Posts
Stuart S. Yeh, a, University of Minnesota, Educational Policy and Administration, 86 Pleasant Street, S.E., Minneapolis, MN 55455, United States Received 18 October 2007; revised 26 June 2008; accepted 25 September 2008. Available online 2 October 2008.
Educational Research Review Volume 4, Issue 1, 2009, Pages 7-15
Abstract
The cost-effectiveness of class size reduction (CSR) was compared with the cost-effectiveness of rapid formative assessment, a promising alternative for raising student achievement. Drawing upon existing meta-analyses of the effects of student–teacher ratio, evaluations of CSR in Tennessee, California, and Wisconsin, and RAND cost estimates, CSR was found to be 124 times less cost effective [emphasis added] than the implementation of systems that rapidly assess student progress in math and reading two to five times per week. Analysis of the results from California and Wisconsin suggest that the relative effectiveness of rapid formative assessment may be substantially underestimated. Further research regarding class size reduction is unlikely to be fruitful, and attention should be turned to rapid formative assessment and other more promising alternatives.
3 comments:
That's a huge number!
I also think that class size is of relatively less importance when the class is HOMOGENEOUS. That would also simplify rapid formative assessments. Not that the ed establishment cares about homogeneity, because it doesn't fit their pet theories.
Precision Teaching sounds like a form of Rapid Formative Assessment
Post a Comment