Student Achievement Is Affected By Class Size

Having to experience larger classroom sizes while in grade school, and knowing the effects it had on me; I was curious to know how the research was conducted and why in this story there wasn’t any significant data to prove or disprove the outcome.

The other articles we have read were based off the education system also. Many of the articles were against the system, just as Dave Barry is. The other articles we read were more persuasive and informative, than an argument. They contained more evidence and facts. Davy Barry did not have facts in his article, but opinions.

According to Malcolm Gladwell chapter two of “David and Goliaths” economist Caroline Hoxby found that there was not any significant data indicating smaller classroom sizes had a greater effect on a child’s academic achievement. However; Diana Whitmore Schanzenbach from National Education Policy Center (NEPC), Northwestern University has contradicted Gladwell’s assertion that smaller classroom sizes were not an academic advantage. Schanzenbach review research done by Tennessee’s Student Teacher Achievement Ratio (STAR) and found many flaws that had been considered in Hoxby research that conflicted with much of the research that has already been concluded. There has been a considerable amount of research and much of it has concluded with: the children who were placed in a classroom with less students from kindergarten to third grade, scored higher during academic testing, and were more likely to continue to achieve higher grades throughout their school years. Because education is an important stepping stone for children, it is crucial their educational needs are exceeded while they are young and still able to grasp.

Williams is illogical in his presentation of facts and figures, which does not aid his argument. The University of North Caroline presents a handout on statistics which helps writers know the proper use for them in a paper and has the following questions to ask yourself about the research: “What is the data’s background? Does your evidence come from reliable sources? Are all data reported? Have the data been interpreted correctly?” Williams fails to answer these questions, for example, “The Oklahoma Council of Public Affairs commissioned a civic education poll among public school students. A surprising 77% didn't know that George Washington was the first President; couldn't name Thomas Jefferson as the author of the Declaration of Independence; and only 2.8% of the students actually passed the citizenship test. Along similar lines, the Goldwater Institute of Phoenix did the same survey and only 3.5% of

Although some statistical evidence given is not backed with proper citations, the reader can find that the evidence given is effective in proving her point.

He does this by inserting counterarguments and effectively refuting them with evidence. The use of statistics from academic research and anecdotes from scholars on the given subject give his argument legitimacy. Williams also provides a hidden assumption in his argument that makes readers think critically about his implicit statement and its relevance to his argument. However, there are weakness to his argument and that is his use of non-academic language that dissuades readers from believing his article can stand as an academic

On top of this anecdotal evidence, there is also research showing curricula play a larger role on student achievement than state/federal standards and that when curricula is substandard, intervention can have the same impact as replacing a poorly performing teacher with one who is high

Author Lee Ventola used statistical data to provide evidence to prove his opinion about childhood vaccinations in almost every paragraph of his academic journal. One example being, “It has been estimated

Student achievement for children is dependent upon the mental processes that are developed and nurtured through educators, culture, and society. Society plays a major role in cognitive human growth and development. It is important for educators to understand that children need opportunities to develop and expand their cognitive abilities. Vygotsky’s theory about mental tools suggest that every child has the ability to develop skills that will enable them to think in complex ways.

However, the fact that the study only focused on a small group (a specific university students), a specific race (whites), one specific social class (middle class), and one gender (female) makes the credibility of the findings questionable because we cannot use them to develop a general conclusion to represent all the teachers. The researcher also acknowledged this by stating that the findings from the study can be used to inform other groups, but is not meant to be representative of all teacher researcher groups (Vetter,

"Smack". Do you hear that sound ? If you said the sound of kids throwing pencils, paper and etc. You are correct. This is what happens in a class that has to many kids. That’s exactly why kids should be in smaller classes. There are 3 main reasons I think this. Reason 1 is because kids will have enough time for individual attention to themselves unlike in bigger classes. Reason number 2 The kids will understand more without distractions like in a bigger class.

Growing up has not been easy, but it’s a part of life we all go through, Like in the Disney Movie Meet the Robinsons you need to “Keep Moving Forward”. In Life we have to take challenging Obstacle courses that are not so easy but it helps us in life. One challenging obstacle course that we take is school, to be exact High school. In high school to get to the top you have to fail because from failing you learn, because you learn from your mistakes and “Keep Moving Forward” and you do your best to do a better job the next time. From success not so much because you are not learning anything out of it. Vista del lago students are required to learn special goals known as Expected school- wide learning Results known as (ESLRS).

For instance they found that there is no descriptive proof that integration into university/college life, will lead to better academic achievement.

a field of social science data” (p.86). He is not “persuasive, consistent or suggestive” (Patton. 2002, p.162) and simply gives the accounts an equal weight in the debate. His synthesis of the evidence does address the research question, but

According to Malcolm Gladwell in Chapter Two of David and Goliath, economist Caroline Hoxby found that there was not any significant data indicating smaller classroom sizes had a greater effect on a child’s academic achievement. However, Diana Whitmore Schanzenbach from National Education Policy Center (NEPC), at Northwestern University has contradicted Gladwell’s assertion that smaller classroom sizes were not an academic advantage. Schanzenbach reviewed research through Tennessee’s Student Teacher Achievement Ratio (STAR) and found many deficiencies with the research Hoxby’s uncover, leading to her conclusion that classroom sizes did not affect academic learning. There has been a considerable amount of research and much of it has concluded with: the children who were placed in a classroom with fewer students from kindergarten to third grade scored higher during academic testing, and were more likely to continue to achieve higher grades throughout their school years. Because education is an important stepping stone for children, it is crucial that their educational needs are exceeded while they are young and still able to grasp. Why did Gladwell agree with Hoxby research? Granted there has been a larger amount of other research projects that conclude with smaller classroom size do make an academic difference. Not only are students better off learning in smaller classrooms sizes, but in fact research has shown that these