[quote=bearishgurl]Uhhh, pri-“harvey,” the “mandatory class-size reduction” in CA public schools only affected grades K-3. My youngest was the only one affected by class-size reduction, and, now in HS, they are still a “successful-person-in-the-making.”

The jury is still out on whether the mandatory class-size reduction in the primary grades creates more successful adults as those affected kids haven’t had time to graduate from college yet. I can tell you that my kid(s) who had 30+ pupils in their primary grades are VERY successful now!

The ONE thing I CAN say on the program’s behalf (not really sure it was on behalf of reduced class size, though) is that my youngest made the same good grades in primary grades as the older one(s) did and I did NOT pay for them to go to “Pre-K” in the school year preceding kindergarten. They went directly from home daycare to kindergarten. (A commercial or home daycare “Pre-K” program with a trained teacher is more expensive than daycare alone.)

Aren’t all you Piggs smart and successful without the benefit of reduced class size in primary grades??

Just sayin’ …. the reduced class-size program required nearly twice as many certified teachers in each school in the primary grades and no doubt cost CA taxpayers a FORTUNE. It’s a smart and doable education cut right now, IMO.[/quote]

(other stuff deleted)

Anyway, back on topic…Clearly having a larger student/teacher ratio wouldn’t be better than a smaller one from the kids perspective. So the question is whether it’s worth the cost.