Methodology for Survey—Chicago:

Dr. Mark Schneider, Professor of Political Science at the State University of New York, Stony Brook conducted the teacher survey. It was commissioned by the 21st Century School Fund as part of their Building Educational Success Together initiative. In Chicago, the Survey Research Center at SUNY, Stony Brook, drew a random sample of teachers from a list of all members of the Chicago Teachers Union (CTU), supplied by the CTU.

Prior to developing the survey instrument, Dr. Schneider conducted an extensive literature review to identify research that has already taken place concerning school facilities, including the effects that lighting, temperature, small schools, newer facilities to name a few have on learning and teaching. This literature review is provided as an appendix at the end of this study, and will also be published separately through the National Clearinghouse on Educational Facilities (NCEF) in November.

Interviews were conducted in Chicago and Washington, DC by each city’s teacher union members:

• 12 minute phone survey of 688 randomly selected Chicago Teacher’s Union affiliate school-based Chicago Public School classroom teachers. (May and June 2002)
• Same survey, but on paper of 5,000 (all) school-based District of Columbia Public School teachers. Response from 89 schools and 1273 teachers. (May and June 2002)

5 Key Highlights from Chicago’s Teachers & Facilities Survey:

1. Even after more than $2.4 billion has been spent on building and repairing our schools, nearly 50% of the Chicago teachers give their schools a grade ‘C’ or lower!
• More than 30% of the teachers were dissatisfied with their facilities
• More than 20% said their facilities were inadequate
• Of these teachers grading their facilities a ‘C’ or lower, more than 40% have considered leaving their school, and almost 30% have considered leaving the profession altogether!
2. Almost 60% of the teachers surveyed said their science labs were inadequate or didn’t have labs at all.
• Of the elementary school teachers (K-8th), 40% said labs were inadequate
• Of the high school teachers surveyed, 31% reported science labs were inadequate
3. Teachers say that facility design in their schools are off-track, as evidenced by:
• Nearly 50% of the teachers reported their schools were too big and the room size was wrong.
• More than 25% of teachers have taught in spaces not meant to be classrooms
4. Nearly 50% of the teachers report poor Indoor Air Quality
• More than one-quarter report adverse health affects due to facilities
• Nearly 20% reported losing time due to adverse facility conditions, averaging about 4 days per year
• Of the most frequent problems reported, more than 25% report asthma or respiratory problems
5. Facilities have an affect on academic performance! Better facilities can add 3-4 percentage points to the school’s overall test score!

Additional Highlights on School Design Problems & Facilities—Chicago:

• More than 30% reported no professional space
• Nearly 1/3 reported physical educational facilities were inadequate!
• Most alarming is that over 1/4 teachers reported teaching in rooms not intended as classrooms!
• 63% of Chicago teachers can’t safely open their windows (contributor to poor IAQ).
• In Chicago, students with limited English language skills and those in larger schools are significantly linked to higher reported poor schools facilities*
• Difference in Test Performance Against Teacher Facility- Rated Scores
• The size of the school and the building age affects how teachers evaluate the design of their school.
• The more crowded the school, the worse the evaluation, and the older the building the more problems reported.

NCBG’s Rebuilding Our Schools Initiative: Policy Recommended Actions

NCBG’s “Rebuild Our Schools” network of parent and community leaders is urging the Chicago Public Schools to improve and reform its Capital Improvement Program by:

1. Annually disclosing every school’s latest building assessment and all building code violations so that schools can be more informed on their building conditions, help pinpoint priorities for capital projects, and build the case for additional funding for facilities. Local School Council’s and principals should receive detailed building assessment reports conducted by architect and engineers every year, so that each school is fully aware of the building condition and capital needs of the school as inspected by the experts. LSCs and principals should also receive notices of any building code violations, and status reports on correcting the code violations.
   
   

Schools want to become more aware of school facility conditions, in many cases would conduct their own building evaluations, and should be encouraged to incorporate facility and design functions into their annual School Improvement Plan for Advancing Academic Achievement (SIPAAA) in order to better attain their academic curricular goals. It is recommended that CPS work closely with the Neighborhood Capital Budget Group and its coalition of school leaders to further develop a standardized building evaluation for parents, teachers, and school administrators to use for assessing the conditions of their building that incorporates elements learned in today’s Teachers & Facilities Study.

2. Including educators and parents in planning for major school redesign and construction projects, so that schools truly reflect the needs of those working and learning in the buildings, ensure that school capital investments produce educationally appropriate facilities, and serve as community anchors for generations to come.
   
   
3. Establishing a Citizens’ Advisory Panel, charged with helping to create a “Facility Master Plan” that better forecasts and plans for school repair and construction projects. A renewed call for the Chicago Public Schools’ to establish a Citizens’ Advisory Panel for the CPS capital program, inclusive of Chicago Teachers Union representation, leading to the development of a comprehensive and strategic Facilities Master Plan to hold CPS more accountable on its capital spending and prioritization.