Replies

Pogy, I'm not sure about the SCOFLAW ruling. Doing some basic research I was surprised to learn that editorials have been written for years about this national scam. Have you seen any articles in your local Florida papers pointing out the failed facts about the "class size' amendment? I haven't here in SW Fla. What's "news" if this isn't?

Political Allure of education (class size is down, BUT it isn't helping), National Center for Policy Analysis, 1998

Push for smaller class size: still no proof, California, Nevada, Maryland....1999.
While the academic benefits of class-size reduction are still in dispute, there is one result that cannot be denied: the California Teachers Association has exactly 37,584 more members than it had three years ago.

The Hype Over Class Sizes (1999):

Class-size reduction hurts lower income districts as teachers flee to meet the demand in more affluent districts.

It's led to an increase in more poorly trained teachers. The number of non-credentialed teachers has jumped from almost zero in 1995 to 12% in 1997.

It's stuck low-income districts with big bills, drained other programs and made crowded facilities worse.

What's more, the California program even at its highest funding levels will still not reach the level of the Tennessee program. California is shooting for classes of about 20 students each. Tennessee had about 15.

But all this debate about class size is moot. No study is going to be able to definitively answer the question. There are just too many variables. Take South Korea. It leads the world in mathematics achievement among fourth graders. Average class size: 43.

THE SCHOOL CLASS SIZE POWER GRAB (1999):

THE SCHOOL CLASS SIZE POWER GRAB

According to published reports, the one thing President Clinton is adamant about in the current budget negotiations is inclusion of his "100,000 new teachers" proposal. In a two-year propaganda blitz, reducing class size (the number of students per teacher) has been touted as one of the single most important factors in improving the quality of public education. In reality the proposal is a ploy to make a quantum leap in federal control of K-12 education in the public schools. Here's how it works.

First the public had to be convinced that reducing class size is critical to providing a "better" quality of education for the nation's students. Phony statistics are presented purporting to show that schools with smaller class sizes have better test results. The statistics assume that class size is the only factor involved in higher test results. That is patently untrue. What is taught, and how it is taught, are much more important than class size alone. Even if the proper subjects are included in the curriculum, if they are presented in an incomprehensible way, students will have poor test scores regardless of class size.

Another part of the scam is how class size; e.g. the ratio of "teachers" to students is calculated. In many schools a teacher has one or two "teaching assistants" in the classroom. Should these assistants be included in the calculation of class size? In many districts they are not.

From this year's Salon, of all places:
Money also matters [How CA's landmark law to reduce class size was a disaster for poor students]

So, not only does this amendment cost Florida voters big $$$, instead of helping children, it hurts those who need help the most. The only ones benefiting are the teachers' unions, the Democratic Party elites. It's a scheme. It's a crime. It's fraud, theft, money laundering (teacher's unions -> DNC), with the press as willing accomplices, imho.