Why Bloomberg's attack on class size doesn't add up; my oped in the Washington Post (plus charts!)

Last month, Michael Bloomberg wrote an oped in Bloomberg News that was reprinted int the Washington Post and the NY Post, vociferously attacking the new NY class size law.  Below is a copy of my oped in today's  Washington Post AnswerSheet with a couple of charts and the image of a Michael Bloomberg campaign flyer added.  In this piece, I dispute Bloomberg's claims and analyze why he appears so passionately opposed to lowering class size, despite the fact that he campaigned for smaller classes when he first ran for Mayor.

Why a new attack on small class size doesn’t add up

Perspective by Valerie Strauss

Washington Post Staff writer

September 26, 2023 at 6:00 a.m. EDT

In 2014, I wrote this: “Every now and then someone in education policy (Arne Duncan) or education philanthropy (Bill Gates) .... will say something about why class size isn’t really very important because a great teacher can handle a boatload of kids.”

Well, some can do that, but anybody who has been in a classroom knows the virtues of classes that are smaller rather than larger even without the research that has been shown to bear that out.

Now the issue is back in the spotlight, this time in New York City, where a new state law requires the public school system — the largest in the country — to reduce class sizes over five years. Opponents of the law are pushing back, especially Mike Bloomberg, mayor of New York City from 2002 to 2013. He called for smaller class sizes in his first mayoral campaign but has now changed his mind.

In an op-ed in several publications, Bloomberg says students don’t need smaller classes but better schools — as if the two were entirely unrelated — and he ignores research, such as a 2014 review of major research that found class size matters a lot, especially for low-income and minority students.

This post, written by Leonie Haimson, looks at the issue, and Bloomberg’s position. Haimson is executive director of Class Size Matters, a nonprofit organization that advocates for smaller classes in New York City and across the nation as a key driver of education equity.

Class size matters a lot, research shows

By Leonie Haimson

The knives are out against the new class size law, overwhelmingly passed in the New York State Legislature in June 2022, requiring New York City schools to phase in smaller classes over five years, starting this school year. The law calls for class sizes in grades K-3 to be limited to no more than twenty students; 23 students in grades 4-8, and 25 in core high school classes, to be achieved by the end of the 2027 school year. The law was passed despite the opposition of the city’s Department of Education officials, who insist that it will be too expensive, and somehow inequitable, because, they say, the highest-need students already have small enough classes.

Most recently, Mike Bloomberg, the former mayor of New York City and an adviser to Mayor Eric Adams, published identical opinion pieces in three major outlets: Bloomberg News (which he owns), The Washington Post, and the New York Post, inveighing against the goal of lowering class sizes. His piece is clearly meant to sway opinion leaders and legislators to repeal the law, and because of his prominent position, some may listen without knowing about fundamental problems in his op-ed.

Class size reduction has been shown as an effective way to improve learning and engagement for all students, especially those who are disadvantaged, and thus is a key driver of education equity. The Institute of Education Sciences cites lowering class size as one of only four education interventions proven to work through rigorous evidence; and multiple studies show that it narrows the achievement or opportunity gap between income and racial groups.

Bloomberg claims that because of the initiative, “City officials say they’ll have to hire 17,700 new teachers by 2028.” Actually, the estimate from the New York City Department of Education (DOE) itself is far smaller. In their draft class size reduction plan, posted on July 21, DOE officials estimated that 9,000 more teachers would be required over five years. While it’s true that the Independent Budget Office estimated the figure cited by Bloomberg, this large disparity between the two figures appears to stem from the fact that, as the IBO pointed out, the DOE’s budget already includes 7,500 unfilled teaching positions, which schools have not been allowed to fill. While Bloomberg claims the cost will be $1.9 billion for staffing, the DOE’s own plan estimates $1.3 billion — and these costs could be considerably lower if they redeployed teachers who are currently assigned to out-of-classroom positions to the classroom to lower class size.

The legislature passed the new law in recognition that the city’s DOE is now receiving $1.6 billion in additional state aid to finally settle the Campaign for Fiscal Equity lawsuit launched more than 20 years ago. In that case, the state’s highest court found that, because of excessive class sizes, the city’s children were deprived of their constitutional right to a sound, basic education.

Yet since his election, Adams has repeatedly cut education spending, and now threatens to cut it even more, by another 15 percent. As a result of these cuts, class sizes increased last year and will likely be larger this year. Hiring enough teachers to meet the law’s requirements will be a challenge in any case, but it will be impossible to achieve if the administration’s repeated cuts and hiring freezes are implemented. Yet in the end, smaller classes would likely strengthen teacher quality by lowering teacher attrition rates, especially at our highest-need schools, as studies have shown.

In his op-ed, Bloomberg claims that creating the additional space necessary to lower class size will cost $35 billion, which is misleading. DOE did include this estimate in its original May 2023 draft class size plan. However following pushback by critics who pointed out that this figure bore no relation to reality, they deleted that inflated estimate in their more recent July class size plan. If DOE equalized or redistributed enrollment across schools, this would likely save billions of dollars in capital expenses. Right now, there are hundreds of underutilized public schools, sitting close by overcrowded schools that lack the space to lower class size.

Bloomberg, echoing an erroneous DOE claim that funds spent on lowering class size will not help the highest-need students, wrote: “Under the new mandate, only 38 percent of the highest-poverty schools would see class sizes shrink, compared to nearly 70 percent of medium- to low-poverty schools … it won’t help the students who need it most.”

Actually, only 8 percent of schools with the highest poverty levels (with 90 percent or more low-income students) fully complied with the class size caps last year, according to an analysis by Class Size Matters. Thus, 92 percent of these schools would see their class sizes shrink if DOE complied with the law, rather than the 38 percent that Bloomberg claims.

Moreover, by solely focusing on schools with 90 percent poverty levels or more, his claims are misleading. A piece in the education publication Chalkbeat attempted to make a similar argument, by using class size data provided by DOE that shows that 68 percent of classes in the highest-poverty schools met the class size limit. This is far different than Bloomberg’s claim that 68 percent of these schools are achieving the limits in all of their classes.

In addition, the class size data, analyzed in conjunction with DOE demographic data, shows that there are many more NYC public schools in the other two categories summarized by Chalkbeat, “Low-to-Mid Poverty” (schools with 0-75 percent low-income students) and “High Poverty” (schools with 75 percent to 90 percent low-income students), than those in their “Highest Poverty” category. Most importantly, these two categories of schools enroll a supermajority of our highest-needs students.

In fact, 79 percent of low-income students, 78 percent of Black students, 74 percent of Hispanic students, and 74 percent of English-language learners are enrolled in these other two categories of schools, while only 21 percent to 26 percent of these students are enrolled in the “Highest Poverty” category.

This further indicates that without a citywide mandate to lower class size, smaller classes would likely never reach most of our most disadvantaged students.

Indeed, the highest-needs students, including students of color, low-income students, and English-language learners, have been shown to gain twice the benefits from smaller classes in terms of higher achievement rates, more engagement, and eventual success in school and beyond, which is why class size reduction is one of very few education reforms proven to narrow the achievement or opportunity gap. Thus, by its very nature, lowering class size is a key driver of education equity.

There is also no guarantee that the smaller classes in our highest poverty schools will be sustained without a legal mandate to do so. In July, DOE officials omitted the promise in their May class size plan that schools that had already achieved the caps would continue to do so, as pointed out by a letter signed by over 230 advocates, parents, and teachers. In fact, we found that fewer of the schools in every category achieved the class size caps last year compared to the year before.

Only 69 schools citywide fully met the caps in the fall of 2022, compared to 89 in the fall of 2021, and the number of students enrolled in those schools declined from 18,248 to only 13,905, a decrease of nearly 25 percent. Fewer still will likely do so this year.

So given that the data does not back up his claims, why is Bloomberg so apparently enraged at the notion that public school students would be provided the opportunity to benefit from smaller classes.

Bloomberg campaign flyer

One should recall that when he first ran for mayor more than 20 years ago, Bloomberg himself promised to lower class size, especially in the early grades. His 2002 campaign kit put it this way: “Studies confirm one of the greatest detriments to learning is an overcrowded classroom … For students a loud packed classroom means greater chance of falling behind. For teachers, class overcrowding means a tougher time teaching & giving students attention they need.”

Yet class sizes increased sharply during the Bloomberg years, and by 2013, his last year in office, class sizes in the early grades in public schools had risen to the highest levels in 15 years. By that time, he had long renounced his earlier pledge, and had proclaimed in a 2011 speech that he would fire half the teachers and double class sizes if he could, and this would be a “good deal for the students.”

Bloomberg’s main educational legacy in New York City was a huge increase in the number of charter schools as a result of his decision to provide them free space in public school buildings, and his successful effort to persuade state legislators to raise the charter cap. During his three terms in office, the number of charter schools in the city exploded from 19 to 183.

Since leaving office, Bloomberg has continued to express his preference for charter schools, and has pledged $750 million for their further expansion in the city and beyond. A close reading of his op-ed suggests that one of the main reasons for his vehement opposition to the new law is because lowering class size may take classroom space in our public schools that, in his view, should be used instead for charter schools.

Indeed, he concludes the op-ed by saying “it would help if Democratic leaders were more supportive of high-quality public charter schools,” and goes on to rail against a recent lawsuit to block the Adams administration’s decision to co-locate two Success charter schools in public school buildings in Brooklyn and Queens — a lawsuit filed on the basis that it would diminish the space available to lower class size for existing public school students.

Of the $750 million Bloomberg pledged for charter expansion, $100 million was specifically earmarked for Success Academy. Regarding the lawsuit, launched by the teachers union along with parents and educators in the affected schools, Bloomberg writes, “It was an outrageous attack on children, and thankfully, it failed.”

Misleading people about the value of small classes to teachers and students as well as about class size data seems to be an attack on opportunities for New York City public school children, who deserve better. Class Size Matters hopes these efforts fail.

Bloomberg's education record; important for voters to know!

The Indypendent just published a piece I wrote, called Michael Bloomberg's Disastrous Public Education Legacy. For those of you who live outside NYC or don't send your kids to public schools, you may be unaware of how destructive and arrogant his policies really were.

If you are interested in learning more, you can check out this article on Bloomberg that Diane Ravitch and I co-authored in The Nation in 2013 when left office.  In 2010,  I  helped edit a whole book about the Bloomberg/Klein regime which you can find on Amazon or Lulu Press here.
Meanwhile, please watch this short video below by Darren Marelli, most of it shot at a press conference where community leaders and elected officials denounced Bloomberg's school closings in 2012.

Hilarious video of DeVos testimony on class size - with a more serious message lurking behing it

Check out hilarious clip below of Anthony Cody reacting to Betsy Devos testifying before the US House of Representatives on Wednesday that larger classes have benefits to students.  Anthony, who is a former teacher and a fellow board member of the Network for Public Education, got up at the crack of dawn to attend these hearings and we're glad he did.

Not to detract from the absurdity of her comments, I'd like to point out that individuals including Bill Gates and our Michael Bloomberg have made similar absurd claims.  In fact, Anthony Cody himself rebutted Bill Gates' damaging ideas on class size in the Washington Post.

When he was Education Secretary Arne Duncan also advised districts to increase class size, offering this likely fabricated example:

"In fact, teachers in Asia sometimes request larger class sizes because they think a broad distribution of students and skill levels can accelerate learning."

In a one-to-one meeting, I asked our former Schools Chancellor Farina to back her claims, oft-expressed in town hall meetings, that larger classes were good for children's social-emotional learning.  Of course, she never did because that research doesn't exist.

Right now in Ontario, the education minister Lisa Thompson has announced that their government intends to increase class sizes in high schools from 22 to 28 students per class.  As justification, she has maintained that this will make students "more resilient." 

That research doesn't exist either.  To the contrary,  there is abundant evidence to show that students' persistence, effort, engagement and self-esteem -- all linked to success in schools and later in life -- are significantly increased when class sizes are smaller.


What's the message here?  Though Betsy DeVos deserves ridicule, so should all the other class size deniers who are trying to force their wrong-headed views on other people's kids -- and in the process deny them a quality education.

Is Mayor de Blasio turning into Michael Bloomberg? and will our legislators heed the need to reform mayoral control?

On Friday, we learned that Elzora Cleveland was pressured by the Mayor's office to resign from the Panel for Educational Policy because she voted against a number of school closures and co-locations at the last PEP meeting on February 28.  On Sunday,  more details were reported in a NY Post article, in which I am quoted:

“I find it deeply disappointing that the mayor would break his promise to parents in this way,” said Leonie Haimson, a member of the PAC board. “This ensures there will be no checks and balances on his autocratic decision-making that affects so many families.”

By firing Elzora Cleveland, de Blasio is also breaking a promise he made when he first ran for mayor.  In his 2013 response to our NYC Kids PAC candidate survey,  his campaign wrote: "PEP members will have two-year fixed terms, which will ensure that PEP members who might disagree with Bill will maintain their membership." 

He also responded yes to the question, "having Board of Education members with set terms, who cannot be fired at will by the Mayor."

Yet de Blasio has broken so many of his campaign promises, as reported in the 2016 NYC Kids PAC report card.  He selected not one but two Chancellors through a highly secretive process, without any public input or parent feedback, contrary to his campaign pledge that would hold a "serious, serious public screening" rather than select one the way Bloomberg did who is "pushed down our throat."  Last month, he refused to even talk to  parent leaders who asked to meet with him about how they participate in the process.

Yesterday, Diane Ravitch asked on her blog, "Is Mayor de Blasio turning into Michael Bloomberg?"

Bloomberg and his Chancellor Joel Klein were rightfully criticized for being dismissive of parents, arrogant in their slash-and-burn school policies, and ignoring what rigorous research shows works to improve learning. Now with de Blasio's record of closing schools, refusing to reduce class size, firing PEP members, ignoring parent input, co-locating charters and generally refusing to collaborate with stakeholder groups, his educational policies are increasingly resembling those of his predecessor.  To some extent, this behavior is the predictable result of mayoral control out of control. As Lord Acton famously wrote, power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely.

Clearly mayoral control needs checks and balances, no matter who is sitting in that chair.  I hope our legislators will heed that reality.

Journey for Justice and "School choice" week; just whose choices are being respected??

Last week was “School choice” week.  The entire concept of “school choice week” was invented by Jeb Bush  to promote the expansion of charter and vouchers,  supposedly to allow for more parental choice in selecting their children's schools.  Meanwhile, it was just revealed that Bush's organization, Foundation for Excellence in Education (FEE), promotes the business of for-profit companies, including several that donate to the organization and at least one corporation in which Bush has stock.

The reality is that the corporate reformers pushing “school choice,” including Arne Duncan, Jeb Bush, Bill Gates, Michael Bloomberg and Michelle Rhee, are not interested in the real-life choices of parents;  but instead in privatization.

When thousands of parents repeatedly turn out across the country to oppose the closing of their neighborhood schools, are their choices listened to?  No, they are ignored, or else the people in charge, like Bloomberg, say that parents are too uneducated to understand the value of a good education.

When parents say that their first priority for their children’s schools is reducing class size, are their choices listened to?  No, instead, the same people who say they believe in parent choice vehemently oppose  lowering class size: Bill Gates insists that class size doesn’t matter, Michelle Rhee pushes for eliminating any caps on class sizes, and Bloomberg say he would double class sizes if he could.

When parents say their children are over-tested and they should be allowed to opt out, do the authorities listen?  No, instead they plan to subject them to even more frequent and longer tests.

Let’s all admit it; “school choice” is a myth,  meant not to give public school parents the choices they want for their children, but instead represent the choices of corporate raiders who want to give our public schools to private interests, like hostile takeover artists who took over companies in the 1970’s and 1980’s, in order to dismantle them and sell them off piece by piece.

Coincidentally during “School Choice” week, on Tuesday, as part of the "Journey for Justice" campaign, parents, students and activists from 18 districts all over the country traveled to DC, testified at the US Department of Education, and demanded a moratorium on the mass school closings that are occurring with the encouragement of the federal government, on the grounds that  their children’s civil rights were being violated.  See videos below by Jaisal Noor of The Real News of Tuesday's events. See also this week’s Village Voice, about the invasion of charter schools in Williamsburg, Brooklyn run by Eva Moskowitz and her husband, despite the vehement opposition of parents in that community.

Journey for Justice: Parents and Students from 18 Cities Demand Nationwide Moratorium on Schools Closings and demand US DOE investigate Civil rights violations

Part 2: Chicago Parent and Activist Jitu Brown at "Journey for Justice" Hearings in DC 

Part 3: New Orleans Parent and Activist Karran Harper Royal at "Journey for Justice" Hearing in DC 

Who is Bradley Tusk and why should we care?

On Sunday, there was a front page story about how Bradley Tusk is coordinating the campaign against Obama’s appointment of Chuck Hagel as US Secretary of Defense on the grounds that Hagel was anti-choice and anti-gay (apparently Hagel made an anti-gay comment in 1998).  Tusk’s campaign includes TV ads and sending mailers that push Sen. Schumer to oppose the nomination with the mysterious name of “Use your Mandate” as the return address. I’ve received two of these large glossy mailers in the last week.

Here is Tusk claiming that there is opposition to Hagel from liberals in Foreign Policy magazine:

"From the left, there's a lot of consternation about the Hagel nomination," said Bradley Tusk, former campaign manager for New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg and founder of Tusk Strategies, which is helping coordinate the campaign. "A lot of people worked hard to reelect the president, believe in the president, and don't feel like they raised money and knocked on doors to then have him nominate a defense secretary who is clearly is anti-gay and anti-choice. I think what you hear a lot from the progressive community is: Couldn't he find someone who is just as qualified on defense issues who doesn't have these other views that we find abhorrent?"

Though Tusk claims this campaign is being funded by progressive members of the gay community, LGBT groups have criticized Tusk for keeping his donors secret, and Rachel Maddow has suggested that it’s most likely funded by right wingers disguising themselves as liberal. The NYT article suggests that this campaign is really being financed by GOP forces allied with hawks on Israel and who may want to hand Obama a defeat.  According to the NY Times:

In an interview, Mr. Tusk would only identify its financiers as Democratic “gay and L.G.B.T. people who have been active in campaigns around the country.” Yet federal records show that Use Your Mandate uses Del Cielo Media, an arm of one of the most prominent Republican ad-buying firms in the country, Smart Media, with clients that have included the presidential campaigns of former Gov. Jon M. Huntsman Jr. of Utah and Senator John McCain of Arizona; the 2010 Senate campaign of Christine O’Donnell, who was known for positions against homosexuality, in Delaware; and, as it happens, the Emergency Committee for Israel. 

Who is Bradley Tusk and why is this relevant to NYC education?

Tusk is the former Lt. Governor and right hand man to former Governor of Illinois, Rod Blagojevich, who is now serving a 14 year sentence for corruption. Subsequently, Tusk became the manager of Bloomberg’s 2009 mayoral campaign, which spent $109 million and won by only 4.5  percentage points, after inundating NYC voters will hundreds of mailers like those being sent out about Hagel.  Tusk’s website also takes credit for running the campaign that lifted the cap on charters for DFER/ERN and the hedgefunders, and states that he now works for Michelle Rhee’s StudentFirst NY and Eva Moskowitz’s chain of Success Academy charters:

With StudentsFirst, led by Michelle Rhee, we have played an integral role in the first comprehensive attempt to pursue and implement education reform across the country. This includes launching full campaigns in target cities and states across the nation. With the Success Charter Network, Tusk Strategies has helped introduce high performing charter schools to new neighborhoods across New York City.

Tusk was also paid $1.5 million of $2 million of the Facebook money for “community engagement”, that was supposed to go towards improving Newark’s schools. [Community engagement with whom, one wonders.  Michael Bloomberg, Michelle Rhee and the hedge fund community?].

His website brags that he helped organize an education forum in October 2011 during the Presidential campaign,  with four GOP candidates, co-hosted by the College Board and Rupert Murdoch’s News Corporation:  “While all of the GOP candidates were invited to participate, only former House Speaker Newt Gingrich and former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum attended in person, with Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.) and Cain speaking via satellite.”  Who moderated?  None other than our former chancellor, Joel Klein.

As the mayoral campaign heats up, expect Tusk to engage in similar tricks, either openly or secretly on behalf of Bloomberg, Rhee, Eva and the charter lobby, to try to ensure they keep and enlarge their control of education policy and hold on real estate in NYC public school buildings.

DeWitt Clinton HS: another victim of the Bloomberg preference to close schools rather than allow them to improve

DeWitt Clinton High School

The Bloomberg administration has been defined by its determination to close as many schools as possible, and has shut more than a hundred so far, rather than make attempts to improve them. It is now threatening to close down DeWitt Clinton High School, one of the last remaining large schools in the Bronx, with a renowned history. Over its 115 years, its alumni have included 32 Oscar, Emmy and/or Tony Award winners, 11 Pulitzer Prize winners, 5 Olympic medalists, and 54 current or former members of the NY State Supreme Court. 

Just 13 years ago, Clinton was ranked among the top 100 high schools in the nation, according to U.S. News and World Report.  But then came the Gates-funded small schools initiative, as implemented by Bloomberg/Klein, which undermined all the large comprehensive high schools in the Bronx through overcrowding.  For at least the last six years, Clinton has been at 120 percent utilization, with nearly one thousand more students than it was designed to hold. 

Perhaps as a consequence of this overcrowding, many of its classes have 34 students or more -- far above the goals of 25 or less in the city's Contract for Excellence plan.  Moreover, in March, 2011, almost two years ago, a “joint intervention team” of the State Education Department and the city recommended changes in leadership: 

·         Assign new leadership with the capacity to clearly communicate and implement a plan for improving student achievement in ELA and mathematics, including ELLs and students with disabilities.  

·         Develop a new leadership team with a focus on improving instruction to include differentiated instruction and the infusion of higher level thinking skills into the instructional program for all students.

Yet nothing was done: not a reduction in class size to allow for differentiated instruction; not a lessening of overcrowding, and not a change in leadership. Despite all these problems, Clinton students exhibit relatively high rates of college readiness, a goal that the DOE claims to care about most. According to the recent Progress Reports, the school’s students average SAT scores of 422-437; a hundred points higher than the scores of the high school that DOE says is the best in the city.

In response to concerns expressed by State Commissioner King, the DOE promised last year to refrain from continuing to flood high-needs students in certain schools, which consultants to DOE had pointed out years ago relegated them to failure.  From Alan’s description, DOE does not seem to have followed through with its promise in the case of Clinton. 

It is obvious what should be done to improve a school: refrain from overcrowding it, do not overwhelm it with high numbers of at-risk students, reduce class size, and if this doesn’t work, replace the principal. Yet the DOE has taken none of these steps. One has to wonder if they purposefully want the school to fail so they can close it down. 

A community forum to help determine the fate of DeWitt Clinton will take place on Thursday December 6, 2012 from 6-8 in the auditorium. The school is located at 100 West Mosholu Parkway South, Bronx, NY 10468.  Here is Alan Ettman’s account; for more information, you can contact him at 917-613-7047, aettman@optonline.net.

The NYC Dept. of Education has included DeWitt Clinton HS in the Bronx on its recently released list of “failing schools”, which means that it may shut down Clinton – a school that is more than 100 years old - within the next year.  Clinton is one of a few large comprehensive high schools remaining in NYC; the others having been undermined then closed by the DOE.  This policy of closing schools rather than helping them is part of the effort of “reformers” to privatize public education.

There has been a systematic sabotage of large high schools by the Bloomberg administration.  After more than a decade in office there are more and more schools that, based on the Department of Education’s questionable “Progress Reports,” are slated to close.   We believe that schools do not fail, which is what education “reformers” claim; rather, it is policies that fail.

In 1999, U.S. News and World Report listed Clinton as one of the 96 outstanding schools in the country.  During the Bloomberg regime, the school has declined to a point where we now have received an “F” on the city’s dubious report card.

The story of our decline, like that of dozens of high schools in NYC, is a tale of bad policies, lack of support, and statistical calculations that favor newly created small schools over large comprehensive ones.  Over the past few years, we have watched as the city funneled high needs students into specific schools, and then closed those schools based on declining scores.  DeWitt Clinton is one of those schools which have been flooded with students who are known to be the most challenging to educate. 

Currently DeWitt Clinton has 748 students who are English Language Learners (ELLs), which is 19% of the total school population, and 556 Special Education students which accounts for 13% of the school.  (Many of the Bloomberg-created small schools have 400-500 students in the entire school.)  It should come as no surprise, then, that the number of Clinton students who graduate in four years is below the city average – the population of incoming students is simply a different caliber and requires extra services than those that we are being measured against. (However, the number of students who graduate in six years is 71.5%, which is higher than the city-wide average.) To those critics that say DeWitt Clinton is just a dropout factory, we say in response that it is the city’s policies that have created this dropout factory.

Other factors that are relevant include the fact that our per-pupil spending is lower than city-wide norms; the number of students whose families are considered poor is higher than the city average; and the number of students who have low scores, poor attendance and/or discipline issues in middle school is quite high.  For example, out of a current incoming class of 950 students, more than 100 were considered long term absents (LTAs) in 8^th grade and more than 100 failed a majority of their 8^th grade classes.  It is the current administration’s practice of closing schools based on assessments that do not take certain factors into account that are too heavy-handed and ignore the reality of the lives and environment of our students.  Indeed, there were a number of schools on the potential closing list from last year which have improved their performance and are no longer being considered for closure.  It would seem to us that this measure of closing our school – which is so rich with tradition and history – is drastic, when it has been proven that additional time, resources and investment can result in a school’s rebound and improvement. 

The Mayor has chosen his toughest battles for his final political year. With the potential closings of more high schools, we are witnessing Bloomberg touting his agenda of opening small schools (which have not been shown to be any more effective than the large schools) in one last ditch attempt to claim that his educational policies are successful, despite the concerns of the community, current students and education professionals.

Despite the factors described above, we are proud of our significant achievements.  DeWitt Clinton offers more than a dozen Advanced Placement classes, has a large number of highly engaging student  clubs (which faculty supervise without pay because of budget shortages), and approximately 30 athletic teams.  The number of students who attend public colleges and who earn at least 30 credits in their first two years is 61%, which virtually matches the NY State average of 61.5%.  Our students attend some of the best universities in the country – the honors program at DeWitt Clinton High School is still so highly regarded that college recruiters make it a point to recruit our students because of the quality education they have received.  These are the same students that continually demonstrate the fine teaching being practiced at Clinton, through AP scores that far exceed city and national averages.  Bronx middle schools continue to send their best and brightest to Clinton because we serve these gifted minority students. None of this is factored into the school report cards, but it is widely known in the Bronx education community.  There are simply too many good things happening here at Clinton for the city’s “solution” to be closure.

Many students do thrive in small schools; however, it is the large schools that offer a wide array of course offerings, extra-curricular activities and traditions.   It would be a shame to close the last comprehensive high school on the west side of the Bronx – and one of only a handful left in NYC.  We believe strongly that the tradition of our school extends beyond the current student population, teachers and administration – the institution of DeWitt Clinton is 115 years old, and we owe it to future generations to keep this rich tradition alive.   The list of our notable alumni is 38 pages long and includes such luminaries as James Baldwin, Richard Avedon, Ralph Lauren, Paddy Chayefsky, Countee Cullen, Avery Fisher, Irving Howe, Robert Klein, Stan Lee, Neil Simon, Burt Lancaster, Tracy Morgan, Charles Rangel, and many others.

There will be a public hearing to discuss the fate of our school on Thursday December 6 from 6 – 8 PM.  It is my hope that this event can be covered and that the story of the undermining of the NYC public school system be addressed. -- Alan Ettman