There is an ongoing debate in the public schools with respect to class size. For instance, Washington State public schools are ranked 42 in the country for the largest class sizes (although I did recently read an article that stated that the Superintendent of Public Instruction says the overall student-teacher ratio for Washington’s public schools was 17.4-1 during the 2005-2006 school year—I find this hard to believe.) A recent study released just days ago stated that smaller class sizes do affect the performance of elementary school students; however the results for grades 3 through 6 were mixed. By the time students reach middle school and high school the effects of class size appeared minimal to almost non-existent. In kindergarten and the earlier grades they found smaller class sizes consistently were associated with better test scores. I’m not thrilled with nor have I been a big fan of standardized tests but clearly it’s a reasonable metric to use to prove the case. What I’d love to see is a study about how smaller classes sizes in the earlier years better prepare children socially and emotionally for the older grades. While I don’t have any data, I have to believe more 1:1 time spent with teachers and interacting and bonding with other students must yield positive results on this front as well. So what’s the problem?
The problem is that for every point we reduce class sizes costs $200 more per student. How much are we spending to continue supporting failing schools which by the way are causing over crowding in the schools that are working. It’s an absurd debate. Washington State should invest in its future by buying smaller class sizes—at least for our youngest students.
Posted on March 11th, 2007 by Sam
Filed under: Uncategorized
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.