Coalition battles to preserve class size reduction

In response to proposals that threaten to increase class size in grades K-3 by as much as 25 percent, a diverse coalition of parents, teachers and community groups is rallying behind the message: "Small Classes Work: Don't Turn Back the Clock."

Californians for Smaller Class Sizes - consisting of more than 30 organizations and community groups, including CTA, the California State PTA, People for the American Way, the Congress of California Seniors, the Black American Political Association of California, and Madres Del Este De Los Angeles (Mothers of East Los Angeles) - is dedicated to preserving class size reduction and keeping education dollars in California classrooms.

Perhaps due to the huge public outcry and polls showing that more than 70 percent of voters view smaller classes favorably, class size reduction proponents have won the first couple of legislative rounds.

Earlier this year, the Legislature deleted a provision in a Special Session budget bill that would have immediately dismantled the state's historic class size reduction program. Another attempt was killed in the Assembly Budget Committee.

More recently, the Assembly Education Committee voted down SB 10X (Sher). At the same meeting, two other bills - AB 42 (Daucher) and AB 1129 (Goldberg) - were withdrawn and will see no further action this year.

But the Senate Education Committee has approved SB 556 (Sher) and sent it to the floor for a vote. And SB 837 (Alarcon) is expected to get a hearing soon.

Most of the bills call for K-3 class size "flexibility" - a euphemism for increasing the number of students in classrooms. CTA is opposed to all of the bills, including those still under consideration:

• SB 556 (Sher), which includes a school site average class size of 20 to 1 with a cap of 22.
• SB 837 (Alarcon), which, as currently written, would increase the class size ratio to 25 to 1.

The coalition objects to allowing school districts to place 22 to 25 students in K-3 classrooms and still receive money for 20 students. It's a 10 to 25 percent class size increase and a corresponding reduction in one-on-one time for teachers and students.

In addition, the state currently has the second most overcrowded classrooms in the nation. Eroding class size reduction would make it dead last.

And increasing class size in grades K-3 will turn back many of the gains that California teachers and students have been able to achieve.

Even small increases in class size can have a negative impact on student achievement. "In general, the addition of each student results in a decrease of approximately one point in the class average in all academic scores," says Alex Molnar, the principal investigator for Wisconsin's SAGE project.

CTA believes that the flexibility bills are misguided because they would not save the state a penny nor help it bridge the state budget deficit. Instead, districts would be allowed to keep the class size reduction money while squeezing ever more students into overcrowded classrooms. It would also mean less accountability for education dollars.

According to CTA analysts, the impact of changing regulations to permit an average class size of 20 and a cap of 22 would be that participating districts could accommodate students with about 6,000 fewer classes and 5,000 fewer teachers. While districts could save money by hiring fewer teachers, the state would face significantly higher costs from increased participation in the program. In short, "flexibility" legislation would be a gold mine for some districts at state expense.

Districts are threatening to withdraw from the class size reduction program altogether if they can't get the flexibility to add one or two students per class. But to make up for the loss of class size reduction funding, the average district would have to increase K-3 and ninth-grade class sizes by seven students each.

"Those who are attempting to undermine class size in the name of making the program more 'flexible' are simply looking to divert money and resources away from the classroom," asserts CTA President Wayne Johnson. "Flexibility is a slippery slope. If politicians start tinkering with the law, soon all class sizes will be back up to 35 or 40 students. And that will not provide our students with the education and individual attention that they deserve."

Administrators may claim they have no choice but to increase class sizes, but that is far from the truth, says CTA President-elect Barbara E. Kerr. If maintaining class size reduction were a priority, they could look at reserves. "Many districts have huge reserves - much more than they are required to have."

Districts could also consolidate administrative positions. "Every time a district starts a new program, they take a certain amount of money off the top to hire a coordinator. And then they hire an assistant. Class size reduction money should not pay for administrative expenses, because it is not a true cost to the program. Just because there are now three second grades rather than two is no reason to hire an extra site principal." It's the same number of students.

Class size reduction money from the state goes into a school's general fund and becomes "discretionary money" for administrators, who can use it any way they desire, Kerr says. That's the flexibility they want to preserve.

With the state reimbursement set at $906 per student, class size reduction can in some cases pay for itself. It's extra money the district gets on top of average daily attendance (ADA) funds per child.

Class size reduction was implemented in 1996, when CTA dared then Gov. Pete Wilson to use a large budget surplus to reduce class size. Wilson accepted the challenge, not because he was being magnanimous but because he saw it as a way to avoid putting the money on the salary schedule for teachers. Instead of phasing it in as CTA proposed, he implemented the program all at once.

The state allocated more than $200 million - $25,000 per classroom - to help cover facility costs for extra classrooms. The amount was increased to $40,000 per classroom in 1997. In addition, a portion of the Proposition 1A bond money was designated to help districts pay for facility needs related to reducing class size.

Funding also exists for class size reduction at the high school level. The Morgan-Hart Class Size Reduction Act of 1989 created incentives for grades 10-12. While the program ended in 1997-98, districts already participating can continue under a grandfather clause.

In 1998, the K-3 program was expanded to include ninth-grade English and at least one other ninth-grade course required for graduation - social studies, math or science. According to the California Department of Education, 896 schools in 342 districts are receiving $180 per participating student.

If state lawmakers change the law to a district-wide average, some schools would have smaller classes and some would have larger classes. CTA Vice President-elect David A. Sanchez fears that poor and minority children attending schools where there is already severe overcrowding will be more affected than children in wealthier areas.

"Class size reduction is extremely beneficial for English language learners (ELL)," says Sanchez. "ELL kids in smaller classrooms do better on standardized tests than those in larger classrooms. I'm worried that increasing class sizes will hurt the children who need help the most."

Some groups are demanding that the Legislature postpone any decision about increasing class sizes until parents and voters have a chance for input on the issue.

"Every public opinion survey shows that voters overwhelmingly support smaller class size," says Percy Pinkney, president of the Black American Political Association of California. "Lawmakers owe it to the voters and the children of California to have a full debate on this issue like any other educational policy decision."

"We know tough budget decisions must be made, but increasing class sizes when California already ranks 49th in the country in the number of students per teacher is the wrong solution," says California State PTA President Jan Harp Domene. "California parents know that smaller class sizes work - and will oppose any attempt to turn the clock back on class size reduction."