The New Reverse Class Struggle

Jay Matthews:

The idea seems odd to many. But some scholars and administrators say raising class sizes and teacher pay might improve achievement
It was 9:45 a.m. on a Wednesday morning. Jane Reiser’s mathematics class in Room 18 was stuffed with sixth- and seventh-graders. There were 32 of them, way above the national class size average of 25. Every seat was filled — 17 girls, 15 boys, all races, all learning styles. A teacher’s nightmare.
And yet, despite having so many students, Reiser’s class was humming, with everybody paying attention. She held up a few stray socks to introduce a lesson on probabilities with one of those weird questions that interest 11- and 12-year-olds:

8 thoughts on “The New Reverse Class Struggle”

  1. Given the current discussion of ability grouping, it’s interesting to see that the math class described consisted of all high ability students, all well behaved, eager to learn.
    Why couldn’t we use this strategy in the Madison schools. Group the high ability students in larger classes, leaving the remaining students in smaller classes. This would provide the high ability students an opportunity to learn with their peers in classes that provide more challenge challenge and move at a faster pace, while at the same time creating an environment that would allow for more support for struggling students in the heterogeneously grouped classes.

  2. I think it is a stretch to track the higher ability students into one set of sections and refer to the other sections as “heterogeneously grouped.”
    The hypothesis behind this policy proposal is that substantially larger class sizes would free up funds to attract and retain a more highly skilled teaching staff, especially in high need districts.

  3. Tim,
    I used that description on purpose. While parents of high performing students advocate allowing these students to learn together in accelerated or honors classes, we are not suggesting that the rest of the student body be stratified into separately tracked classes based on their ability. I realize that giving the top 20% (just to pick a number) the opportunity to opt out of the regular classroom means that the regular classroom wouldn’t have the full range of abilities; but it wouldn’t be a tracked classroom, either. I was simply trying to make that clear.
    I think it’s also important to realize that many of the students who would be choosing the honors/accelerated classes are advanced in their academic performance by several grade levels. Many are capable of college-level work, even as high school freshmen. They start the school year in full command of much-to-most of what will be covered in the regular classroom over the year and with the capability of learning new information without the multiple repetitions they will have to endure. The tragedy of a high performing student disengagng from school, as a result of boredom and lack of challenge, is no less than the tragedy of any other student doing the same.
    The article also made an important point about class size: not all students are best served by larger classes. Struggling students do better with smaller class sizes and the concomitant greater individual attention to their learning needs.
    I also appreciate that part of the policy described was to increase teacher pay in return for the higher class sizes. Personally, I am in favor of anything that increases the status of our teachers, and I would love it if our best and brightest college graduates were recruited to teach the next generation of learners. Given the importance of providing students with a solid foundation for learning, I think you could argue that an elementary school teacher has a larger impact on a nation’s academic success than a professor at a high powered research university.

  4. Jeff,
    Whether an elementary vs. tertiary instructor has the greater impact is an interesting question, but I’m not familiar with any body of research on it. Most of the increase in staffing resources in the last decade plus has been allocated to reducing class size, and the evidence is there that small enough class sizes help student achievement, especially for struggling students. But the counter argument is starting to be raised on what impact a higher class size, higher teacher compensation, higher skilled strategy might have and I interpreted the article in that light.
    With all respect, I think we differ on how we define tracking and heterogeneous grouping. I’d agree that differentiation is essential and acknowledge that skill grouping can be an effective way to differentiate instruction. I just wouldn’t define separate sections for the 20% highest performing students as heterogeneous grouping.

  5. Tim, I think what Jeff meant was that if you provide the high performing students with the opportunity to learn with similar-ability peers (something the research makes quite clear they need on a daily basis, otherwise they become at risk for serious academic disengagement), there is still broad heterogeneity amongst the remaining students. High performing students suffer — in terms of academic achievement and self-esteem — when they are in completely heterogeneous classes. Other students do not suffer when schools provide high performing students with what they need. Thus the need for honors, accelerated and AP classes is quite clear. If we decry the lack of racial, ethnic and socioeconomic diversity in those classes (and well we absolutely should), the solution is not to eliminate those classes. If we are serious about increasing the diversity of the students in those classes, there are many, many things we can and should be doing, beginning in kindergarten.

  6. Laurie,
    I think that high performing students suffer when their learning needs are not met, just like any other student. There are many approaches to meeting the learning needs of high performing students and the best choice depends on the individual student and the capacity of the particular school/district. Acceleration, be it in grade or in subject, AP/IB classes, Youth Options, skill grouping, and differentiation within heterogeneous classes are all possibilities, but, again, the best choice depends on the child and the school context. If I remember correctly, “A Nation Deceived” enumerated 18 different acceleration strategies.
    Can high performing students suffer in heterogeneous environments? Sure. But not always. Do other students have to suffer when schools meet the needs of high performing students? No. But historically there were often problems associated with tracking. Regardless of whether a school tends toward heterogeneous grouping or more leveled classes, there are very tough challenges involved to provide high quality learning opportunities for all students. It’s up to each community to decide which set of challenges it would rather tackle based on local capacity and philosophy/values.
    But it’s still my opinion that I’m not comfortable calling my regular sections heterogeneous if I’m pulling my top 20% into an honors track. YMMV. 🙂

  7. Now I am confused.Memorial and East don’t seem to have their courses on the web, but at LaFollette, they offer English 9-12 and Advanced English 9-12. In the past, you had to have a teacher’s signiture in order to take the course, it wasn’t self selected. I am not sure how it is today. At West, they will only be offering English 9 and English 10. At LaFollette kids are allowing kids to gather with other academic peers, yet at West, they want homogeneous classrooms. LaFollette had one National Merit Semi Finalist and West had 30. I think West would have enough higher end kids to fill advanced English courses. To me, West is trying to dumb down the curriculum and LaFollette is tracking. So, it looks like the district does track at least at some schools but not at others. Don’t tell me this is “best practice”. I am just asking that the district treats everyone fairly.

Comments are closed.