Class Size
“Teachers matter most” is the mantra of, and justification for, an accountability era that is focusing almost exclusively on teachers’ contribution to student learning.
The education bureaucrats and politicians responsible for the accountability system also have an obligation to listen to teachers about what is happening in the classroom.
In every year since the District's 2012 "educational delivery model" has been a disaster for art, music, libraries, physical education, and many other programs in PPS. The over-use of exceptional schedules and abandonment of the principle of "equity" for middle school and high school class sizes, means underserved students are more at risk.
CCEU members believe that schools can offer more opportunities and students have a greater chance for success when class sizes are smaller. And, the positive impact of smaller class sizes is greater for disadvantaged students. But, if you don’t want to listen to teachers, then read the research. We are saying the same thing.
The Tennessee Star (Student-Teacher Achievement Ratio) study, including the original 1985-89 examination (comparing class sizes of 13-17 to 22-26) and the updates through 2010, showed that smaller class students substantially out-performed larger class students on standardized tests. The effects of smaller class sizes K-3 were realized all the way through high school. Students in smaller K-3 classes were more likely to:
The Star study also showed a 56% reduction in the black-white achievement gap attributable to smaller class size. The Star study is not the only research that shows this.
It doesn’t take a psychometrician to see that the impact of smaller class size in Pittsburgh will mean an increase in Promise-Readiness among our students.
The PFT/PPS professional contract does not have a uniform standard for class size across grade and content levels. This is appropriate, but does not get to the core of the matter. The contract language for class size was written in an era where the pedagogical delivery was different and was not closely considered.
It is nearly impossible to do quality differentiated instruction to meet the needs of students, each with a unique intellectual, educational, social, and emotional developmental history, when there are 30 or more students in class.
Arne Duncan couldn't do it.
Bill Gates couldn't do it.
Linda Lane couldn't do it.
Anthony Hamlet couldn't do it.
It also makes sense that class size may have a varying effect depending upon what type of learning is taking place and the method measurement used to measure that learning. There may be little measurable effect on learning between smaller and larger class sizes when the learning is informational and the delivery is predominantly lecture. However, if the learning is student-centered, more rigorous, engaging and problem solving, then class size surely has a greater impact. That is the type of learning that Pittsburgh is dedicated to, as part of on-going reform. A 1970’s approach to class size is not aligned with a 21st century educational reform agenda.
We are not ignoring the financial threats to the district made by a state government whose goals do not include the success of students in Pittsburgh. At the same time, the leadership of the PFT must be and is poised to address all aspects of a changing environment that have an effect on the success of both students and teachers.
CCEU members and endorsed candidates know that appropriate class sizes will have a positive impact on the success of our students. We will continue the work to align all aspects of reform in the direction of greater opportunities for students and better working conditions for educators represented by the PFT.
The education bureaucrats and politicians responsible for the accountability system also have an obligation to listen to teachers about what is happening in the classroom.
In every year since the District's 2012 "educational delivery model" has been a disaster for art, music, libraries, physical education, and many other programs in PPS. The over-use of exceptional schedules and abandonment of the principle of "equity" for middle school and high school class sizes, means underserved students are more at risk.
CCEU members believe that schools can offer more opportunities and students have a greater chance for success when class sizes are smaller. And, the positive impact of smaller class sizes is greater for disadvantaged students. But, if you don’t want to listen to teachers, then read the research. We are saying the same thing.
The Tennessee Star (Student-Teacher Achievement Ratio) study, including the original 1985-89 examination (comparing class sizes of 13-17 to 22-26) and the updates through 2010, showed that smaller class students substantially out-performed larger class students on standardized tests. The effects of smaller class sizes K-3 were realized all the way through high school. Students in smaller K-3 classes were more likely to:
- Graduate high school on schedule
- Not drop out
- Take Honors courses
- Graduate in the top 10% of their class
- Take the SAT or ACT
- Go to college.
The Star study also showed a 56% reduction in the black-white achievement gap attributable to smaller class size. The Star study is not the only research that shows this.
It doesn’t take a psychometrician to see that the impact of smaller class size in Pittsburgh will mean an increase in Promise-Readiness among our students.
The PFT/PPS professional contract does not have a uniform standard for class size across grade and content levels. This is appropriate, but does not get to the core of the matter. The contract language for class size was written in an era where the pedagogical delivery was different and was not closely considered.
It is nearly impossible to do quality differentiated instruction to meet the needs of students, each with a unique intellectual, educational, social, and emotional developmental history, when there are 30 or more students in class.
Arne Duncan couldn't do it.
Bill Gates couldn't do it.
Linda Lane couldn't do it.
Anthony Hamlet couldn't do it.
It also makes sense that class size may have a varying effect depending upon what type of learning is taking place and the method measurement used to measure that learning. There may be little measurable effect on learning between smaller and larger class sizes when the learning is informational and the delivery is predominantly lecture. However, if the learning is student-centered, more rigorous, engaging and problem solving, then class size surely has a greater impact. That is the type of learning that Pittsburgh is dedicated to, as part of on-going reform. A 1970’s approach to class size is not aligned with a 21st century educational reform agenda.
We are not ignoring the financial threats to the district made by a state government whose goals do not include the success of students in Pittsburgh. At the same time, the leadership of the PFT must be and is poised to address all aspects of a changing environment that have an effect on the success of both students and teachers.
CCEU members and endorsed candidates know that appropriate class sizes will have a positive impact on the success of our students. We will continue the work to align all aspects of reform in the direction of greater opportunities for students and better working conditions for educators represented by the PFT.