[Vision2020] Myth of smaller class sizes

[Dale Courtney]

George,

I *really* appreciate your thoughtful reply to my post. It's nice to have a
fresh perspective from Indiana coming in.

Let's chat about some of what you wrote!

> 1.  In the US, the general idea that drives public education
> is that all children can achieve at high standards.  

Do you really think that *all* children can *achieve* *high* *academic*
standards? That would be like saying that everyone can make the varsity
football team.

In order to reach this goal, either every child must be the same (nope!), or
the bar must be lowered so that everyone can jump as high (yup!). IMO,
that's what we've done in the government schools today -- lowered the bar so
that everyone is equal. More on that later...

> 2.  IEPs.  In a typical class of 25 students, you may have
> anywhere from 4 to 10 students with individual education 
> plans that are different than the "average" student, that the 
> teacher must accommodate.  (Actually, the school must 
> accommodate, and thereby forces the teacher to accommodate).  
> These students may have learning disabilities, emotional 
> handicaps, behavioral problems, and may just be violent.  (My 
> favorite handicap--oppositional defiant disorder--they defy 
> authority.  How do you think they respond in a classroom with 
> a teacher that is trying to maintain order?)  All of these 
> students must be accommodated by the public school.  If they 
> are suspended or expelled, the school must provide home 
> tutoring at school's expense.  If they are held out of a 
> mainstream classroom,  you now have one teacher with maybe 
> 3-4 students.  This affects your overall student teacher 
> ratios.  Again, this does not occur in other countries to the 
> extent it does in the US.

Now we are getting to the crux of the matter! This will involve a long
conversation concerning the "mainstreaming" of such students (using the
educators' lingo); the responsibilities of the parents verse the State; and
our "obligation" to educate even the incorrigibles (to those high academic
standards). We should discuss this area at length. I don't have the time to
do it now. Let's talk about this later in the week, OK? 
 
> In conclusion, you are right that some countries educate
> better with higher student/teacher ratios.  However, they do 
> not operate under a system anything like the United States', 
> and therefore your arguments, I think, lose some strength due 
> to these systemic differences.

Now, the question is -- who is better off? The other countries I mentioned
(Korea; Hong Kong; Japan; Singapore) educate better. They can do it more
cheaply. And they can load their teachers with up to 50 children in a
classroom and still score 20% better than we do on Math and Science tests.
When students from these countries come to the USA, they walk all over our
students in Math, Engineering, and Sciences.

Why? Because we have painted ourselves into the corner. We have brought
these "solutions" onto ourselves; and now we pay the piper. 

Again, more on this later in the week. IMO, we're finally getting to the
crux of the matter. 

Best,
Dale Courtney
Moscow, Idaho