Reducing of class sizes is good idea

Thanks for the quick response snuki. ==Rebuttal== R1) My opponent says, "Students in schools with large populations of disadvantaged students perform least well on standardized assessments. Evidence also suggests that these schools often have the least-experienced teachers (NCTAF, 1996; Roza, 2001)." Not only do disadvantaged schools attract the least-experienced teachers, who often transfer to better schools if they prove themselves to be good teachers, but the dance of the lemons results in the WORST teachers being transferred to disadvantaged schools. Rather than paying to put more BAD teachers in disadvantaged schools to reduce class sizes, we should adopt measure like "adversity pay," which pays teachers significantly more for working in more difficult schools. This is the only way to get good teachers in bad inner city schools. Since money is finite in the education system, it's really one or the other, and Hanushek clearly shows that a better teacher is better than decreasing class sizes (you have to cut class sizes in HALF to equal the effect of replacing a 50th percentile teacher with a 75th percentile teacher). So money spent on teacher quality is comparatively TWICE as effective as decreasing class sizes. R2) Small schools initiatives First, small schools do NOT mean small class sizes. The goal of the small school movement is to aim for high schools of 400 students or less to foster a feeling of community. BUT if a small school of 400 has 16 teachers and a school of 1200 has 48 teachers, they will have the exact same CLASS SIZES, even though the first school is smaller. So small schools DOES NOT EQUAL small class sizes. You can agree that smaller schools would be good and still negate, saying should focus more on teacher quality than hiring more teachers. Small schools has more to do with sub-dividing the teachers and students that are already in the system, not hiring more teachers. For example, if you had a school with 800 students and 32 teachers and you subscribed to the small school movement, then you would divide this school into two schools of 400 students and 16 teachers each. This does not affect class size. Second, there are advantages to larger schools, namely economies of scale. Larger schools have the budgets for much better extracurricular activities and facilities for sports. "Large schools tend to have higher test scores and a wider diversity of course offerings, as well as more clubs, arts programs, higher performing sports teams, and other extracurricular activities such as school newspapers and social events. Some schools have abandoned the small school approach after failures to overcome these difficulties, even after being offered grants to continue these experiments." [1] Third, my opponent mentions that the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation supports small schools. Just because they support something doesn't make it good. They also support merit pay, which would be a better use of money than reducing class sizes. Merit pay provides an incentive for good teachers to stay and bad teachers to leave. In fact, in Texas' merit pay system, the leave rate of the top tier teachers was reduced and the leave rate for the worst teachers was increased. Lastly, the Seattle Times reports that because small schools are failing to yield better test scores, the Gates Foundation is abandoning its sponsorship of this solution to education problems in large high schools; they are instead working more directly on instruction, giving grants to find better teachers in math and science. [2] R3) Three "studies" that small classrooms are better My opponent talks about the inputs to education – that students pay more attention, etc. Firstly, I don't even know how you study how much attention students pay. In fact, I think all three studies are based on theorizing, NOT actual observation. But in addition, if students are paying more attention and learning more in small classrooms, why do studies of learning OUTCOMES fail to show any real improvement in test scores in small classrooms. Why do larger high schools get better test scores than smaller ones? Why did Hanushek find that investing in better teachers yields TWICE the results of investing in smaller class sizes? Why did class sizes decrease from 22 students per teacher to 16 students per teacher over the last 30 years and yet NAEP scores have failed to improve one iota? It's because there aren't enough good teachers to begin with and spreading students out into smaller classes just spreads the good teachers even thinner. If my school only had one really good Physics teacher, for example, I'd rather have larger class sizes but everyone in the school having the good teacher (during 6 different "periods") than forcing the school to hire another Physics teacher who isn't any good and then FORCE half the students to attend the bad teacher's class rather than the good teacher's class. Good teachers are already spread too thin – don't spread them even thinner. Oh yeah, and Pro fails to refute anything I've said. Vote Con. [1] http://tinyurl.com... [2] http://tinyurl.com...