| Printable Version

Winter 2000 (v4#1)

CFE Update:
Fight for Fair School Funding Moves to Court

For the past few months, Room 228 at the State Supreme Courthouse has been the center of New York’s school funding debate. In that room, attorneys have been arguing Campaign for Fiscal Equity (CFE) v. State, the historic education finance case that could have dramatic effects on the way New York State pays for its schools.

In its suit, CFE charges that the current school finance system violates the state constitution because it denies thousands of students in New York City the opportunity for a "sound basic education." In a 1995 preliminary ruling in the case, New York’s highest court held that every child in the state is entitled to that opportunity. CFE also argues that the funding system has a disproportionately negative effect on the state’s minority children, 74% of whom attend New York City public schools, and therefore violates Title VI of the 1964 federal Civil Rights Act.

But any decision in CFE v. State will have profound implications everywhere in the state, so CFE and other advocacy groups are urging people across New York to stay informed about issues in the case and to show their support for a fair school funding remedy. That support became abundantly clear even before the trial began.

Rally for Fair School Funding
On the morning of October 12, the first day of trial, hundreds of New Yorkers gathered in front of the courthouse for a "Rally for Fair School Funding." The crowd, many of whom carried banners and wore buttons reading "Fair Funding, Better Schools," included parents, advocates and concerned citizens from the five boroughs and districts upstate.

No sooner had the rally begun than another group made a stirring appearance: parents and students who had marched the length of Manhattan to show their support. The marchers were led by Robert Jackson, a member of Community School Board 6 and the Chair of CFE’s Board of Directors. Six years ago, Mr. Jackson served as the driving force behind CFE’s legal challenge to New York’s education finance system, and he seemed exuberant at having that challenge finally heard.

"Today marks a time for justice," he told the cheering crowd. "And if I have to walk 100 miles to get educational justice for our children, then that’s what I’m going to do."

Mr. Jackson’s day started at 5:30 a.m., when he and his daughter Sumaya left their home in Washington Heights along with students from PS/IS 187, Councilman Guillermo Linares, other supporters, and two television news crews. Others joined the march as it proceeded down Broadway.

A number of prominent city and state officials lent their voices to the call for school funding reform. Speakers included City Council Speaker Peter Vallone, Public Advocate Mark Green, State Assemblywoman Barbara Clark, Manhattan Borough President C. Virginia Fields, Queens Borough President Claire Shulman, City Councilmembers Guillermo Linares and Bill Perkins, and Phil Rumore, President of the Buffalo Federation of Teachers. The rally was also co-sponsored by many citywide groups, including EPP and the Class Size Matters Campaign.

Standards Take Center Stage
Right from the start, standards has emerged as a pivotal issue in the case. In his opening statement, Joseph Wayland, partner at Simpson Thacher & Bartlett and co-counsel for CFE, stressed the importance of the new Regents Learning Standards, calling them "what we must minimally demand of our children if we are to properly prepare them for work, college and the responsibilities of citizenship."

This position was echoed by three prominent officials who took the stand during the first week of trial: Education Commissioner Richard Mills, former Commissioner Thomas Sobol, and Regents Chancellor Carl Hayden. All three agreed that virtually all students can meet the state’s new standards

–but only if more resources are made available to help students in high-needs areas achieve at higher levels. As to the significance of the standards, Commissioner Mills put it plainly: "It is of absolutely critical importance that all students have these skills."

Attorneys for the State of New York, however, have expressed a different view of the standards. In her opening argument, Assistant Attorney General Harriet Rosen described the new Learning Standards as "aspirational" and "optimally desirable" – in other words, a nice idea, but not a standard the state is legally obligated to fund. In essence, then, the state’s position seems to be that while students must pass Regents exams based on state standards in order to graduate high school, the state is not required to provide the resources students need to prepare them to pass the tests. Instead, the state’s attorneys argued that the state only has a responsibility to provide a "minimally adequate" education–a level, they maintain, that New York City students already receive.

Qualified Teachers: The Foundation of a Sound Basic Education
So far, the Court has heard compelling and often dramatic testimony about a range of related issues, including qualified teachers, which CFE sees as a cornerstone of a sound basic education. Hamilton Lankford, a professor at SUNY Albany, presented a groundbreaking study demonstrating that teachers in New York City are not nearly as qualified as those in the rest of the state. He also found that those students with the greatest educational needs are usually taught by the least-skilled teachers.

Another expert for the plaintiffs, Ronald Ferguson of Harvard, presented evidence of a direct link between highly qualified teachers, teacher salaries and higher student performance. He stated that while factors like poverty and parents’ education levels are often connected with low achievement, the effect of excellent teachers can be so strong that it compensates for these obstacles to success.

Dr. Linda Darling-Hammond, Professor at Stanford and Executive Director of the National Commission on Teaching and America’s Future, also discussed the qualifications teachers need to properly educate students, calling the number of uncertified teachers in New York City–14 %–"shockingly high."

Dr. Darling-Hammond also analyzed the skills students need to be able to vote and serve on a jury, skills that, in its 1995 preliminary ruling, the New York Court of Appeals emphasized as part of a "template" definition of a sound basic education. She noted that these responsibilities require the ability to reason, evaluate opinions and analyze various types of data, precisely the sort of skills that the Learning Standards help students develop.

Reducing Class Size: Proven Results
Another key issue arising in recent testimony has been reducing class sizes. Dr. Jeremy Finn of SUNY Buffalo described conditions in the city’s bulging classrooms. Finn’s data shows that more than half of K-3 students in New York City are in classes of more than 26 students; the statewide average is 21. Nearly 80% of 4th and 5th grade classes in the City have more than 26 students, as do 83% of classes in grades 6-8.

Dr. Finn also described the significant benefits of smaller classes, particularly in the early grades. He relied on the landmark STAR study in Tennessee, which demonstrated lasting gains for students

–particularly poor and minority students–placed in small classes from kindergarten through grade three. This testimony was bolstered by the statements of Dr. David Grissmer of the RAND Corporation. He presented striking evidence linking standards-based reforms, adequate resources, and dramatic improvements in the test scores of at-risk students.

"Where we have devoted additional resources," he said, "particularly to minority and disadvantaged children, we have gotten significant payoff in higher achievement." Dr. Grissmer also argued that targeting money to reduce class size in the elementary grades is the most effective way to improve student performance.

Still, state attorneys seem unwilling to admit that the city’s overcrowding is a problem. Assistant Attorney General Rosen argued in her opening statement that "the most crowded schools are often the successful schools," where parents choose the programs those schools offer. "Overcrowding," she argued, "is more a result of good education than a condition leading to inadequate education."

"The state’s claim is absurd," according to Leonie Haimson, chair of the Class Size Matters Campaign, which is comprised of parents from throughout the five boroughs. "Though classes in all New York City public schools are overly large–and extremely detrimental to the education of our children–the best performing schools are found mainly in districts 2 in Manhattan and 26 in Queens, where, not coincidentally, students are from the wealthiest backgrounds. The largest and most overcrowded classes," she continued, "are in districts 17 in Brooklyn, 24 and 27 in Queens, as well as many of the districts in the Bronx where immigration has been most rapid." Ms. Haimson maintains that "We don’t see classes of 25 or more in the rest of the state–and it is unfair that our children should be forced to receive a substandard education simply because they live in New York City."

To date, the trial has focused mainly on CFE’s arguments and evidence. Recently, the state began to mount its defense by calling their own expert witnesses. The case is expected to extend into April, with a decision expected sometime over the summer.

Are schools preparing students
Schools’ ability to prepare students for the workforce has also proven to be a contentious issue in the case. Recently, two witnesses for plaintiffs testified about preparing students for the world of work. Frederick Salerno, Chief Financial Officer for Bell Atlantic, discussed the increasing educational demands placed on his company’s employees and the difficulty of finding enough graduates of the New York City public schools who are ready for the workforce. Steven Farkas, Director of Research for Public Agenda, presented a survey of business leaders that shows a dramatic lack of confidence in the city’s schools and their graduates.

Remarkably, in both cases state attorneys objected to questions about preparing students for employment. They argued that the issue of whether schools are providing the skills students need to enter the workforce is not the standard for this case and is therefore "not relevant" to a sound basic education.

As CFE’s executive director Michael A. Rebell notes, the state’s position is in sharp contrast to the statements of participants in CFE’s public engagement process over the past few years. "Time and again, in our forums and conferences, people have stressed the importance of this issue," he says. "Many participants, in fact, have been adamant on this point, that our schools must prepare our children to sustain competitive employment in the contemporary economy. Many people see that as an essential part of what our schools must do." for the world of work?

Now You See It, Now You Don't: Children Lose In Three-Card Monte Game Of State Aid
Class Size Reduction Has Finally Come to NYC!
Gov's "School 2000" Falls Far Short
Ambitious Plans To Reform State Funding Of Schools Emerge In Albany
The Pluses and Minuses In The Different Plans
Fight For Fair School Funding Moves To Court
Printable Version

Subscribe