Thrust For Educational
Leadership 		Class Size Reduction:
Is it working?

 

Confronting the unknown


Many questions remain unanswered: The policy has its roots in findings from an impressive Tennessee study called Project STAR, which found that children in the early grades benefit from small classes, at least in reading and math, and that benefits appear to last over time, even if the children later move to larger classes.

Exporting the experiment to California, however, radically changed its scale and complexity, which led to doubts whether similar results could be achieved here. Moreover, Tennessee's small classes averaged 15; California's are a third larger. And other research suggests that getting class sizes below 15 may be key. Gains don't result from CSR alone; teaching and learning behaviors also need to be changed. That's a variable that has been thinly documented in California but is being closely watched.

The stark reality is that most of the state's newly-hired teachers are inexperienced. Nearly 30 percent are also uncredentialed. What effect will that have on the quality of instruction and on the state's return on its CSR investment?

Then there's the money issue. It appears that inner-city children may have less access than others to CSR's benefits due to the pressure on schools' facilities and/or lack of qualified teachers. Yet findings from Project STAR and other research suggest that CSR dollars might best be focused on those very schools, since they serve many students from minority and adverse socio-economic backgrounds -- two groups that tend to gain most from smaller classes.

Bottom line, CSR's success will be judged by student achievement. But measuring achievement gains poses enormous challenges. For starters, no data were collected up front to measure gains against. And there's no statewide test to give districts a common yardstick. Next spring, students in grades two through 11 will probably take a new test, but comparing scores with results from 1996-97 will be problematic.

It's generally agreed that assessing the learning of first and second graders is itself a difficult feat -- one requiring multiple measures. On top of all that, both local and statewide evaluators face the thorniest problem of all: how to interpret results once they're available. And as Stanford's Mike Kirst puts it, "If you get an effect, is it caused by class size?"

The state hasn't funded its mandated evaluation, but an independent one is being planned. Meanwhile, a number of surveys and analyses, along with press reports, have attempted to get a fix on how CSR is turning out.

Evaluating Class Size Reduction
by Joan McRobbie

n evaluation now being developed will make an effort to find out what impact class size reduction has had on education in California. A consortium of research agencies is working in concert with school districts and associations -- including ACSA -- on a multi-year, comprehensive study of what changes have occurred, what effects the reform is having and what support could be given to increase its benefits. The group is headed by the American Institutes for Research of Palo Alto, the RAND Corporation of Santa Monica and Policy Analysis for California Education of Stanford and Berkeley and includes WestEd, EdSource and the National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards and Student Testing at UCLA. It is also convening a larger group that includes ACSA, both state teacher unions, CSBA and representatives of the California Department of Education. The consortium has mapped out an approach aimed not only at informing policy-makers, but also encouraging information-sharing along the way. The aim is for practitioners to learn from each other while contributing to the general pool of knowledge. Accordingly, the research design is broad-based, including student achievement and much more. Factors to be measured include:
  • The influx of new teachers.
  • The extent to which instructional changes have accompanied CSR.
  • The impact on other reforms and the effects on special education and LEP students.
Where possible, researchers are drawing information from existing data bases and coordinating efforts across agencies to minimize the burden on districts. Surveys, interviews and focus groups are also being organized. The study will also include intensive classroom case studies focused on student experiences in language arts and mathematics. Classrooms in large and small districts with students and teachers from differing backgrounds will be included. The findings will be recorded in writing and on video. The estimated cost of the evaluation is $1 million to $1.5 million over four or five years. Funding is being sought from the federal government and from California-based and national foundations. The State Board of Education has contributed some money. If the state does provide evaluation funding, that's one more source the consortium will try to tap. Districts are joining the effort primarily through existing networks or groups, such as ACSA's committees or county office links. For more information, please contact Joan McRobbie at (415) 565-3069.
continue