Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Labor Education topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Teachers urge board to make class size top priority in negotiations

Piedmont Unified School District Board of Education · October 22, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

At the meeting teachers' representative Dr. Marks pressed the board to adopt stronger classroom-size limits, citing sections with 32—6+ students and one class of 37. The board said it will continue negotiations and host community forums on student well-being and admissions.

Teachers' negotiator Dr. Marks told the board that class size is "Piedmont teachers' absolute top priority" and urged stronger contract language to stop large sections at both elementary and secondary levels. "34 or 37 or 38 students in a core academic class should never be acceptable here," Dr. Marks said, noting that the district's current contract counts a "maximum average student teacher ratio of 28 to 1" that can mask very large individual classes.

Dr. Marks described scheduling imbalances that have produced one junior English period with 16 students and the next with 30, and a high-school academic section with 37 students. Board members thanked the teachers for raising the issue and said negotiations will continue; Superintendent Dr. Hahn and board leadership said they expect substantive counterproposals at the next negotiation session on Oct. 30 and announced related community workshops on college admissions and student well-being.

The account in the meeting was framed as ongoing collective bargaining, not as a board directive: Dr. Marks said teachers had submitted a detailed proposal to cap class sizes and that the district's recent counterproposal was effectively "a blank piece of paper." The board acknowledged budget constraints and the need to balance new course offerings with staffing and class-size reductions. No formal motion or vote on class-size policy was taken at the meeting.