Contributing RP Eva Moskowitz, a former New York City Councilperson, has been an outspoken advocate for charter schools since her time in public office. Now the founder and chief executive of the Success Charter Network, a collection of seven charter schools in Harlem and the Bronx, she is speaking out on what she has learned from her work. Today, she argues, contrary to conventional wisdom, that class size is not the critical factor upon which to build education policy.
Here’s an excerpt — the link to the entire op-ed piece (originally published in the Manchester Union-Leader) can be found below it:
THAT CLASS size should be small is revered like an article of faith in this country. Its adherents include parents, education groups, politicians and, of course, the unions whose ranks it swells. In many states it is even required by law, which has lead to millions of dollars in fines against schools in Florida and a lawsuit against New York City by its teachers union.
Yet small class size is neither a guarantor nor a prerequisite of educational excellence.
The worst public elementary school in Manhattan, 16 percent of whose students read at grade level, has an average class size of 21; PS 130, one of the city’s best, has an average class size of 30. Small class size is one factor in academic success. The question, then, is whether the educational benefits of class-size reduction justify the costs.
Some proponents contend that because research shows reducing class size is beneficial, spending on this should be prioritized over anything that is unsupported by research. That’s a neat rhetorical trick but unsound logic. The absence of research on, say, teacher salaries doesn’t prove that we should pay the minimum wage to teachers to dramatically reduce class size. Research should guide spending decisions only if it measures the benefits per dollar of spending on all alternatives.