.classsizematters.org/abettercapitalplan.html







Chart and data table A: Reductions in class size 1998-2008








Chart B: Class size averages and class size reduction targets 2006-8.



Class Size Averages citywide


Click to Enlarge




in bold are class sizes which increased or remained constant



*as of 01/23/08

**as of 10/31/08



Data sources: Class size averages 2008-2009 from NYC DOE, 2008-9 Preliminary Class Size Report, Dec. 2008; http://schools.nyc.gov/NR/rdonlyres/3EB9D745-1D83-449A-B894-F9D395D7655C/49954/Dec200809CSReportingSummaryFinal1.pdf and NYC DOE City Level Detail Report at http://schools.nyc.gov/NR/rdonlyres/48AEEDB4-A07F-4E2F-8CD2-D7F1008441F0/0/200809CityLevelDetailReport.xls



Class size averages 2007-2008 from NYC DOE 2007-2008 Summary Report, Feb. 2008; http://schools.nyc.gov/NR/rdonlyres/A5BC96A6-049F-4BF1-87EC-0E19597F4053/0/Feb200708CSReportingSummary.ppt



Baseline and annual class size targets from NYC DOE, Approved NYCDOE 5-Year Class Size Reduction Plan, (November 8, 2007) posted at http://schools.nyc.gov/NR/rdonlyres/5C60C0BA-F6E4-456E-8762-CAF02609E69E/40021/NYCDOEClassSizePlan_111907_final.pdf

Thousands join march over school class sizes

By Eimear Ni Bhraonain

Monday November 17 2008

THOUSANDS of teachers descended on the Taoiseach's constituency over the weekend to deliver an angry message to Brian Cowen over Budget cutbacks in education.

Up to 4,000 primary and secondary school teachers and parents stormed O'Connor Square in Tullamore, Co Offaly, roaring slogans to show their anger at the Fianna Fail Budget.

The last time O'Connor Square saw such crowds was on May 16, when the Taoiseach belted out his rendition of the late Frank Sweeney's 'The Offaly Rover'.

But May 16 seemed like a lifetime away on Saturday afternoon as teachers marched towards Brian Cowen's constituency office in Tullamore and hand-delivered petitions from local schools calling for the cutbacks to be reversed.

It was the second of four protests building up to a national rally in Dublin planned for December 6. Teachers from Carlow, Kildare, Laois, Offaly, Westmeath and Longford were among those who made the journey to Tullamore.

It also preceded a meeting of the Federation of Parents Councils in Christian Brothers' and other Catholic Secondary Schools (FEDCBS) in Portlaoise yesterday.

Up to 100 parents attended that event to voice their concerns on the education cutbacks and were addressed by Fianna Fail TD Sean Fleming, Junior Minister John Moloney and Fine Gael TD Charlie Flanagan.

President of the Irish National Teachers' Organisation (INTO) Declan Kelleher told the rally in Tullamore that parents, teachers and boards of management would continue to oppose the cutbacks, which would "seriously damage" the future of thousands of children.

"We are united in our opposition to these cutbacks on an already underfunded primary education service. Government must be persuaded to change its position," he said.

The INTO also warned that every TD in the country would "get the message" that they would not be re-elected unless the cutbacks were reversed.

Anxious principals exchanged stories on how many teachers they would lose because of the proposals.

Principal of Rathdowney Church of Ireland NS Jean Treacy told the Irish Independent that the Co Laois school was going from three teachers to two from September.

This means the 48 children from junior infants to sixth class will be split into two classes. "We'll have four classes each, it's nearly an impossibility. It's scandalous. We were only beginning to move in the right direction and we're going back to where we were years ago.

"Children are only going to get the one chance at primary school education and we want to deliver the best we can to them and to do our utmost but it's making life very difficult."

Ms Treacy said teachers felt "cheated" by Fianna Fail's election promises to reduce pupil-teacher ratio. "It's all lies, they couldn't be trusted."

- Eimear Ni Bhraonain

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/thousands-join-march-over-school-class-sizes-1541984.html

Regents and State Ed demand real accountability from NYC DOE on Class Size!

Leonie Haimson to NYC Education News Listserve:

Today, the State Education Department and the Regents announced that despite being provided with millions of dollars in additional state aid last year, dollars that should have been used to reduce class size, in nearly 54% of NYC schools, class sizes and/or student-teacher ratio increased.

In seventy NYC schools that received $100,000 or more to specifically reduce class size, both class size and student-teacher ratio increased. Those seventy schools alone account for nearly $20 million in wasted funds.

In elementary schools, nearly 40% of those schools with the highest class sizes failed to reduce class size. Not surprisingly, SED concluded, DOE failed to make its first year class size reduction targets and must improve compliance in the future.

State Ed also said that because of DOE’s sloppy reporting and poor performance, more detailed reporting will be required, as well as certified audits to show that C4E funds are being used appropriately and not being used to supplant city funds.

DOE must also give a detailed accounting of how they are using the class size funds in every school, to show how many extra teachers are being hired, in what grades and/or subjects, and to what effect. They must also demonstrate how these reductions at the school level will allow them to achieve the targets in their citywide plan this year. If this does not occur, SED says it will withhold additional C4E funds.

This sort of forthright statement is nearly unprecedented for the State Education Department, and is a real step forward in terms of accountability and transparency.

As parents, we rejoice and commend the State for stepping up to the plate, and performing its critical oversight responsibilities -- to make sure that the funds that are supposed to provide our children with their right to an adequate education, are properly spent.

Halleluyah!

The statement from State Ed follows.

Leonie Haimson

Executive Director

Class Size Matters

124 Waverly Pl.

New York, NY 10011

212-674-7320

classsizematters@gmail.com

www.classsizematters.org

http://nycpublicschoolparents.blogspot.com/

Please make a tax-deductible contribution to Class Size Matters now!

-----Original Message-----

------ Forwarded Message

From: Tom Dunn

Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2008 14:25:26 -0400

To: Jonathan Burman

Conversation: Regents receive State Education Department Contract for Excellence report - News release

Subject: Regents receive State Education Department Contract for Excellence report - News release

STATE EDUCATION DEPARTMENT COMPLETES "CONTRACT FOR

EXCELLENCE"MONITORING; VAST MAJORITY OF DISTRICTS IMPLEMENTED

CONTRACT PROVISIONS, BUT EXCEPTIONS MUST BE CORRECTED

The State Education Department presented the findings of its monitoring

of the "Contract for Excellence" school districts to the Board of

Regents today. The Department reported that the vast majority of those

districts implemented their contract provisions, providing new and

expanded programs and services shown to improve student performance.

There are exceptions, however - particularly with regard to required

class size reductions - that must be corrected.

The 2007-08 State budget required, for the first time, that certain

school districts enter into "Contracts for Excellence" and spend a

portion of their Foundation Aid increase on certain allowable programs

and activities. Contract for Excellence school districts are required to

implement proven programs and activities primarily focused on students

with the greatest educational needs. These districts could use funds for

class size reduction; time on task; teacher/principal quality

initiatives; middle school/high school restructuring; and full day

pre-kindergarten/kindergarten and experimental programs. For the 2007-08

school-year, 55 school districts across the State - made up of over

1,500 schools with a total enrollment of 1.1 million students - were

required to adopt Contracts.

"The Regents insist that districts meet their Contract

obligations," said Regents Chancellor Robert M. Bennett. "It's

encouraging to see that most have substantially complied. We will make

certain that those who haven't will quickly come into compliance."

State Education Commissioner Richard Mills said, "The Legislature and

the Executive have given schools record amounts of State Aid to help

improve performance through proven methods, like class size reduction.

With that added funding comes added responsibility. The Department and I

will continue to work closely with Contract districts to ensure that

they meet their commitments."

To meet the Regents expectation that the terms of the approved

Contracts are being met, the Department conducted monitoring visits to

183 schools in Contract districts between March and May 2008. Since it

was not possible to conduct site-visits at all 1,500 schools impacted by

the Contracts for Excellence, the Department visited a sample of schools

in each district based on student performance. The more schools

identified as "in need of improvement" in a district, the more

schools the Department selected for monitoring.

Department monitoring visits assessed implementation in the following

areas:

* Implementation of the 2007-08 Contract as approved;

* Public comment process for 2007-08 Contracts;

* Established procedures for parent complaint;

* Improved student performance and expectation of achievement of

contract performance targets; and

* Public comment process for 2008-09 Contracts.

In general, Department monitors found that the majority of Contract

districts substantially implemented the Contract provisions as approved

by the Commissioner. In those districts where Department monitors had

concerns about implementation, detailed monitoring reports that included

findings and corrective action steps that need to be taken were provided

to them. And those districts must prepare a corrective action plan to

correct deficiencies within 30 days.

New York City Class Size Reduction

In its Contract, the New York City Department of Education (NYCDOE) was

required to reduce the average class size in its public schools, as part

of a broad, five-year class size reduction plan. NYCDOE substantially

increased the number of classroom teachers, by 1,892, and made progress

toward achievement of the citywide targets they established. However,

they did not fully achieve the 2007-08 school-year citywide class size

targets the NYCDOE established in their plan.

Grade Level Baseline 06-07

(October 2006) C4E Target from approved November 2007 Plan 2008

Interim NYC DOE Report Preliminary Citywide Reported Change

K-3 21.0 20.7 20.9 -0.1

4-8 25.6 24.8 25.1 -0.5

9-12 28.3 27.7 27.8 -0.5

NYCDOE made progress toward achieving its 2007-08 school-year pupil to

teacher ratio targets. As permitted by law, much of the New York

City's class size funding was used to reduce pupil-teacher ratios

rather than reduce official class sizes.

Overall, 53.9% of New York City schools reported that either class size

or pupil-to-teacher ratio increased in 2007-08. In contrast, 46.1% of

schools reported decreases in both class size and pupil-to-teacher

ratio.

NYCDOE will be required to improve implementation of the second year of

its class size plan. And based upon the Department's findings, certain

actions have already been taken by NYCDOE, including:

1. For 2008-09, the timing of funding designations and Contract for

Excellence allocations has already allowed class size planning to occur

when it is more likely to impact system and school-level resource

allocations.

2. The NYCDOE also reports that its other school-level planning

efforts, including the Comprehensive Education Plan (CEP) process and

School Support Organizations technical assistance programs, have been

aligned with class size reduction planning efforts, making it more

likely and easier for schools to achieve reductions.

Beyond these changes, the Department is also requiring that the

following actions be taken by the NYCDOE, among others:

1. NYCDOE must provide evidence of how Contract funds were used

appropriately to support class size reduction in schools in the 70

schools that received $100,000 or more in Contract funding but in which

class sizes and pupil-teacher ratios increased. In addition, all

Contract districts, including New York City, are required to submit

certified audit reports that show that systems are in place to

separately track receipt and spending of Contract for Excellence funding

for purposes of assessing that contract funding is targeted to schools

consistent with the approved Contract and that the increase in total

foundation aid and supplemental improvement plan grants have been used

to supplement and not supplant funds allocated by the district in the

previous year.

2. NYCDOE must provide SED with class size and pupil-to-teacher

targets for each school and a detailed description of how many

additional classrooms are to be created in school year 2008-09 under the

Class Size Reduction Option for each school, including the grades,

subjects and/or special populations that are targeted for reduced

teacher/student ratios for 2008-09.

NYCDOE's 2008-2009 class size reduction plan will be approved only

after all required actions have been taken. To receive approval, NYCDOE

must demonstrate that the elements of its plan will result in NYCDOE

achieving its 2008-2009 average class size and pupil-to-teacher ratio

targets.

The Commissioner's Class Size Panel will make recommendations on

future class size targets and provide guidance on NYCDOE's five year

plan. The panel will also recommend methodologies that can be used

statewide to calculate class sizes and pupil-to-teacher ratios. The

Commissioner then must set class size targets and pupil-to-teacher ratio

targets.

Next Steps for all Contract for Excellence Districts Statewide

The Department is using what we learned in the first-year

of Contract for Excellence implementation and monitoring to inform the

approval process for the 2008-09 Contracts. Building upon that

knowledge, the Department will, among other things, continue to meet

with Contract districts, provide technical assistance, and review final

monitoring reports provided by districts; review New York City's class

size data and detailed year-end expenditure reports; provide the Regents

with analyses of broad trends in student performance in C4E districts,

once a full set of test results are available; and report to the Regents

on the degree to which schools were successful in meeting performance

targets. Additionally, the Department is discussing potential

consequences in the event that districts do not carry out the terms of

their Contracts and/or fail to follow-through on corrective actions

The Regents Monitoring Report as well as several supporting documents

are attached