Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Is there any research which shows the effect of smaller class sizes and instructional coaches on these schools with small class sizes?

I wonder if the studies of factory chickens vs. organic chickens are applicable. You know, when they compare chicken completely crammed into tiny cages with those with slightly more space.

Cramming so many kids into a classroom feels a little factory to me.

I'm not following. Buckell has an abundance of space, excessive numbers of teachers compared to other schools, and is still failing. It's in a neighborhood that was built to succeed as a middle class neighborhood with many single family homes. If any school should succeed it's this one, but it isn't. So do we throw more money at it or do we figure out a better way to teach to this neighborhood? I don't think these families or teachers want to be in a failing school either even if the class sizes are so low.

The homes surrounding Bucknell are small townhomes, crappy duplexes, and old single family houses that young yuppie families don't typically want to live in, and no one is flipping/renovating many in that area because it isn't a great area. It's a tough cycle to break.

Many neighborhoods that were once succeeding in the last century are not any longer.

The title one schools benefit from extra teachers because they have SO MUCH LESS human capital than the schools in the more stable neighborhoods - in the FARMS/ESOL schools, PTAs are almost nonexistent, parents are not clamoring to volunteer for things, in many cultures it just isn't common for parents to helicopter over their children's education, parents may want to help with homework, but they just can't, because they don't know the language and materials - I could go on and on about what I see.

But some of these are easy fixes. There is no school with less than 300 students that has an active PTA. It's just not possible especially with a population like you described. There are parents all over FCPS who speak a many different languages and not english and still seem to get by and even have kids who excel. Look at Greenbriar West and the exploding AAP population there. Or TJ which is filled with foreign students. I looked at the stats for this school. The amount of special ed kids is nil. These kids are not born by parents on drugs. The parents just don't speak another language. If they can't help with homework because they don't know the language and materials, how about educating the parents? Is that done? Are parents basically given short lesson plans in spanish to help their children? There are bilingual reading materials that could be given out for homework instead of asking parents to read with their child for 20 minutes. Monthly newsletters on what is being covered that month with suggestions on how to help your child can be distributed bilingually. I'm not an expert, but there are parents all over the world sending their children to schools where they don't speak the language and their kids are still succeeding.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Is there any research which shows the effect of smaller class sizes and instructional coaches on these schools with small class sizes?

I wonder if the studies of factory chickens vs. organic chickens are applicable. You know, when they compare chicken completely crammed into tiny cages with those with slightly more space.

Cramming so many kids into a classroom feels a little factory to me.

I'm not following. Buckell has an abundance of space, excessive numbers of teachers compared to other schools, and is still failing. It's in a neighborhood that was built to succeed as a middle class neighborhood with many single family homes. If any school should succeed it's this one, but it isn't. So do we throw more money at it or do we figure out a better way to teach to this neighborhood? I don't think these families or teachers want to be in a failing school either even if the class sizes are so low.

The homes surrounding Bucknell are small townhomes, crappy duplexes, and old single family houses that young yuppie families don't typically want to live in, and no one is flipping/renovating many in that area because it isn't a great area. It's a tough cycle to break.

Many neighborhoods that were once succeeding in the last century are not any longer.

The title one schools benefit from extra teachers because they have SO MUCH LESS human capital than the schools in the more stable neighborhoods - in the FARMS/ESOL schools, PTAs are almost nonexistent, parents are not clamoring to volunteer for things, in many cultures it just isn't common for parents to helicopter over their children's education, parents may want to help with homework, but they just can't, because they don't know the language and materials - I could go on and on about what I see.

But some of these are easy fixes. There is no school with less than 300 students that has an active PTA. It's just not possible especially with a population like you described. There are parents all over FCPS who speak a many different languages and not english and still seem to get by and even have kids who excel. Look at Greenbriar West and the exploding AAP population there. Or TJ which is filled with foreign students. I looked at the stats for this school. The amount of special ed kids is nil. These kids are not born by parents on drugs. The parents just don't speak another language. If they can't help with homework because they don't know the language and materials, how about educating the parents? Is that done? Are parents basically given short lesson plans in spanish to help their children? There are bilingual reading materials that could be given out for homework instead of asking parents to read with their child for 20 minutes. Monthly newsletters on what is being covered that month with suggestions on how to help your child can be distributed bilingually. I'm not an expert, but there are parents all over the world sending their children to schools where they don't speak the language and their kids are still succeeding.

I wonder if the studies of factory chickens vs. organic chickens are applicable. You know, when they compare chicken completely crammed into tiny cages with those with slightly more space.

Cramming so many kids into a classroom feels a little factory to me.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Is there any research which shows the effect of smaller class sizes and instructional coaches on these schools with small class sizes?

I wonder if the studies of factory chickens vs. organic chickens are applicable. You know, when they compare chicken completely crammed into tiny cages with those with slightly more space.

Cramming so many kids into a classroom feels a little factory to me.

I'm not following. Buckell has an abundance of space, excessive numbers of teachers compared to other schools, and is still failing. It's in a neighborhood that was built to succeed as a middle class neighborhood with many single family homes. If any school should succeed it's this one, but it isn't. So do we throw more money at it or do we figure out a better way to teach to this neighborhood? I don't think these families or teachers want to be in a failing school either even if the class sizes are so low.

The homes surrounding Bucknell are small townhomes, crappy duplexes, and old single family houses that young yuppie families don't typically want to live in, and no one is flipping/renovating many in that area because it isn't a great area. It's a tough cycle to break.

Many neighborhoods that were once succeeding in the last century are not any longer.

The title one schools benefit from extra teachers because they have SO MUCH LESS human capital than the schools in the more stable neighborhoods - in the FARMS/ESOL schools, PTAs are almost nonexistent, parents are not clamoring to volunteer for things, in many cultures it just isn't common for parents to helicopter over their children's education, parents may want to help with homework, but they just can't, because they don't know the language and materials - I could go on and on about what I see.

But some of these are easy fixes. There is no school with less than 300 students that has an active PTA. It's just not possible especially with a population like you described. There are parents all over FCPS who speak a many different languages and not english and still seem to get by and even have kids who excel. Look at Greenbriar West and the exploding AAP population there. Or TJ which is filled with foreign students. I looked at the stats for this school. The amount of special ed kids is nil. These kids are not born by parents on drugs. The parents just don't speak another language. If they can't help with homework because they don't know the language and materials, how about educating the parents? Is that done? Are parents basically given short lesson plans in spanish to help their children? There are bilingual reading materials that could be given out for homework instead of asking parents to read with their child for 20 minutes. Monthly newsletters on what is being covered that month with suggestions on how to help your child can be distributed bilingually. I'm not an expert, but there are parents all over the world sending their children to schools where they don't speak the language and their kids are still succeeding.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Is there any research which shows the effect of smaller class sizes and instructional coaches on these schools with small class sizes?

I wonder if the studies of factory chickens vs. organic chickens are applicable. You know, when they compare chicken completely crammed into tiny cages with those with slightly more space.

Cramming so many kids into a classroom feels a little factory to me.

I'm not following. Buckell has an abundance of space, excessive numbers of teachers compared to other schools, and is still failing. It's in a neighborhood that was built to succeed as a middle class neighborhood with many single family homes. If any school should succeed it's this one, but it isn't. So do we throw more money at it or do we figure out a better way to teach to this neighborhood? I don't think these families or teachers want to be in a failing school either even if the class sizes are so low.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:7.0M out of a budget of 3.8 Billion.

If they found 2% worth of waste/fraud/abuse in the budget they could reduce the class size to 21.25 ((3,800,000,000*.02)=(76M/7.0M) =~11*.5) = class size of ~21.25)

....but they are not looking very hard

We don't need more taxes. They just need to spend the money they have wisely.

So you propose cutting not 7, but 11.5 million. Assuming this is more than message board bluster/hyperbole, what gets cut?

Anonymous wrote:7.0M out of a budget of 3.8 Billion.

If they found 2% worth of waste/fraud/abuse in the budget they could reduce the class size to 21.25 ((3,800,000,000*.02)=(76M/7.0M) =~11*.5) = class size of ~21.25)

....but they are not looking very hard

We don't need more taxes. They just need to spend the money they have wisely.

Anonymous wrote:

Is there any research which shows the effect of smaller class sizes and instructional coaches on these schools with small class sizes?

I wonder if the studies of factory chickens vs. organic chickens are applicable. You know, when they compare chicken completely crammed into tiny cages with those with slightly more space.

Cramming so many kids into a classroom feels a little factory to me.

Is there any research which shows the effect of smaller class sizes and instructional coaches on these schools with small class sizes?

Anonymous wrote:Many years ago –when Title I was relatively new—I taught Title I kids. In those days, the kids were Title I—not the school. We were given quite a bit of money. However, we were required to spend it on equipment. That meant tape recorders, filmstrip projectors (I said this was a long time ago!) etc. The teachers were livid. How much equipment do you need? Of course this was before computers. (By the way, our classes were mixed Title I and non-Title I kids). We were not supposed to use Title I equipment with non-Title I kids. It was ridiculous. We screamed and with the help of a caring principal and a brilliant teacher, we wrote up a program to hire additional teachers to reduce class size. We also used the money for a reading specialist and a math specialist dedicated to these kids. These specialists took every child every day. The math specialist took half of my class (first grade) and worked with the kids in her math lab while I drilled and did worksheets with the other half. She worked on concepts while I worked on rote. Then, we switched groups. We did the same thing with reading. Reading specialist worked on phonics, I worked on sight words and comprehension. At the end of the year, the math results were amazing. Reading was not as impressive. One teacher took the non Title I kids and the rest of us had entirely Title I. The class sizes were too big—29, as I recall, but the extra help from the specialists was critical. These “specialists” were real teachers who worked with kids—not “instructional coaches” giving advice to teachers.
FCPS spends entirely too much money on people that do not work with kids. Someone needs to figure this out. Teachers don’t need advice—the kids need real help.
I guarantee you, the Title I money could be better spent.

NO class in FCPS should have double the size of another--except special needs.