A new report reveals that many of New York City’s lowest-performing public schools remain the same institutions the state has targeted for improvement for over a decade. Tracing data across six different accountability systems since 2012, the report finds that roughly one-third of the city’s chronically struggling schools have been identified for improvement for more than 10 years, despite repeated reform efforts and significant financial investment.
Stagnant Performance Amid Increased Funding
The analysis identifies 906 public schools where a majority of students are failing math, English language arts, or both. In more than 500 of these schools, a majority of students are failing in both subject areas.
Despite these persistent outcomes, the city’s per-student spending has climbed to more than $42,000, which is more than double the national average. Jennifer Weber, a fellow at the Manhattan Institute, notes that funding is frequently layered onto struggling schools without robust accountability measures to verify that these investments translate into academic gains. For example, PS 123 Mahalia Jackson in Harlem received over $11.4 million last year—roughly $43,335 per student—yet only about one in four students achieved proficiency in math, and one in three in reading.
Did You Know?
A child who entered kindergarten when a school was first identified for improvement could have graduated from high school before it was ever turned around.
Accountability and Evaluation Challenges
The report highlights that the city has not lacked improvement plans, but rather evidence that those plans effectively raise student achievement. State accountability frameworks have shifted repeatedly, and schools have been merged or renamed, yet the list of schools needing improvement remains largely consistent. This creates a cycle where schools receive additional funding and new initiatives without producing lasting academic results.
Current teacher evaluation systems also face scrutiny. Under existing metrics, an overwhelming majority of New York City teachers receive ratings of “Effective” or “Highly Effective” annually. This discrepancy—where nearly all teachers in a low-performing school are rated effective—suggests that the current accountability system may not be measuring the right things.
Expert Insight:
The persistence of these performance gaps despite a decade of shifting policies suggests a structural disconnect between resource allocation and measurable student outcomes. The reliance on process-oriented accountability—rather than student-centered proficiency standards—may be why schools remain on improvement lists for years, regardless of funding levels or administrative rebrands.
Potential Policy Shifts and Future Oversight
Mayor Mamdani recently secured a two-year delay in implementing a state-mandated class-size reduction. However, the report suggests that if schools already in compliance with such mandates fail to show stronger academic outcomes, the state may face increased pressure to justify the necessity of further multi-billion-dollar expenditures.
If the trend of stagnancy continues, the DOE could face calls to demonstrate yearly that specific investments are directly improving student learning. Analysts and policymakers may shift the focus away from simply launching new improvement plans toward a system where student outcomes serve as the primary standard for success.
Frequently Asked Questions
How many NYC public school students attend schools where a majority of students are failing core subjects?
According to the report, 906 schools have a majority of students failing math, English language arts, or both, enrolling more than 409,000 students—roughly 43% of the total NYC DOE student population.
Does the report suggest that a lack of funding is the cause of school failure?
No. The report indicates that the city spends more than $42,000 per student, more than double the national average, and that additional funding is often provided to struggling schools without corresponding evidence that these investments produce lasting academic gains.
How are teachers currently evaluated in these low-performing schools?
Under the current teacher evaluation system, an overwhelming majority of teachers across the city, including those in low-performing schools, receive ratings of “Effective” or “Highly Effective” each year.
What metrics should the city prioritize to ensure that school improvement funding is actually helping students learn?
Worth a look