January 5, 2010

Fact sheet on city’s failure to reduce class size

In April 2007, the state approved new legislation to settle the Campaign for Fiscal Equity (CFE) lawsuit. Called
the Contracts for Excellence (C4E), this program has provided the city approximately $1.5 billion in additional
state funding over the last three years. In return, the city was supposed to spend these funds on approved
programs, including a plan to reduce class sizes in all grades.

This was necessary since the state’s highest court found that classes were too large in NYC schools to provide
students with their constitutional right to an adequate education. The C4E program was also supposed to
provide enhanced transparency and accountability, with comprehensive public input and reporting
requirements.

What happened

As part of its C4E plan, the state approved the city’s five-year class size reduction plan in November 2007.
This plan called for the city to reduce class to no more than 19.9 students per class on average in grades K-3
22.9 students per class in all other grades, to be achieved by 2011-2012.1 Later, this was amended to 24.5
students per class in core academic high school classes. As a result, $258 million in Contract for Excellence
funds were awarded the city, with $153 million of those funds specifically allotted towards creating smaller
classes. 2

In April 2008, a report commissioned by the UFT was released, showing that in nearly half of the elementary
and middle schools that had received funds meant for class size reduction, class sizes were not lowered, and
in 34 percent of these schools, class sizes increased. While average class sizes did decrease by a fractional
amount citywide – by one-tenth of a student in K-3 schools and six-tenths of a student in grades 4-8 – class
sizes were almost as likely to increase as to decrease in the highest needs schools.3

NYC Department of Education, “NEW YORK CITY FIVE YEAR CLASS-SIZE REDUCTION PLAN – Update – November 8, 2007,” at
http://eservices.nysed.gov/c4e-public/reports/2007/otherreports/NYCDOE%20CSRP%205YR_11%208%2007_FINAL.doc.
Later this plan was revised in January 27, 2009 to specify high school classes in core subjects to achieve average class sizes of 24.5 by
the 2011-12 school year. See DOE, Chart 5: FY09 C4E Class Size Baseline and Projections at
http://schools.nyc.gov/NR/rdonlyres/5C60C0BA-F6E4-456E-8762-
CAF02609E69E/66528/5FY09C4ESchoolListClassSizeprojectionsSummary.pdf
2
NYSED press release, “CONTRACTS FOR EXCELLENCE APPROVED FOR 55 SCHOOL DISTRICTS,” November 19, 2007.”
http://www.oms.nysed.gov/press/C4ERelease.htm

3
See United Federation of Teachers, “DOE flouts state class-size reduction mandates,” at
http://www.uft.org/news/issues/press/state-mandated_class_size/ and John Tapper, “Class Size and the Contract for
Excellence: Are we making progress in NYC’s public schools?” April 28, 2008;
http://www.uft.org/news/issues/press/contract_for_excellence.pdf. See also scatterplot graph at end of this document.

1
In September 2008, the State Education Department confirmed these findings, and concluded that the city had
failed to make any of its class size reduction goals. 4 More specifically, the State found that class size and/or
pupil-to-teacher ratio had increased in 54 percent of schools, and in seventy schools that received over nearly
$20 million in class size reduction funds, both class sizes and student/teacher ratio increased. The state also
said that the city would be “required to improve implementation of the second year of its class size plan.
(emphasis added.)” 5

In the summer of 2008, New York City submitted a proposal for $378 million in additional Contract for
Excellence funding to be spent during the 2008-9 school year over the previous year’s amount, with $146
million specifically earmarked for class size reduction. The C4E funding from the year before was to be
continued for the same purposes.

Yet rather than making the necessary improvements, the city’s compliance considerably worsened the
following school year, with the result being the largest increases in class size in ten years. Significant
increases occurred in all grades, except for fourth. The increases in grades K-3 were so large as to wipe out
nearly five years of gradual improvement.

Of the 765 schools that received nearly $150 million in class size reduction funding, 47 percent lowered class
size, two percent saw no change, and in 48 percent of these schools, class sizes increased. In other words,
schools that received class size reduction funding were more likely to raise class size than to lower it.6
(See the scatterplots in the appendix, showing this finding graphically by school.) 7

Why? Despite the infusion of millions of state funds meant to form new classes, there were 143 fewer classes
in grades K-3 and 183 fewer classes in grades 4-8th than the year before. 8 According to a recent analysis in
the New York Times, while the number of out-of-classroom positions has grown by over 10,000 in the city’s
public schools since 2002, the number of classroom teachers has shrunk by more than 1600.9

On September 9, 2009 the City Comptroller released a new audit, showing that the city had misused millions of
dollars in funds meant for smaller classes in its Early Grade class size reduction program. The DOE had
promised the state that this program would remain unchanged, as part of its Contract for Excellence Plan, and
that “the Department continues to be committed to reducing class size in early grades via the Early
Grade Class Size Reduction program." 10

4
See NY State Education Department, “State Education Department Complete Contracts for Excellence Monitoring; Vast Majority of
Districts Implemented Contract Provisions, but Exceptions Must be Corrected,” Sept. 15, 2008; also NYSED, “Contracts for
Excellence–Monitoring Report,” Sept. 8, 2008, http://www.oms.nysed.gov/press/C4EMonitoring.htm and
http://www.regents.nysed.gov/2008Meetings/September2008/0908emscd4.htm
5
SED also said that by October 15, 2008, NYC would have to “submit certified audit reports that show that systems are in place to
separately track receipt and spending of Contract for Excellence funding for purposes of assessing that contract funding is targeted to
schools consistent with the approved Contract and that the increase in total foundation aid and supplemental improvement plan grants
have been used to supplement and not supplant funds allocated by the district in the previous year.”

6
In Kindergarten, average class sizes grew larger than they were in 2003. More than 66,000 of K-3 students -- or 25 percent -- were
in classes of 25 students or more, an increase of more than 11,000 students compared to the previous year. There was also a 36
percent jump in the number of students in grades 1-3 in classes over 28. About 40 percent of middle school students, and about half of
high school students remained in classes of thirty students or more.
7

8
Indeed, despite nearly a billion dollars in additional funds provided the city to form additional classes to reduce class size since 2000,
at first through the state’s Early Grade Class Size Reduction program and then through the Contracts for Excellence, there has been a
decline of nearly 2,000 classes in grades K-8. See Table 3. These figures are derived from earlier analyses from the Independent
Budget Office and more recently, from NYC DOE figures. High school data is unavailable, since the Independent Budget Office
never reported on HS data and to this day, the data provided by DOE in their class size reports for high schools are unreliable.

9
NY Times, “With More Money, City Schools Added Jobs,” June 30, 2009.
2
Yet in its formal response to the audit, the Department of Education responded that the “Early grade class
size reduction program no longer exists.” 11

In the fall of 2009, class sizes again increased in all grades, by the largest amounts in eleven years, despite
continued funding from the state over the baseline in 2006-7 of $645.3 million, with about half of that
earmarked for class size reduction. Kindergarten class sizes are now larger than they have been at any time
since 1999-2000 school year, and class sizes in grades 1-3 are larger than at any time since 2001-2. (See
charts and table following.)

Clearly, the city has reneged on its promise to the state to reduce class size.

Conclusion: what’s wrong with what the DOE has done

From the beginning, the city failed to allocate any funds centrally towards reducing class size, and established
no specific class size targets at specific schools, except for a list of 75 priority schools. Even in these schools,
the DOE made no effort to reach its targets and failed to do so in more than half. 12 See, for example Beach
Channel HS, (chart follows) which the DOE now proposes to close – and where class sizes have increased
dramatically over the last two years, despite the city’s pledge to reduce them.

The DOE has also failed to provide the overall direction, support and oversight to ensure that these funds are
used in schools according to their purpose, and has refused to align its capital plan with its class size plan, as
required by law. Despite all the hundreds of millions meant for class size reduction, about 800 fewer classes
were provided this year than in 2007-8.

Charts follow, summarizing the city’s five year class size targets and the actual class sizes in our schools, as
well as the city’s utter failure over the last three years to use these funds according to law.

Smaller classes continue to be the top priority of parents, according to the DOE's own surveys. This is no
surprise, considering our students are crammed into the largest classes in the state. The DOE and the
Chancellor have committed fraud on NYC children by refusing to provide them with the smaller classes, that
the state's highest court said would be necessary for them to receive their constitutional right to an adequate
education. They are also violating the trust of taxpayers, by failing to use hundreds of millions of dollars for the
critical purpose they were intended.
Average class sizes K-8 over time, compared to city’s C4E goals

10
NYC DOE, “NEW YORK CITY FIVE YEAR CLASS-SIZE REDUCTION PLAN – Update – November 24, 2008”; p. 5, posted at
http://schools.nyc.gov/NR/rdonlyres/3F12A337-2FAF-492B-AEBB-59509284098A/0/NYCDOECSRP5YR_YR2_FINAL.pdf See
also NYC Comptroller, “Audit report on the Department of Education’s Administration of the Early grade class size reduction
program, fm09-113a, September 9, 2009. For more on this, see NYC Public School Parent blog, Class size audit: another broken
promise to our children, Sept. 11, 2009.
11
Daily News, “Space crunch keeps kids at home, bussed elsewhere, as packed classes begin in city,” Sept. 10, 2009; WNYC radio,
Comptroller Says DOE Didn't Use All Funds for Smaller Class Sizes,” Sept. 9. 2009.

12
See NYC DOE, Chart 6, Class Size Reduction Targets for 75 Low Performing Schools with Largest Class Size, Class Size
Reduction plan, updated January 27, 2009; posted at http://schools.nyc.gov/NR/rdonlyres/9C8F083F-8957-469D-94C4-
C5A5A724F6DF/0/NYCDOECSRP5YR_YR2_FINAL_Chart6.pdf

3
 Average class size grades K-3

22.5

22

21.5
children per class

21
C4E target
20.5
citywide actual
20

19.5

19

18.5

2
0
e

-8

-9

01

01
-1
lin

07

08

09

-2

-2
se

20

20

10

11
20
Ba

20

20

Class size grades 4-8

27
26
25
C4E target
24
citywide actual
23
22
21
1

2
0
e

-8

-9

01

01
-1
in

07

08
l

09

-2

-2
se

20

20

10

11
20
Ba

20

20

children per class

4
 HS average class size in core academic classes
.

27
26.5
26
25.5
c C4E targets
25
24.5 Actual
24
23.5
23
Baseline 2007-8 2008-9 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12

Beach Channel HS
general ed class sizes

30

28

26 actual
24 C4E targets

22

20
baseline 2007-8 2008-9 2009-2010

5
Percent of NYC students in very large classes over time

Percent Kindergarten students

in classes of 25 or more

40 34.1
27.9 27
30 22.8 23
21.5
17 19.1 2008
20 14 14
2009
10
0
Brook Man Queens Staten I Bronx

Percent K-8 students in classes 25 or more

90 85.4
80.8
80 75.9
70 58.9 61
60
2007
50
38.1 2008
40 30.3 33.5
26 2009
30
20
10
0
K 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th 6th 7th 8th

Percent of HS students in classes of 34 or more

30
24.8
25 23.4
21.6 21.2
20
15.8 16.5
15 14.5 2008
15
2009
10

0
English math science soc sci

6
 Class sizes K-3 by borough

24.0
23.0 C4E target
22.0 citywide actual
21.0
brooklyn
20.0
bronx
19.0
manhattan
18.0
queens

2
1
0
e

-8

-9

staten I.
01

01
-1
in

07

08
l

09

-2

-2
se

20

20

10

11
20
Ba

20

20

Average class size, grades K-8, 1998-2009.

(data from IBO 1998-2005; DOE 2006-2009)

1998- 1999- 2000- 2001- 2002- 2003- 2004- 2005- 2006-

9 00 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 2007-8 2008-9 2009-10
K 23.8 22.4 21.5 21.1 20.7 20.9 20.7 20.9 20.7 20.6 20.8 21.7
1 25.2 23.3 22.3 22.0 21.7 21.6 21.6 21.1 21.3 21.1 21.3 22
2 25.0 23.4 22.6 22.3 21.8 21.6 21.2 21.1 21.0 21.1 21.4 22.2
3 25.5 23.8 23.1 23.0 22.4 22.1 21.5 21.5 21.2 21 21.9 22.5
4 27.5 27.0 26.4 25.9 25.4 24.5 24.2 23.9 23.8 23.5 23.8 24.3
5 28.2 27.6 27.2 27.3 26.9 26.3 26 25.4 24.9 24.1 24.2 24.7
6 27.7 27.3 27.3 27.7 27.4 26.9 26.6 26.2 25.7 25.5 25.7 26
7 28.4 27.9 28.0 28.2 28.0 28.2 27.8 27.1 27.0 26.2 26.5 26.7
8 28.9 27.8 27.5 28.0 27.8 28.0 27.8 27.2 27.1 26.6 26.8 27.5
TOTAL 26.5 25.3 24.7 24.7 24.4 24.2 23.9 23.6 23.6 23.3 23.6 23.9

7
 Scatterplot by school,
showing the city’s failure to use the C4E funds appropriately.
Each dot represents one of the 347 schools that received C4E funding to reduce class sizes in 2008-9.
Only those schools that were funded to create additional classrooms are shown here. These graphs reveal that
schools that received these funds were just as likely to have increased as decreased class size.

Data sources: Class size averages from NYC DOE, Class Size Reports, posted at
http://schools.nyc.gov/AboutUs/data/classsize/classsize.htm

Annual CSR targets from DOE, Chart 5: FY09 C4E Class Size Baseline and Projections, Updated January 27, 2009 at
http://schools.nyc.gov/NR/rdonlyres/5C60C0BA-F6E4-456E-8762-
CAF02609E69E/66528/5FY09C4ESchoolListClassSizeprojectionsSummary.pdf

C4E spending allocations by school for 2008-9; posted at http://eservices.nysed.gov/c4e-public/actions/allNYC.do

75 priority schools for CSR including Beach Channel HS; see NYC DOE, Updated Five Year Class Size Reduction Plan,
dated November 24, 2008 , Chart 6:Class Size Reduction Targets for 75 Low Performing Schools with Largest Class
Size; posted at http://schools.nyc.gov/NR/rdonlyres/9C8F083F-8957-469D-94C4-
C5A5A724F6DF/0/NYCDOECSRP5YR_YR2_FINAL_Chart6.pdf