per student as the rest of the State, its class sizes are much larger. Nor does additional funding for more teachers or increased teacher pay neatly translate into the assignment of more qualified teaching staff to the "worst" schools. For example, the record clearly established that the most inexperienced teachers are routinely placed in the “worst” schools. This situation is likely to persist, regardless of the number of teachers or their pay, so long as the collective bargaining agreement between the teachers' union and the school district allows more experienced teachers to opt out to “better” schools. Remedy The majority first directs the State to determine the actual cost of a "sound basic education" and to ensure that every school in New York City has the necessary funding to meet the standard, and sets a deadline. The funding level must reflect the cost of a “sound basic education” that is not tied to anything other than a “meaningful high school education.” The majority also remands the case to the trial court to review the Legislature's efforts to determine if under the new funding scheme “inputs and outputs improve to a constitutionally acceptable level” (majority opn at 50). This remedy is extraordinary, if not unprecedented. Having determined that the State is not satisfying its constitutional obligations with respect to the education of New York City's public school children, we should -- as the State requests -- simply specify the constitutional deficiencies. It is up to the Legislature, as the entity charged with primary responsibility under the Education Article for maintaining the State's system of public education, and the Executive, who shares responsibility with the Legislature, to implement a remedy. This lawsuit should be at an end. Instead, the majority, observing that "the political process allocates to City schools a share of State aid that does not bear a perceptible relation to the needs of City students" (majority opn at 50), casts the courts in the role of judicial overseer of the Legislature. This disregards the prudential bounds of the judicial function, if not the separation of powers. Moreover, as soon as the trial court is called upon to evaluate the cost and educational effectiveness of whatever new programs are devised and funded to meet the needs of New York City's school children, the education policy debate will begin anew in another long trial followed by lengthy appeals. The success of the new funding mechanism will then be tested by outputs (proficiency