Mixed Signal Sent as Spitzer Dodges a Teachers Event

In yesterday's email, I mentioned the teacher union's push to use a big chunk of the billions of new CFE dollars that will likely soon be flowing into NYC schools to reduce class size (read: hire lots more union members).  While reducing class size, at first glance, seems like motherhood and apple pie -- who could be opposed? -- the reality is that this is probably the single WORST way to improve student achievement because: a) it's EXTREMELY expensive -- we're talking BILLIONS of dollars; and b) it's very unlikely to improve student achievement and, in fact, may HARM the most vulnerable students.  (See the slides I sent out yesterday -- posted at http://www.tilsonfunds.com/Personal/Classsize&teacherpay.pdf -- see pages 5-7.)

 

HUH?!  This seems very counterintuitive, but it's really not when you think about it.  Here's an excerpt from the book, No Excuses, which explains perfectly what happened in California in the three years after the state passed a smaller class size law in 1996 (note that CA wasted $4 BILLION on this failed initiative):

“The small-class mandate in California forced the hiring of many teachers who were apparently ill-qualified, especially in schools where the need for strong instruction is greatest.  The sudden jump in the demand for teachers allowed those with better credentials – whether new or experienced – to move to schools in safer, more pleasant neighborhoods.  Reading scores rose only slightly and math scores actually declined in the most heavily black schools in the state…

 

The lack of academic progress should have been expected.  The smaller the average class, the more teachers a school needs, and the harder it may be to maintain teacher quality…

 

In their desperate search for additional staff, California’s high-minority, low-income schools evidently had no choice but to hire the weakest teachers in the pool.  The disappointing results would seem the logical consequence.”

Who benefited from this train wreck?  Only the teachers unions, who saw membership (and political power) soar. 

 

So it's no wonder that the NY union is pushing this so hard.  What's sad is how much traction they appear to be getting -- here's the latest evidence of it:

The Democratic Party's designated candidate for governor, Attorney General Eliot Spitzer, will be marking the first day of school by sending his running mate, state Senator David Paterson, to a United Federation of Teachers press conference calling on Mayor Bloomberg to shrink class sizes by hiring more teachers.

Mr. Paterson, who is running for lieutenant governor, will be lending his support to a high-profile campaign waged by the teachers union to pressure the city to set aside a chunk of its education budget for increasing the teacher workforce...

"I've been saying very clearly we're going to reduce class size," Mr. Spitzer told The New York Sun yesterday. "It's one of the critical ways to improve the educational quality that our kids receive."

For now, I'm choosing to believe that Spitzer (who has shown some real signs of being willing to champion school reform; for example, he's publicly supported lifting the charter cap) and Paterson (who has been a huge champion of charter schools and school reform -- a rarity among Democrats in the state legislature) are not knowingly supporting this for political reasons, but instead simply don't realize what a terrible idea this is.

 

We have to stop this!  However, the message here is NOT an anti-union or anti-teacher one.  In fact, I WANT teachers to get a big chunk of this new money, BUT it has to be done in a way that improves overall teacher quality.  Klein's office is exactly right here:

City education officials have expressed doubts about the benefits of smaller classes, arguing that students would be better off with higher quality teachers. Officials said they would rather spend additional funds stemming from the lawsuit on salary increases and signing bonuses for teachers assigned to less-desirable schools and who teach subject areas, such as math and science, where there is a shortage of educators.

Why stop there?  As part of a grand bargain with the union, why not introduce a system to measure teacher effectiveness and pay the most effective teachers A LOT more (and weed out the most ineffective teachers)?  I WANT a teacher to be paid $100,000 or more if, for example, it's a math teacher in a tough school who takes a group students at the beginning of the year, 20% of whom are at grade level, and takes them to 60% at grade level by the end of the year.

 

==================

Mixed Signal Sent as Spitzer Dodges a Teachers Event

BY JACOB GERSHMAN - Staff Reporter of the Sun
September 5, 2006
URL: http://www.nysun.com/article/39093

The Democratic Party's designated candidate for governor, Attorney General Eliot Spitzer, will be marking the first day of school by sending his running mate, state Senator David Paterson, to a United Federation of Teachers press conference calling on Mayor Bloomberg to shrink class sizes by hiring more teachers.