Testimony of Randi Weingarten before City Council Education Committee on the Failure to Comply with the Campaign for Fiscal Equity Lawsuit: Feb 13, 2006
Feb 13, 2006 10:39 AM
You know, a lot of people, probably even including a lot of friends of Mayor Bloomberg and Chancellor Klein, say that money doesn’t matter, that the problem is poor management. And they point to the strides the city school system has made under the leadership of two men who come out of the corporate structure and know how to manage large systems and get the most out of a buck. (If the system were more transparent, all of New York would know how much progress has, in fact, been made.)
I’d like to talk about just how much progress the city schools have made — at least from the vantage point of educators — and why we still need more resources. Like the chancellor and mayor, we too are delighted every time we see positive trends, and we always hail them as such. But we have also seen some warning signs:
· The Chancellor hailed the NAEP results (National Assessment of Educational Progress) for New York City as evidence of progress. But the report of those results notes that in 2005 the percent of students who performed at or above the NAEP basic or proficient level “was not significantly different from that in 2003.” And while the black-white test gap in fourth grade reading narrowed, this was partly the result of white students’ scores going down.· According to the MMR, English language learners testing out of ELL programs within 3 years was off sharply, to 55.9% from FY 04’s 72.5%.· The on-time graduation rate fell a point, to 53.2% from 54.3% last year, as did the 7-year graduation rate. And including special ed students, the 4-year rate is only 43.5%, according to figures just released by the State Ed Dept.· The number of SURR schools increased, to 40 from 35 in 03-04.· Class size is the second most important factor named by Justice DeGrasse in a sound basic education.
Ø Our class sizes are 15-30 percent larger than those in the rest of the state.
Ø Only 38% of our kindergarteners are in classes that meet the state goal of 20 or less.
Ø And, in our high schools, where students are preparing for tougher Regents standards, classes often average 50 percent larger than the rest of the state. For example: Sequential math I regents classes are 29 here vs. 20 in the rest of the state; Physics classes average 28 here vs 18 in the rest of the state.
Yet class size has decreased by only a single child, on average, during the past three years, while enrollment fell by 35,000 students. And the mayor , although he agreed in the contract to use CFE funds to lower class size, didn’t help when he had previously proposed to use just 2% of CFE funds to reduce class size — or by directing his law department to sue the New Yorkers for Smaller Classes Coalition to keep a measure to reduce class sizes using CFE funds off the 2006 ballot. We want to thank the Council for considering filing an amicus in this case; we would welcome your support.
· We call it universal Pre-K but in reality less than half of New York City’s 100,000 four-year-olds attend, and those only for half a day. Even corporate CEOs and national governors are urging that Pre-K be made a priority in all school districts. Yet pre-K enrollment has fallen, not risen (45,409 to 45,393), in the last year.
· The promise of the SAVE school-safety law remains an empty one. For example, there are no functioning, fully-staffed SAVE rooms in all of Manhattan. Students who have assaulted or threatened teachers often return to that same teacher’s classroom within hours. I just received an e-mail last night from a teacher at JHS 117 who was assaulted by a student who remains in her class.
· Every large high school in the city (but two) is filled beyond its official capacity. That crowding alone accounts for many of the incendiary encounters that plague our most dangerous schools.
Ø Only 204 new seats have been created so far this year, one-eighth of the rate last year, and down from 22,267 in fiscal 03.
Ø What’s more, there was a 15-point surge in the percentage of buildings rated in “fair” condition (fully 81.5% of all school buildings now) while those rated “fair to good” fell by nearly half.
The funding disparity in New York State between the have and have-not districts is morally outrageous. According to the Education Trust 2005 study, New York ranks # 1 in the nation for the greatest per pupil spending gaps between high and low poverty districts and #4 for gaps between high and low minority districts. Those gaps run $2,000 to $3,000. Now, Governor Pataki insists he is addressing CFE by increasing school aid, and the Education Trust concurs that between 1997 and 2003 spending gaps have narrowed. You know by how much? Eight dollars. Yes, you heard right: $8.00.
You know, I believed that Gov. Pataki was sincere four years ago when he disclaimed his own lawyers’ statements that an 8th grade education is good enough for our kids. But if he wanted to prove that he meant it, he just missed almost the last chance. Next to withdrawing his appeal of CFE, the executive budget would have been the perfect opportunity to demonstrate a commitment to giving our children the sound basic education they deserve and to which they are constitutionally entitled. At the very least, there should be an advance payment this year that is credited against the CFE award.
The state has a $2 billion surplus, which is funding more than a billion dollars in tax cuts for big business and another billion dollars between the STAR school tax relief program (of which NYC homeowners get virtually nothing) and new tax credits for people who send their children to private schools. That money could have gone a long way toward fulfilling the CFE court order for a $2.8 billion increase for this year.
Instead, of the $634 million in new state aid to education, only $64 million, about 10 percent, is slated for NYC.
Perhaps most disappointing of all, in the face of so little for public education, is the proposal for a $400 million tuition tax credit program.
We should help struggling parochial schools, and the way to do it is to adopt, in the context of a CFE solution, the recommendations made by the Attorney-General’s 2002 Advisory Committee on Non-Public Education, on which I sat. It suggests that state monies can be directed toward students in non-public schools for certain defined services, including academic intervention, computer hardware, teacher training and special education.
Let me say that I sat on that committee with people you might expect to have very different views from ours on this issue: Catherine Hickey, superintendent of the NY Archdiocese schools; The Rev. Floyd Flake, whose church runs a very large school in Queens; David Zweibel, who represented Agudath Israel of America, and others. Still, we found common ground in these proposals.
What I am afraid of now is that the unity we forged there will be destroyed by the governor’s proposal, just as it will pit parents against one another and divide communities. We should not allow that to happen.
If the governor really wanted to help parents defray education-related costs, then that ability should be made available to parents of all school-age children, whatever type of school they attend. Many public schools today require uniforms, for example. With art, music and other enrichments in the public schools drastically curtailed, parents must now pay for their children to receive this kind of instruction elsewhere. And have you seen the supply lists that elementary school parents must fill each September? Everything from crayons, scissors, compasses, calculators and portfolios to tissues, cleaning supplies and toilet paper. When I was a kid, those were part of the basic supplies provided in every classroom — or lavatory!
So how far would $400 million go to address those needs? Assuming that New York City residents receive 60 to 75 percent of that $400 million, what could our schools do with that money instead? Let me give you some examples.
· For $230 million, we could reduce class size in every grade, K-12, by two students. This would bring us closer, but still not at, the rest of state average. Or you could target those funds for even greater reductions in Regents classes where the disparities with the rest of the state are do unfair to our students.· For $300 million, we could provide full-day pre-K to every 4-year-old in the city. Right now, less than half the city’s 4-year-olds attend pre-K. For most working parents, a half-day program is inadequate and inconvenient.· For $171 million, we could double the number of School Security Officers. We could place a guard at every school entrance. We could have a substitute SSA pool, so schools don’t go unprotected or have to compromise security at another school when an agent is absent or pulled away. Or we could use some of that money to install and update security cameras and classroom communication systems. (Would you believe in this day and age, thousands of classroom teachers have no way of summoning help in an emergency?) · For $200 million we could create 2,500 new school seats each year on a pay-as-you-go basis. For instance, you could build two early grade schools, an elementary school and a high school with that money. You could reduce overcrowding, make room for smaller classes and give kids science labs and roofs and windows that don’t leak.· Or, for $168 million we could build and/or renovate science labs in 64 high schools. Add another $211 million and you could also put labs into 179 middle schools. Laboratory experience is mandated and part of the 8th grade science Regents exams, yet most middle schools don’t have the labs to provide that experience.It’s too bad the governor has other priorities. Our public school children could benefit so much from even from a share of the education tax credits.
So Councilman Jackson, thank you for holding this hearing, and we pledge to work with you and the rest of the Council to secure compliance with CFE before yet another generation of kids passes through our schools.
As you may know, the UFT is going to Albany on March 14 for our annual Lobby Day. We are delighted that parents and parent leaders are also going that day as well. We will make this case to our representatives in the assembly and senate. It is our top priority because both parents and teachers, like the members of this council, want the same thing: to give our kids the chance not just to dream their dreams but to achieve them.
