Chapter 9 Forum

I think it would be counterproductive.  If we have more teaching time we shouldn't increase class sizes but put that extra time into more one-on-one teacher time with the students or into individualizing instruction to better meet the needs of the students that already exist in the class.  I think that increasing class sizes is never the answer.

This statistic is a bit disturbing, not so much the stat itself, rather the fact that someone would correlate the stat in a way that somehow seems to justify or advocate for larger class sizes.  The author of this section, or the person who derived that statistic, must not be familiar with the reality that most of us use the copy room early in the morning before contract hours, or late in the afternoon after contract hours.

To me, the benefits of 1 to 1 should be focused upon helping students gain learning opportunities to productively and efficiently prepare them for future success.  Clearly there are cost benefits involved in 1 to 1, I’m certainly a fan of saving $ on paper and copy expenses.  However, to translate the efficiency that 1 to 1 might provide us into avenues for larger class sizes seems at best, disingenuous.

We are all new to implementing technology into our curriculum and any free time we have needs to be used to find appropriate data bases and lessons for our students, not increasing the amount of students in our rooms.  This is counterproductive since some of our classes have trouble accommodating 25 student laptops on the band width we have currently.

Hopefully districts would not increase class size to save money and cut down on the number of teachers that are hired to accomodate more technology.

Good catch, Lynn!  And, IF I am reading the next bullet on that page correctly (correct me if I'm wrong), the saved time could also translate to a "head count reduction" of "admin, staff, & others", which might mean 2 extra kids per class???

I'm wondering, in a rare "glass half full moment" if this is a future ideal, once all the kinks, knots & snarls are worked out.  If I had less paperwork, and if I felt I was giving quality instruction to my current students, I wouldn't be opposed to another kiddo...but I don't see that happening for many, many moons into this project.

Great point, Lynn.  Although we keep hearing that studies don't show a correlation between smaller class sizes and increased learning, our practical experiences often seem to tell us otherwise.  And as we faciltate not only content learning but classroom management for small group, 1-1 and collaborative groups and learn/teach how to use devices, tools, software, searches, communicate on-line, and the myraid other tasks that come with this journey, even when it is all working well, it's hard to see how our efficiency would equate to serving more students per class well.  At the secondary level, some on-line classes are large, but the students interact more with the computer and their personal coursework, using the teacher more for tech support and rarely interacting with their peers.  There's a place for that, but it doesn't reflect the blended classroom the article describes students wanting.

I also agree that class size should not increase with the integration of 1:1 computing. We are still in the initial steps of second order change and teachers and students neet to learn how to change from teacher lead lessons to more constructivist classrooms.  Even in a few years from now, class size should not be increased. As it is, class sizes these year at my school are very close if not already at 30.

This topic makes me wonder. If our district continues to accept open enrollment and the word starts to spread out more that Sunnyside "provides laptops to their students", will our district be prepared to higher more teachers?

When I read that statement, it was the shoe I was waiting to hear drop. Whenever we have thought about technology and learning in the future, it was with the concern that teachers would be seen as expendable. It does very clearly state elsewhere in the Project Red document that a combination of online and face to face instruction is optimal. But in this era of funding cuts, it has to be a concern for teachers that becoming effective users of technology would mean they are rewarded with larger class sizes instead of having the time to continue to build on their skills to help students achieve their full potential. It should be a valid concern for those of us who have given our careers to this profession. What is the future for the teaching profession?

Lynn, I'm going to miss you! This initiative should not have anything to do with increasing class size, but rather freeing us (the professionals) up to spend time with those who need us most, in the spirit of differentiation and intervention that many of our kiddoes need. We've talked at our school about aiming our limited resources to our K-1 classrooms to direct targeted interventions earlier, to keep any from getting too far behind, but we will never have one-size-fits-all kids in this world. We need the time we gain to work with smaller groups of kids, not larger.

Increases class size does not mean increased student achievement don’t have the research to prove this already, technology or no technology.  So much of what “should” happen in a one to one classroom correlates to my training as a gifted ed resource teacher.  The individualize learning will require even more one on one time with students.  Having more students in class and trying to meet their needs while all are involved in different research projects in not practical.

Another red flag for me was the “appropriate penalties” for poor implementation.  Yikes!!!  What would this look like, when if ever would it be appropriate to implement.