Times Attitude Revealing

The Monday, Apr. 14th Seattle Times contained a negative editorial on I-1351, the new Class Size Initiative.  One quote struck me as revealing of the attitude of the Times on this issue.  “There is much debate about whether smaller class sizes significantly improve student performance, ….”   So, I went looking for evidence in support of the concept of lower class sizes and here’s some of the information I found.

Lubienski, Lubienski, & Crane

” Class Size:  The best evidence available indicates that smaller class sizes boost achievement (Finn and Achilles 1999; Krueger and Whitmore 2001; Mosteller 1996.”

“Data from the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) Schools

and Staffing Survey indicate that, on average, private school teachers have

fewer students (19.6) than do public school teachers (23.2; Anderson and

Resnick 1997). Indeed, smaller class size is probably one reason parents choose

private schools.”

http://www.classsizematters.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/lubienski.pdf

Blatchford, Bassett, & Brown

“Results showed that as class sizes became smaller there were more times when pupils were the focus of a teacher’s attention, and more times when they were engaged in active interaction with teachers. This effect was found for all groups at both primary and secondary levels. It was also found that pupils’ classroom engagement decreased in larger classes and this problem was particularly marked for the pupils who are already attaining at lower levels. This, in turn, was accompanied by teachers seeking to control low attainers more than other groups in larger classes. It is suggested that small classes can be a valuable educational initiative right through school, but could be particularly targeted at lower attaining pupils at secondary level.”

http://www.classsizeresearch.org.uk/aera%2008%20paper.pdf

Babcock &Betts

“Empirical findings indicate that class-size expansion may reduce gains for low-effort students more than for high-effort students, but no significant difference in reductions of gains is observed when types are defined by ability.”

“In the Tennessee STAR experiment, disadvantaged students appear to have experienced larger test-score gains than advantaged students. A standard explanation is that small classes allow teachers to offer special help to low-achieving students. Results here, if they may be generalized, suggest an alternative explanation— that larger gains for disadvantaged students may have occurred because small classes allow teachers to incentivize disengaged students more effectively, or because students are better able connect to the school setting in small classes.”

http://www.nber.org/papers/w14777

Chetty, et al

“Second, students in small classes are significantly more likely to attend college,

attend a higher-ranked college, and perform better on a variety of other outcomes.”

http://www.classsizematters.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/Chetty-et-al3.pdf

(Emphasis is mine.) 

That’s some of the information that supports the lowering of class sizes.  But let’s take the Times approach….  The initiative will provide an opportunity for debate.  And then the voters can decide.