7/31/2019 Testimony on Blue Book 4.28.10

1/5

April 28, 2010

Testimony before the NY City Council Education Committee on reforming theblue book

Suggestions on how to improve Int. 0155-2010

Thank you, Chair Jackson, for holding these hearings, and thanks to the committee and

the Speaker for proposing this critical legislation to reform the Department of Educationsannual report on Enrollment, Capacity and Utilization, better known as the blue book.

I have studied this issue carefully over the last three years, as the co-chair of theManhattan Borough presidents task force on school overcrowding and the primaryauthor of the report A Better Capital Plan, written with the collaboration of theManhattan task force, the UFT, the Center for Arts Education, and other parent leaders.1

Why is this effort to provide more accurate school utilization figures so important?

Right now, the DOE inserts new schools and charters into buildings that it assumes areunderutilized, according to a controversial formula that few observers believe

accurately evaluates how much space actually exists in the building.

In fact, according to the principal survey that Emily Horowitz and I released in the fall of2008, half of all principals said that the capacity and utilization ratings were inaccurate,and underestimated the actual level of overcrowding at their schools.2

By siting new schools or programs in our existing overcrowded infrastructure, theadministration is creating worse conditions, leading to the loss of critical cluster roomsand specialized spaces, causing special education students to receive their services inhallways and in closets, and preventing any effort to systematically reduce class size.

1A Better Capital Plan,A Report by the Campaign for a Better Capital Plan, the Manhattan Task Force

on School Overcrowding, Class Size Matters, the United Federation of Teachers and The Center for Arts

Education, October 2008; posted at http://www.classsizematters.org/A_Better_Capital_Plan_final_final.pdf

2Emily Horowitz and Leonie Haimson, How Crowded Are Our Schools? New Results from a Survey of

NYC Public School Principals,October 3, 2008; posted athttp://www.classsizematters.org/principal_survey_report_10.08_final.pdf

1

http://www.classsizematters.org/A_Better_Capital_Plan_final_final.pdfhttp://www.classsizematters.org/principal_survey_report_10.08_final.pdfhttp://www.classsizematters.org/A_Better_Capital_Plan_final_final.pdfhttp://www.classsizematters.org/principal_survey_report_10.08_final.pdf

7/31/2019 Testimony on Blue Book 4.28.10

2/5

The most significant improvement this legislation will make is the requirement that thecitys state-mandated Contract for Excellence (C4E) class size goals be incorporatedinto the utilization formula. The current formula assumes target class sizes that are 20-22 percent larger in grades 4-12th than the city is supposed to achieve by the 2011-2012school year. (See chart A for grade by grade comparisons).

The state C4E regulations mandate that the citys capital plan and class size plan bealigned, so to the extent that the school capital plan is based on the citys estimate ofcurrent overcrowding, this will hopefully lead to a more realistic, aggressive plan forschool construction.3

The legislation also calls for a detailed set of check-lists to be included in theturnaround document that each principal fills out each year, with more informationprovided as to whether there is dedicated space for physical education, library, lunch,art, etc. Right now, according to DOE officials, they have no idea how many schoolslack gymnasiums, which is rather startling, given the crisis of obesity among ourchildren.

All this is critically important, but we strongly urge you to include additional provisions inthe legislation, so that the data on school utilization will more accurately reflect the actuallevel of overcrowding in our schools:

The number of students currently housed in annexes and trailers for eachschool should be reported, and assigned to the main building for thepurposes of calculating a schools utilization rate.

Believe it or not, there are schools with hundreds of students in trailers, and yet are stillbe listed as underutilized, because each trailer is assumed to have its own separatecapacity.

As one principal observed in our survey: My school occupies two buildings due toovercrowding in the main building. We have an annex which is one mile away from themain building and students are bussed there by yellow shuttle buses. There are 4

portable classrooms in the schoolyard, however due to the way that the DOE calculatesspace utilization, it does not deem my building as overcrowded.

The new turn-around document should be completed during a walk-through of the building, including the principal, the PA president, the UFTchapter leader, the School Leadership Team chair, and any other SLTmember who wants to participate.

3 See SEDs regulations (100.13(b)(1)(vi) for the requirement that the DOEs Five-Year Plan be

aligned with the capital plan for school construction. Yet during recent City Council hearings on theproposed amendment to the five year capital plan, when CM Fidler questioned SharonGreenberger, head of the School Construction Authority, what class size goals the capital plan wasdesigned to achieve, she responded: Its 20 for K through 3, 28 for middle school and 30 for 9through 12..... Yet these goals are 20-22% larger than the goals in their state-mandated class sizereduction plan. TRANSCRIPT OF THE MINUTES of the COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION,December 16, 2009, p. 61.

2

7/31/2019 Testimony on Blue Book 4.28.10

3/5

It was the strong consensus of our Taskforce that the entire school community should beinvolved in a rigorous space assessment, rather than have this left up to the principal orother school administrator to undertake in isolation. Each year, a Building Condition

Assessment Survey is completed through a comprehensive walk through at the schoollevel, including the principal, a representative from the SCA and the custodial staff.

A detailed space assessment is just as critical, and needs to involve all the criticalstakeholders. The completed document should be signed off by the principal, the PApresident, the SLT chair, and the UFT chapter leader. District Community EducationCouncil members should be invited to participate in school walk-throughs as well.

There should be a public appeals process if a school receives a utilizationor capacity rating that parents, teachers and/or the principal believes isinaccurate.

To ensure more reliable data, there needs to be a formal way for stakeholders tochallenge their school utilization figures, and for an independent arbitration be triggered,

involving the district CEC and/or the district leadership team in helping to resolve thedispute.

Right now, no one really understands and few agree with the figures that appear in theblue book, and yet there is no way to correct this data, or ensure that these figureshave been accurately computed from the arcane formula devised by DOE.

We know in many cases that DOE routinely releases inaccurate data, for example in itsclass size reports; and it is likely that this occurs in its utilization figures as well.

Finally, a commission or taskforce should be appointed to make furtherrefinements to the official utilization formula, to ensure it allows for

sufficient space for cluster rooms and other dedicated spaces for art,science, gym, and lunch; as well as adequate intervention rooms for theactual population of students needing such services.

Right now, the DOEs formula includes inadequate space for cluster rooms, andassumes no dedicated spaces for a library, art, science or other rooms in middle andhigh schools. As a result, there are many schools that have lost their libraries, artrooms, science and computer labs to classrooms and are still listed as underutilized.

The number of intervention rooms allotted each school is based on a theoretical averageof special education students, rather than the actual number of students needingservices at each school.

Many principals report using inadequate space for remediation or special educationservices:

From our principal survey: We are using closet space for speech, SETTS, and SPINS.

Another response: The classroom that we presently have our 12:1 is too small. It wasthe Deans office space that was for our SAVE Room detainees (total 8.) The studentsare sitting on top of each other.

3

7/31/2019 Testimony on Blue Book 4.28.10

4/5

Yet another: We lost our Science Lab and Art Studio. Most if not all of our AIS[Academic Intervention Services] Instruction is in our hallways and inappropriate officesin the Gym..

The taskforce should look at what figures should be adopted for assumed roomoccupancy rates, with those currently assumed in the blue book formula very high.

The taskforce should also consider whether a different formula should be adopted incases where a school building is shared by multiple programs or schools.

This taskforce should be composed of representatives from the DOE, the CSA (theprincipals union), the UFT, advocacy groups and parent leaders, and should report backto the City Council within a year with specific recommendations.

In short, though this legislation is a good start, we need a better bill, that ensures that inthe future, students are provided with a well-rounded education, with sufficient space forart, science and gym, lunch at a reasonable time, appropriate class sizes, and nochildren forced to receive their mandated services in hallways and in closets, as somany are now.

Finally, a few words about the resolutions submitted regarding the SchoolTransformation Zone:

The concept is a good one, and echoes the model of the Chancellors District underRudy Crew, which provided smaller classes, a longer day and other reforms topersistently low-performing schools. Yet I believe that the issue of class size should begiven greater prominence in this resolution; as smaller classes are essential to improvelearning opportunities in our low-performing schools. The average class sizes in ourfailing schools remain far above the average class sizes in rest of the state, while theyshould be even smaller.

Indeed, simply extending the school day for students who are already disengaged ordisaffected without transforming the conditions under which they learn and improving thequality of the feedback they receive in their existing classes is not likely to lead tosignificant improvements; especially for the high-needs students who need help themost.

Current conditions in many of our low-performing schools are so alienating, with classsizes at 30 or more, that students do not attend classes for the full number of periodsthey are currently assigned; and they would be unlikely to attend even more classes ifthe school day was lengthened.

In short, the idea of a transformation zone is a good one, but a necessary ingredient inconnecting kids more strongly to the act of learning is to give them smaller classes.

Thank you for your attention to this issue.

4

7/31/2019 Testimony on Blue Book 4.28.10

5/5

Chart A

Grades

UFTContract

limits

historicalclass

sizes in

"bluebook"

targetclasssizes

in"bluebook"

Five-YearPlanClass

Sizegoals by

2012

Kindergarten 25 25 20 19.9

1-3 grades 28 25 20 19.9

4-5 (Title 1Schools)

32 25 20 22.9

4-5 (Non-Title 1)

32 31 28 22.9

6-8 (Title 1Schools)

30 28 28 22.9

6-8 (Non-Title 1)

33 30 28 22.9

9-12 (coreclasses)

34 34 30 24.5

5