VPerspective
Closing in on class size
Mar 1, 2007 3:24 PM
Imagine your class or classes had five, six or even 10 fewer students. Or if you had 120 students a day instead of 170. Think of what you could do!
For example (speaking from my own experience), how that lesson on whether America should have unleashed nuclear warfare to end World War II could become a real debate engaging every student. How you could circulate around the room when you do group work and get to every group, and even give kids one-on-one help. How you could keep in touch with all your students’ parents, not just do triage. How you could spend more time developing lessons, and less time on paperwork. How you could read each term paper or homework assignment thoroughly and write all the comments it warranted. How the kids wouldn’t have to wait their turn at the computer. Or be constantly distracted by some commotion in the room.
I’ll bet you can think of a much longer list than I have space for here. But the bottom line is that every classroom teacher I know would find a way to translate smaller class sizes into bigger educational opportunities for children.
The end of a 40-year quest?
Reducing class size has been a UFT goal since the union’s inception. For more than 40 years, beginning with the More Effective Schools program in 1964, all our attempts to improve schools for the benefit of children have featured smaller classes as a central requirement
Today, because of the dogged efforts of thousands of UFT members, parents, civic organizations and other concerned citizens — and despite repeated attempts by city and school officials to stop us — we are closer than ever to a major class-size breakthrough.
It began in 2003 with a broad-based coalition named New Yorkers for Smaller Classes, that included the UFT, the Chancellor’s Parent Advisory Council (C-PAC), the Hispanic Federation, NAACP, Class Size Matters and many other civic, ethnic and community organizations. We came together as a decision in the Campaign for Fiscal Equity lawsuit approached and it became clear that the DOE, left to its own devices, would not invest the lawsuit’s proceeds to lower class size. To turn this around, we tried every strategy in our advocacy toolkit:
- At first we tried the power of persuasion, arguing at every hearing and public forum about the primacy of first, qualified teachers and then lower class size in school reform. Polls showed we convinced most New Yorkers. However, although the city agreed about teacher quality, it was not so sanguine about class size, and it submitted a plan to the court that used only about 2 percent of the anticipated funds for class-size reduction.
- So we tried the power of the ballot, collecting more than 100,000 petition signatures, not once but twice — and both times the city went to court to prevent voters from considering our referendum.
- Then, with a new governor who shared many of our goals, we called on the power of the purse. While Gov. Spitzer did recommend class-size reduction as one of a handful of reforms that CFE money ought to support, he didn’t earmark specific funds for that purpose, leaving the decision for New York City in the hands of the very people who had opposed the idea all along.
- That’s why we unleashed the power of the people. Parents and educators sent more than 20,000 faxes to legislators and, in groups of 10 to 20, personally visited virtually every one of the city’s 92 state legislators, to let them know how strongly we felt that smaller classes were the first prerequisite of better schools. (I hear that at those meetings several legislators greeted their constituent-activists with a plea to “please, please, stop the faxes. I agree with you,” they said, “but I need my fax machine back.”)
And that’s what led to last week’s introduction of a bill in Albany, the Class Size Reduction Act, sponsored by freshman Assemblyman Rory Lancman of Queens and Assembly Education Chair Cathy Nolan and co-sponsored by about 50 of their colleagues. It would require that at least 25 percent of city CFE funds (about a billion dollars) be used to lower class sizes so that in four years they are no more than 105 percent of grade averages in the rest of the state. (See coverage of Lancman’s press conference and my testimony on the governor’s proposed budget on page 2.)
What would reaching that goal mean? Here are some comparisons from the upper grades:
As you can see, in some classes the reductions could be in the range of five to 12 students.
Even before this, through collective bargaining, grievances, legislation and city, state and federal budgets, our 40-year quest for smaller classes had yielded several important gains. For example, based on the Tennessee STAR study we successfully advocated for funding from every government level, which brought class sizes in grades K to 3 down, but not nearly to where they should be. We negotiated contract grievance processes that stopped schools from repeatedly using the lack-of-space argument to justify oversized classes and expedited these grievances so they would no longer be heard so late in the year as to render them irrelevant. The recent infusion of billions of dollars for school construction, that we and the mayor championed together, will ease the squeeze in many neighborhoods and create the funding and space to make lowering class-size feasible. But Gov. Spitzer’s willingness to fund CFE, if implemented to support class size reductions, has brought us closer than we’ve been in decades to the smaller class sizes we and our students need.
The prospects
But let’s not count our chickens yet. We are closer than ever, but the Lancman legislation is far from a shoo-in. There is still a huge battle ahead. March 13 is Albany Lobby Day and we have made CFE and lower class size the priorities.
The good news is that in addition to the Assembly support we have received a receptive audience in the state Senate as well. The bad news? The chancellor still opposes us.
If only he spent as much time thinking about how to help classroom educators do their job as he does focusing on how to hold them accountable, if he focused less on structure and more on instruction, if he actually listened to the people who know best what their kids need, then he would know that smaller classes — the one systemic reform New York City has never tried — is the best tool to give qualified teachers to help kids learn.
Do we want to …
… lower dropout rates?
… raise graduation rates?
… keep students engaged and focused?
… minimize class disruptions?
… maintain school safety?
… individualize instruction?
… communicate with parents?
The solution is clear, Joel. Reduce class size!
