A LITTLE BIT OF HISTORY....

This country has struggled on how to improve schools for decades since the late 1970’s to 1980’s. A crescendo of demands for “reform” reached its height with the publication of a Nation at Risk in 1983. Since then, a number of kinds of reforms have been investigated including assessment, school financing arrangements, and class size ratio. Class size ratio is identified as not only the number of students to the number of teachers in a classroom environment, but any additional professional aide in the classroom- for example teacher assistants, counselors, etc. However, most schools are not fortunate enough to have enough student assistants for every classroom. Pupil-teacher ratios (PTR) do not function as good tools for informing us about class size because teachers who work as administrators or provide instructional support are included in the full time equivalent (FTE) teacher count. One name continues to surface throughout this topic of research- Hanushek: Although not Canadian, Hanushek complied research on class size in 1998 with a number of important findings of contributions to the class size debate. Some of those were: -fall in pupil-teacher ratios -number of students mainstreamed into classrooms -a change in the student population as well as black students in the system These are all factors in why class size has become such a debatable topic. In the 1990’s, class sizes were a key factor in teacher collective bargaining in Ontario and class size averages were typically incorporated into agreements reached between teacher federations and school boards. However, class sizes have increased over time, apparently as an offset for higher teacher salaries. Early research literature on class size did in fact seem to show a link between smaller class sizes and improved learning. Although the literature suggests that class size has little or no impact on the acquisition of substantive knowledge or academic skills, smaller class sizes appeared at first to be somewhat more effective than larger ones in motivating students, producing attitudinal changes and enhancing higher order thinking and reasoning. As early as 1924, researchers compared the performance of students in a 100+ class with a 40+ class in the same course. Students in the small class did slightly better on an essay and mid term test while students in the larger class did slightly well on the quiz and final exam. In initial research, when measures other than the standard academic achievement measures were used, class size appeared to have some impact. Smaller classes were found to produce statistically significant differences in problem solving student attitudes to teaching and knowledge retention. But while the significant differences were small, thus the impact of class six it was suggested depended in part upon the educational goal.As early as 1924, researchers compared the performance of students in a 100+ class with a 40+ class in the same course. Students in the small class did slightly better on an essay and mid term test while students in the larger class did slightly well on the quiz and final exam. In initial research, when measures other than the standard academic achievement measures were used, class size appeared to have some impact. Smaller classes were found to produce statistically significant differences in problem solving student attitudes to teaching and knowledge retention. But while the significant differences were small, thus the impact of class six it was suggested depended in part upon the educational goal.