Teachers get well paid for the short hours,holidays,job security etc.I know of women who want to have a decrease in salary to become teachers so they can go home before 9.00 pm and have a life.

Chris C is right to highlite the myth that class size does not matter - I wonder what those who promote this myth are like as a teacher. Hattie of Melb Uni fame is the person who people use as the authority. It is a very convenient argument for cutting funds to schools and bash teachers with. As a preschool teacher I think there is a difference between a group of 16 to that of 20.

Yabby,

OECD Education at a Glance 2011 does not give any information on teacher pay or class sizes in Shanghai, China. The Grattan Institute reports says classes there are 40 students, but they often have two teachers in them, and teachers teach only 10-12 hours a week. We do not need tiny classes here, just to keep the class sizes we have now, which are in the low 20s. If you find figures on the pay for teachers in Shanghai, please make sure thy are expressed relative to the overall living standards of the country, because that is what affects the relative ability level of those entering teaching.

Loadeddog,

All teachers know there is a difference between a group of 16 and one of 20, or between one of 20 and one of 30. John Hattie is often misquoted. He does not say that class sizes do not matter, just that they matter less than other factors. He actually says a smaller class will give students a nine-month advantage in learning over a larger class. Those that promote the myth that small classes do not matter, the followers of the ideo-illogical mantras of the Institute of Public Affairs, also promote the myth that increased spending on public education does not matter, but are silent when private schools increase their fees to $30,000 pa, the latter fact showing that spending certainly does matter.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/30/world/asia/30shanghai.html?_r=1&pagewanted=all

Chris, in Shanghai teachers earn around 750$ a month, which is
far less then other professionals, according to the NY Times.

Your comparison with private schools is hardly a valid one.
Rich parents would have smarter children, public schools have to
accept everyone, including those who simply don't want to be there.

If you look at Perth Modern School, where more gifted kids are
selected, they still do very well under the public system, as
do schools such as Applecross.

So the point is that simply throwing resources at education is not
the answer, although its a great excuse for an education system
that is not up to scratch, for those who have no better excuse.

Doing more with the resources available, ah, now that would be a
challenge.

Of course class size matters, so too does reward for performance, air-conditioning, good texts, breakfast but do we get due benefit for reduced class sizes with the current organisation and the answer is clearly no. Education spend up, results down, students escaping to the private system.
How about the same class size; ensure Teachers are capable, then paid and supported better by the Headmaster. Our recent experience with a State “Centre of Excellence” meant we had to save our little one by moving to a Catholic Primary. It would make Kafka blush, truly disturbed teachers, bullying, useless “experts”, policies only living on paper and then escape. (NB: Centre of Excellence is like Democratic in a country name.)