Get Schooled

By JustMe

February 14, 2007 11:15 AM | Link to this

It figures. Our State republican leaders continue to short-change education. What a surprise?!!??!!!

What do we ever get from these folks? All we get is lip service along with smoke and mirror results. Will the citizens of GA ever learn (and stop voting for these republicans)? I doubt it.

By catlady

February 14, 2007 11:28 AM | Link to this

Class sizes should be reduced. Period. There should also be NO waivers for classes over the size in lower grades. None. But the state should have to ante up for classroom space IN ADVANCE. It is called planning ahead, and it means more than planning where you will go out for lunch. We could do this, instead of making excuses, if there was a will instead of using it as an out.

By JustMe

February 14, 2007 11:39 AM | Link to this

I think that high schools have it the worst. High schools are allowed to use “average” class size. In other words, a general level class may have 50 students crammed into a room and sitting on top of each other, while an AP class may have 10 students. Thus, the “average” looks fine.

This is ridiculous. Nothing but smoke and mirrors.

By jim d

February 14, 2007 11:43 AM | Link to this

I Actually believe the determining factors in changing Mr. colemans mind were GCPS politics. ie: Mr. Wilbanks whinning and the chamber of commerce standing there with a towel placing pressure on Mr. coleman.

Class size in Gwinnett won’t make nearly the difference that new management would.

By just a teacher

February 14, 2007 11:53 AM | Link to this

(Sigh.) I know others will disagree, but in my limited experience and specific context, I can say that class-size reduction is the single-most important reform for public schools. When people compare public schools to private schools, one factor that is often overlooked is that a private school English teacher might see 40-50 students a day whereas my colleagues and I are responsible for upwards of 130. Rather than use this as yet another reason to justify abandoning public schools in favor of the “superior” private schools, I wish people would first demand smaller classloads for public school teachers and then make the comparisons.

By SET

February 14, 2007 12:21 PM | Link to this

Class size is not critical to education.

Discipline is.

You are wasting money by putting your money on class size reduction. Doing this will harm your students, especially the left side of the Bell Curve. The right side of the Bell Curve will always take care of themselves.

Spend the money on discipline and supporting the teachers in imposing discipline.

By meme

February 14, 2007 12:29 PM | Link to this

I teach 3, 90 minute classes. The first one has 21 students, the second one has 15, and the third one has 27. Would you like to guess which class has the most discipline problems? My two smaller classes are remedial classes and the larger one is an average class, but I have more trouble with the average kids simply because there are so many.

PS - I taught when it was nothing to have 35-40 students in a classroom. However, the students were better behaved and the parents more supportive.

By luvs2teach

February 14, 2007 12:37 PM | Link to this

SET - I don’t disagree with the idea of discipline being paramount, however, discipline is much easier in a smaller class. You can catch the kids that are off-task easier - you can identify and help those struggling easier - you can even “differentiate” (educratic buzzword of the day) easier in a smaller class.

I teach science, and during lab activities, size absolutely matters. Science is an area we are failing in worldwide - partly because we can’t teach through inquiry and we’re limited on proper labs - partly due to class size.

Class size may not matter as much in a traditional lecture - you can talk to 50 as easily as 25. Monitoring 50 doing a lab? It’s a lawsuit waiting to happen. Even colleges know this - science lecture classes are huge, but lab classes are limited. A single lecture class may have several lab sections to accompany it.

By JustMe

February 14, 2007 12:37 PM | Link to this

SET -

Have you taught in a public school?

Discipline and class size really does goes hand in hand. Large classes of 50 students are almost impossible to manage. And, those students know that they can get away with more because a single adult simply cannot keep track of so many students.

Smaller class sizes are easier to manage and will usually have far less discipline problems. An adult can watch over the students and correct their behavior before it gets out of hand.

I agree with you that discipline is very important as is the support for teachers. But, class size is also very important.

Few students per class = less discipline problems = more time for learning = improvement in education.

By jim d

February 14, 2007 12:39 PM | Link to this

None of this really matters since it is no longer the prime objective of schools to actually provide an education.

By wwww

February 14, 2007 12:42 PM | Link to this

Yep. Agree with SET. It is all about discipline, and more specifically, classroom management, support from the administration and parents. The worst class I ever taught had 9 (!) students. It was horrible. One of the best classes I’ve taught was around 28.

By Janine

February 14, 2007 01:40 PM | Link to this

I have to agree with SET and wwww[as well as jimd]. I have taught English /Language ARts classes of 32 students that were a joy…because all were well behaved [well, maybe 1 or 2 students were class clowns]. It was HORRIBLE trying to grade all the papers, though. Usually when I got a smaller class, it was because it was a lower level class and/or was loaded with students with * behavior disorders*..i.e. they were BAD !!!!! Back in the day, I always had at least 28-30 kids in my classes…even 1st grade, with no assisants for the teacher. Then in college, lots of my classes were huge, including labs. Well disciplined students are the key.

By Dan

February 14, 2007 02:28 PM | Link to this

People who adamantly state “class size must be lowered” or “restrictions are a must” crack me up they are so ignorant of reality it scares me. Sure if teacher A has a class with 25 kids and a class with 15 the smaller one would more than likely perform at a higher level, that of course is with that same teacher (not to mention the assumption that not all of the worst behaved kids stayed in the 15) But when you reduce class size by rule, edict or law. You need to hire more teachers, teachers are in short supply as it is, so the teachers availble to fill those gaps are more than likely the bottom of the class. So while the kids who reamain with teacher A may benefit, those that move to teacher B may be in a smaller class yet be penalized with a poor teacher Kids are better off in a bigger class with a better teacher. After all teachers are to provide opportunities and guidance to learn. But actual learning is up to the pupil

By Jeff

February 14, 2007 02:29 PM | Link to this

At the HS level, I had classes of between 25 and 30 for every class.

At the MS level, the LARGEST class I had was 23, smallest was 15.

Guess which group gave me more fits?

Hint: It is the one that produced six scars on my arm…..

By Jeff

February 14, 2007 02:38 PM | Link to this

Dan:

Once again, two points:

a) The teacher is highly irrelevant to student achievement. The STUDENT is the most important factor in student achievement.

b) More experience does NOT make better teachers. I’ve worked with 30 YEAR veterans that were FAR worse than some 30 SECOND veterans I’ve seen.

By HS Teacher Too

February 14, 2007 02:41 PM | Link to this

jim d — one caveat in Gwinnett:

Reducing class size WOULD make a difference for classes held in trailers. Try putting 28-30 student desks, a teacher’s desk, cabinet, and computer workstation, an overhead … and then have every student be able to see. It doesn’t happen. Period.

Side factors: kids can’t work (easily) in groups; the teacher can’t (easily) float around the room; cheating is easier than breathing … it’s not an environment at all conducive to learning.

So I agree with you in principle, but I offer up that reducing class size for trailer-bound classes would help.

By luvs2teach

February 14, 2007 02:49 PM | Link to this

Food for thought:

Reagrding bigger classes for better teachers: Why would we penalize a good teacher with more work? More students = more grading (although I’ll admit, A papers are far easier to grade than F papers).

Given equal teachers, I wouldn’t want my child in a bigger class because I would be concerned that s/he wouldn’t get enough attention. Many parents feel the same way - they are paying for private school.

As a gifted teacher, my classes are maxed at 21 - my on-level classes are maxed at 28 (and I have more than one maxed out class in each category). Some one mentioned that the smart kids will take care of themselves - if that’s the case, why do we have smaller classes for them? (Rhetorical question - I don’t have a problem with it).

Related - on the subject of workload - I teach about 130 kids a day - other teachers at my school teach as few as 84. Yet, if we have the same education and the same time w/the county, we are paid the same. Maybe a per child bonus pay would help draw teachers to larger classes?

By jim d

February 14, 2007 02:54 PM | Link to this

hs2

To reitterate, “Class size in Gwinnett won’t make nearly the difference that new management would.”

This was a comparitive statement not meant to insinuate that reducing class size would not have some effect.

Just a word to the wise today, don’t get me started on the “modular learnnin units” it’s a touchy subject right now.(again)

By jim d

February 14, 2007 02:57 PM | Link to this

Luv,

It’s for the love of the kids and joy of teaching not the money. REMEMBER? (smirk)

By HS Teacher Too

February 14, 2007 03:00 PM | Link to this

luvs —

My experience with why gifted classes are smaller is because in theory, those kids are just as needy as the lower-achieving kids can be. Now, granted, it’s a different kind of needy, but they still are needy. It goes to the arguments some other people made about science labs, etc., and being able to DO more with fewer kids, and if you are trying to teach gifted classes at the “above and beyond” level, having fewer kids really has proven wonderful. Of course, I am speaking from my experiences only and I am sure there are people who would have opposite experiences, but there have been times that I have been able to do great things with my gifted classes that were related as much to the kids’ giftedness as to the fact that there weren’t as many of them, and that alone facilitated the activity.

I guess the legislative logic is that we should do more of this kind of teaching with this kind of student? That’s a shame, beacuse ALL kids would benefit from that kind of teaching and learning experience … but that’s my best guess as to the official reason the class sizes are limited. What’s your take?

By HS Teacher Too

February 14, 2007 03:04 PM | Link to this

Point taken, I should have read your post more carefully.

But please, I would love to hear your take on the “modular learnnin units!!” If you’re up for the rant, ask Bridget for my email address.

By luv2teach

February 14, 2007 03:10 PM | Link to this

Hee hee - then I’m loving a lot more kids this year than some others! And the joy, oh the joy!

Actually, I have a good group of kids this year, and I can’t complain about that - but when I’m grading 130 lab reports over the weekend…around number 90, I might get a wee bit resentful - ugh.

By luvs2teach

February 14, 2007 03:20 PM | Link to this

I’m not against smaller class sizes for the gifted kids, precisely for the reasons you mentioned. I have found my gifted kids are very needy, but in a different way, and to be able to do the type of deeper, critical thinking activity (and grade the results), smaller classes are needed.

I assume the gifted class size is based on research - so much of what happens in gifted classes is. I wouldn’t be surprised if parental pressure played a factor as well.

My point was simply that we want to throw the less gifted kids in bigger classes, where they get less personal attention - how can that be a good thing?

By jim d

February 14, 2007 03:24 PM | Link to this

My take on the class size for gifted?

Very simple really. The school gets paid more for these kids and they are actually considered to be SE. The state doesn’t differentiate between SE gifted and regular SE when it comes to finance or many other regulations.

By jim d

February 14, 2007 03:26 PM | Link to this

HS2,

No ya don’t and I’m not sure I really want to go fetch all my stats on health and safety issues associated with these sardine cans.

By jim d

February 14, 2007 03:29 PM | Link to this

Luv2,

you always say that. I suspect it’s not so much the students as it may be the teacher and her expectations of the students,

By Dan

February 14, 2007 04:24 PM | Link to this

Jeff My post does not disagree with what you said. I finished it by pointing out it is up to the student to learn. I also did not laud experience, I referred to good and bad teachers, my inference to bad teachers filling the new openings referred not to their lack of experience, but to their being the last selected for a job. Unfortunately due to the non existence of a consistent reliable way to gauge teacher performance experience is often equated with ability

By WFC

February 15, 2007 08:39 AM | Link to this

I’m recently retired after teahcing history for thirty years in both public and private schools. Here is my take on class size:

• Reducing the size of a regular class from 31 to 28 makes almost NO difference in either the quality of instruction or in classroom discipline. Spend the money elsewhere.

• Reducing a class from 31 to 20 makes ALL the difference in the world.

• The “middle-of-the-road” students are the ones hurt most by large classes.

• Any statistics about “average class size” or “teacher-student” ratio are worthless.

By KA

February 15, 2007 09:21 AM | Link to this

I attended Catholic schools K-8 and looking at my class pictures there are anywhere from 30 to 60 !! students in the pictures. We had no problem learning as as perfect conduct was maintained by the nuns and lay teachers. The ‘Fear of God’ comes to mind.

By jim d

February 15, 2007 10:18 AM | Link to this

While we’ve had many pro’s and con’s about class size posted here, the one question I really feel we need to be asking ourselves is:

What are the costs associated with reducing class sizes in Gwinnett County if every school were a high school.

Assuming 160,000 students with a T/S ration of 21:1 would require 7,614 teachers. Reducing the ratio to 20:1 would require 8000 teachers or additional 386 teachers at an added expense of $25.1 million(based on GCPS reported average teacher salary)plus the cost of building 386 classrooms.

Assume an average high school the size of Peachtree Ridge; Final Instructional Areas: two gymnasiums, 77 general classrooms, 20 science classrooms, eight business education classrooms, seven computer labs, three art rooms, one band classroom, one orchestra classroom, one choral classroom, one technical education classroom, one family/consumer science classroom, three health/P.E. classrooms, one TV production classroom, one marketing classroom, and 12 special education classrooms. (130 classrooms)COST $30 million

386 classrooms = 3 new high schools at an average cost of $30 million each = $90 million.

$90 million + $25 million = $115 million to reduce student teacher ratio by 1 student per teacher for just the first year with another $25.1 million per year to maintain that ratio.

The question becomes Are we willing to pay the price?

By jim d

February 15, 2007 10:31 AM | Link to this

OH YEAH,

then throw in administative and operational costs as well. It get rather pricey.

By JustMe

February 15, 2007 11:23 AM | Link to this

KA -

Private schools, especially religous private schools, do not have to be concerned with following all of the governmental rules and regulations. Also, they can more freely enforce rules and immediately react to discipline problems.

If any public school were to do what your school likely did, they would be on the 6 o’clock news and also have multiple law suits to deal with.

Think about it!

By KA

February 15, 2007 11:45 AM | Link to this

JustMe, LOL, I know, and I was in elementary and HS in the ‘50’s and 60’s a world away in time. However, no matter what the class size, a disciplined environment will always contribute to everyone’s ability to learn.

By catlady

February 15, 2007 12:43 PM | Link to this

Nationwide reasearch indicates that poor and minority children benefit the most from smaller schools and classes. However, white middle class kids can also suffer from alienation; witness the different school shootings. It costs us a great deal either way. Me,I worry about the multigenerational effects of dropouts and babymamas. That means I pay and my kids pay and my grandkids pay…Not to mention school safety issues (invisibility rage).

In our county there is one school that is a small, community school. The families in the community are not wealthy or well-educated, but the school is the top-achieving one in the county and the kids go from there to high school to be the leaders and honor graduates. Why? Small school, smaller classes, personal accountability, parent buy-in, higher expectations. The kids experience school on a personal scale, and they are under the microscope all the time.

Please don’t tell us anymore about what the nuns were able to do when you were in school. Let’s hear from nuns teaching today, remembering that they teach a special, self-selected group. And let’s get tuned into reality about how students behave today versus when we were in school. There were 3 fights in my 4 years of high school, and the biggest scandal was when some of the boys taped a “girlie” picture on the elderly bachelor teacher’s projector screen so that when he pulled it down we all saw this “obscene” picure for the 10 seconds it took for him to roll it back up. Contrast that with now, folks. Lack of discipline does not manifest itself in those (innocent) ways nowdays.

By HS HX Teacher

February 16, 2007 10:05 AM | Link to this

Money is the bottom line. Gwinn Co Schools DO NOT have enough money to reduce class sizes for elem and MS, much less HS. The idea to reduce classes is great, if the state is going to provide funds for teachers and rooms to do so - but they aren’t. So, parents need to start enforcing discipline rules, supporting teachers and making their kid behave because being in a large classroom will be the norm until more $$$$$ becomes available.

By dektea

February 19, 2007 12:23 PM | Link to this

jimd stats were informational.

to add to that, when more classes are added, how does the school function to rotate classes to lunch, gym music p.e. etc in a six day hour. teachers barely have 10 minutes to eat/students 20 minutes.

but i must say if the country truly wants to be up to par with other countries academically, small class sizes are a must. as another WFC said, reducing the class size from 31 to 28 does no good, but 31 to 20 is realistic.

imagine a teacher in a classroom with 28 students, plus 28 desks. especially in a trailer. one cannot effectively give a well rounded education in a sardine can. teacher want to have other learning activities going on and cannot because there is no space. additionally, how will the teacher grade papers. too many students to effectively “teach.”

we must go the route jimb said, however, we must cut many school administrative, non-essential positions, and programs, even cut back on some sport programs. parents who want their children to be the next football/basketball professional, let them pay for it.

private schools - been there-many spoiled kids, who are absorbed with their riches/gadgets - many do not make the effort, standards are lower. we had even recruited from the public middle school, and high school, we were even looking to recruit from a few public elementary schools.

seriously, classroom management alone cannot ensure a quality lesson. just common sense, working with a smaller group is better for teachers, to focus on each learner.

By Jeff

February 19, 2007 12:29 PM | Link to this

I’m all for class reductions. But putting these new classes in the same schools is NOT the answer.

How about we go to 500-600 student MAX population for High Schools???

By teacher in fulton

February 19, 2007 02:20 PM | Link to this

I teach in a Fulton Co high school with an enrollment of approx 2200 students. I DEFINITELY think that reducing class size would be an improvement. My class of 33 freshmen CAN’T get the same one-on-one attention as my class of 20 juniors can. And I feel bad, because these kids are NOT getting all the “teacher” they might need and definitely deserve. But I’m only one person and I can only do so much in a 55 minute period. The person who said it was to be budgeted AHEAD of time is right on the button! Our school district routinely ‘underbudgets’/underestimates enrollment and then we’re told that we have no $$ for more teacher headcount. In the meantime, some teachers are giving up their planning period to teach an additional class, so that the class sizes can be managed.