New York State passed a law in 2022 requiring schools in New York City (NYC) to reduce classes to 20 students in grades K–3, 23 students in grades 4–8, and 25 students in grades 9–12 by the 2027–28 school year. This new policy will require as much as $1.9 billion per year to hire additional teachers, but how this potentially inequitable policy plays out in practice will depend on how it is implemented, especially how it is funded.
Key Takeaways
We draw on data from the 2022–23 school year to estimate the teacher salary and benefit costs of implementing the law in grades K–5. Using these data, we find the following:
- Fully implementing the class size caps in grades K–5 under current school enrollment and programming would add an additional cost of $2,625 per student in these grades, an increase of about 9 percent over current spending on these students.
- This additional cost would reduce funding equity as measured by the average funding of schools attended by low-income students versus higher-income students. Under current school funding policy in NYC, the average low-income student attends a school with per pupil funding levels that are 7 percent higher than the school attended by the average higher-income student. Adding in the estimated cost of class size reductions reduces this measure of funding equity to 5 percent.
- The cost would also reduce funding equity for students when analyzing the funding levels by race and ethnicity. The average Black student’s school currently has per pupil funding levels that are 13 percent higher than the school attended by the average white student and would fall to 10 percent. For Hispanic students, it would fall from 7 percent to 5 percent.
Implications
Our results indicate that there will be trade-offs between equity and efficiency when implementing the class size mandate for K–5 students in NYC. Increasing funding levels through Fair Student Funding (FSF), a formula based on student characteristics such as grade level, special education status, and economic disadvantage, could make funding more equitable. Under this approach, schools with a greater need to reduce class sizes would spend more of the additional funds on that purpose, while schools that already have smaller classes could use the funds for other purposes. But this would be more expensive than funding only the schools with the greatest need for class size reductions.
One general strategy to address the law’s negative impact on funding equity is to reduce implementation costs. For example, policymakers could consider a hybrid approach that would increase funding levels equitably, require schools with remaining shortfalls to reprioritize existing funds for class size reductions, and provide additional funding to schools that cannot meet the caps through their existing budget.
A significant reason for the increase in cost is how the class size caps interact with the use of integrated coteaching (ICT) classrooms in New York City, which have two teachers and serve a mix of special and regular education students. Another way to address costs is through amending the class size caps. If New York State amended the class size law to increase the caps in classes with two teachers by 25 percent (e.g., from 20 to 25 students in grades K–3), the per student cost of implementation would be cut by more than half. But even without a change to the caps, the district and individual schools can reduce the implementation costs by changing programming decisions. For example, a school that has different program types in the same grade could rebalance students across programs to reduce the number of additional classes that must be created.
New York City funds its schools somewhat equitably; schools serving low-income and Black and Hispanic students receive more per pupil funding than other schools. Partly as a result, these schools can afford lower average class sizes than schools that serve higher-income and white and Asian students. But without an enormous infusion of new resources, implementing the uniform class size caps will require a reduction in funding equity. The challenge facing policymakers is how to minimize the inequitable impact while complying with the law.