eduwonkette_header_515.jpg

Through the lens of social science, eduwonkette takes a serious, if sometimes irreverent, look at some of the most contentious education policy debates. (Find eduwonkette's complete archives prior to Jan. 6, 2008 here.)

Main

September 5, 2008

skoolboy Throws Down the Class Size Gauntlet

moneymouth.JPG

Long-time followers of skoolboy (hi, Mom!) know that his first posts on eduwonkette’s blog were about class size. I argued for championing class size reduction as the right thing to do for children and for teachers—an argument grounded in the moral content of public schooling more so than in the technical consequences of class size reduction for standardized test scores.

Over the past year, I’ve observed a number of trends in the operation of big-city school districts. I’ll use New York City as my key example, because it’s my hometown, but the issues are sufficiently general to warrant posting here.

First, large districts are increasingly trying out innovative policies and practices for which there is little or no pre-existing research support. In New York City, the issuing of school report cards and conduct of school quality reviews are high-stakes evaluative practices for which there’s no prior evidence showing beneficial outcomes. In Washington, DC and New York City, school officials are offering incentives in the form of cash and cellphones to students in exchange for meeting academic performance targets. Some of these innovations have evaluations built into their design, whereas others do not.

Second, the arguments in support of these innovations often rely on claims that other innovations have not been successful. The best example is the juxtaposition of teacher quality and class size reduction. All kinds of policies regarding teachers—value-added assessment, merit pay, new recruitment strategies—are being justified on the grounds that teacher quality has much larger consequences for student achievement (read: test scores) than other policy choices, such as class size reduction.

Third, a lot of the claims about these effects take the form of “Research shows…”, which eduwonkette has derided as glib and poorly documented. There are, of course, important studies of both teacher quality effects and class size effects on student outcomes, but different studies yield different estimates of the magnitude of these effects. In part, this is because the impact of a particular innovative policy or practice is contingent on how the policy or practice is implemented and the features of the local organizational and institutional context for the new intervention. (We might expect, for example, that class size reduction would have different effects in classrooms with novice teachers than in classrooms with experienced teachers, or in classes that differ in the amount of prior student misbehavior.)

So when a policymaker confidently says that we should prefer innovations designed to influence teacher quality rather than class size reduction in a particular local setting—say, New York City—what’s the evidence for such a claim? Specifically, what does research tell us about the consequences of a well-designed class size reduction intervention in New York City?

The answer is, we don’t know—because there has never been a carefully-controlled study of class size reduction in New York City.

So at this point, skoolboy throws down the gauntlet: If we’re serious about data-driven decision-making, we should put our money where our mouth is, and demonstrate the relative effectiveness of class-size reduction and other policy initiatives. I call on the New York City Department of Education to carry out a well-designed study—ideally, a randomized experiment—of class size reduction in New York City public schools. View it as a small-scale pilot, as is true for some of the other initiatives, such as the student incentive plans, and look for some private funding (if it’s not feasible to draw on the operating budget). It will not be hard to pull together some of the leading researchers on class size to inform the design (and it wouldn’t kill anybody to have a couple of knowledgeable parents and teachers at the table too.) There's nearly a full year to get this off the ground for the start of the 2009-10 school year.

skoolboy is willing to live with the findings of a well-designed and well-implemented study of class size reduction in New York City, whether they support or refute claims about the efficacy of class size reduction. What I cannot support are claims that “research shows” that teacher quality is more important than class size reduction for student outcomes in New York City—or any other local education setting—in the absence of research that actually does show this.

April 2, 2008

Quotes of the Day

GarthHarries.jpg
Call me old fashioned and curmudgeonly, but I can't stand it when the wonks break out in a "research shows" chorus with no references. If research so valiantly and definitively shows it, you should be able to tell us whose research shows it.

The quote of the day is a tie; both quotes hail from the Teachers College forum on class size this afternoon.

1) In introducing NYC Department of Education's Garth Harries, who is the "Chief Portfolio Officer" and the former "engagement manager" at McKinsey, TC prof Carolyn Riehl said, "These titles - we usually don't think about them in education - so I'm sure it makes for some great cocktail party conversation."

2) After Harries spoke at length about how the effect of teacher quality is much larger than the effect of reduced class size, an audience member asked him to cite some studies supporting this claim. Harries replied, "Uh, I can't quote to you on what the research is, but I can (pause) get it to you." Research shows!

For a paper on teacher effects using the STAR data, see "How Large are Teacher Effects?"

March 25, 2008

Class Size at AERA

I unfortunately missed the session yesterday afternoon on class size, but USA Today's Greg Toppo covered it here:

New findings from four nations, including the USA, tell a curious story. Small classes work for children, but that's less because of how teachers teach than because of what students feel they can do: Get more face time with their teacher, for instance, or work in small groups with classmates.

"Small classes are more engaging places for students because they're able to have a more personal connection with teachers, simply by virtue of the fact that there are fewer kids in the classroom competing for that teacher's attention," says Adam Gamoran of the University of Wisconsin-Madison, who analyzed the findings.

Update: Ed Week coverage as well!
The opinions expressed in eduwonkette are strictly those of the author and do not reflect the opinions or endorsement of Editorial Projects in Education, or any of its publications.

Get RSS

Get eduwonkette delivered by e-mail. Enter your e-mail here:

Delivered by FeedBurner

Advertisement
Powered by
Movable Type 3.34
<

EW Archive