Paul Ryan in Esquire

This is from 1998, but I think it's about right:

 

http://ed.gov/pubs/ReducingClass/Class_size.html

Project Challenge districts' average rankings before and after class size reduction, according to second-grade student achievement in reading and mathematics

Total number of districts in Tennessee: 138

Average ranking of Project Challenge districts before class size reduction (1990)

Average ranking of Project Challenge districts after class size reduction (1993)

Second-Grade Reading Achievement


Before class-size reduction: 99th

After class-size reduction: 78th

Second-Grade Mathematics Achievement

Before class-size reduction: 85th

After class-size reduction: 57th

 

http://www.ethanallen.org/html/about_us.html

I am shocked a right-wing think tank advocates spending less on education.

 

I'm always one who is open to counter-intuitive information, but the idea that class size - and you are talking about a 1/3 reduction in class size here - doesn't have an effect on student learning just does not even pass the giggle test for me.

 

I'm sure we could.

I mentioned this only recently on another thread. Too many weapons programs & military institutions are predicated on serving the interests of individual members of Congress and their donors/fundraisers/lobbyists. (See former Congressman Jack Murtha, among others.)

We can also look at re-defining our global mission. Do we need a presence in so many places abroad. Should we be funding NATO at its current level. Can we lean on our allies in Europe and Canada to pay more for their defense.

And, should our military be responsible for responding to natural disasters around the world.

Those questions should all be asked and debated. And, if we make cuts in those areas, then people need to understand that we will not and cannon play world police or world ambulance.

Give me some evidence.

It's a huge talking point for teachers unions. It keeps their numbers up.

It sounds good. It sounds reasonable, and makes sense. But show me the results.

 

I've never even heard of the group. I was looking for the specific quote: "instead of hiring 100,000 new teachers to teach smaller classes, the country would be far better off firing the 100,000 worst teachers and putting their kids into larger classes taught by better teachers."

 

Class size. Several points of view.

www.usatoday.com/news/education/2008-03-24-small-classes_N.htm

www.brookings.edu/papers/2011/0511_class_size_whitehurst_chingos.aspx

www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2007-10/cums-ssr101607.php

www.epi.org/publication/books_classsizedebate/

blogs.ajc.com/get-schooled-blog/2010/05/19/latest-study-reducing-class-size-doesnt-benefit-student-achievement/

 

I never once had less than 26 kids on my class in grade school.

How much or little of a gain was required to move from 99th to 78th or from 85th to 57th?

It may be very little. It might be little enough to be random.

Was class size the only difference? Or, did they make other changes to increase the odds the study would reach the desired results?

And, are we really celebrating 78th and 57th out of 138 as success stories?

Seriously? Is that worth it? Very shitty results to just plain old shitty? That's good?

Study is 20 years old now. Would love to know the real results. How'd the kids turn out?

(The last part isn't a challenge to you. I'm just curious.)

 

When you go looking for a quote like that, where else do you expect to end up? That is the #1 answer to all of society's problems for the entirety of the GOP establishment, up to and including the presidential nominee. Fire everybody. Profits go up!

 

Can you give me a day or two to pull the class size data together?

You know me. I'll be honest about it. I'm just a little busy right now.

 

Sure.

And, I'm open to agreeing with this argument.

I just don't think the sort of obvious answer that smaller class size = better results, is necessarily true.

Or that if it is, that makes a big difference, and should be such a focus at the expense of other, potentially better, fixes.

 

I read a book that tried to "objectively" analyze various issues in education.

The author did a chapter on class size. I remember reading that when Tennessee reduced class size one the legislators, who had a P.H.D. in sociology, designed the law in such a way as to test if smaller class sizes lead to better results. The subsequent study indicated that smaller class sizes contributed to enhances performance. Given the large size of the Tennesse study and the fact that it was well designed have made it the go to study for advocates of smaller classes.

There are of a lot of studies that have reached the conclusion that class size does not matter much. And there are other studies that correlate performance to class size. So either side you can find a study to fit to your preexisiting belief.