Class Size

Jason Kessler
Fundamentals of Curriculum Development
Dr. Jay Dugan
Position Paper #1 Class Size

As a young teacher with only three years of teaching experience to his name, I have come to see the difference you can make when your roster size is of a manageable number. The larger the class gets the more individualized programs for the multitude of learners get neglected. In today’s educational setting with laws like IEP’s it is much easier to ‘dumb’ down your assessment strategies in order to ensure greater success with the twelve lower level students than to provide academic rigor to the four advanced students in the class of thirty-five. I know it may seem very callus, but class size plays an integral role in how an educator plans their assessments as well as their overall presentation of material. The fewer students one has in class, the obvious more individualized attention each student receives.
According to the Northwest Education Magazine, “evidence is considerable and compelling: Especially in early grades, smaller classes do make a difference”. This makes sense that if students start school in small groups with individual attention focused on each one of them in small manageable classes, the more chance they well have to grow. The same article claims that less time will be spent on disciplinary issues and more time on facilitating individual learning plans. If Johnny and Jake are at two polar opposite levels and in the same small class, the teacher will be able to manage providing challenging work for the one student, while providing remediation for the other.
After interviewing Dr. Kyriakos Evrenoglou, Principal of Millville Alternative High School and former Assistant Principal of Discipline at Millville Senior High School, I found unique perspective as it pertains to class size. As an administrator and teacher for many years he has seen the impact of small class sizes can particularly have on emotionally disturbed students. In Alternative School, there are students who have various emotional, mental and social disorders, who could not adhere to the rules of the regular school. The students are separated into extremely small class sizes and discipline issues for these students who were typically the disruptive force in the regular school setting can thrive. Students in these situations have an easier time establishing healthy relationships with staff and peers. The less discipline issues lead to more time for qualitative instruction, where authentic assessments can occur. Teachers in this setting provide more feedback and develop greater parental contacts. It has been said over and over again that in order to have a successful educational experience, all stakeholders (staff, students, parents, community) should be involved in the educational process. If teachers develop stronger parental contacts, the goals of the classroom may in fact be reinforced in the home, which makes it that much more powerful.
In Tennessee, Project STAR (Student/Teacher Achievement Ratio) found several requirements in order to receive the benefits of small class size. Classes must have good teachers in abundance. The increased number of classes requires more classrooms and more teachers. If there is not an ample supply of qualified motivated teachers, it won’t matter whether or not you have small numbers in the classroom because the facilitator is insufficient. The other requirements include sufficient space, diverse classes and access to materials. If the school is too small, additional space must be somehow produced or reallocated. Another issue is diversity and access to materials. Both require careful planning in the scheduling department. When determining who will be each class, the ethnicity, SES and academic performance level should be taken into account, not to track students, but rather to ensure a diverse classroom where students can learn from the various levels of intelligence and cultures. If students are homogeneous, the students will miss the experience of learning from their peers and developing into well-rounded culturally aware individuals. Materials could also become a concern without carefully scheduling. Textbooks and technological access could be shared among classes with a rotating schedule would maximize resources without sacrificing educational time.
Along with all of the previously mentioned concerns, the underlying concern has to do with the bottom line, what is the price tag. The need for more space, qualified teachers, and supplies is going to increase the per pupil expense. Some ways to alleviate the expense are not necessarily scene immediately, but will end up lowering the financial burden in the long run. As mentioned earlier, resources could be shared from classroom to classroom, so that the number of texts and computers can be maximized. The other cost reductions could be done through consolidations of classrooms. Special subjects like the practical arts (music, foreign language, ect.) could share a classroom on a rotating basis or even go into the regular education classroom. This would allow the rooms utilized by these “Specials” to be converted into regular classrooms. Another cost reduction would be from the lowered need for classroom aids at the Secondary level. In special education mathematics courses, an aid is required when the class size is 12 or more students. The lowered class sizes would cut down on the need for that support staff.
The final reason why the cost is not worth preventing the implantation of smaller classes is tied in with the lowered need for special education aids and teachers. Smaller classes sizes enhance performance. Students receive more individual attention. According to the Rouse Study, when the class size is an average of seventeen to one, students made “substantially faster gains in reading. The SAGE program in Wisconsin found that students with extremely low SES performed better on standardized tests after being put into classes of an average fifteen students. There are also various studies done in Israel and California that have found similar results. The underlying message is this lower class sizes equal enhanced student performance. Students performing at higher level equates to higher graduation rates and students better prepared for post secondary endeavors. The more students that get a college degree, the higher their income will be after they graduate college. When the lower SES population rises up out of poverty they enhance our society. They could be the next inventors of the next big thing that improves quality of life. The more money made by each individual, the more each person will pay in taxes which means the cost of the implementation of small class size could be deferred. Less money will be spent on Welfare and more on education. In the world of health, primary prevention simple things like practicing good hygiene, exercising and getting immunizations lowers the chances of developing disease or infirmity. This lowers insurance costs, so why do we not do the same in the world of education. Small class sizes mean a better individual education for each student. The more educated each individual is the less time and money well be spent later on remediation problems in school and adult life. Small class size is primary prevention for our youth, society and wallets.