| Printable Version

Letters 99
EPP September 1999 Letter on the State Class Size Reduction Initiative

September 23, 1999

The Hon. George E. Pataki
Governor of New York State
Executive Chamber, State Capitol
Albany, NY 12224

Dear Governor Pataki:

The Educational Priorities Panel is a coalition of 25 civic groups that have worked together since 1976 to monitor the impact of federal, state, and city funding on the quality of instruction and services to New York City’s public school students. We want to thank you for agreeing to restore state funding for class size reductions in the early grades as well as the expansion of pre-kindergarten programs for the 1999-2000 school year. Besides expressing our gratitude for the positive outcome of the protracted state budget negotiations, we are writing to urge you to assure that these programs receive multi-year funding, as originally intended. We have already been hearing from legislative staff that this year’s "concessions" will not be repeated. Below we state our reasons for concern, if these statements are true.

Fairness
New York State now has the most rigorous testing standards among all 50 states. Even children from affluent suburban school districts have evidenced difficulty in writing essays on the basis of passages read to them as part of the fourth grade test. Statewide, 52% of children tested attained scores that put them below grade level in language arts. In the five large cities of our state, on average, 67% of children tested below grade level. Higher concentrations of poverty and immigrant populations in these cities may be part of the explanation. In the big five school districts, on average, 15% of the students are English Language Learners and 82% of them qualify for free or reduced price lunch, in contrast to school districts in the rest of the state where comparable demographic profiles of students show that, on average, only 2% of students are English Language Learners and 36% qualify for free or reduced lunch. EPP believes that these disadvantages of urban students could be overcome if these students had a quality pre-kindergarten program and entered schools with class sizes similar to those of the rest of the state. In New York City, it is not unusual for kindergarten to third grade classes to be as large as 32 students. Is this fair to these young children? They are handicapped by their families’ circumstances, which may include a host of problems, including a struggle to learn the English language and very low family incomes. Must they also be handicapped by partisan budget squabbles in Albany?

We know that on the behalf of the state of New York, you and the Attorney General are mounting a vigorous defense of the state school funding system in the lawsuit brought by the Campaign for Fiscal Equity. As strong supporters of this lawsuit, we believe that the per-pupil funding level for New York City students, currently $1,500 below the average for the rest of the state, has a substantial negative impact on student achievement. In 1996, EPP calculated that if the city’s per-pupil funding levels were appropriate, there would be 13,000 more teachers in K to 12 classrooms in New York City public schools. With high testing standards in place now, the children of New York City and other urban school districts cannot wait until the eventual outcome of the CFE lawsuit. There is no benefit to the state, at least one that we can comprehend, of having two thirds of fourth graders in large cities function below grade level. Irrespective of the outcome of the lawsuit, the Panel believes that 4,657 teachers need to be hired in New York City over the next three years so that students get a good early start in their schools.

We have been told that one of the reasons that the class size reduction funding initiative has become embroiled in partisan regional politics is that it provides fewer benefits to most suburban and rural school districts because their class sizes are at or below 20 students in the K to 3 grades. EPP finds this explanation shocking. Shouldn’t all school children be guaranteed a good learning environment in the early grades? STAR was adopted with the full knowledge that it would provide far fewer benefits to urban taxpayers. Initial estimates show that only 20% of funds expended under this school property relief program have gone to New York City taxpayers. This program would not have passed the state legislature in 1997 without the balance provided by passage of the LADDER programs for class size reduction and pre-kindergarten children. Why now are these benefits for low-income urban children being offered on a one-year basis only, but tax relief for affluent homeowners is assured multi-year funding?

Disruption As
representatives of civic groups, we are dismayed by the lateness of state budget agreements both under your administration and that of Governor Cuomo. Our more substantive criticism is that New York stands out among all states in that annual education funding allocations are negotiated every year along regional lines and that school aid formulas are not allowed to be objective, but instead are fine tuned every year so as to arrive at negotiated targets. The Fiscal Year 2000 negotiations, however, hit an all time low. During the crucial spring months when school districts do their planning, contracting, and hiring for the next school year, funding for the expansion of pre-kindergarten programs and the initiation of smaller class size programs was in jeopardy. This was the first time in EPP’s collective memory that large-scale programs for the youngest students in the state were used as budget bargaining chips up until August.

The Educational Priorities Panel urges you to choose other strategic negotiating points with the legislature around the FY 2001 state budget. Because research has shown that the academic gains of students result from at least two years of continued attendance in smaller class sizes in the earliest grades, a one-year program is of little utility. Furthermore, uncertainty of continued funding may result in disruptive teacher layoffs or resignations as well as a reluctance by private sector providers to maintain their pre-kindergarten programs. Unless the objective is to continually harm the quality of early childhood education in urban school districts, we see no rationale for once again placing these LADDER programs on the budget chopping block in January.

Cost Effectiveness
State funding for class size reductions goes directly to the classroom for the direct benefit of children. In addition, the achievement gaps between children of different racial and socioeconomic groups has been reduced dramatically in states such as Texas, Wisconsin, and Tennessee and such cities as San Francisco by providing children in urban districts a similar instructional environment as children in suburban school districts. Researchers for the Tennessee Department of Education did a cost benefit analysis showing that there were substantial savings from reduced class sizes in the early grades resulting from lower rates of referrals to special education and grade retention. Now that New York City has adopted a large-scale grade retention policy and the state is in process of complying with the Congressional mandate of least restrictive environment for children with disabilities, small class sizes are critical to helping more children achieve academically and thus reducing future school district and state costs.

Across the nation, Republican and Democratic governors have either initiated these early grade reforms or been strong supporters. It is clear from press reports that Governor George W. Bush is one of these governors. A program that provides smaller class sizes in the early years of schooling when a smaller student-to-teacher ratio seems to have the most academic benefit is not a "Republican" or a "Democratic" program, it is an educational reform that works. We urge you to remove the funding for smaller class sizes and pre-K programs from partisan politics.

Sincerely,
Marilyn Braveman, Chairperson
Noreen Connell, Executive Director

CC
Mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani
Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver
Senate Majority Leader Joseph J. Bruno
Assembly Education Committee Chair Steven Sanders
Senate Education Committee Chair John R. Kuhl, Jr.
Assembly Ways & Means Committee Chair Herman D. Farrell, Jr.
Senate Finance Committee Chair Ronald R. Stafford

Printable Version