OT: Good news for those with kids in school

[admin]

If you have kids in school you will be glad to hear that class sizes will be returning to normal next year. For nearly two decades, class sizes have been abnormally small here in California. But thanks the the budget crisis, we are finally able to fix this problem. We are finally going to see 30+ kids in each classroom!

A fellow Pigg relayed the good news on another thread:

http://piggington.com/more_public_pension_loony_tunes_now_providence_ri_is_in_trouble?page=2

[quote=CA Renter]I also want to point out that class sizes are simply returning to NORMAL. The norm for class sizes was 32-40 pupils per classroom before they reduced class sizes in ~1996.[/quote]

She goes on to explain how, back in the early nineties, teachers pushed for legislation that forced class sizes to be abnormally small – and they got away with it. This situation has existed for so long that none of our school-age children even know what a normal classroom is like. That is going to change next year. And it gets better: most projections show that classrooms will be even more normal in following years.

Thanks to the persistence and dedication of our public-sector unions, at least one important aspect of our life will be returning to normal.

[all]

I don’t think they can roll back the number without adjusting the format and reducing the amount of group/pair work.

[Hobie]

???

[an]

Fantastic news. I’m glad something is finally getting back to normal.

[Coronita]

Actually, I’m more excited they are getting rid of the stars testing…Though the replacement testing (which is rumored to be computerized and adaptive like the GMAT/GRE) I’m not so sure will be better.

[jstoesz]

I read somewhere that class size has a very tenuous link to performance. It depends on a whole list of other factors it seems. I would say class size requirements are another case of top down mandates overruling decisions better left to individual schools.

I don’t understand the desire to close school districts and force kids to go to failing schools. If we free students to go where they wish, and we will have a nation of much higher performing schools.

Brookings is left of center these days right? Either way, it covers some interesting studies.

http://www.brookings.edu/research/papers/2011/05/11-class-size-whitehurst-chingos

[Anonymous]

[quote=jstoesz]I read somewhere that class size has a very tenuous link to performance.[/quote]

I’m guessing you’ve never had to manage a group of thirty kids, seven years old, while trying to actually teach them something.

Class size may not matter in college much, you can lecture 150 kids the same as 10. But in elementary school it matters, big time.

My wife volunteers in our elementary school classrooms several days a week, along with many other parents. These unpaid “teachers aides” are the only reason the classrooms don’t spiral into chaos.

[jstoesz]

[quote=harvey][quote=jstoesz]I read somewhere that class size has a very tenuous link to performance.[/quote]

I’m guessing you’ve never had to manage a group of thirty kids, seven years old, while trying to actually teach them something.

Class size may not matter in college much, you can lecture 150 kids the same as 10. But in elementary school it matters, big time.

My wife volunteers in our elementary school classrooms several days a week, along with many other parents. These unpaid “teachers aides” are the only reason the classrooms don’t spiral into chaos.[/quote]

The link makes mention of this…after 6th grade according to most studies class size makes little or no difference. The younger the kid, the more difference it makes. Just seems like this is one of very many factors that affect performance. It would seem wise to leave these decisions to individual schools.

Maybe some classes its fine to have 50 kids and others need 10. School for young kids seems to be more about babysitting than teaching anyways. Just ask homeschooler parents home many hours of instruction they need to give to keep their kids on track.

[an]

All I can say is, voucher system.

[jstoesz]

have you all seen this?

Great outside the box thinking.

[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.

[jstoesz]

The think that irks me, is not teaching costs. Newer-ish teachers are not that expensive. It is all the other crap that seems ridiculous, the middle management, older burnt out teachers, and ipads.

I think I have shared this before, but good to keep in mind.

[Anonymous]

Gee, now I’m confused.

Was it right to support the teachers unions who wanted to cut classroom sizes back in the 1990s?

Or is it right to say “no big deal” today when class sizes are growing?

Why did teachers want smaller classrooms if it doesn’t matter anyway?

But, I still haven’t heard any explanation as to why we need to raise taxes in order to maintain the same number of teachers.

Time for the Anvil sisters to strike up another tune…

Chorus

It’s Wall Street’s fault
It’s Wall Street’s fault
Ohhh…yeah…it’s Wall Street’s fault!

[Coronita]

[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.

[Diego Mamani]

I went to a Catholic school in South America where class size was 40-42, both boys and girls, discipline was tight, and academic standards and quality of teaching were very high. Class size is only one of many, many factors affecting quality of education. And I think it’s far from being the most important one.

[Author]

Posts