|
| Printable
Version
STATE FUNDING EQUITY
Winter 00/01 (v4#3)
Ghastly Graduation Rates in NYC
Will the CFE decision close the graduation gap?
Overwhelming evidence provided during the Campaign
for Fiscal Equity (CFE) v. State of New York trial showed that the current
funding system does not really address students educational needs,
and is more a reflection of political deal-making.
The dismal number of New York City students graduating
from high school in four years is astonishing, especially when compared
with the rest of New York State. Last year, when the Regents math exam
was optional, only 56 percent of NYC students that entered high school
in 1996 passed the Regents math test, according to the New York Times.
This school year, the exam is mandatory. The class that entered high school
in 1997 must pass both the English and math Regents to receive a diploma
in the spring.
CFE has argued that the state has imposed the
more stringent Regents Learning Standards without providing students with
the resources necessary to achieve those standards.
Academia has been analyzing New York States
efforts to implement high performance standards, as well. The number of
students scoring a 65 percent or better on the Regents exams has been
decreasing as the number of students taking the exams has been increasing
and "the strength of this negative relationship appears to be growing",
according to a recent study by Pennsylvania State University researchers
David Monk and Samid Hussain which analyzed test data from the 1991-92
to 1997-98 school years. The study also states that there are "large
inequities in both participation as well as performance results for schools
in the large cities of the state compared to others".
Justice Leland DeGrasse may make a determination
about possible remedies in his decision in the CFE lawsuit. If CFE wins,
the court would set broad guidelines for an adequate funding system. After
determining the cost of providing a sound basic education to every student,
the state would have to create new accountability measures to make sure
that funds for education are effectively and efficiently used.

Courtroom Closing: "More Than Adequate"?
In
late July, a standing-room-only crowd of nearly 300 people filled the
main courtroom to full capacity to hear closing arguments at the New York
State Supreme Court. Joseph Wayland, partner at Simpson Thacher &
Bartlett, and Michael A. Rebell, CFEs executive director and counsel,
made the closing arguments for CFE.
Wayland described in detail the "educational
triage" practiced in places like Brooklyns community school
district 13. At trial, District 13 Superintendent Dr. Lester Young detailed
the brutal choices he and other district leaders often must make in deciding
which students will benefit from the few resources and programs available
to help them succeed.
Wayland used charts and figures to graphically
illustrate a virtual "pyramid" of studentsa base of thousands
of ninth graders which dramatically shrinks by the year as fewer progress
towards graduation.
Wayland also stressed that such problems exist
systemwide, not in just a few schools or districts. In New York City,
only 50 percent of students graduate high school in four years; only another
10 percent gain a diploma within seven years. The citys schools,
he said, suffer from "grossly inadequate resources and unconscionable
outcomes."
Wayland also challenged the states position
that the skills needed to pass the Regents Competency Testswhich
are pegged at an eighth grade levelconstitute a sound basic education.
He summarized the testimony of Commissioner Richard Mills and other leading
national experts that New Yorks new, higher Regents Learning Standards
represent "a consensus on the minimal skills our students must have."
He urged the court not to adopt a lower standard for New Yorks children.
Wayland also blasted the states education
finance system as a "charade" and stressed that higher student
achievement would be impossible without badly needed resources. In fact,
he noted that Dr. John Murphy, a former Maryland superintendent who testified
for the state, had secured significant additional resources in his districts
to raise the achievement levels of disadvantaged students.
High school graduation turnaround will greatly
depend on the outcome of the trial. If the lawsuit is not successful,
the next Mayor will inherit a crisisless than half of the citys
students graduating from high school.
CFEs Remedy
In their
closing arguments, for the first time, CFE proposed a formal remedy for
New York States current school finance system. Rebell presented
an outline of CFEs remedial proposal. The proposal calls for a dramatic
and sweeping overhaul of the way New York State funds its schools. He
stressed the need for a systemwide emphasis on adequacy, including a clear
definition of a sound basic education (SBE) and a fair assessment of the
costs of providing a SBE.
Rebell noted the trend in recent state court decisions
toward defining adequacy and providing guidelines for adequate funding,
and he asked the court to take notice of those decisions. CFEs proposal
stresses the importance of new, effective accountability measures and
the need to make sure that a diverse range of citizens from parents, students
and teachers to school administrators, school board members and the general
public have a voice in how funds for education are spent.
The proposal asks the court to order the New York
State Legislature to significantly reform the states school finance
system or to create an entirely new one by September 1, 2001. CFE also
proposes that the state be required to file a report with the court on
March 1, 2001 to describe the steps being taken toward school finance
reform. While the court would set broad guidelines for an adequate funding
system, the Legislature, the State Education Department and other state
officials would determine the details.
The remedial proposal also closely ties the idea
of a sound basic education to the Regents Learning Standards. The proposal
suggests that if New York provides all students with the resources they
need to have a genuine chance at meeting the Learning Standards, the states
constitutional obligation to provide the opportunity for a SBE would be
satisfied.
Proposed Findings of Fact
Along
with its remedial proposal, a few days before the final arguments, CFE
submitted a brief containing proposed findings of fact and conclusions
of law in the seven-year-old case. This 1,200-page document, compiled
by a legal team of eight lawyers from Simpson Thacher & Bartlett and
three attorneys from CFEs staff, details the extensive evidence
presented over seven months of trial. The documents represent the most
exhaustive record ever compiled on urban education reform.
The brief forms an comprehensive record of not
only the most important cutting-edge research on the problems facing urban
education today, but realistic solutions to those problems from experts
across the nation whose work demonstrates that all children can learn
at high levels if provided with the necessary resources. Beyond its significance
in CFE v. State, this document will serve as a valuable resource for reformers
and policy makers for years to come.
The brief also outlines a proposed constitutional
standard for a sound basic education. During the trial a number of experts
testified about how to effectively prepare students to be civic participants,
voters and jurors, a measure of adequacy articulated by the Court of Appeals
in its 1995 preliminary ruling in the case.
The court also heard extensive testimony about
the importance of the Regents Learning Standards in providing students
with the skills that they need to obtain a SBE and succeed in competitive
employment in the 21st century. The CFE brief contains a detailed proposal
for a definition of a sound basic education that is based on this evidence
and also heavily influenced by the SBE definition developed through the
public engagement process.
Awaiting the Decision
A decision
in CFE v. State of New York is expected to be rendered this fall or early
winter. If presiding Supreme Court Justice Leland DeGrasse rules in favor
of CFE, the state Legislature would then be charged with creating a funding
formula or system that factors in the real cost of a sound basic education.
Only 50 percent of students in New York City graduate
from high school in four years, according to CFE testimony. Within the
next three years, all students in the state will have to pass five Regents
exams to graduate. The state has set the standards. Now, New York City
waits to see if the state will provide the resources necessary for students
to meet those standards.
|
The CFE Remedy
The CFE remedy proposal draws on a number
of sources: the extensive record in CFE v. State, reform experiences
in 19 other states, and principles for an adequate educational
system developed by the National Conference of State Legislatures.
Using this information, CFEs proposal sets out five basic
guidelines for a statewide system that will provide the opportunity
for a SBE to all students:
1. Provide clear and measurable educational
goals or objectives expected of students.
2. Identify the educational essentials
necessary to enable schools to provide all students the opportunity
to achieve the educational objectives.
3. Ensure that sufficient funding is made
available and used to provide the educational essentials and to
maintain conditions conducive to effective teaching and learning.
4. Identify and undertake additional actions
that are necessary to support the establishment and maintenance
in all schools of the conditions conducive to effective teaching
and learning.
5. Establish an effective accountability
system.
A key component of the CFE remedy is a proposal
that the state must "cost out" a sound basic educationin
other words determine, as objectively as possible, the actual
cost of providing an SBE to every student in the state according
to the educational essentials identified by the court.
|
Printable Version
Subscribe 

|