Class SizeClass SizeClass SizeClass SizeAngelo BradleyAngelo BradleyTaikein CooperTaikein Cooper

Parita ShahParita Shah

Just a few questions…1. About how many students did you have

in your classes in elementary school?2. Did you also have a teachers’ assistant?3. Would you rather be in a small

classroom with a less qualified teacher or a larger classroom with a highly qualified teacher?

What is Class Size Reduction (CSR) Policy?• A policy to reduce the number of pupils

per classroom• Largest CSR program currently is in

California• Usually it requires a class size of 15, 18,

or 20 students• Focuses on class size reduction in

grades 1-3

Two Models of CSR program

• Implementation of the CSR program in every single school in the nation.

• Implementation of the CSR program in schools with high percentages of low-income students.

Operational (Monetary) Costs

• Dependent upon the number of additional classrooms needed– Number of additional classrooms depends on the

specifications of the program such as: class size, grade level, eligibility, phase-in period, measurement level, and flexibility

• A less flexible program calls for more classrooms which requires extra teachers and resources increased costs– For example, reducing class size to 15 costs twice as

much as reducing class size to 18.

Issues with CSR programs

• CSR programs lead to a need to hire more teachers which may increase teacher salary and possibly reduce the average quality of teachers hired.

• If these new classrooms are not fully financed, schools may be compelled to meet CSR targets by reallocating resources from other uses.

• Teaching may be less effective if spaces used are not permanent classrooms

S.B. 1777• California legislation passed this

education reform initiative in 1996• $1 billion project• Reduce the number of students in

grades K-3• Financial incentive catalyzed school

implementation immediately• Unprecedented

Results• Students in smaller classes do perform

slightly better• Helped students in primary grades more• More teachers, but less qualified• More negative consequences than

benefits• Disadvantaged students are being hurt

the most

Results• Teachers did not alter their

teaching methods• California’s budget is no longer a

surplus• Researchers hope that the

benefits will continue to increase

Project STAR- Overview• Project STAR (Student-Teacher

Achievement Ratio) was a class size experiment conducted in various Tennessee school districts

• Districts had to agree to participate for 4 years and allow site visitations for verification of class sizes, interviewing, and data collection, including extra student testing

Project STAR- Methods• 7,000 students were distributed into one

of three classes: 1, a small class with between 13 and 17 students; 2, a regular class with between 22 and 25 students; and 3, a regular class with a permanent teacher’s aide

• The students were monitored from grades K-3 and were subject to the extra testing and special class set-ups for all four years

Project STAR- Results• According to the data, small classes had their

greatest effects for low-achieving students in reading but not so much in mathematics—where it was actually found that smaller classes helped higher achieving students more

• Despite this discrepancy, the statistical data collected throughout Project STAR are seen as proof, however disputable, that class size reduction does in fact have a positive effect of academic achievement

Opponents to the Results of Project STAR

• Tom Loveless and Frederick Hess, members of the so-called “Common Sense” school reform group, believe that Project STAR leaves out a lot of important information that should have been included:

• 1. The effects of reducing class size by 2 or 3 students as opposed to 10

• 2. Whether or not the benefits found in Tennessee public schools would be/could be replicable on a broad scale

• 3. The grade range under watch, K-3, does not provide any conclusive information in regards to achievement gains in later grades

Opponents to the Results of Project Star

(cont’d)• Hess and Loveless also examine the trade-offs

which are made because educational resources are never infinite:

• 1. Resources used to implement smaller classes cannot be used elsewhere in terms of bringing in teachers of the highest caliber or providing the best of current technologies to all students

• 2. The need to hire more teachers will quickly dilute the quality of teachers at any given school since quality will eventually have to give way to quantity

Discussion Questions1. What could be the possible mechanism that enables

smaller classes to help "low-achieving" students succeed?

2. Why does this mechanism only seem to produce desirable effects for reading/English classes but not for mathematics classes?

3. Are there any other ways to appeal to this mechanism that are lower cost than reducing class sizes?

4. The California Size Reduction's goal was to reduce class size which affected the number of teachers that were needed.  Is it effective to reduce class size, and also sacrifice the integrity of teachers because of the demand?