tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5458172893016186479.post2799647832193298698..comments2024-03-09T03:28:44.216-05:00Comments on Thoughts on Education Policy: How Small is Small Enough?Corey Bunje Bowerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09764159604965707919noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5458172893016186479.post-91965061324343055552008-05-22T12:11:00.000-04:002008-05-22T12:11:00.000-04:00As an instrumental music teacher, I was accustomed...As an instrumental music teacher, I was accustomed to handling classes of 65 middle school students, often more--so it's hard for me to understand when teachers adamantly demand and defend tiny class size reductions. Is there much difference between 18 and 20? The saving grace, for me, was having the students over multiple years, which allowed relationships to develop--and I think that's where thoughtful teachers can make a good case for reducing class size. Knowing your students well, the ability to analyze their learning needs, is key. And that is significantly impaired with large groups.<BR/><BR/>The research, of course, doesn't show much difference in achievement related to class size--except for very early grades, where literacy instruction is demonstrably improved by more individualized attention. There's also some evidence that smaller class sizes provide a bigger achievement bounce in high-needs populations. <BR/><BR/>The problem is that many bargained teacher contracts don't allow for a lot of latitude in tailoring class size to optimum educational effect. If you have a superstar secondary lecturer on staff, why doesn't that teacher have groups of 50, perhaps with an aide to help with grading? Teachers with heavy writing loads might need significantly smaller classes. And so on. One size fits all doesn't work with class size.<BR/><BR/>My take on this (and this is not statistical analysis, just armchair observation): Good teachers make the adjustments needed to keep instruction effective, even when their class sizes are large. They will have to cut corners--fewer writing assignments, more group projects, perhaps fewer labs, dependent on the students and their subjects. But they will still produce solid learning gains, even if they know that the work could be done better. The thing is--those good teachers know which instructional shortcuts can be used. For a teacher with weak skills, class size simply reduces the amount of work without having any impact on student learning.Nancy Flanaganhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00047575960944913289noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5458172893016186479.post-90272235457726296682008-05-22T09:15:00.000-04:002008-05-22T09:15:00.000-04:00I taught large classes in public schools and small...I taught large classes in public schools and small classes in private schools. <BR/><BR/>My take on class size: Larger classes work much better with high achieving students. Smaller classes are necessary for low peforming students and students with learning disabilities and/or behavior problems. <BR/><BR/>I found it easier to teach 30+ honors students than to teach 5-10 low-income students with learning disabilities and/or emotional disabilities.<BR/><BR/>I agree with Rachel that when you have very small classes of high achieving students, some of the ability to hold interactive discussions and lessons diminishes.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5458172893016186479.post-13229529450729444692008-05-22T01:54:00.000-04:002008-05-22T01:54:00.000-04:00My experience is that teachers start having doubts...My experience is that teachers start having doubts about reducing class size when they realize that there's a trade-off between smaller classes and higher salaries...<BR/><BR/>I've also heard teachers of high achieving high school students talk of 18 or so as optimal -- smaller than that and you don't get good discussions.RDThttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08566356038836885187noreply@blogger.com