[Vision2020] The myth of smaller class sizes
Dale Courtney
dale@courtneys.us
Tue, 3 Jun 2003 06:46:45 -0700
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------=_NextPart_000_0080_01C3299B.E7746320
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
=20
<http://courtney.dns2go.com/msd/images/56a.jpg>=20
Martin West (Harvard University: Program for Educational Policy and
Governance) and Ludger W=F6=DFmann (Kiel Institute for World Economics) =
have
completed a joint research study on the effects of class sizes around =
the
world on results of the international math/science test, TIMMS (Third
International Mathematics and Science Study). See
http://www.educationnext.org/unabridged/20033/woessmann.pdf
The motivation for reducing class size is intuitive: with smaller =
classes,
teachers should be able to devote more time to each student, both in the
classroom and in giving feedback on homework and tests. However, the
critique for doing so is at least threefold.
*=09
Reducing class size is remarkably expensive, since it requires hiring =
more
personnel (and labor costs in the USA are notoriously expensive -- hence
labor moving off-shore). There may be less costly reforms that are at =
least
as effective as class-size reduction.=20
*=09
Hiring more teachers may dilute the quality of the workforce, thereby
negating any gains among the students of good teachers.=20
*=09
The intuitive relationship between class size and teachers=92 =
effectiveness
may not actually hold true=97teachers may be no more successful with 18
students than with 23.1=20
<http://courtney.dns2go.com/msd/images/56c.jpg>=20
Reducing class sizes is one of today=92s most popular education reform
strategies. The Education Commission of the United States estimates that
such efforts cost states $2.3 billion during the 1999=9600 school year =
alone.
The federal government contributed another $1.6 billion in 2000=9601 =
toward
meeting the Clinton administration=92s goal of decreasing class size
nationwide in the early grades to no more than 18 students. During the =
past
year or so, the deteriorating condition of state budgets and the Bush
administration=92s new emphasis on accountability have made class-size
reduction less of a priority. Yet it remains popular among parents,
teachers, and the teacher unions, which often promote it as an =
alternative
to vouchers.2
West and W=F6=DFmann found an interesting correlation -- but not one =
that
Statists expect or like: Only in two countries, Greece and Iceland, did
making the classes smaller help student performance (because of
under-educated teachers in those two countries). In all other countries,
making classes smaller had little to no effect.
Attached is a list of some countries with the largest student/teacher =
ratios
in the world. These four countries also have 4 of the 6 highest TIMMS
scores. (The USA is included for comparison purposes only).=20
Country Student/Teacher Ratio TIMMS score=09
Korea 53 570=09
Hong Kong 40 545=09
Japan 37 570=09
Singapore 34 600=09
USA 28 508=09
Countries with the better scores had the higher student/teacher ratio. =
In
fact, if you run the correlations, you will find that student/teacher =
ratio
correlates to TIMMS score (read: the larger the classroom size, the =
better
kids scored on the TIMMS test).=20
<http://courtney.dns2go.com/msd/images/56fig1.gif>=20
Conclusion: Student/teacher ratio is not the "fix" for the American
government school system. It is increasing the overall cost of education =
at
the expense of actually receiving a good education. People supporting
government education need to look elsewhere for their silver bullet.
1 http://www.educationnext.org/20033/56.html
2 Ibid.
------=_NextPart_000_0080_01C3299B.E7746320
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV=3D"Content-Type" CONTENT=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<TITLE>Message</TITLE><BASE=20
href=3Dhttp://courtney.dns2go.com/msd/ClassSize.htm>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Language content=3Den-us>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2800.1141" name=3DGENERATOR>
<META content=3DFrontPage.Editor.Document name=3DProgId>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<P align=3Dcenter><IMG height=3D240 src=3D"images/56a.jpg" width=3D600 =
border=3D0></P>
<P align=3Djustify><FONT color=3D#0000ff>Martin West </FONT><FONT=20
color=3D#808080>(Harvard University: Program for Educational Policy and=20
Governance)</FONT> <FONT color=3D#0000ff>and Ludger W=F6=DFmann</FONT> =
<FONT=20
color=3D#808080>(Kiel Institute for World Economics) </FONT><FONT=20
color=3D#0000ff>have completed a joint research study on the effects of =
class=20
sizes around the world on results of the international math/science =
test, TIMMS=20
</FONT><FONT color=3D#808080>(Third International Mathematics and =
Science Study).=20
</FONT><FONT color=3D#0000ff>See <A=20
href=3D"http://www.educationnext.org/unabridged/20033/woessmann.pdf"=20
target=3D_blank>http://www.educationnext.org/unabridged/20033/woessmann.p=
df</A></FONT></P>
<P align=3Djustify><FONT color=3D#0000ff>The motivation for reducing =
class size is=20
intuitive: with smaller classes, teachers should be able to devote more =
time to=20
each student, both in the classroom and in giving feedback on homework =
and=20
tests. However, the critique for doing so is at least =
threefold.</FONT></P>
<UL>
<LI>
<P align=3Djustify><FONT color=3D#0000ff>Reducing class size is =
<U>remarkably</U>=20
expensive, since it requires hiring more personnel (and labor costs in =
the USA=20
are notoriously expensive -- hence labor moving off-shore). There may =
be less=20
costly reforms that are at least as effective as class-size =
reduction.</FONT>=20
</P>
<LI>
<P align=3Djustify><FONT color=3D#0000ff>Hiring more teachers may =
dilute the=20
quality of the workforce, thereby negating any gains among the =
students of=20
<U>good</U> teachers.</FONT> </P>
<LI>
<P align=3Djustify><FONT color=3D#0000ff>The intuitive relationship =
between class=20
size and teachers’ effectiveness may not actually hold =
true—teachers may be no=20
more successful with 18 students than with 23.<SUP>1</SUP></FONT> =
</P></LI></UL>
<P align=3Dcenter><IMG height=3D290 alt=3D"" src=3D"images/56c.jpg" =
width=3D450=20
border=3D0></P>
<P align=3Djustify><FONT color=3D#0000ff>Reducing class sizes is one of =
today’s most=20
popular education reform strategies. The Education Commission of the =
United=20
States estimates that such efforts cost states $2.3 <U>billion</U> =
during the=20
1999–00 school year alone. The federal government contributed =
another $1.6=20
<U>billion</U> in 2000–01 toward meeting the Clinton =
administration’s goal of=20
decreasing class size nationwide in the early grades to no more than 18=20
students. During the past year or so, the deteriorating condition of =
state=20
budgets and the Bush administration’s new emphasis on =
accountability have made=20
class-size reduction less of a priority. Yet it remains popular among =
parents,=20
teachers, and the teacher unions, which often promote it as an =
alternative to=20
vouchers.<SUP>2</SUP></FONT></P>
<P align=3Djustify><FONT color=3D#0000ff>West and W=F6=DFmann</FONT> =
<FONT=20
color=3D#0000ff>found an interesting correlation -- but not one =
that <SPAN=20
class=3D359004513-03062003>S</SPAN>tatists expect or like: Only in two =
countries,=20
Greece and Iceland, did making the classes smaller help student =
performance=20
(because of under-educated teachers in those two countries). In all =
other=20
countries, making classes smaller had little to no effect.</FONT></P>
<P align=3Djustify><FONT color=3D#0000ff>Attached is a list of some =
countries with=20
the largest student/teacher ratios in the world. These four countries =
also have=20
4 of the 6 highest TIMMS scores. (The USA is included for comparison =
purposes=20
only). </FONT></P>
<DIV align=3Dcenter>
<CENTER>
<TABLE id=3DAutoNumber1 style=3D"BORDER-COLLAPSE: collapse" =
borderColor=3D#111111=20
cellSpacing=3D3 cellPadding=3D3 border=3D1>
<TBODY>
<TR>
<TD><FONT color=3D#800000><B>Country</B></FONT></TD>
<TD><FONT color=3D#800000><B>Student/Teacher Ratio</B></FONT></TD>
<TD><FONT color=3D#800000><B>TIMMS score</B></FONT></TD></TR>
<TR>
<TD><FONT color=3D#800000>Korea</FONT></TD>
<TD><FONT color=3D#800000>53</FONT></TD>
<TD><FONT color=3D#800000>570</FONT></TD></TR>
<TR>
<TD><FONT color=3D#800000>Hong Kong</FONT></TD>
<TD><FONT color=3D#800000>40</FONT></TD>
<TD><FONT color=3D#800000>545</FONT></TD></TR>
<TR>
<TD><FONT color=3D#800000>Japan</FONT></TD>
<TD><FONT color=3D#800000>37</FONT></TD>
<TD><FONT color=3D#800000>570</FONT></TD></TR>
<TR>
<TD><FONT color=3D#800000>Singapore</FONT></TD>
<TD><FONT color=3D#800000>34</FONT></TD>
<TD><FONT color=3D#800000>600</FONT></TD></TR>
<TR>
<TD>USA</TD>
<TD>28</TD>
<TD>508</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE></CENTER></DIV>
<P align=3Dleft><FONT color=3D#0000ff>Countries with the <U>better</U> =
scores had=20
the <U>higher</U> student/teacher ratio. In fact, if you run the =
correlations,=20
you will find that student/teacher ratio correlates to TIMMS score =
(read: the=20
larger the classroom size, the better kids scored on the TIMMS test).=20
</FONT></P>
<P align=3Dcenter><IMG height=3D420 src=3D"images/56fig1.gif" =
width=3D600 border=3D0></P>
<P align=3Dleft><FONT color=3D#0000ff>Conclusion: Student/teacher ratio =
is not the=20
"fix" for the American government school system. It is increasing the =
overall=20
cost of education at the expense of actually receiving a good education. =
People=20
supporting government education need to look elsewhere for their silver=20
bullet.</FONT></P>
<P align=3Dleft><FONT color=3D#0000ff><SUP><A name=3D1>1</A></SUP> =
</FONT><A=20
href=3D"http://www.educationnext.org/20033/56.html">http://www.educationn=
ext.org/20033/56.html</A><FONT=20
color=3D#0000ff><BR><SUP>2</SUP> Ibid.</FONT></P></BODY></HTML>
------=_NextPart_000_0080_01C3299B.E7746320--