I am fed up with people’s unending numb-skull suggestions on education reform, and I’m about to offend some people in that regard.
Check your twitter feed, your facebook streams, your other snorking tools over a period of time and you’ll see the occasional comment on either what is wrong with our system of education, or what can be done to fix some problem or another. If you’ve got nothing along these lines in your recent snorking streams, try an experiment: Put up a facebook post, or send out to the twittosphere a tweet that brings up something about the education system. With that bait, you’ll see what is annoying me.
I promise you, whatever you are thinking is wrong with the system of education is either something that simply isn’t true (and you don’t know what you are talking about) or it is something that has been noticed.1 You have nothing to bring to the table that wasn’t already there. And, there is little doubt that any suggestions you might have to make things work better are useless, dumb, stupid, or if they are good ideas, they are already being done.
You are no more able to identify the problems in the educational system of the US or elsewhere than a lawyer or bank manager or truck driver is to identify flaws in what Physicists call their “Standard Model” (how everything works) and your lame-brained idea of how to fix your delusional concepts of what is wrong are no more likely to work than some dumb-ass perpetual motion machine.
The only difference between physics and the system of education vis-a-vis the crap you are thinking is this; Physicist’s have a simple answer to your suggestions: “Show me the math. Oh, you don’t have that worked out yet? Then get back to me later on that…” The field of education has no such easy answer.
I first realized that every single person on this planet has a) thinks they have identified what is wrong with our system of education and b) thinks they know how to fix it, while I was sitting in the audience at a Skepchick Track panel at CONvergence three years ago, and five or six people in a row … representing humanity in general (I should note that all were audience members) felt the need to stand up and regale the rest of the room with their wisdumb and experience regarding the American System of Education. There were actually people who were using their own personal experiences in high schools in the 1960s as a reference to make their point about what is wrong with “teachers these days.” There were actually people who prefaced their mumbled missive with something like “I am not an expert in this field” and then, instead of just listening to themselves say what they just said and sitting the hell down, they followed that with a, “… but …” and then, annoyingly, kept talking. OMG.
None of this would be more than mildly annoying except for the transition that I’ve noticed over the last few months, with the last straw coming at me via a tweet from the National Center for Science Education.
Here’s the thing. Our system of education in this country has remained the same or gotten worse in most measures, objectively and scientifically. What are the major trends behind this? There are two, with the second one having very specific consequences, although there are many other factors. Trend one: More kids are being filtered out of public schools, or, in the case of comparative statistics, kids are being differentiated between public and charter schools, with the charter schools, being fully filtered, making the public schools look bad and, probably, be bad. Trend two: Less and less money per student, and the specific consequence is larger class size.
How do we fix this? Money.
Money. Money. Money. Money. Money. Money. Money. Money. Money. Money. Money. Money. Money. Money. Money.
Spend. More. Money. On. Education. Not less. More.
All the other ideas everyone has are pretty much useless as long as the per capita spending relative to inflation stays the same from year to year except in those all to frequent years when it goes down.
The shift that has happened in recent months, maybe a bit longer, is that this part of the process has been left out of the conversation. Over the last 8 weeks I’ve listened to two major interviews or panel discussions by top educational experts on how to improve education, and neither one once mentioned either funding or class size. The assumption is, apparently, that these will not change. If you mention funding you will probably run into the phrase “taxes” and everyone has been beaten into submission in regards to taxes. Taxes will never, ever, ever be raised again in the United States. They will only go down now and then when a tax cut for privileged individuals or powerful corporations is arranged. So mentioning taxes is a big no-no. Thus, class sizes can not be mentioned either.
And this tweet from the NCSE sent me to an on line article at Oxford American where average citizens are being asked to say how to improve the system of education, in which it is said:
What matters most about education is what you choose to teach and how you choose to teach it. That seems almost axiomatic to me, so it’s strange that so much of the intense ongoing debate about education ignores these topics and focuses instead on structural issues like teacher tenure, administrative control of schools, and class size.*
Emphasis added.
First, no one is talking any more about class sizes. And, if they are, how is it that class size is a “structural issue” like “administrative control of schools”? Has the most fundamental variable in teaching and learning just been thrown under the big yellow bus? One on one tutoring vs. large lecture, vs interactive lab groups? Number of students requiring individual attention per tech er in a class of N individuals? Structural? No, I don’t think so.
The problem with our system of education is obvious: We have stopped talking about the problems with our system of education and rather engaged in some sort of cynical semi-professionalized circle jerk. The way to solve this problem is obvious. Give up. Or, see above. The parts about money. And taxes.
_________________________
1Obviously I’m speaking here to people who are not in the education field.
Have you read the breakthrough novel of the year? When you are done with that, try:
or Paperback
*Please note:
Links to books and other items on this page and elsewhere on Greg Ladens' blog may send you to Amazon, where I am a registered affiliate. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases, which helps to fund this site.
My wife is a teacher… and she approves of your message!
Well, after that, I can’t believe I’m going to say anything, but:
Do you have the average class size figures for countries doing better than the US? Are you sure they are generally lower?
Have you seen research showing the relationship between class size and educational success? I thought I saw one paper reporting no link, but as you rightly say, I have not looked into it in detail.
Do you know the sum of money spent per student in countries doing better than the US?
If you do know all these things, why didn’t you just mention them in your post in the first place? Wouldn’t it be easier and more convincing to prove your point straight out of the gate?
http://eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/search/detailmini.jsp?_nfpb=true&_&ERICExtSearch_SearchValue_0=ED217111&ERICExtSearch_SearchType_0=no&accno=ED217111
And when I have to link to something 30 years old am I allowed to ask how come people don’t know that yet?
I am not sure if things are as simple as you think, Maureen, especially with 30 year old data. Certainly, some dissenting voices/evidence is easy to come by.
http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/edu_cla_siz_age_13-education-class-size-age-13”
http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/54/12/46643496.pdf
http://edpro.stanford.edu/hanushek/admin/pages/files/uploads/testmony.PDF
It’s real simple Greg, teaching is “women’s work” especially primary education. So it just goes without saying that the very idea of an “expert” in education is and oxymoron at best, if not an outright attempt to defraud the taxpayers with cockamamie schemes based on “evidence” and “research”. Certainly business and church leaders (Good upstanding God fearing capitalist Men) are much better qualified to reform education than anyone silly enough to get a degree in “Education”. It’s obvious that there are only two types of educators; pointy headed ivory tower elites who think they’re better than regular folks, and frivolous women who are best left to follow the instructions of their betters.
Besides, it’s just like us liberals to “just throw money at the problem”.
😉
Pen: Well, after that, I can’t believe I’m going to say anything, but:
YOU BETTER NOT SAY ANYTHING DAMMIT!!!
Do you have the average class size figures for countries doing better than the US? Are you sure they are generally lower?
No idea. I was not comparing US to other countries, I was comparing US to itself. My mention of US schools is because I’m only talking about US schools and if I don’t say “US” in there now and then people from Canada or England get first confused and then angry. I actually once had a very famous person (you’d know the name instantly) send me an angry email because I wrote an entire blog post without mentioning that it was about the US!
Anyway, within the US there is a pile of research on class size that supports the idea, but it is complicated.
Large classes can work, as long as students get lots of time in small classes. Therefor, when principals force “Equitable” class size rules into play, which they do, they are being dumb. I’d rather have a distribution like 12-20-25-200 (where the 200 is some kind of media center fiasco you don’t have great expectations of) than 28-28-28-28 for students ina given day.
Research shows that there are other single factors that are more important than class size, but my argument is that outside of the really dismal school districts and states with the worse funding, no teachers unions, etc., schools are already doing many of those things and we are now ignoring class size at our peril.
Have you seen research showing the relationship between class size and educational success? I thought I saw one paper reporting no link, but as you rightly say, I have not looked into it in detail.
I’m sure there are papers out there that show no link. I also know a guy who claims to be a starship catpain stranded on earth.
The research is pretty much all over the place and you can pick and choose. A 2010 study at Harvard Ed showed that most earlier studies were invalid because they sucked methodologically (Mosteller et al). As I said above, in the post and in this comment, it isn’t the only factor, so you will find papers that show that class size is not the thing that needs to be improved next. But again, given that the number of students and the number of teachers is fixed in a formula (in public schools) where the multiplier determines the tax requited, and that multiplier only goes up, well, the rest is simple math. Class size is the most unimprovable variable.
Do you know the sum of money spent per student in countries doing better than the US?
Again, I am not making that comparison.
If you do know all these things, why didn’t you just mention them in your post in the first place?
Because the post was not about that.
Wouldn’t it be easier and more convincing to prove your point straight out of the gate?
Were that my point, perhaps.
Maureen, it depends on whom you are asking, because I certainly did know about it. There’s been quite a bit more research done since then. And, if you look at it you see a strong trend towards research that deemphasizes class size getting more funding and, I suspect but I’m not sure, coming out of fiscally conservative (so called) think tanks.
The Hanushek (llen Wallis Institutue) testimony is interesting. He very clearly documents how the existing research is all flawed yet he is willing to draw strong concupiscent from it.
This is a political issue.
Again, the international comparisons are not the point here. Pen, reading your later comment, I now see you came here prepared for this fight,but thinking it was a different fight, or thinking that everyone was already thinking what you were thinking they were thinking. This would be a good time for you to lay out your objectives and reasons for them.
blotzphoto: good point.
From my admittedly anecdotal experience as a substitute teacher, class size has a large effect. In my experience there is a cut off point somewhere around 22 or 23 students where the class gets to be much more difficult to control. Teachers with small classes, 15 or less, spend most of the time teaching. Teachers with large classes, 25 or more, spend a lot less time teaching and a lot more time disciplining. You can teach large classes well but at the expense of individualized instruction, assuming that your willing to let the bottom third of the class fail.
The other factor is poverty. When children come to school hungry and on two hours sleep because they were taking care of younger siblings, they do not learn as well.
I’m sure that tea baggers believe that it is the teachers fault that their students belong to a gang or are so terrified of gangs that they are afraid to do well in school.
[citation needed]
Mike the Mad Biologist has a long series of blog posts on education in the US. He consistently makes the point that the US education system is as good as anywhere in the world if you control for levels of child poverty, which is the single biggest factor affecting educational outcomes.
Andrew, Mike’s stuff is great, but please everyone, you must read my sentences without inserting “than other countries” into them, because that is not what I said or meant! “Remaind the same” means over time, generally.
Mike’s posts also contradict the claim that the US system has failed to improve over time.
Money. Money. Money…
Anyone with a child in school today watching as more and more flyers come home asking for more and more donations, fundraisers, school supplies, etc. It is painfully clear that our schools can barely keep their doors open. They are running on shoe strings. I can’t speak for all schools, but my local district is doing what they can with what they have! They are teaching so much more today in better ways than I remember as a child, but with less money. You’re right, I have nothing to say about the education system in America other than it is ridiculously under funded. How about we take all the free money we’re giving churches and put that into education?
I expected you to know of that research, Greg, but I still want to claim my gold star for not leaping to the conclusion that we were talking international comparisons. Even though I am in a country which – oh! horrors! – is not the USA.
Pen did ask whether there had been any research on class size, which would suggest a failure of the google finger. When he then presented to me a piece of Friedmanite special pleading as though it were evidence I promptly forgot about him.
Interestingly, Hanushek has changed jobs and now appears to be pushing the notion that the problems of low achievement would be best tackled by spending more money. And of that sort of shift an early result would be – wait for it – smaller class sizes.
No Greg, I merely noticed you had made a strong assertion without backing it up. Then when Maureen made a comment I found slightly offensive in tone (and not terribly convincing because it’s 30 years old), I spent 5 minutes with Google. Not prepared at all… no fight… except maybe that I’m very into evidence-based practices, so I’m always willing to fight for those.
Oh yes, you’re also quite right that ideal class sizes aren’t the point. I thought the point was that you don’t want people making random unsupported suggestions for education reform. My point was: you seemed to be doing just what you’re complaining about. Was it an oversight?
As someone who is retraining to become a teacher this is the information that I have been taught regarding class sizes:
good (effective) teachers can teach 25 students as well as they can teach 15.
average teachers can be as effective as good teachers if they teach 15 students.
So, in general, reducing class size from 25 to 20 is pretty much a waste of money. You can make average teachers more effective through training. Or you can hire more teachers. Either will work but one is probably a lot cheaper.
There is a lot of crappy research in the education field. However, there is no shortage of known ways to improve student achievement that is not implemented. It requires time, training, support, and as a result, money.
Ha! Before I even got past the first sentence, my “solution” was pretty much “Throw money at it! Stop cutting funding! Go back to small classroom sizes, adequately paid teachers, and funds for new schoolbooks, computers, and whatever else schools need!!!”
But then, I’m of a generation that basically had everything cut one or two years before I got there, so it’s easy for me to see the problem. Schools are dead broke. They’re trying to run a millionnaire’s budget on a pensioner’s paycheque.
Any problems after that (lesson content, teaching styles, the mysterious “10% of teachers suck” assertion) are insignificant next to the lack of funding.
And, because I’m not an expert, after saying throw money at it, I’m content to let the experts do the rest.