Delay Urged in Expanding Class-Size Reduction

The cost of California’s much-discussed class-size reduction effort could be dramatically reduced--and brought in line with state funding--with relatively minor changes such as allowing an additional pupil or two in some classes, according to a report issued Wednesday by the state legislative analyst’s office.

Nonetheless, the report says that the difficulties of finding enough classrooms and qualified teachers are so great in some areas that the state ought to put off further expansion of the enormously popular--but as yet unproven--program.

That message is likely to resonate with Orange County educators. On Sunday, The Times reported that 15 of the county’s 24 elementary school districts are undecided about expansion or leaning against it.

The independent report used a survey of 150 California school districts to determine the status of the state’s $1-billion wager that having classes with only 20 students in three primary grades will help youngsters read and calculate better.

Gov. Pete Wilson, state Supt. of Public Instruction Delaine Eastin and some legislative leaders want to add the fourth grade to the three grades involved this year.

But Eastin and some legislators also side with Orange County school administrators who worry that the $666 per pupil in funding proposed by Wilson does not cover the true costs of the program, meaning that school districts are skimping elsewhere to make it work. They say the actual cost is closer to $800 per pupil.

The report gave ammunition to both sides in that debate. On the one hand, it said that school districts are spending about $770 per pupil for extra teachers, custodians, books and other costs created as new classes are added to achieve 20-student classes. On the other hand, it said those costs could be reduced to below what Wilson is proposing if school districts were allowed to maintain merely an average of 20 pupils--but have as many as 22 pupils in some classes--and still qualify for the extra state funding.

That proposal brought a mixed response. Some educators warned that lifting the cap could undermine support for the program. Others said they welcomed the proposed flexibility, but worried that it would not produce the financial windfall anticipated by the analyst’s report.

Dennis Smith, superintendent of the Irvine Unified School District, said he also supports eliminating the absolute cap of 20 on the number of students in primary grade classrooms. He said he could save money--and quell parent complaints--if the district were able to average class sizes to satisfy state law. Many of his classes, he said, total fewer than 20 students. Others are right at the limit, and in jeopardy of surpassing it because they are in fast-growing neighborhoods.

“What we’re having to do in some situations is add a class where we don’t need one,” Smith said. “But in other instances, we’re not able to accept a student in their home area. They could move right across the street from a school, in the first and second grade, and we might not be able to accept them.”

To allow for such uncertainties, Irvine and many school districts across the state are keeping enrollments below even the 20 set by the state. The report issued Wednesday, in fact, said the average number of pupils in classes participating in the program is below 19, which makes the program far more costly than it would be otherwise.

Smith, who said the program is costing Irvine nearly $900 per pupil, was one of those skeptical that the solution proposed in the report would produce the anticipated financial windfall.

“We’re still underfunded at $650 a child,” Smith said. “Eight hundred dollars is where we need to be.”

Every elementary district in the county has shrunk classes this year in at least first grade, and several have done so in other grades. The Times survey found about 48% of children here in public school through third grade are enrolled in classes with no more than 20 students.

Many districts also have complained about the high cost of reshaping school buildings and adding portable classrooms. Campuses in urban areas such as Fullerton, Santa Ana and Anaheim are short on real estate.

But school officials applauded the legislative analyst’s recommendation to give them more local control.

“It’s terrific,” said John Tennant, an assistant superintendent for Ocean View School District in Huntington Beach, which is the only district in the county planning to offer every child through third grade a class with 20 or fewer students in the next school year. “It adds flexibility and it deals with reality.”

But Mac Bernd, superintendent of Newport-Mesa Unified--which has decided not to shrink more classes next year after shaving sizes in first and second grades and parts of kindergarten--said the key is more state dollars.

“We need funding, and ‘flexibility’ is no substitute for funding,” Bernd said.

Bob Wells, assistant executive director of the Assn. of California School Administrators, said the cost issues are serious and, as the report noted, will only get worse in future years as newly hired teachers move up the salary schedule.

“This program has the potential within two or three years to bankrupt school districts,” Wells said. “It’s happy talk to think about going to a fourth grade . . . but it’s not very realistic, and I think we’re a lot better off finishing this job and doing it right before we push on.”

Aside from the cost issue, the report says 24% of the 18,400 teachers hired to reduce class sizes this year lack credentials. It also says that creating enough classrooms to house those additional teachers has forced the elimination of libraries, computer labs and day-care rooms at many schools.

In addition, now that schools have used every nook and cranny for newly created classes, they face the added expense of constructing new facilities or purchasing thousands of portable buildings, the report said.

“The evidence is clear that we’ve put a lot of pressure on teacher supply, and we need to let schools that haven’t fully implemented the existing program to catch up,” said Paul Warren, education director for the politically neutral analyst’s office.

Expanding the program further would worsen those problems, he said, and some districts--including many in Orange County--might not be willing, or able, to take part.

Gov. Wilson, however, doesn’t plan to ease off, spokesman Dan Edwards said Wednesday. Wilson is sensitive to the difficulties of making the program work and is addressing them, he said.

This week, Edwards said, the governor signed legislation making it easier for districts to hire retired teachers for temporary duty or to create or expand teacher internship programs. Wilson also supports a bond issue in 1998 that would help pay for new classrooms.

Edwards said the governor may support amendments to the class-size reduction program to give school districts more flexibility, as suggested by the report.

But Wilson still wants to see smaller classes through the third grade, his spokesman said, explaining that, “If we don’t move on it now, it’s likely it will get lost in the shuffle.”

Eastin agreed. “When you are a policymaker and a leader, your job is to lead and make a difference and I think we ought to press on,” she said.

State Sen. Leroy Greene (D-Carmichael), however, agreed with the legislative analyst that caution is warranted. “We are throwing a billion dollars around without the slightest idea of what we’re buying,” he said. “I’m convinced there’s going to be some benefit, but I can’t relate that benefit to what it’s costing.”

Times staff writer Kate Folmar and correspondent Regina Hong contributed to this story.