lessons from cfe
TRANSCRIPT
-
7/30/2019 Lessons from CFE
1/22
Presentation on CFE
class on Urban Education Reform
Princeton UniversityNovember 27, 2012
Leonie Haimson, Class Size Matters
http://www.classsizematters.org/mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]://www.classsizematters.org/ -
7/30/2019 Lessons from CFE
2/22
Campaign for Fiscal Equity lawsuit In 1993, group of parents & education advocates concerned about inadequate
state funding to NYC schools filed lawsuit, CFE vs. state of NY.
In 1995, Court of Appeals, New York's highest court, ruled that the NYSconstitution requires that state offer all children the opportunity for a "soundbasic education."
In 1999, the case went before State Supreme Court Justice Leland DeGrasse; in2001 he ruled that school funding system was unconstitutional based on trialevidence.
Gov. Pataki appealed decision and in 2002, the Appellate Division reversed it;re-defining sound basic education as providing 8th or 9th grade skills level &
that existing funding is sufficient to achieve this.
In 2003, the Court of Appeals overturned Appellate ruling, rejecting 8th gradestandard, noting that a "high school education is now all but indispensable" toprepare students for employment and civic engagement.
-
7/30/2019 Lessons from CFE
3/22
CFE Part II
In 2004, Court appointed panel of three special referees to handle the state'snon-compliance & develop plan to resolve the funding inadequacies. Thereferees presented their report and recommendations on November 30, 2004.
On February 14, 2005, Justice DeGrasse affirmed panels recommendations,that NYC schools needed an additional $5.63 billion in operating aid and $9.2
billion for facilities if NYC students wd receive right to the opportunity for asound basic education.
On November 20, 2006, the Court of Appeals re-affirmed DeGrasse & thatstate constitution required that all NYS children have right to a "sound basiceducation" defined as "a meaningful high school education," & state hadresponsibility to increase funding for NYC public schools.
The ruling deferred to the state's executive and legislative branches todetermine the appropriate figure, establishing a minimum funding figure of$1.93 billion, adjusted for inflation.
-
7/30/2019 Lessons from CFE
4/22
What did Court say about class size
in the CFE case? CFE presented evidence about excessive class sizes in all grades in NYC schools
and how this led to low achievement and high dropout rates.
The Court of Appeals said that NYC class sizes were too large in all grades toprovide students their constitutional right to an adequate education.
Plaintiffs presented measurable proof, credited by the trial court, that NYCschools have excessive class sizes, and that class size affects learning.
Plaintiffs' evidence of the advantages of smaller class sizes supports theinference sufficiently to show a meaningful correlation between the largeclasses in City schools and the outputsof poor academic achievement andhigh dropout rates.
*T+ens of thousands of students are placed in overcrowded classrooms,taught by unqualified teachers, and provided with inadequate facilities andequipment. The number of children in these straits is large enough torepresent a systemic failure.
(Campaign for Fiscal Equity, Inc., et al. v. State of New York, et al., 100 N.Y.2d 893, 911-12 (2003)
(CFE II).
-
7/30/2019 Lessons from CFE
5/22
Korea
Chile
Japan
TurkeyBrazil
UKNYC
USAGermany
OECD
Czech
Poland
HungaryDenmark
Spain
Italy
Greece
Iceland15
20
25
30
35
Average elementary class size Source: OECD, 2006 For NYC, NYSED data
-
7/30/2019 Lessons from CFE
6/22
Korea
Japan
Brazil
Chile
Mexico
NYC
Greece
Germany
Spain
Poland
USA
Austria
FranceOECD
EU UK Italy
IrelandIceland
15
20
25
30
35
40
Average middle school class size
(lower secondary)
Source: OECD, 2006
For NYC, NYSED data
-
7/30/2019 Lessons from CFE
7/22
Class size in CFE costing out studies
Expert educators assembled to decide what class sizes were necessary toprovide an adequate education in NYC & other high needs districts.
These professional judgment panels concluded that much smallerclasses in all grades were required.
In NYC & other high-poverty districts, class size should be capped at 14students per class in grades K-5th .
In middle schools, class sizes capped at 22 students.
No more than 18 students per class in high schools.
These recommendations, along with other necessary programs andservices costed out by consultants.
Cost estimates provided the basis for the $5.6 billion in additional funds
that de Grasse originally ordered.
-
7/30/2019 Lessons from CFE
8/22
Tennessee STAR study In 1985, Tennessee sponsored large scale experimental study involving 6,500 students
in about 330 classrooms at approximately 80 schools.
Students randomly assigned to small class (13-17) , large classes (22-25) or large class
with teacher plus aide, in grades K-3.
Students randomly assigned to smaller classes did better in every way could bemeasured: higher test scores, better grades, better attendance, fewer held back, and
many fewer disciplinary problems.
In 4th, 6th, and 8th grades, students who had attended small classes in the early gradeswere significantly ahead of their peers in all subjects
In high school, they had higher graduation rates, better grades, and higher scores oncollege entrance exams; 4 years of smaller classes more than doubled odds of
graduation for poor students.
Also, these students had higher college graduation rates and were more likely to majorin STEM subjects.
Gains especially large for poor and minority students. Alan Krueger, economist atPrinceton, found that smaller classes in the early grades narrowed achievement gap byabout 38% & economic benefits outweighed costs two to one.
-
7/30/2019 Lessons from CFE
9/22
What we found in NYC first year of state-funded CSR program(source: Smaller is Better, Educational Priorities Panel)
Students appeared to be learning faster.
Teachers able to give individualized attention and small group instructionmore effectively.
Smaller classes allow more frequent evaluation and follow-up.
Heightened level of student participation and enthusiasm.
Sharp decline in disciplinary referrals.
Upsurge in teacher morale and parental involvement.
Reform focuses on prevention rather than remediation.
-
7/30/2019 Lessons from CFE
10/22
Why does reducing class size work?
Institute of Educ Sciences cites smaller classes as one of only four evidence-based strategies that rigorous research has shown to improve learning:
More teacher/student feedback including individualized attention andinstruction (students receiving more feedback from teacher).
More student/teacher feedback (allowing teachers to adjust style/strategiesfor each student.)
Less stereotyping on both sides; racial disparities between teacher/student nolonger matter.
Class size reduction top priority of parents on NYC Dept. of Education learningenvironment surveys, every year since its been given.
86% of NYC principals say they are unable to provide quality educationbecause of excessive class sizes.
-
7/30/2019 Lessons from CFE
11/22
CFE case settled
with 2007 Education Reform Act
On April 1, 2007, the NYS Legislature enacted the Education Budget and
Reform Act of 2007.
The law mandated commitment to raise annual state educational aid annually,
leading to $7 billion increase by the 2010-11 school year, with new
foundation formula to distribute aid to all districts (not just NYC) based onneed.
Requirements for public participation in the development, approval and
enforcement of the Contracts for Excellence (C4E), law's primary
accountability tool.
As part of its C4E plan, NYC required to develop and implement plan to reduce
class sizes in all grades.
In fall of 2007, state approved NYC plan to gradually reduce class size to
average of20 in K-3, 23 in 4th-8th grades, and 25 in core HS classes by 2011-
2012.
-
7/30/2019 Lessons from CFE
12/22
Yet despite citys promise, class sizes have risen sharply; bylast year, the final year of CSR plan increased to four students
above C4E goals in grades K-3
NYC class size data at http://schools.nyc.gov/AboutUs/data/classsize/classsize.htm
2120.7
20.520.3
20.119.9
21 20.9
21.4
22.1
22.9
23.9
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Baseline 2007-8 2008-9 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12
NYC class sizes K-3actuals vs. C4E goals
C4E goals
Citywide actual
-
7/30/2019 Lessons from CFE
13/22
24.9
23.2
22.4 22.1
21.721.6
21.321.1 21.0 20.9
21.4
22.1
22.9
23.9
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
K-3 Class sizes now LARGEST since 1998(data sources: IBO 1998-2005; DOE 2006-11)
-
7/30/2019 Lessons from CFE
14/22
Also in grades 4-8,
class sizes have increased
far above C4E goals
25.6
24.824.6
23.8
23.3
22.9
25.6
25.125.3
25.8
26.326.6
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
students
perclass
NYC class sizes 4th-8thactuals vs. C4e goals
C4E target
Citywide actual
-
7/30/2019 Lessons from CFE
15/22
Also in HS: average class sizes
have risen far above goals
25.6
26.1 26.2
26.627
26
25.7
25.2
24.8
24.5
23
23.5
24
24.5
25
25.5
26
26.5
27
27.5
2007-8 2008-9 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12
students
perclass
HS core class sizesactuals vs. C4E goals
Actual
C4E targets
-
7/30/2019 Lessons from CFE
16/22
What happened to the C4E program?
Despite receiving more than $3 billion in C4E funds and higher overallspending, city has cut school budgets about 14% since 2007.
Maintenance of effort provision in C4E law was ignored (city cut funding toschools when state increased spending, despite prohibition ofsupplanting).
Overcrowding in many schools worsened by growing enrollment &damaging co-locations.
C4E state funding never reached full level & flat-lined or slightly
decreased.
NYC DOE eliminated special programs designed to keep classes small(targeted K-3 class size funding that existed since 1999, agreement to capclass sizes in grades 1-3 to 28 or less, special ed initiative).
-
7/30/2019 Lessons from CFE
17/22
But even when state C4E spending increased;
class sizes grew !
0
258
645 645
531
21 20.9
21.4
22.1
22.9
18
18.5
19
19.5
20
20.5
21
21.5
22
22.5
23
23.5
$-
$100
$200
$300
$400
$500
$600
$700
2006-7 2007-2008 2008-9 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012
C4Espending(inmillions)
K-3averageclass size
C4E goals
-
7/30/2019 Lessons from CFE
18/22
Why? DOE had other priorities
Between 2002-11, while out-of-classroom positions grew bymore than 10 thousand, general ed classroom teachers haveshrunk by more than 6000.
Enrollment has also grown fast in NYC schools, especially inearly grades.
Spending on testing, contracts, consultants, and morebureaucrats have all risen sharply including nearly $1B spenton charter schools.
-
7/30/2019 Lessons from CFE
19/22
268100
269097
275323
277878
280941
12804
12619
12451
12109
11758
11400
11600
11800
12000
12200
12400
12600
12800
13000
265000
267000
269000
271000
273000
275000
277000
279000
281000
283000
285000
2007-2008 2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012
TotalStudents
Total Students
Total Sections
Since 2007, general education classes ingrades K-3 fell by more than 1000, as student
pop grew by nearly 13,000
-
7/30/2019 Lessons from CFE
20/22
But can NYC afford to reduce class size?
In 2009, NYC DOE estimated would cost $358 million per
year to achieve average C4E class size goals across the
city;
This represents less than 2% of DOEs overall budget.
Would cost $448 million per year in staffing to achieve
class size goals in ALL schools; plus more in capital costsfor school construction.
Last year and this , NYC due to receive more than $530
million in C4E funds.
-
7/30/2019 Lessons from CFE
21/22
Problems with public process
C4E hearings happen in fall, supposed to happen before money spent, sopublic can have input.
State Ed Dept. now pre-approves plan; but law says citys 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 borough hearings in NYC; hasnt occurred since 2008;
now DOE does informal presentations w/much information missing at
district parent councils; many on same date.
C4E parent complaint process complex and difficult for any non-attorney
to implement.
-
7/30/2019 Lessons from CFE
22/22
Lessons from NYC?
How money is spent is as important as extra funding.
Enforcement, compliance & accountability mechanisms
critical.
Do not rely on state govt.
Continuing court oversight should be required to ensureconstitutionally deficient conditions addressed.
Prisoners analogy