The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Class sizes and the dead hand of history > Comments

Class sizes and the dead hand of history : Comments

By Dean Ashenden, published 1/3/2013

Smaller class sizes are good, but other measures are better, and cost far less.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. All
Read the work of John Hattie for figures to back up this article. There are many more important thing the government should be aiming for before even looking at class size.
Posted by rational-debate, Friday, 1 March 2013 12:54:37 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Hear hear!

I refer you to my article of 11 September 2012:

If Gonski is the answer what is the question?

http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=14097&page=0

>>In economic terms what we have seen globally over many centuries is the substitution of capital for labour. The deployment of capital in the form of machines and software enables one man to do the work of many more cheaply and, usually, better. A man with a horse drawn cart with steel-rimmed wheels can shift more cargo more rapidly than a human being can carry on his back. Give the man a diesel truck and decent roads and he can shift even more.

And a small team armed with the right software can do the work of armies of lawyers and do it better and more cheaply.

[...]

I suggest that the current model for education belongs to the horse and cart era. Or, if you like, the era of hundreds of lawyers laboriously over thousands of documents. Just as we can substitute capital for labour in every other human enterprise, so I suggest, we can do it in education.>>

Gonski may turn out to be the biggest blunder of an especially inept administration.
Posted by stevenlmeyer, Friday, 1 March 2013 5:40:49 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I quite enjoyed this article. It raised valid points and smacked of an article whose author knows what he is talking about. It also provides a far better refutation of the 'small classes' argument than those who lazily throw Hattie's name into the equation (and no, rational-debate, I don't mean you: you haven't made the assertion that I'm about to discuss).

In a workshop with John Hattie that I attended last year, he expressed some concern at the fact that his work was used as evidence that small classes don't work and therefore classes should be made bigger. If he reads this (unlikely, I know), he's more than welcome to correct me, but what I got out of the workshop was the following:

Class size ON ITS OWN has little effect on learning. Smaller classes may, however, allow more effective pedagogy that is only effective in small groups. Assuming that a small class is an effective one, then, is incorrect. A small class with a well-trained teacher who employs effective pedagogy may be an effective class, though.

Which brings us back to the article. If we are looking for cost-effective improvements to learning, a reduction of class sizes on its own is ineffective. When you add in new resources and new training for teachers, it may not be cost-effective at all. Other strategies with greater proven effects may be the solution we need. I'm not entirely sure that Gonski has taken that into account. Until we know what to spend it on, money thrown at education is money wasted.
Posted by Otokonoko, Friday, 1 March 2013 11:18:33 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Yes a good article, & definitely on the right track, as far as it goes. I know those I went to school with, in classes of around 40 students, all had results better than similar kids today, in classes of less than 30. We had good teachers, unlike so many in schools today.

Of course our teachers were not only allowed, but expected to maintain discipline, a great aid to learning.

Where the article failed was in not suggesting our kids would do better in classes of double the number of students, if this increase in class size was caused by SACKING all incompetent, disinterested, & bludging teachers from the system.

Getting rid of the no hopers would allow a large increase on pay for those good teachers left to do the work, & all kids would benefit.
Posted by Hasbeen, Friday, 1 March 2013 11:47:49 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Another way that we could be more selective with teachers is by recognising that school is not the place for everyone. The ABS shows a sharp spike in the retention rates of students from Year 7 to Year 12, dating back to the early 1990s:

http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/Lookup/4102.0Main+Features40Mar+2011 (scroll down about 2/5 of the page)

What this means is that when you, Hasbeen, were attending school, it is likely that senior classes - although bigger - were fewer. More kids in smaller classes require more teachers. This, in turn, reduces the level to which we can be selective of those entering into the workforce as teachers.

The thing is, so many of those kids are there not because they have ambitions that require a Year 12 education, but because opportunities outside of school have dried up. I suspect that many don't have the 'get up and go' to get up and go somewhere else - school is all they know, so they stick it out until the end. Opportunities for those students outside the school environment - and a societal shift away from the belief that those who leave before Year 12 are 'lazy dropouts' could be beneficial.

Perhaps Year 12 should be seen as extension rather than a base, and a Year 10 certificate should once again be introduced to indicate the satisfactory acquisition of skills needed for the workforce. Students in Years 9 and 10 would be motivated to make the most of those years, and students in Years 11 and 12 would be reduced to those who saw value - or whose parents saw value - in continued academic study in order to achieve their goals.

At present, by trying to please everyone, our schools seem to be pleasing nobody.
Posted by Otokonoko, Saturday, 2 March 2013 12:05:38 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I agree a proportion of students coerced to remain after Year 10 when they dont desire or need academic quals. 30-40 years ago the Federal government wanted to brag education interest, they legislated students to stay in school/Tafe education until grade 12 .

This clogged up the education system through to post graduate.

This also capped off the demise of real jobs for 'juniors' and in trade training, as difficulty finding a placement at 17-18 yrs with no experience and exhalted wages, which were close to an experienced, productive adult. The extra 2 years, frustrated and bored students doing dumbed down subjects, led to disrupted school communities.

At this time political correctness went a trip to the moon too far so that parents, schools and Australians in general were terrified to discipline/teach self discipline to anyone.

Unfortunately,training courses for real work were not there when the ' bright idea ' was legislated and student's later quasi courses, didnt fulfil "out in the world".

UNFORTUNATELY AUSTRALIANS STARTED TO BELIEVE THAT ACADEMIC SUCCESS WAS THE ONLY TRUE SUCCESS... disregarding that Australia was well populated by highly successful, contributing Australians whose academic education was limited. IT WAS political ACADEMIC SNOBBERY and ended boxing extraordinary skills ( not academic) onto a second class shelf. As Australians felt obliged to do 'the best' for their children, grade 11 & 12 was overloaded, and thousands of university graduates never worked in their field.

PS....Discipline...Why are the young students from families recently added to our Australian family showing such aptitude for their studies and work ethic. I believe it is their family Discipline leading to the Student's learned self discipline and their recognition for the students natural skills

Australians have been politically duped into thinking that discipline/self discipline is a loss of freedom and that was a cute political ploy to garner votes at that time, from 18yr plus young people who had been recently given the vote.

PPS......If small classes are such a benefit are there any statistics/ studies which show that students in country schools with small class sizes have much higher education achievement
Posted by nannabev, Saturday, 2 March 2013 9:27:42 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Actually I think the extension of schooling for all was a device to hide the huge number of unemployed at the time. Made the figures look much better.

Then instead of teaching something worthwhile, the teaching of the real subjects, math & science, were merely drawn out to fill the 2 extra years. Kids leaving year 12 had no more math & science, or anything else for that matter, than those previously leaving year 10.

In fact the reverse was often the case, as many less competent teachers had to be added to the workforce to stand in front of those new classes. Many of those "teachers" are still standing in front of classes today, despite having never taught anyone anything.

We now find a large requirement for remedial math in tech collages, [TAFE I believe today], so these 17 year olds can be brought up to the standard of 15 year olds of yesterday, a standard required for many trades. The huge drop out rate in for example, electrical apprenticeships, is due mostly to these lids being unable to grasp what was normal math for the intermediate certificate, due to lack of grounding.

The really astounding thing is many graduating from Uni with a BSc, particularly in things like environmental science, & many medical subjects, would be unable to undertake those apprenticeships, without a remedial math course first.
Posted by Hasbeen, Saturday, 2 March 2013 10:25:22 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
One new area which I'm sure you'd approve of nannabev, is the in school apprenticeship scheme.

It is going quite well in our large near Brisbane country high. The most difficult problem for us is lack of public transport to many of the areas where we can find companies willing to take part.

Not only does it give a number of kids, who have no intention of undertaking academic courses an outlet & an interest one full day a week, it gives them a small income to boot.

Even better, as those taking part are usually the more committed, they do well in the workplace. With some experience & having shown a willingness to work, most of the kids have a job to go to immediately on finishing school.

My wife ran the scheme for our P&C for some years, & we had over 50 kids involved some years. It has since been run by the professional career advisors in the school who are not finding the same number of employers willing to take kids, [perhaps they won't beg on behalf of the kids], but the kids still love it, & it is still advantaging many.
Posted by Hasbeen, Saturday, 2 March 2013 7:54:17 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Yes Hasbeen , I am aware and do heartily approve of these opportunities available now, but there was about 15 years lag time in which we 'lost' many young folk Australia wide. I still feel "holding" frustrated, non academic kids in school until they are 17-18( and then they have to be paid near to work experienced adult wages ) contributes heavily to the abysmal current youth unemployment figures.
So many never have the good feeling and confidence boost of having a real job for a real period of time with regular income, and there is a reality that the hardest time be a successful job applicant is when unemployed ( and much harder when the person has no real experience of a workplace). It is a terrible gamble for the employer to take on these young people.
Posted by nannabev, Sunday, 3 March 2013 8:45:18 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Arguments over class sizes seem about as relevant today as discussing what paper size to use for electronic textbooks. Research shows that class size is not a significant factor in student results. More importantly, as learning moves from the classroom to on-line, "class size" becomes less meaningful. Teaching is moving on-line, faster at higher levels (fastest at universities), but is moving at all levels. We need to discover the best way to blend face-to-face student interactions, especially for learning social skills and e-learning. I suspect there will still be a need for small classes and a "home room" for students, but these will mostly be virtual and more fluid.

See:

1. "A Green Computing Professional Education Course Online" from my paper at the 7th International Conference on Computer Science & Education (ICCSE 2012): http://www.tomw.net.au/technology/it/green_computing_professional/

2. On-line Professional Education For Australian Research-Intensive Universities in the Asian Century: http://blog.tomw.net.au/2012/11/on-line-professional-education-for.html

3. "Combining Synchronous and Asynchronous Learning Techniques" for the 8th International Conference on Computer Science & Education (ICCSE), Colombo, Sri Lanka, April 2013: http://blog.tomw.net.au/2013/01/combining-synchronous-and-asynchronous.html
Posted by tomw, Monday, 4 March 2013 10:24:20 AM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
In the 1960s the Finns realised that the products of their education system were of much lower quality in literacy and numeracy than would be expected for a first-world nation. This state of affairs was turned around mainly by raising the standards required of teachers. In particular, only those in the top ten percent of academic achievers at high school could end up as teachers. Today Finland consistently rates at or near the top in measures of education performance. Over the same period Australia has followed a policy of lowering standards across the board at universities and then reacts with surprise at the level of mediocrity we now encounter.
When asked: Do you believe that all children should be given an equal opportunity for a good education? Most people including all politicians answer “Yes”.
When asked: Do you believe that you should strive to give your child an educational advantage over others? Many people answer “Yes” by their actions.
When asked: Do you think the Government should provide funds so that your child can get this advantage over others? A large portion of the population answers “Of course.”
If these are our cultural attitudes how can we expect to raise educational standards for all our children? Money spent on education needs to be spent more wisely than it is at present.
Posted by Dayton, Monday, 4 March 2013 12:48:36 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Tomw the only situation where class size is not relevant is if exams are set as multiple choice questions marked by computer technology. Maybe futuristically, just a direct download installation into the brain.
Any education situation, such as in primary and early secondary school, where personal mentoring, individual guidance and marking of assessments, provision of social training and parenting, and the never ending additional demands by governments for more detailed reporting to satisfy their need for statistics, IMMEDIATELY DEMANDS A CAP ON CLASS SIZES, otherwise there will be little time to actually teach !
Posted by nannabev, Tuesday, 5 March 2013 8:49:35 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Sorry nanabev, I can't agree with that at all. We got a much better education in my day, the 50s, than any of my kids have had through our schools. This despite class sizes in the 40s. Our kids had classes down to below 25 at times, but with incompetent lazy teachers, this was no help at all.

If we had not been able to help, in some subjects, & been able to afford the necessary coaching, by competant people in other areas, our kids would be as poorly educated as most of their peers.

So true Dasyton, you would not give many of today's primary school teachers a job stacking shelves in a supermarket, it would be beyond their capacity.

We had great teachers. Not only did they know their subjects, they wanted to share their knowledge. Two of my kids had a senior math C teacher who could not have passed any exam on the subject. A friend, a biology teacher, resigned when told he was to teach senior math C, a subject he did not understand. He was horrified when told to "just muddle through".

Yes as with the Finns, it was only the very good who got a teacher’s scholarship to Uni You needed at least a couple of first class honors to get a company scholarship for any subject, so many top students took the teachers scholarship, & served their 5 years teaching that entailed. Many stayed on & were really great teachers. Today it is one of the last options ticked
Posted by Hasbeen, Tuesday, 5 March 2013 10:07:53 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Hasbeen, we are the same vintage, & mostly agree re our education system.
We differ where the blame lies. ??Teaching subjects outside their training ?? unruly and physically abusive bullying students with knives and weapons including furniture in class. Teachers NOW have children with medium to severe degrees of learning and behaviour difficulties , & children with poor social skills ( in normal courtesy or toilet & health training).
The Education Depts try many new fandangled ideas in teaching subjects (often failed ideas from the USA) on a whim, trialling them and discarding them with gay abandon. The years of my children/grandchildren's education there were 5 variations of primary school math. University lecturers of all sciences & maths based courses, have complained for years that students High Schools assessment requiring flowing essays on subjects that need answering with clear dot point presentations of the facts, have 'lost' real maths/science oriented students who often dont excel at english. NOT TEACHERS CHOICE, and now, new teachers are products of their poor education system
English in trouble... Education Depts instructions over the years ...ignore correct spelling, then reading became a memory test with flash cards, no instruction how to read a word you have never learnt before, then grammar became a no no, as well as punctuation. What's left of the English language after that!
Many other subjects have been similarly maltreated.
THE TUG OF WAR, BETWEEN DIFFERING IDEALISTIC FACTIONS IN THE STATE EDUCATION DEPARTMENTS, IS AT FAULT, AND NOW THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT IS ENTERING THE FRAY AS WELL.
Also the inordinate amount of teacher time needed for form filling for statistics, health and safety, (school trip organisation is a real nightmare)ETC.

I agree... sad standards, students in high school & cant read( cant upset & tell a parent in plain english that their primary school child is not coping). I also believe there is too much "fluffy" stuff in the first years . A child who reads competently can broaden their own education and will enjoy learning enthusiastically and confidently. SO READING AND WRITING COMPETENCY SHOULD HAVE THE MAXIMUM EARLY ATTENTION.
Posted by nannabev, Wednesday, 6 March 2013 1:22:28 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The campaign to make teacher’s working lives worse by increasing class sizes needs to be resisted. I have dealt with many of the issues at http://community.tes.co.uk/forums/t/576719.aspx?PageIndex=22
Posted by Chris C, Wednesday, 13 March 2013 9:21:27 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
nannabev wrote 5 March 2013 8:49:35 AM:

>Tomw the only situation where class size is not relevant is if exams are set as multiple choice questions marked by computer technology.

No, research has shown that class size does not improve student learning, in classrooms with teachers, face-to-face. The research also shows that e-learning is just as effective as face-to-face teaching, but that is a separate issue.

> Any education situation, such as in primary and early secondary school, where personal mentoring, individual guidance and marking of assessments, provision of social training and parenting ...

Yes, I teach postgraduate professional courses at university where those issues are still important. But they have little to do with "class size".

>... IMMEDIATELY DEMANDS A CAP ON CLASS SIZES, otherwise there will be little time to actually teach !

You appear to be confusing class size with the number of students per teacher. In "Educating Gen Wi-Fi: How We Can Make Schools Relevant for 21st Century Learners" (ABC Books, 2013) Australian educator Greg Whitby provides a practical prescription for better education: http://blog.tomw.net.au/2013/02/making-schools-relevant-for-next.html

Much of Greg approach is the same as being implemented at university.
Posted by tomw, Wednesday, 13 March 2013 1:54:37 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The main thing is to get rid of all the political correctness & bring back streaming.

My teachers had no difficulty with large classes, but the disruptive elements distributed through out classes today, were all off doing woodwork, or agricultural studies, or some such. Not only were they much happier, doing something they could see some point in, & enjoy, & therefor much less disruptive, my teacher had 40 kids, but 40 kids who wanted to get a good result at exam time.

Yes that's right, real exams, with real marks, & actual places in the class.

Part of the reason I did 3 honors was that it allowed me to drop history. I hated history, & was always near the bottom of the class, as you would expect. I did not like that, much better doing physics honors, which was hard, but I was one of the top students.

So class size in no problem, when the kids in the class are there to learn, & because they want to be there.
Posted by Hasbeen, Wednesday, 13 March 2013 6:50:17 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy