Claus von Zastrow, Executive Director of Learning First Alliance, rightly points out in a blog post that the failure of class size research to show enough test score gains to be worth the cost past 3rd grade really points to the failure of test scores themselves to tell us much.
Interestingly, the author of the first comment speaks to precisely my train of thought when I looked into the class size research and its limitations. I ended up looking beyond just class size to the other–intertwined–relational factors. Tom came across my book in that process. His comments are:
Chicago’s school board and “CEO” recently proposed to raise class sizes to 35 (article) but then backed down to union pressure (article).
What’s lost in the discussion of this victory is that the old class sizes are already too high.
According to the Sun-Times, “K to third-grade class sizes will remain at 28; fourth- through eighth-grade classes will stay at 31, and high school classes will rise from 28 to 33.”
Talk of acute budget shortages obscures the fact that class sizes have always constituted a budget shortage.
The Jacksonville Observer reports that a Florida senate committee approved with only one vote against a bill for vote that would put on the ballot a change to the class size amendment. According to the AP it would “keep counts at the school-wide average and permit the addition of a few extra seats where necessary” by removing the next step stipulated for the 2010-11 school year, which mandates absolute class-by-class caps.
All in all, this is not a bad compromise, no? Much worse could have happened.
Many assume we won’t be able to find enough teachers to lower class size. The state of Queensland, Australia has 2000 extra certified graduates this year! There are about 54,000 total school employees in Queensland (source).
Education Queensland figures show that of the 2751 teachers applying for jobs in state schools, only 787 have a permanent or short-term contract position for 2010.
Education Queensland should take advantage of a glut in qualified primary school teachers and reduce class sizes in the state’s schools, the teachers’ union and State Opposition said yesterday.
Queensland class sizes were set at 25 from prep year to third grade, 28 between fourth and 10th grade, and 25 for grades 11 and 12.
source
After a class size of 50 was considered “standard” in the compulsory education standard act enacted in 1958, the size was reduced to 45 in 1964 and to 40 in 1980. Since fiscal 2001, however, class composition has been left up to prefectural boards of education. Prefectures except Tokyo currently have 40 or less students per class, but this is mostly limited to early elementary classes.
http://mdn.mainichi.jp/mdnnews/news/20100115p2a00m0na005000c.html
An Education Week piece quotes Duncan directly connecting class size to teacher quality, rather than the standard argument that they’re somehow in competition.
He says a class size drop to 15 would make a difference for students experiencing the least success.
He questioned whether reducing class sizes by just a few students, as has been reported anecdotally under Title II, represents a breakthrough in teacher quality. “if you’re going to do something, do it” by reducing classes from, say, 26 to 15 students for low-income students, he said.
‘Nuf said, Arne, let’s do it.
Kent School District near Seattle just settled with teachers to end a strike for lower class size limits and support for teachers with the largest classes and pupil loads.
To get class sizes reduced, [the teachers] accepted a slightly lower compensation package in the two-year contract they overwhelmingly approved Monday morning.
(Kent teachers settle; class-size issue to live on. Though the Kent teachers strike has ended and schools were reopening Tuesday, teachers inside and beyond the Kent School District vowed to continue fighting for smaller classes. Nancy Bartley and Linda Shaw. Seattle Times, 9/15/09)
A great victory in lean times.
