HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - 11-10-1998 - Attachment #4aCHAPEL HILL - CARRBORO CITY SCHOOLS
Lincoln Center, Merritt Mill Road
Chapel Hill, North Carolina 27516
Telephone: (919) 967 -8211
Neil O. Pedersen
Superintendent
TO: Board of Education
FROM: Neil G. Pederse
Superintendent
AU
Ann Hart, Assistant Superintendent
for tnstructionai Services
Chester Preyar, Assistant Superintendent
for Support Services
RE: Report on Feasibility of Reducing Class Size
DATE: February 9, 1998
Last year, at the suggestion of Harvey Goldstein, the Board requested the
administration to undertake a study to develop a multi-year plan for significantly reducing
class size. For years, little progress had been made in this area except for the recent
additional funding from the state to reduce class size from 26 to 23 in grades K -2. There is
strong support among teachers and parents for reducing class size in order to enhance
student learning and to create a more supportive learning environment for students and
teachers alike.
The committee that studied this matter and compiled the enclosed report included the
following people:
• Gail Turner
• Charley Stewart
• David Thaden
• Harvey Goldstein
• Neil Pedersen
• Ann Hart
• Chester Preyar
• Haul Gibbs
• Bill Mullin
Principal, Glenwood Elementary School
Principal, McDougle Middle School
Principal, East Chapel Hill High School
Member, Board of Education
Superintendent
Assistant Superintendent for Instructional Services
Assistant Superintendent for Support Services
Director of Human Resources
Director of Facility Management
Appreciation is extended to these members for their thoughtfulness, creativity, and
commitment to this task. There is much analysis behind the figures in this report that is not
shared in the interest of conciseness.
This report should be considered a preliminary, feasibility study. At the planning
conference, we are looking for further direction from the Board regarding your interest in
taking additional steps to further this initiative. If you are interested in pursuing this, we
will need to set up a series of forums to solicit feedback from teachers, teacher assistants,
and parents. We also would want to solicit feedback from our SGCs.
In my opinion, this plan, for the most part is feasible. We still need to resolve the
capacity shortfall and also listen carefully to our teachers about the possible trade -off of
fewer teacher assistants to achieve a smaller class size. Despite these obstacles, I believe
that class size reductions of this magnitude would create the kind of atmosphere that our
parents. and teachers expect in a school system of our quality. I urge the Board to give it
your serious consideration.
Report on Feasibility of Reducing Class Size
Background
For years, one of the most common pleas for support that School Board members
have heard from teachers has been to reduce class size. Every year, it seems, teachers are
asked to do more and more, particularly related to accountability and differentiation of
instruction. In addition, teachers perceive that students coming to our schools have more
Personal and social needs than ever before which demand their attention. Teachers believe
that lower class sizes will allow them to tailor their instruction more effectively to the needs
of students and, thereby, enhance student achievement.
Modest efforts have been made in recent years to reduce class size. The State has
provided more teaching positions (but not teacher assistants) in grades K -2, reducing class
size from 26 to 23. Last year, local funds were used to reduce the average class size at the
high schools to 26. The State also allows teacher assistant positions in grades K -3 to be
reallocated to teacher positions if this will reduce class size. It is possible, but not certain,
that the State will provide more funds to reduce class size in future years. The State's two
biggest educational priorities currently are the ABC plan and the Excellent Schools Act,
neither of which includes funding to reduce class size. It is encouraging that President
Clinton cited reducing class size as one of his educational priorities.
Locally, little progress has been made in reducing class size because it has appeared
to be cost prohibitive and we do not have the facilities to accommodate the additional
classes that would be generated Consequently, during budget discussions, the Board has
received more requests for adding specialists (e.g. technology, science, reading and family
specialists) to support classroom teachers than it has requests to reduce class size. The
addition of specialists has led to a growing percentage of non - classroom teachers.
The research on the impact of reducing class size is mixed It, generally, has been
shown that small, incremental reductions make little difference in terms of student
achievement. Classes need to be reduced to approximately 15 to 17 students and,
according to a recent study from Tennessee, teachers must change how they teach. If they
rely on the same techniques that they used when classes were large, student gains usually
are not evident. Teachers need to take advantage of smaller classes to engage students
more in their learning and to provide more individualized support to each student. The goal
of reducing class size is very consistent with the district's initiative to promote
differentiation in the regular classroom.
Of course, there is an argument to be made that class size should be reduced simply
to lessen the demands placed on our teachers. The teaching profession is becoming
increasingly stressful as teachers are held more accountable, as more special needs students
are included in the classrooms, and as parent support, in some cases, diminishes with
increasing economic pressures placed on families. Approximately one -half of all teachers
leave the profession after five years, suggesting that the quality of teaching conditions must
improve if we are to retain our best teachers. More. manageable class sizes could be
expected to lead to more successful recruiting efforts and less teacher burn -out.
Definition of Reducing Class Size
There are many possible definitions that could be used to describe what is meant by
the term "reducing class size." For example, we could place two teachers in one classroom
with 30 students and, effectively, reduce class size to 15. The committee, however, used a
more traditional definition. It defined the objective of reducing class size to mean that the
number of students in regular classroom teachers' classes (elementary), core classes
(middle), and academic classes (high school) would be reduced. The standards proposed
by the committee are as follows:
Grade
Present
Proposed
Level
Class Size
Class Size
K -2
23
15
3 -5
26
20
6 -8
26
20
9
26
23
10-12
26
25
Although these standards are attractive, they, admittedly, are not ideal according to
the literature on class size. The committee believes that these reductions are significant
enough to make a major impact on the quality of instruction and that they are realistic.
Facility Implications and Strategies for Increasing Effective Capacity
As stated previously, one of the roadblocks to making more progress in this area
has been a lack of classroom space. The committee conducted a thorough review of our
facilities and drew the following conclusions regarding the capacity that would be required
to accommodate classes at the proposed sizes:
• After Southern Village elementary school opens in 1999, we would need approximately
45 additional classrooms to implement the recommended class sizes. Some of the 21
mobile classrooms on our elementary campuses could be used for classrooms, which
would reduce this shortfall.
• If a fourth middle school opens in 2001, we would still need approximately 15 more
middle school classrooms. There are no mobile classrooms at any of our middle
schools at the present time.
• After the addition to ECHHS is completed, approximately 20 more classrooms would
be needed at the high schools, assuming that none of the six mobile classrooms remain
at Chapel Hill High School.
These facility constraints are considered to be major stumbling blocks. Possible
strategies considered by the committee for increasing the effective capacity of our schools
include the following:
• Establish flexible daily starting and ending times for schools, particularly at the high
school level;
• Expand the high school summer school program so that students might take fewer
courses during the regular school year or graduate early;
• Expand the permanent capacity of the existing schools
• Continue to use the present mobile classrooms and consider expanded use of mobile
classrooms
• Reduce the amount of time some high school students attend classes on campus by
arranging for them to participate in off - campus courses and/or distance learning.
• Increase collaboration with community colleges
• Support efforts to establish quality charter schools in our community.
There appear to be more options for flexibility at the high school level than at our
elementary and middle schools. Although the classroom shortfall is significant at every
level and would need to be addressed before these recommendations moved forward, they
do not seem to be entirely prohibitive.
Financial Implications and Strategies for Generating Savings and
Increasing Revenues
The number of additional teachers needed is substantial. If these standards were
fully implemented in the year 2000, we would need an additional 66 elementary teachers,
28 middle school teachers, and nine high school teachers. It is hard to envision this plan
moving forward without identifying some significant cost reductions that could be achieved
in our local budget. Strategies for providing funding differ according to the level of
schooling. The following strategies were discussed but are not necessarily recommended
• Elementary: Possible strategies for reallocating personnel include reducing the
number of teacher assistants and using non - classroom teaching positions differently. If
schools are willing to trade off these positions for a lower class size, then this proposal
becomes much more financially feasible.
• Middle: Middle schools also could reallocate teacher assistant positions, but this
would be difficult because the number of assistants in middle schools is lower (1 per
100 students). Furthermore, many of these positions already have been re- allocated by
schools. Another possibility would be for core teachers to teach an elective, which
would mean that fewer elective and more core teachers could be staffed. Neither of
these options is very feasible or desirable. It appears that additional funds for
classroom teachers would need-to be allocated at the middle school level to implement
this plan successfully.
• High: The number of teachers needed at the high school level is more modest. Some
savings could be achieved by administrative and support personnel teaching a period,
providing additional compensation for teachers who teach an extra class, and
contracting for services in some classes.
A number of suggestions were made for how the district could generate additional
funds to support this effort. They included the following:
• Reduce the number of school and central office administrators
• Pursue grants as part of a start-up or research effort
• Convert new vocational education dollars to this use
• Contract for services when this would produce savings (teaching, administration, and
operations)
• Reduce otter district expenses and overhead
No conclusions were reached concerning the feasibility of any of these strategies or
the amount of savings that might be achieved Clearly, only a small percentage of the costs
of reducing class size could be achieved through these steps.
4
Criteria for Evaluating Strategies for Reducing Class Size
The following criteria were used for evaluating strategies for reducing class size:
• Impact on teacher workload
• Practicality
• Cost
• Impact on instruction
• Consistency with the district's mission, beliefs, and values
• Disruption within the community
• Loss of people's jobs (layoffs)
Recommended Strategy for Phasing In Reductions and Associated Costs
Several approaches for phasing in the reduction of class size were discussed;
however, only one is recommended for further consideration. Under this approach,
significant class reductions would be phased in, by grade level, over the next ten years.
The timing of the reductions are related to the annual cost as well as the availability of
capacity as new schools are constructed.
A major point of discussion among the committee members was the affordability of
this proposal. In order to provide options that are financially feasible, the committee
recommends that the Board consider reducing the number of assistants as class size is
decreased in elementary schools. In the table below, three scenarios are presented
(1) maintain the present allocation of teacher assistants in the elementary grades (one
assistant per teacher in grades K -3 and one assistant for every two teachers in grades 4-5);
(2) reduce the allocation to one assistant per every two teachers in grades K-3 and one
assistant for every four teachers in grades 4-5; and
(3) allocate one assistant for every four teachers in grades K -5.
Year Grade Present Proposed Estimated Estimated Estimated
Class Size Class Size Add. Cost (1) Add. Cost (2) Add. Cost (3)
1998 -99 9 26 23 $150,000 $150,100 $150,100
1999 -00 10 26 25 $36,431 $36,431 $36,431
1999 -00 11 26 25 $36,000 $36,000 $36,000
1999 -00 12 26 25 $32,923 $32,923 $32,923
1999 -00 3 26 20 $448,615 $124,615 ($37,385)
2000-01 4 26' 20 $394,038 $223,288 $223,288
2001 -02 5 26 20 $400,385 $226,885 $226,885
2002 -03 6 26 20 $318,462 $318,462 $318,462
2003 -04 1 23 15 $819,478 $426,812 $230,478
2004 -05 7 26 20 $315,231 $315,231 $315,231
2005 -06 2 23 15 $948,870 $494,203 $266,870
2006 -07 8 26 20 $321,692 $321,692 $321,692
TOTAL $4,981,877 $3,102,294 $2,334,627
5
The rationale for the order in which grade levels would be phased in relates to
building capacity and budgetary implications. The following factors were taken into
consideration:
• The cost of the phase -in needs to be spread out, avoiding major costs in upcoming
years when the Excellent Schools Act and the cost of opening new schools will place
major burdens on our budget.
• It is difficult to make major reductions at each level until the new elementary school,
new middle school, and addition to East Chapel Hill High School are complete.
• Class sizes at the elementary level should be reduced first in grades 3 -5 in order to
avoid having classes with 15 students in K -2 and others in grades 3 -5 with 26 students
and fewer teacher assistants. This disparity within the same school seems too great.
• After completing reductions in grades 3 -5, the next priority should be first grade where
formal reading instruction is critical.
• Middle school reductions are interspersed with primary grade reductions because it
would be unfair to expect middle schools to wait eight years until 2005 -06 to begin
benefiting from this initiative.
Conclusion
Reducing class size is a fi�equent request of teachers that can be justified on the
basis of student achievement, quality of instruction, and quality of the work environment
for teachers. Significant class size reductions are necessary in order to make a real
difference in these areas. The proposal outlines reductions that are of a significant
magnitude, particularly at the elementary and middle school level. Many cost savings
measures were considered, however, the one that generates the largest savings is to reduce
the ratio of teacher assistants to teachers as class size is reduced.
Three scenarios were outlined in the study. If we keep the same teacher assistant
staffing pattern that we have now and don't make any other cost reductions, the cost to
implement this recommendation is $4,981,877. It would require the addition of 96
teachers and 57 teacher assistants. An alternative would reduce the allocation of teacher
assistants to one per two teachers in grades K -3 and one per four teachers in grades 4-5.
This would result in the reduction of 36 elementary teacher assistant positions over the ten
years of the phase in. This scenario would cost $3,102,294. The third scenario would
allocate one assistant for every four teachers in grades K-5. This would reduce 74 teacher
assistant positions, but would reduce the cost to $2,334,627. Under scenario 2 and,
possibly, scenario 3, it should be possible to make these reductions without any teacher
assistants losing their employment with the district. Normally, we have a high rate of
turnover among teacher assistants.
The total cost of this proposal, ranging from $5 million to $2.3 million, is
significant. For this reason, it is recommended that the class size reductions be phased in
over the copse of ten years. If additional cost - cutting measures can be agreed upon or if
the state or federal governments provide additional funding for reducing class size, this
schedule could be expedited and the cost would be reduced.
This report is a feasibility study and not a recommendation. If the Board would like
this issue to be pursued further, it is recommended that an extensive process be used to
garner reactions and suggestions from teachers, teacher assistants, SGCs and the
community about these scenarios.