Agenda - 11-10-1998 - Attachment #4a

Browse Search

Report on Feasibility of Reducing Class Size Background For years, one of the most common pleas for support that School Board members have heard from teachers has been to reduce class size. Every year, it seems, teachers are asked to do more and more, particularly related to accountability and differentiation of instruction. In addition, teachers perceive that students coming to our schools have more Personal and social needs than ever before which demand their attention. Teachers believe that lower class sizes will allow them to tailor their instruction more effectively to the needs of students and, thereby, enhance student achievement. Modest efforts have been made in recent years to reduce class size. The State has provided more teaching positions (but not teacher assistants) in grades K -2, reducing class size from 26 to 23. Last year, local funds were used to reduce the average class size at the high schools to 26. The State also allows teacher assistant positions in grades K -3 to be reallocated to teacher positions if this will reduce class size. It is possible, but not certain, that the State will provide more funds to reduce class size in future years. The State's two biggest educational priorities currently are the ABC plan and the Excellent Schools Act, neither of which includes funding to reduce class size. It is encouraging that President Clinton cited reducing class size as one of his educational priorities. Locally, little progress has been made in reducing class size because it has appeared to be cost prohibitive and we do not have the facilities to accommodate the additional classes that would be generated Consequently, during budget discussions, the Board has received more requests for adding specialists (e.g. technology, science, reading and family specialists) to support classroom teachers than it has requests to reduce class size. The addition of specialists has led to a growing percentage of non - classroom teachers. The research on the impact of reducing class size is mixed It, generally, has been shown that small, incremental reductions make little difference in terms of student achievement. Classes need to be reduced to approximately 15 to 17 students and, according to a recent study from Tennessee, teachers must change how they teach. If they rely on the same techniques that they used when classes were large, student gains usually are not evident. Teachers need to take advantage of smaller classes to engage students more in their learning and to provide more individualized support to each student. The goal of reducing class size is very consistent with the district's initiative to promote differentiation in the regular classroom. Of course, there is an argument to be made that class size should be reduced simply to lessen the demands placed on our teachers. The teaching profession is becoming increasingly stressful as teachers are held more accountable, as more special needs students are included in the classrooms, and as parent support, in some cases, diminishes with increasing economic pressures placed on families. Approximately one -half of all teachers leave the profession after five years, suggesting that the quality of teaching conditions must improve if we are to retain our best teachers. More. manageable class sizes could be expected to lead to more successful recruiting efforts and less teacher burn -out. Definition of Reducing Class Size There are many possible definitions that could be used to describe what is meant by the term "reducing class size." For example, we could place two teachers in one classroom with 30 students and, effectively, reduce class size to 15. The committee, however, used a more traditional definition. It defined the objective of reducing class size to mean that the number of students in regular classroom teachers' classes (elementary), core classes