One class size does not fit all

The Lowell Sun ^ | 02.22.06

[Coleus]

A group of Tewksbury parents and educators may be well-intentioned, but its idea to cap the public school system's teacher-student ratio does little but place another financial burden on the struggling town. The group is pushing a proposal to limit the number of students per class to 25. To do so, the town would have to hire an additional 20 schoolteachers, at a conservative cost estimate of nearly $800,000 annually in salaries and benefits.

In all likelihood the proposal would translate into a huge tax increase for fiscal 2007, since the Tewksbury School Department is already facing a multimillion dollar deficit in its proposed budget -- one that the School Committee has shown little inclination to reduce despite overtures from the town's Finance Committee.

Quite simply, Tewksbury can't afford the luxury of imposing a class-size mandate throughout the school system. And even if tax dollars were plentiful, the proposal offers little guarantee that it would be either effective for students or efficient in raising academic excellence.

Recent U.S. studies on the value of class size have produced mixed results. There are about as many experts advocating a lower student-teacher ratio as there are those saying it doesn't measurably improve performance.

If anything, reduced class sizes seem to work best in kindergarten through grade four where young, impressionable students need greater teacher attention. In the latter school years, studies have shown, there is little appreciable positive effect on students. (A good book to read is author Joel Turtel's Public Schools, Public Menace, which analyzes 277 published studies on the effect of teacher-pupil ratios and class-size averages on student achievement. According to Eric Hanushek, a University of Rochester economist, only 15 percent of these studies showed a positive improvement in achievement with smaller class size, 72 percent found no statistically significant effect, and 13 percent found a negative effect on achievement.)

Class size has long been a "magic bullet" used by parents and teachers' unions to get the public's attention about the perceived deteriorating conditions in school systems. Certainly, Tewksbury schools have been challenged financially since the local aid bust of 2001, but they aren't showing any major reversal of academic results.

In reality, a blanket class-size mandate amounts to nothing more than a status-quo solution that drains vital taxpayers' dollars from other education resources where they might do the most good.

We are not advocating that class sizes be allowed to grow exponentially. What we are advocating is the establishment of priorities. A better proposal for the parents' group would be to endorse a study that would investigate where reduced class sizes might have the best impact on helping students learn. If it is in the younger grades, petition the School Department to set up a pilot program to serve as a "research and development" arm. With documented results in hand, it would be easier to enlist townspeople into expanding the program should more funding become available.

Of course, there are other creative ways to reduce class sizes that don't involve spending money. Progressive school systems across the nation have set up online courses for exceptional students as well as those who must work to sustain their families. In both cases, students who show promise for independent study are given the chance to succeed beyond classroom borders, thus reducing the overall student population. Why can't Massachusetts schools be so forward thinking?

It's a question Tewksbury parents should be asking before they discuss another tax increase to pay for a class-size mandate that isn't a proven winner.

[Coleus]

The New Reverse Class Struggle: Although Smaller Sizes Are Touted, Some Say Bigger May Be Beneficial

[gondramB]

"If anything, reduced class sizes seem to work best in kindergarten through grade four where young, impressionable students need greater teacher attention."

I found that class size made a big difference teaching science and math in high school too. As a student in physics and class sizes dropped from 250 in freshman phhysics down to an average of 6 in upper grad school classes it made quite a difference.

[Coleus]

Back in the 1950's & 1960's we had 60 kids in one kindergarten class w/o an aide, all learned how to read by the end of the year. During the baby boom years, schools were at their highest enrollment in 1973-74, we all learned. Today, enrollment is down below the 1973-74 numbers.

[gondramB]

I'm not saying that class size is the only determinant teacher quality is even more key. I remember two professors teaching the class back to back. Students could go to either class. One professor had 400 kids a day with them sitting in the aisles or even standing while the other professor only atrtracted 20-30 students. The testing was unified and the students gravitated to the professor who could best help them pass.

But for a give teacher quality I have found that I can personalize and help students more when there are less students - I found less was better down to about 6-8 when discussion starts to suffer.

[taxesareforever]

If is isn't class size it is standings nationally. The educational establishement uses everything in its arsenal to go after more money and more teachers. The only thing they don't use is the quality of education which is spiraling down.

[genghis]

what i don't get is
why would anybody thing a government could run a business ?
when in the history of the world have they ever been effective in doing so.
Maybe if you spend enough money the government can figure out how to blow up some bridges, but nothing else.

[taxesareforever]

I agree with you. However, the government can run a business because it is not concerned with loss. You, me and 200 million other people will pick up that tab.

[RHINO369]

First of all the only thing government has ever proven itself good at is collecting money.

I think small class sizes are probably a good thing when your younger, but once your in middle school or junior high, class sizes should be larger. In my middle school and highschool classes where around 25, maybe 30 if there was only one section open, and even then one on one instruction was non existant. What do teachers need to talk to one person for when most of what they do at that level of education is lecture, and assign homework. Then again maybe I'm too used to college where my smallest class this semester is 100 people.

[taxesareforever]

When I went to school in the 40s-60s class size was never an issue and we had 25 or more in all classes. You are right about the lectures and homework. We can only guess at what the lectures are about. That is the norm today.

[DustyMoment]

Try again. School class size is not te issue. When I went through school in the 60s, class sizes averaged 30 - 35 students with no TAs or other assistants in the classroom. Despite the class size, we were better educated and had higher graduation ratios.

Perhaps this red herring has been tossed out by the NEA to cover up the fact that today's teachers are lazy, poorly educated themselves and many are far dumber than their students.

[Born Conservative]

If you have asked to be added to this list, and haven’t been receiving the pings, please let me know. I’ve had a problem with my file synchronization between my home and work computer, and apparently have lost some names on the list. I think I have the problem fixed, and will gladly re-add your name.

[NonValueAdded]

Actually, the professors in the lecture hall weren't the issue, it was the instructor grad student who could barely speak English in recitation that had the impact. But I don't think the college experience applies to the Tewksbury school system. Schools need some flexibility to add the 21st kid to a good teacher's class when capped at 20, rather than condemn another student to mediocrity.

[wintertime]

The group is pushing a proposal to limit the number of students per class to 25. To do so, the town would have to hire an additional 20 schoolteachers, at a conservative cost estimate of nearly $800,000 annually in salaries and benefits.

&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&77

Amazing! Kids in senior year of government high school need small classes, but the following year their parents pay big bucks for them to sit in huge college classes of a hundred or more.

[wintertime]

The group is pushing a proposal to limit the number of students per class to 25.
&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&

Of course, no one in the education-industrial-complex would ever suggest firing an assistant principal or two.

[wintertime]

It's a question Tewksbury parents should be asking

&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&7

The question the Tewksbury parents should be asking is:

"Should I send my child to a pit of ignorance and Marxist-lite indoctrination? Should I have my child instructed in the fine art of homosexual sex practices? Should I allow my child to be bullied or to learn sophisticated bullying tactics that fly under the radar? "

These and hundreds of other questions and the biggest of all:

"Why are we funding this at all? Why don't we drive a stake through the heart of government schooling?"

[grania]

I found that class size made a big difference teaching science and math in high school too

I'm not so sure it is an absolute. I spent most of my career in a school where the administrators sometimes used discipline as a tool to bribe teachers and students.

When class size got above 24 or so, the game stopped, and discipline support became excellent. Result...the students excelled.

In the SAT prep courses I've done, large class size sometimes brings a wider variety of knowledge to the environment. Also, the students don't think they "own" a lot of time.

Size matters, sure. But sometimes smaller isn't better.

[brytlea]

I was going to say the same thing about science at least. I taught biology in HS and it was very difficult to have large lab classes (especially when our labs were designed for 24 students, and we had over 30 kids per class). There are lots of considerations, but one of them is space. If you stuff too many students into too small an area, you are bound to have some problems.

Additionally, the number of students with some sort of special needs is an issue that is rarely (if ever) mentioned in these discussions. I can easily teach 40 students if they are all at about the same place (reading level/background knowledge/etc) and only a small number have special educational needs (need to sit in the front of the classroom or be near the teacher, special behavioral programs, cannot read at grade level, must be giving instructions several times, do not speak English, etc).

However, I have had classes of 30 where almost half had some sort of special modifications, and I can tell you,that what happens is the whole class slows down and I do believe education suffers. I don't think class size is the problem tho. I think the biggest issue is the ADA and the fallout from that well intentioned law.
susie

[brytlea]

Yup, it's all just stupid, lazy teachers. (I do so wish for a rolling eyes emoticon here). Stupid lazy parents, stupid laws, unhelpful administrations, none of those enter into the equation...... (yes, this is sarcasm).
susie

[brytlea]

Amazing! Kids in senior year of government high school need small classes, but the following year their parents pay big bucks for them to sit in huge college classes of a hundred or more.

On the surface, your comment makes sense. However, you have to bear in mind that public high schools must teach EVERYONE. Most of the kids that require extra help in HS do not go on to college, and of those who do, I suspect they are just there to sink or swim. Unless things have changed dramatically since I was last in college (late 90s) the professor doesn't much care if you pass/fail, turn in your homework, study, etc.

susie