Time sensitive! Check out letter to DOE & SED on NYC's Contract for Excellence "plan" and send your own comments by Jan. 17!

Check out the letter below from the Education Law Center, Alliance for Quality Education and Class Size Matters on the inadequate DOE proposed Contract for Excellence plan for the current school year, which is not aligned with the law, as well as the faulty schedule of hearings and public comment which take place long after the funding has already been spent.  

Please send your own letter to DOE and the State officials in charge of approving or rejecting the plan no later than Jan. 17, by clicking here. 

If you prefer to send in your own comments separately, the DOE C4E proposed “plan” is posted here, and the address to send comments to is ContractsForExcellence@schools.nyc.gov

 _____

January 13, 2022

To the NYC Department of Education and NY State Education Department officials in charge of NYC’s proposed Contracts for Excellence plan for the 2021-2022 school year:

We have great concerns about DOE’s failure to allocate a single penny out of its targeted funds towards class size reduction in their proposed plan, even though in 2003, the State’s highest court in the Campaign for Fiscal Equity case said that class sizes in NYC schools were a systemic problem that robbed NYC students of their constitutional right to a sound, basic education.  Class size reduction is one of only a handful of reforms proven to provide real equity by narrowing the achievement/opportunity gap between racial and economic groups.  Smaller classes have been shown to result in higher test scores, better grades, more engaged students, and fewer disciplinary referrals – especially for those students who need help the most.  And yet class sizes in the NYC public schools have increased since the Court of Appeals issued this decision.

We also question why the DOE claims that they received no more C4E funds this year, given that NYC schools are receiving  $530 million in additional state foundation aid during SY 2021-22, increasing to $1.3 billion annually over next three years, to fulfill the goals of the CFE lawsuit. 

We oppose the fact that DOE has informed principals that if they choose to use these funds in the category of class size reduction, they can be used to maintain current class sizes or limit class size increases.  Maintaining and/or minimizing increases in class size would not provide any progress towards the smaller classes that NYC students need and deserve, according to the state’s highest court. 

Another persistent problem with the DOE’s plan is their insistence that they can use these funds to supplant or fill in holes created by the city’s own tax levy cuts, as stated in their proposed plan and their budget allocation memo, even though supplanting is specifically prohibited in the C4E law.  Again, it would make no sense to allow state funds to be used where the city itself has made budget cuts, which would also mean no progress or improvement in terms of providing equitable learning conditions for NYC students.  If the State is allowing the city to use these funds to supplant its own support for staffing or for other critical programs, the State should specify the language in the C4E law or the regulations which would allow this.

Finally, the timing of public hearings and comments occurs too late in the year to make any difference, and the state’s approval process of the proposed plan is meaningless since these funds have long been spent. The DOE must be required to hold hearings and schedule the public comment period in the spring, with the submission of the plan by July 1, to ensure that there is meaningful public input into the spending of these funds, and that the plan complies with the language and the intent of the C4E law. 

As it stands, year after year, the DOE has ignored the input of parents and teachers on this issue.  Every year that the DOE’s surveys have been administered, smaller classes have been the top priority of K12 parents when asked what changes they would like to see in their children’s schools. According to a UFT teacher survey, 99% NYC teachers responded that class size reduction would be an effective reform to improve NYC schools, far outstripping any other proposal.  And yet DOE refuses to follow through on a critical reform that we know for sure would lead to improved student outcomes, especially for children of color, English Language Learners, students with disabilities and those from low-income families.

 

Yours sincerely, 

 

Leonie Haimson, Executive Director, Class Size Matters

Wendy Lecker, Senior Attorney, Education Law Center

Marina Marcou-O'Malley, Policy Director, Alliance for Quality Education

Send in your comments by Sept. 3 concerning DOE's inadequate Contracts for Excellence plan!

The DOE has proposed a Contracts for Excellence spending plan that is completely inadequate to provide an equitable or adequate education to NYC kids -- contrary to the intent of the law, which was passed to fulfill the goals of the CFE lawsuit. 

Please make your voice heard by sending your own letter to DOE, with a copy to the Commissioner and your legislators, by clicking here. Deadline is Sept. 3. Or you can email your comments to ContractsForExcellence@schools.nyc.gov  

The DOE claims that the state has allocated no more funding to the program, though NYC is getting $538 million more in Foundation aid as a result of CFE. No funds in the plan are specifically targeted towards lowering class size, though this was a central issue that led the state's highest court to find NYC kids were deprived of their constitutional right to an adequate education. If principals choose to use some of these funds to hire teachers for that purpose, they have to pay 40% more than they do for other teachers, because they have to cover the costs of their pension and benefits from their own school budgets, whereas DOE usually covers these costs  centrally.

The following memo was sent by Class Size Matters, Education Law Center and Alliance for Quality Education to the Commissioner and the Regents Chancellor, explaining our deep concerns and profound objections to the DOE's totally inadequate proposal. Please send your own letter today!

Amanda Vender, parent and ENL teacher, explains in her C4E comments why putting extra teachers in the classroom is NOT as beneficial as reducing class size

The last borough hearing for the DOE's proposed Contract for Excellence's "plan" is tonight, Thursday,
August 5 at 6:30 PM at Isaac Newton Middle School for Math & Science, 260 Pleasant Avenue, New York, NY 10029, 2nd floor auditorium.  You can send in your comment via email as well to ContractsForExcellence@schools.nyc.gov.  

Below are comments sent in by Amanda Vender, Queens parent and ENL teacher, who points out from her professional experience how putting extra teachers in the classroom does not provide the same benefits as a smaller class size.  While the DOE's proposed plan allocates nearly $100 million to put extra teachers in a classroom for inclusion and NEST classes,  not a single penny is targeted specifically towards class size reduction.

To Whom It May Concern:

I am a public school ENL teacher and public school parent in Queens. I am concerned that our class sizes in NYC are 15-30% larger than classes in other parts of the state. That’s why I’m so pleased to know that we now have $530 million additional aid from the State to lower class size, concurrent with the CFE legal decision. I urge you to ensure these funds are used as they are intended, to lower class size.

As an ENL teacher who has taught both push-in and stand-alone classes, I can confirm what the research shows: having a second teacher in a room is nowhere near as good as a smaller class size. As you can imagine, only one teacher can speak to the whole class at a time. During that time, the second teacher can’t do much other than help direct students’ attention to the teacher speaking, or wait around. It is not a good use of our professionals’ time. During group work and independent work, both teachers can circulate in the room and offer support or work with targeted groups, but students’ ability to focus in a classroom of 30 students is much less than compared to a classroom of 15 or 20 students.

I teach high school students who are new immigrants and have interrupted formal education. (SIFE) A portion of our ninth graders have not been in school for several years. They have been out fishing or doing agricultural work full-time in their home country. They are not used to sitting at a desk and engaging with print text. While we have excellent curriculum resources provided by CUNY Grad Center and the NYS DOE to quickly develop these students’ literacy skills in English, we cannot achieve this without small class size.

My own children attend IS145, across the street from where we’re meeting tonight. I observe that class sizes there are always at the maximum, 30 students. 90% of students there are Latinx, 90% are low-income and many students are English Language Learners. The school is one of few middle schools in the area with a dual-language bilingual program. How can children learn a second or third language effectively in a class of 30 students, especially in a school that remains intensely segregated like IS145, where so many students speak Spanish at home? Students need exposure to English and opportunities to practice speaking that cannot be achieved in a class of 30 students. 

A large body of research confirms my statements. I urge you to use the funds to mandate smaller class size immediately.

Thank you,

Amanda Vender

Parent in District 30

ENL teacher in District 24

 

Testimony on the need to fully fund and provide more accountability with the Foundation funds owed NYC so that class sizes are (finally) reduced

Here is the testimony from Sarita Subramanian of the IBO which cites an Urban Institute study showing NY ranking second-to-last among 50 states because of how regressive its school funding is (including state and local.) Here is testimony from Michael Mulgrew of the UFT and Andy Pallotta of NYSUT.

Yesterday I spent most of the day at NY Senate hearings by the Education and Budget Committees on the Foundation aid formula for school funding, following a series of round table discussions that have been held throughout the state.

The Foundation aid formula which was established in 2007 but has never been fully implemented. NYC schools are owed either $1.1 billion or $1.4 billion from the state, according to different sources, as a result of the Campaign for Fiscal Equity court decision and the Contracts for Excellence law passed in 2007.  Statewide, the unmet need varies from about $3.4 billion to $4.2 billion according to whom you ask.  Some of the witnesses said there should be a two-year phase in, and others a three-year phase in of these amounts.

There were many experts in school finance, some who said the formula was so badly flawed it should be improved before funding it, and others who said we can't wait for this to happen.  They argued that our schools need more resources now because students are suffering, and can't wait.  They said that the state legislature and Governor need to fully fund the original formula and worry about tweaking the formula later.

The first witness was Lindsey Oates, the Chief Financial Officer of the NYC Department of Education  who began with a long account about how wonderfully our schools are doing, from rising graduation rates, more students taking SATs, more preK, yadda yadda yadda.  The thrust of her remarks would make any listener think that  our schools don't really need more funding at all.

When asked what they would do with the additional $1.1 billion, she echoed Carranza: all schools' Fair student funding would be brought up to 100% and then principals could do with the money what they want.  In the DOE experience, this usually meant primarily the hiring of more staff of one kind or another.   She said it would cost $750 million to bring all schools up to 100%, though a couple of years ago, the IBO estimated less than $500 million. [Update: DOE is now including pension and fringe costs

NYC Council Education Committee chair Mark Treyger was a far more effective witness in outlining the crying lack of counselors, social workers and teachers to provide reasonable class sizes, and argued that the need to fund these positions are "non-negotiable."

The results of a recent survey of School Superintendents throughout the state was released, reporting a sharp increase in the number of English Language learners and students diagnosed with disabilities who need more support, and a need in many districts to supply more mental health services to their students.

Sen. Robert Jackson, the lead plaintiff in the original CFE lawsuit, was vociferous about the fact that the state was in non-compliance with the court decision, and that the Legislature must take action in response.

Sen. John Liu was especially biting in his questions, and pointed out that it would be impossible to find the billions of dollars required unless the Governor Cuomo softened his opposition to allowing the state budget to increase by more than two percent in any year, even if more revenue is raised through a tax increase for the super wealthy.

Liu asked Michael Mulgrew, President of the UFT and Andy Pallotta of the state teacher's union NYSUT, “Will you stand with us and demand that he throw this ridiculously arbitrary 2 percent spending increase cap out the window?”  They nodded yes.

Sen. Shelley Mayer, the Committee chair, seemed most concerned with accountability compared with other legislators, and asked Michael Mulgrew how we could be sure that the additional funding would be well-spent.  He replied rather incongruously that NYC teachers needed new curriculum and training to properly implement the new standards.

I focused on the need to strengthen the accountability, enforcement and maintenance of effort provisions of the Contract for Excellence law, so that we could ensure that a significant portion of these funds be spent on lowering class size, especially in NYC. 

Class size was a central focus of the original lawsuit and the court decision that concluded that class sizes were too large to provide NYC students with their constitutional right to a sound, basic education.  And yet class sizes have risen even higher since that decision was rendered, especially in the early grades.  I included charts with the latest class size data from this fall.

I also pointed out that $2.1 billion was being diverted out of the DOE budget to charter schools, and while every other district in the district receives "transitional aid" to make up for some of the funding lost to charters, NYC does not.

My testimony is posted here and below.