Re: Class size

[Gerald Weitz <cweitz@moscow.com>]

The question I pose deals with the present approach of
reductions across the district rather than cutting where the effect would
be minimal assuming the levy passes. Generally the research  that I
have reviewed ( I am not an expert) talks about the need to keep the
class size low during the first years. This is where the affect is the
greatest.  The problem that must be solved is  the pressing
need for technical-professional education rather the predominance of
college tracking.  My experience (Being an exchange student in
Germany and hosting 17 exchange students), traveling in a number of
different countries, Chairing the School-to-Work committee, working with
the Albertson's foundation and the Federal Government on Pro-Tech
throughout the state,  reveals that MSD has not kept pace and 
effectively has rejected this form of education. (Call Don Eshelby
(208-334-3216) for complete information about the other public school
systems in Idaho that do not have a white collar bias.)  

 I had the opportunity this summer to interview the Editor of the
Chinese National English-Language Newspaper(XinHau).  The hot topic
is Pro-Tech.   Of course this applies to the urban areas. 
Rural China is much different.  However 65% of their high school
grads are going to college in the major cities.  Urban =25% and is
going up.  Presently, their colleges are doubling in student
population every three years.  The costs are solely borne by the
student.  They have banks at every University.  Interesting for
a communist country which is on an accelerated rate of capitalism and
basic freedoms.  America now relies on foreign immigration for our
technical work force.  How many of our own youth will have to be
left behind economically because our public system refuses to change its
approach and emphasis?

We talk about equality and simply do not practice the concept in the
application of education.  When one reviews the Pullman numbers,
they have not forgotten this  form of education.  Hence, if
small class size is not used wisely, other segments of the student
population are compromised.  Recall that this distinct had about
$500,000 spent on it to make Votech happen. Plus a wide variety of
community folks dedicated themselves to have this change occur.  We
had focus groups,  town hall meetings, and were on public
Television.  This district was recognized as the most forward
thinking district in the state.  It was honored and recognized by
the IEA, etc. Further, the district was given the opportunity to enter
into a partnership with the National Guard for a skills center. 

Think of this concept;  dual enrollment would free up assets at the
high school. For example, I worked with an extremely bright student that
just dropped out. This student would have benefited from the opportunity
of dual enrollment. Some of the drops of enrollment happen due to this
issue.  Pullman will tell you that they gain enrollment from the
privates due  to dual enrollment.  A recent Daily News article
talked about Idaho having the second largest increase in idle
teenagers.  The article goes  talks about our lack of
vocational education.  It discussed the plight of the alternative
student.  MSD Strategic Planning and present discussions do not
address either of these.  I wonder, if voting on a  levy
increase will cause just more of the same. 

There are over 900 students that do not avail themselves of our
system.  I think that this question  must be brought forward
and changes must be instituted. Recall that the levy is a permanent
levy.  This is rarely used in the state.  I believe there are 3
others districts.  Call Sue Driskill for the specifics.  I
believe that the community has been left out of decisions since
1992.  It starts showing up in the enrollment declines and the
decrease in academic performance. For example, during Alethia Fasolino's
tenure, our district average of 8 to a height of 12 National Merit
Semifinalists.  L:ast four years average was four.  I believe
the district has forgotten that we own the district, it is ours and that
not all the expertise is held by the inside educator.  It is time to
demand more and also to fund it properly.  Pullman is considered one
of the 100 best public school districts in the nation.  We have the
advantage since we are not held down by as many regulations and have more
local control (in theory).  We could be the best in the
nation.                

I resigned from the Board because there had to be changes made and it was
not possible to be on the Board and make it happen.  I am a devoted
advocate of public education, however I can not stand up blindly and pat
this district on the back for not being willing to be the best and for
not educationing all students with equality and equally.  This
district is noted for needless internal conflict.  Example, as 
freshman I was trust into a 9 month labor dispute.  Long term and
fair labor contracts would have eliminated this. Nobody is talking about
this.  Another example about how this district reacts, when I went
to the classroom, I found teachers and their students in overheated
classrooms 110 +.  Since my orientation is in real time, I made a
considerable effort to change those conditions.  What most do not
know, was the complete hostility that ensued.  A benign project, yet
everything was a fight..  Hence, it will have to be the CQE with
devoted folks to be the vanguard for change.  Just a few insights.
Thanks for reading this. 
Jerry        




At 12:51 PM 04/03/2002 -0800, John Davis wrote:
> Ah, perhaps a bit of clarification regarding
> Weitz’s commentary regarding information provided by Bob
> West—specifically regarding class size.
>
> There actually is a significant body of research that has been conducted
> on class size which demonstrates a positive effect upon student
> achievement in classes around 20.  Most notably is the meta-analysis
> studies by Smith & Glass (1978), followed with similar investigations
> by Robinson & Wittebols (1986), and Slavin (1989).  A more
> recent study by Wenglinsky (1997) examining data from over 180 school
> districts across the US supports conclusions mentioned above.  In
> addition, several large-scale longitudinal studies in the states of
> Indiana & Tennessee (Prime Time, 1984, STAR, 1985, and Project
> Challenge (1990) also provide significant evidence supporting small class
> size correlated with positive student achievement.
>
> With that said (and as with all research), there are certainly
> investigations which do not support the aforementioned studies.  In
> most cases the samples were small, extraneous variables were not
> controlled, and the conclusions were invariably tied to ‘significant
> extra costs are not worth the increases in achievement’.  My and the
> rest of my community’s children are certainly worth the $8-$10 or even
> $50 more per month to maintain a quality educational environment.
>
> Here is a nice overview of the research:
>
> http://www.ed.gov/pubs/ReducingClass/Class_size.html
>
> What is also ignored is the input from the professionals: the teachers
> who manage both small and large classrooms.  Through the years I
> have heard comments from community patrons, legislators,
> business-persons, and parents suggesting that, based on their 1-hour
> visits, that having a large classroom is not really a problem. 
> Which is the same as saying, upon concluding a 1-hour visit to a hospital
> ER during a quiet period, that there really are not very many people who
> require emergency services so why spend the money?
>
> Just think for a minute about being confronted with the daunting task of
> managing the educational, social, emotional, and psychological well-being
> of 20, much less 30 or 35 students for a 7-8 hour block of time; and, not
> have the monies to really be able to do what you could do
> (educationally), AND be paid a rather small salary to do this.  Now
> do this every day.  And spend time on the weekends and holidays and
> summers to ‘upgrade’ professional skills and knowledge.  You are
> just beginning to understand the concept of ‘teacher’.
>
> Intuitively, you realize that smaller class = higher quality environment
> yielding a more positive overall experience—that being achievement, to
> say the least.  All of this of course assumes that you have a
> qualified, knowledgeable, caring person as the teacher—that is a
> given.  Does that mean that with the class of 20 you will still have
> some people who do not achieve as they could or should?  Of
> course.  So listen to what your professional educators (Moscow
> teachers) say—they know very well what they are talking about.  Do
> you rely on advice from your doctor, lawyer, dentist, fire-persons,
> police electrician, and plumber (I left out a lot—not intended)? 
> Absolutely—or, we get a second opinion. . . right?
>
> With all that has been presented, please remember the mandate in the US:
> provide a free, equal, and non-discriminatory educational
> environment/experience for all children (through about 16 depending on
> the state) regardless of race, color, creed, ethics, religion,
> socioeconomic status, or physical/emotional/cognitive disability. 
> It is truly amazing what we do in the US—if in doubt, go to most any
> public school in most any other country and see if they do exactly the
> same. . .
>
> With all that is being decided upon for the upcoming levy (and well into
> the future) we need to be careful about obtaining and presenting
> information.  
> In this case, it is more than just reasonable to support the concept of
> maintaining smaller class size—that is a variable we can control and have
> done so quite well thus far in Moscow.
>
> PASS THE LEVY!!!
>
> John Davis
>
>
>
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos:
> http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx