reproductions supplied by edrs are the best that …summary statement of question parent 1'...

DOCUMENT RESUME

ED 446 853 PS 028 977

TITLE Class Size Surveys, Spring 2000. Evaluation Report.INSTITUTION Saginaw Public Schools, MI. Dept. of Evaluation Services.PUB DATE 2000-00-00NOTE 60p.

PUB TYPE Reports - Evaluative (142) Tests/Questionnaires (160)EDRS PRICE MF01/PC03 Plus Postage.DESCRIPTORS *Administrator Attitudes; *Class Size; Educational

Attitudes; Grade 1; Grade 2; *Parent Attitudes; PrimaryEducation; School Attitudes; *Small Classes; *TeacherAttitudes

IDENTIFIERS Saginaw City School System MI

ABSTRACTThis study surveyed perceptions of parents, teachers, and

principals concerning reduced class size classrooms (RS) with first andsecond graders versus traditional size classrooms (TS). Participating in thestudy were 63 RS parents, 80 TS parents, 12 RS teachers, 13 TS teachers, and14 principals in the Saginaw, Michigan school district. Response rates for RSgroups were substantially smaller than those for TS groups. The majorfindings indicated that the majority of respondents considered the benefitsof reduced size classrooms worth the extra expenditure (92 percent firstgrade parents, 70 percent second grade parents, 88 percent principals).Overall, parents saw approximately the same amount of student improvement inthe variables under study regardless of class size condition. The largestarea of academic increase seen by parents was in learning to read, regardlessof condition. Principals and teachers reported substantially more improvementin the RS over the TS condition. Teachers at TS sites and principalsrecommended the addition of more reduced-size classrooms. First grade parentsin both conditions and second grade parents in the TS condition wanted moreone-to-one instruction. Parents in the RS condition thought that teachersshould be more sensitive and provide more feedback. Teachers in TS sitesthought their effectiveness was limited because diverse student abilitylevels. Principals were concerned about the possibility of an elite class andthat students most in need of one-to-one instruction might not be placed inRS classrooms. (Four appendices include the surveys used, detailed resultsfrom the surveys by question, and results summarized by respondent groups.)(KB)

Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be madefrom the original document.

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATIONOffice o1 Educational Research and improvement

EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATIONCENTER (ERIC)

NKThis document has been reproduced asreceived from the person or organizationoriginating it.

O Minor changes have been made toimprove reproduction quality.

Points of view or opinions stateddocument do not necessarily repofficial OERI position or policy.

CLASS SIZE SURVEYS

Spring, 2000

DEPARTMENT OF EVALUATION SERVICES- PROVIDING ASSESSMENT, PROGRAM EVALUATION AND RESEARCH SERVICES -

PERMISSION TO REPRODUCE ANDDISSEMINATE THIS MATERIAL HAS

BEEN GRANTED BY

Rc\No.srd. 1\1

e. o'u'5TO THE EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES

INFORMATION CENTER (ERIC)

ST R lc

0 it,oN1,67\

O

0NOP.

OF SP's'`

rn

Saginaw, Michigan

In thisesent

BEST COPY MAILABLE2

CLASS SIZE SURVEYS

Spring, 2000

An Approved Report of theDepartment of Evaluation, Testing and Research

ic ard . Claus, 'h.D. u Kilrerka, M.A.Man er, Program Evaluation Research/Evaluation Specialist

Dr. Foster B. Gibbs, SuperintendentSchool District of the City of Saginaw Public Schools

September, 2000

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

CLASS SIZE SURVEY'S EXECUTIVE SUMMARY, SPRING 2000 1

Respondents 4

MAJOR FINDINGS 4

SUMMARY 6

APPENDICES 8

Appendix A: Parent Survey 9Princiapal Survey 12Teacher Survey 18

Appendix B: Results: Parent Survey (First Grade Students) 24Parent Survey (Second Grade Students) 28Teacher Survey 32Principal Survey 40

Appendix C: Summary Response of Part II Questions By Respondent Groups 47

Appendix D: Summary Response of Part III Questions By Respondent Groups 48

LIST OF TABLES

Table Page

1. Correspondence of Question Topics Among Class Size Surveys, Spring 2000 3

i

4

Class Size Survey's Executive Summary, Spring 2000

Purpose

A class size survey of parents, teachers, and principals concerning student improvements and changes in classroompractices between reduced class size (grade 1 = 18 or less and grade 2 = 21 or less students) versus traditional class sizesettings was undertaken in April through May, 2000.

Description of Respondents

A total 13.6% (63 of 462) reduced sized classroom parents and 22.1% (80 of 362) traditional sized classroom parentsreturned a completed survey. Approximately 43% (12 of 28) of reduced sized classroom teachers (23 first grade and 5second grade classrooms) and 87% (13 of 15) of traditional sized classroom teachers polled returned a completed survey.A total of 14 of 21 principals (66%) completed the survey. Reviewing the response rates given in the report, it wasapparent that rates among the reduced groups overall were substantially smaller than those of the traditional groups. Thusresulting findings should be considered cautiously in terms of their generalizeability to the entire group sampled. With thatcaution in mind, the major findings follow.

Findings

One important consideration is whether the respondents considered the benefits of reduced class size rooms worth theextra expenditure. Across conditions, the vast majority responded that it was:

92.0% of first grade parents;

70.0% of second grade parents; and

87.5% of the principals responded yes.

Overall, parents saw approximately the same amount of improvement in the variables under study regardless ofwhether the student was in the reduced size or control condition. Conversely, principals and teachers reported substantiallymore improvement in the variables in the reduced over the control condition.

Exception to this among the first grade parents was that those in the reduced size condition perceived moreimprovement than those in the control in the following:

-- Child's interest in learning (85.7% vs. 69.7%);-- Parent/teacher interaction (73.5% vs. 57.2%); and-- Parent involvement (59.2% vs. 31.9%).

Exception to this among the second grade parents were: 1) there was a larger percentage of those in the controlcondition who reported "much improved" in learning to write (58.3%) than reported it in the reduced size reduction(28.6%); and 2) those in the reduced size condition showed more improvement than those in the control in student'sattitude toward school (79.0% vs. 42.9%).

Further, the largest area of academic increase seen by parents was in learning to read (approximately94% of first grade parents and approximately 90% of second grade parents) regardless of condition.

1

5

There were four multiple choice survey questions dealing with the change in student/classroom variables asked of allrespondent groups. The findings to these questions were:

Approximately 73% of all parents (reduced and control) felt that grades improved. Teachers and principals notedgreater improvements to grades received in the reduced size condition (83.3% and 50.0%) than in the controlcondition (15.4% and 11.1%).

Approximately 58.5% of all parents (in both conditions) felt that student interaction improved. Teachers andprincipals saw more student interaction improvement in the reduced size condition (75.0% and 37.5%) than in thecontrol condition (15.4% and 11.1%).

An even 50% of second grade parents (in both conditions) felt that parent/teacher interaction improved. First gradeparents, teachers and principals saw more improvement in the reduced size condition (73.5%, 58.3%, and 50.0%respectively) than in the control condition (57.2%, 15.4%, and 11.1%).

Approximately 47% of first grade parents and 63% of second grade parents (in both conditions) felt that studentability in technology improved. Teacher and principals saw more improvement in the reduced size condition(41.7% and 37.5%) than in the control condition (7.7% and 22.2%).

2

SCHOOL DISTRICT OF THE CITY OF SAGINAW

DEPARTMENT OF EVALUATION, TESTING, AND RESEARCH

The class size survey was undertaken to obtain the perceptions of parents, teachers, and principals to reduced classsize settings (grade 1 = 18 or less and grade 2 = 21 or less students) or traditional class size settings in the first or secondgrades. Particular experimental (reduced class size rooms) and traditional (control rooms at grade 1 greater than 18 andgrade 2 greater than 21 students) were selected for the study. Parents were mailed a survey on April 20, 2000 and asked fortheir return by May 5, 2000. Teachers and principals received their instruments during April staff meetings and were askedto return them through interoffice mail by May 5, 2000.

The survey instruments contained three types of questions. Part I multiple choice questions dealt with classroombackground questions; Part II multiple choice questions focused on classroom practices/improvements; and Part III open-ended questions dealt with issues like unexpected outcomes, likes and dislikes about reduced class size experiment,suggestions for improvement, etc. Appendix A contains a copy of the instruments. Table 1, below, gives a matrix showingcommon questions asked of the four groups in Part II and Part III.

Table 1

Correspondence of Question Topics Among Class Size Surveys, Spring 2000

Reduced Class Size Surveys

Summary Statement of Question Parent 1' Parent 2d Teacher Principal

Part II

Changes in learning to read Q2 Q2Changes in learning to write Q3 Q3Changes in learning math Q4 Q4Changes in verbal expression Q5 Q5Changes in technology skills Q6 Q6 Q13 Q13Changes in grades Q7 Q7 Q25 Q25Changes in school attitude Q8 Q8Changes in student interaction Q9 Q9 Q16 Q16Changes in interest in learning Q10 Q10Change in parent involvement Q11 Q11Changes in parent/teacher interaction Q12 Q12 Q23 Q23Is it worth the extra money? Q13 Q13 Q24Change in student time on task Q6 Q6Change in monitoring/feedback to students Q7 Q7Change in small group instruction Q8 Q8Change in one on one instruction Q9 Q9Change in hands on instruction Q10 Q10Change in remedial instruction Q11 Q11Change in enrichment activities Q12 Q12Change in attendance Q14 Q14Change in discipline Q15 Q15Change in student/teacher interaction Q17 Q17Change in morale Q18 Q18Change in effectiveness of planning Q19 Q19Change in amount of paperwork Q20Change in teacher interactions Q21Change in administrator/teacher interaction Q22 Q22Change in physical environment Q24 Q21

3

7

Reduced Class Size Surveys

Summary Statement of Question Parent Ist Parent 2"d Teacher Principal

Part III

What do you like best Q26 Q25What do you like. least Q27 Q26What changes would you recommend Q14 Q14 Q28 Q27Any unexpected results Q29 Q28Professional development taken Q30Profession development wanted Q31

Respondents

Recall we surveyed the opinions of principals, teachers, and parents of both reduced (experimental) and traditional(control) sized first and second grade classes.

Response rates to the survey by group and type of site were:

Group Type Of Site Grade Level Sample Surveyed Returned# %

Parent Reduced 1 365 49 13.4Traditional 1 217 56 25.8

Reduced 2 97 14 14.4Traditional 2 145 24 16.6

Teacher Reduced 1 & 2 28 12 42.8Traditional 1 & 2 15 13 86.7

And, of the 21 principals surveyed, a total of 14 (66.7%) completed the survey.

Reviewing the response rates above, one can notice that the rates among the reduced groups are substantially smallerthan those for the traditional group. Also, the traditional rates are low except for traditional teachers. As a result, theresponses of those in the reduced and traditional groups may not be as generalizeable and the resulting findings should beconsidered with some caution. Appendix B contains all the responses of grade 1 parents, grade 2 parents, teachers of firstand second grades, and principals.

Major Findings

In an effort to deal with the complexity of the four respondent groups across common questions, part II findings interms of improvement (much and somewhat combined) were summarized (see Appendix C) and part III findings in termsof open-ended responses were summarized (see Appendix D). The summarized results contained in Appendix C and Drepresent the basis for the major findings that follow.

There were four multiple choice survey questions dealing with change in student/classroom variables asked of allrespondent groups. The findings to these questions were:

Approximately 73% of all parents (in both conditions) felt that grades improved(much and somewhat combined). Teachers and principals saw more improvementto grades received in the reduced size condition (83.3% and 50.0%) than in thecontrol condition (15.4% and 11.1%).

4

Approximately 58 to 59% of all parents (in both conditions) felt that studentinteraction improved. Teachers and principals saw more student interactionimprovement in the reduced size condition (75.0% and 37.5%) than in the controlcondition (15.4% and 11.1%).

An even 50% of second grade parents (in both conditions) felt that parent/teacherinteraction improved. First grade parents, teachers and principals saw moreimprovement in the reduced size condition (73.5%, 58.3%, and 50.0% respectively)than in the control condition (57.2%, 15.4%, and 11.1%).

Approximately 47% of first grade parents and 63% of second grade parents (inboth conditions) felt that student ability in technology improved. Teacher andprincipals saw more improvement in the reduced size condition (41.7% and 37.5%)than in the control condition (7.7% and 22.2%).

One important consideration is whether the respondents considered the benefits of reduced class size rooms worth theextra expenditures. Across conditions, the vast majority responded that it was:




Overall, parents saw approximately the same amount of improvement in the variables under study regardless ofwhether the student was in the reduced size or the control condition. Conversely, principals and teachers reportedsubstantially more improvement in the variables in the reduced over the control condition. (See Appendix B for the resultsby question topic.)

Exception to this among the first grade parents were that those in the reduced sizecondition perceived more improvement than those in the control in the following:

-- Child's interest in learning (85.7% vs. 69.7%);-- Parent/teacher interaction (73.5% vs. 57.2%); and-- Parent involvement (59.2% vs. 31.9%).

Exception to this among the second grade parents were: 1) there was a largerpercentage of those in the control condition who reported "much improved" inlearning to write (58.3%) than reported it in the reduced size condition (28.6%);and 2) those in the reduced size condition showed more improvement than those inthe control in student's attitude toward school (79.0% vs. 42.9%).

Further, the largest area of academic increase seen by parents was in learning toread (approximately 94% of first grade parents and approximately 90% of secondgrade parents) regardless of condition.

Respondents also offered answers to a set of open-ended questions. One question asked of all respondents is whatchanges they would recommend.

Teachers at control sites and principals recommended that more reduced sizeclassrooms be added.

Teachers in experimental sites felt there should be more discipline.

First grade parents in both conditions and second grade parents in control conditionwanted more one to one instruction.

5

9BEST COPY AVAILABLE

Parents in the experimental condition at both grades thought that teachers shouldbe more sensitive and should provide more feedback, particularly with regard tospecial needs children.

Principals and teachers were asked what they liked best. Teachers in experimental sites and principals indicated thatthey saw more time for one to one instruction. Teachers in both conditions agreed they saw less discipline problems.

Teachers in the experimental condition did not express any common dislike while teachers in control sites felt theireffectiveness was limited because there was too much diversity among student ability levels. Principals were concerned forthe possibility of an elite class and that the students most in need of one to one instruction may not be placed in the reducedclass size rooms.

No commonly found negative results were reported by teachers in the experimental condition. Teachers in the controlcondition and principals found less parent involvement and were less able to provide one to one attention.

Summary

A class size survey of parents, teachers, and principals concerning student improvements and changes in classroompractices between reduced class size versus traditional class size settings at grade 1 and 2 was undertaken in April throughMay, 2000. A total 13.6% (63 of 462) reduced sized classroom parents and 22.1% (80 of 362) traditional sized classroomparents returned a completed survey. Approximately 43% of reduced sized classroom teachers and 87% of traditional sizedclassroom teachers polled returned a completed survey. A total of 14 of 21 principals (66%) completed the survey.Reviewing the response rates given in the report, it was apparent that rates among the reduced groups overall weresubstantially smaller than those of the traditional groups. Thus resulting findings should be considered cautiously in termsof their generalizeability to the entire group sampled. With that caution in mind, the major findings follow:

One important consideration is whether the respondents considered the benefits of reduced class size rooms worth theextra expenditure. Across conditions, the vast majority responded that it was:




Overall, parents saw approximately the same amount of improvement in the variables under study regardless ofwhether the student was in the reduced size or control condition. Conversely, principals and teachers reported substantiallymore improvement in the variables in the reduced over the control condition.

Exception to this among the first grade parents where that those in the reduced size condition perceived moreimprovement than those in the control in the following:-- Child's interest in learning (85.7% vs. 69.7%);-- Parent/teacher interaction (73.5% vs. 57.2%); and-- Parent involvement (59.2/5 vs. 31.9%).

Exception to this among the second grade parents were: 1) there was a larger percentage of those in the controlcondition who reported "much improved" in learning to write (58.3%) than reported it in the reduced size reduction(28.6%); and 2) those in the reduced size condition showed more improvement than those in the control in student'sattitude toward school (79.0% vs. 42.9%).

Further, the largest area of academic increase seen by parents was in learning to read (approximately94% of first grade parents and approximately 90% of second grade parents) regardless of condition.

There were four multiple choice survey questions dealing with the change in student/classroom variables asked of allrespondent groups. The findings to these questions were:

Approximately 73% of all parents (reduced and control) felt that grades improved. Teachers and principals notedgreater improvements to grades received in the reduced size condition (83.3% and 50.0%) than in the controlcondition (15.4% and 11.1%).

Approximately 58.5% of all parents (in both conditions) felt that student interaction improved. Teachers andprincipals saw more student interaction improvement in the reduced size condition (75.0% and 37.5%) than in thecontrol condition (15.4% and 11.1%).

An even 50% of second grade parents (in both conditions) felt that parent/teacher interaction improved. First gradeparents, teachers and principals saw more improvement in the reduced size condition (73.5%, 58.3%, and 50.0%respectively) than in the control condition (57.2%, 15.4%, and 11.1%).

Approximately 47% of first grade parents and 63% of second grade parents (in both conditions) felt that studentability in technology improved. Teacher and principals saw more improvement in the reduced size condition(41.7% and 37.5%) than in the control condition (7.7% and 22.2%).

7

APPENDICES

8 12

APPENDIX A

ETR ©April, 2000-Form C/E

SCHOOL DISTRICT OF THE CITY OF SAGINAWParent Survey

Dear Parents:

We would like your opinions. The number of students in many first and second grade classrooms in theSaginaw Public Schools has been reduced. Other classrooms have maintained a larger traditional size. We wouldlike to know your ideas concerning your child's classroom. This survey will only take a couple of minutes of yourtime to complete and can be returned in the enclosed, post-paid addressed envelope.

Your responses will help us to evaluate and improve our efforts concerning first and second gradeclassrooms. All answers will be kept confidential and only grouped findings will be reported.

Instructions: First, please write the name of your child's first or second grade school. Then, please fill in the blankor circle the letter corresponding to the most appropriate answer. Thank you in advance for sharing your views.

My child attends elementary.

Circle your child's grade level: first second

Directions: Please fill in the blank or circle the letter corresponding to the most appropriate answer.

PART I: A background question.

1. What is the size of the classroom your child attends?a. 25 - 30 studentsb. 21 - 24 studentsc. 15 - 20 studentsd. Less than 15 studentse. Don't know

PART II: These are a few classroom questions.

2. How has your child's learning to read changed this year?a. Much improvedb. Somewhat improvedc. No changed. Somewhat worsee. Much worsef. Don't know

3. How has your child's learning to write changed this year?a. Much improvedb. Somewhat improvedc. No changed. Somewhat worsee. Much worsef. Don't know

913

APPENDIX A

Parent SurveyPage 2

4. How has your child's learning in mathematics changed this year?a. Much improvedb. Somewhat improvedc. No changed. Somewhat worsee. Much worsef. Don't know

5. How has your child's learning to talk and express himself or herself changed this year?a. Much improvedb. Somewhat improvedc. No changed. Somewhat worsee. Much worsef. Don't know

6. How has your child's learning with and about computers and technology changed since last year?a. Much improvedb. Somewhat improvedc. No changed. Somewhat worsee. Much worsef. Don't know

7. How have your child's grades in school changed this year?a. Much improvedb. Somewhat improvedc. No changed. Somewhat worsee. Much worsef. Don't know

8. How has your child's like for school changed this year?a. Much improvedb. Somewhat improvedc. No changed. Somewhat worsee. Much worsef. Don't know

9. How has the way your child gets along with other students changed this year?a. Much improvedb. Somewhat improvedc. No changed. Somewhat worsee. Much worsef. Don't know

10 14

APPENDIX A

Parent SurveyPage 3

10. How has your child's interest in learning changed this year?a. Much improvedb. Somewhat improvedc. No changed. Somewhat worsee. Much worse

11. How has your involvement in school as a parent changed this year?a. Much improvedb. Somewhat improvedc. No changed. Somewhat worsee. Much worsef. Don't know

12. How has the communication you have had with your child's teacher changed this year?a. Much improvedb. Somewhat improvedc. No changed. Somewhat worsee. Much worsef. Don't know

13. A reduction in class size is expensive. Do you think the benefits are worth the extra money?a. Yesb. Noc. Don't know

PART III: This is an opinion question.

14. What could have been done differently at school to improve your child's experience?

Thank you for your honest response!

Please put survey in postage-paid envelope provided and return it to the Saginaw Public Schools by May 5, 2000.


School:

APPENDIX A

CLASS SIZE SURVEYPrincipal Survey

Introduction: Thank you for taking the time to complete this questionnaire. The purpose of this survey is to determine theperceptions of principals with regard to either reduced class size (grade 1 = 18 or less, and grade 2 = 21 or less) or traditionalclass size in the first or second grades. Your responses will be used to help us to evaluate and improve our early elementaryefforts. All answers will be kept in confidence and only grouped findings will be reported.


PART I

1. At what grade levels have class size reductions been implemented at your school?a. First grade onlyb. Grades 1 & 2c. Second grade onlyd. None GO TO PART II

2. What is the average number of months, if any, that class size reduction classes have been in operation atyour school?a. Noneb. Less than a monthc. 1-3 monthsd. 4-6 monthse. More than six months

3. What percent of your reduced size classrooms are using a team-teaching format?a. 0% to 20%b. 21% to 40%c. 41% to 60%d. 61% to 80%e. More than 80%

4. What percent of your reduced size classrooms are taught by first year teachers?a. 0% to 20%b. 21% to 40c/0c. 41% to 60%d. 61% to 80%e. More than 80%

5. What percent of your reduced size classrooms are taught by teachers who taught at the same grade level last year?a. 0% to 20%b. 21% to 40%c. 41% to 60%d. 61% to 80%e. More than 80%

12 16

APPENDIX A

Principal SurveyPage 2

PART II: Thinking only of your first grade classrooms (second if you have low class size in that grade), please indicate theextent to which the following factors have changed from last school year to this school year. If you have bothReduced and Traditional classrooms mark the questions in each column. If only Reduced or TraditionalClassrooms mark the questions in the appropriate column.

Reduced Class Size Classrooms6. Student time-on-task.

a. Much improved since last yearb. Somewhat improved since last yearc. No changed. Somewhat worse since last yeare. Much worse since last year

7. Monitoring student progress and providing feedbackto students.a. Much improved since last yearb. Somewhat improved since last yearc. No changed. Somewhat worse since last yeare. Much worse since last year

8. Small group instruction.a. Much improved since last yearb. Somewhat improved since last yearc. No changed. Somewhat worse since last yeare. Much worse since last year

9. One-on-one instruction.a. Much improved since last yearb. Somewhat improved since last yearc. No changed. Somewhat worse since last yeare. Much worse since last year

10. Use of hands-on activities and manipulatives.a. Much improved since last yearb. Somewhat improved since last yearc. No changed. Somewhat worse since last yeare. Much worse since last year

11. Effectiveness of remedial activities.a. Much improved since last yearb. Somewhat improved since last yearc. No changed. Somewhat worse since last yeare. Much worse since last year

13

Traditional Class Size Classrooms6. Student time-on-task.


7. Monitoring student progress and providing feedbackto students.a. Much improved since last yearb. Somewhat improved since last yearc. No changed. Somewhat worse since last yeare. Much worse sine last year

8. Small group instructiona. Much improved since last yearb. Somewhat improved since last yearc. No changed. Somewhat worse since last yeare. Much worse sine last year

9. One-on-one instruction.a. Much improved since last yearb. Somewhat improved since last yearc. No changed. Somewhat worse since last yeare. Much worse sine last year

10. Use of hands-on activities and manipulatives.a. Much improved since last yearb. Somewhat improved since last yearc. No changed. Somewhat worse since last yeare. Much worse sine last year

11. Effectiveness of remedial activities.a. Much improved since last yearb. Somewhat improved since last yearc. No changed. Somewhat worse since last yeare. Much worse sine last year

17

APPENDIX A


Reduced Class Size Classrooms12. Effectiveness of enrichment activities.


13. Introducing students to computers and technology.a. Much improved since last yearb. Somewhat improved since last yearc. No changed. Somewhat worse since last yeare. Much worse since last year

14. Student attendance.a. Much improved since last yearb. Somewhat improved since last yearc. No changed. Somewhat worse since last yeare. Much worse since last year

15. Classroom discipline.a. Much improved since last yearb. Somewhat improved since last yearc. No changed. Somewhat worse since last yeare. Much worse since last year

16. Social interaction among your students.a. Much improved since last yearb. Somewhat improved since last yearc. No changed. Somewhat worse since last yeare. Much worse since last year

17. Social/personal interactions between the teachersand students.a. Much improved since last yearb. Somewhat improved since last yearc. No changed. Somewhat worse since last yeare. Much worse since last year

18. Teacher morale.a. Much improved since last yearb. Somewhat improved since last yearc. No changed. Somewhat worse since last yeare. Much worse since last year

14

Traditional Class Size Classrooms12. Effectiveness of enrichment activities.

a. Much improved since last yearb. Somewhat improved since last yearc. No changed. Somewhat worse since last yeare. Much worse sine last year

13. Introducing students to computers and technology.a. Much improved since last yearb. Somewhat improved since last yearc. No changed. Somewhat worse since last yeare. Much worse sine last year

14. Student attendance.a. Much improved since last yearb. Somewhat improved since last yearc. No changed. Somewhat worse since last yeare. Much worse sine last year

15. Classroom discipline.a. Much improved since last yearb. Somewhat improved since last yearc. No changed. Somewhat worse since last yeare. Much worse sine last year

16. Social interaction among your students.a. Much improved since last yearb. Somewhat improved since last yearc. No changed. Somewhat worse since last yeare. Much worse sine last year

17. Social/personal interactions between the teachersand studentsa. Much improved since last yearb. Somewhat improved since last yearc. No changed. Somewhat worse since last yeare. Much worse sine last year

18. Teacher moral.a. Much improved since last yearb. Somewhat improved since last yearc. No changed. Somewhat worse since last yeare. Much worse sine last year

Is

APPENDIX A


Reduced Class Size Classrooms19. Effectiveness of teacher planning and preparation.


20. Quality of contacts with parents.a. Much improved since last yearb. Somewhat improved since last yearc. No changed. Somewhat worse since last yeare. Much worse since last year

21. Physical environment (space, facilities, noise level, etc.)a. Much improved since last yearb. Somewhat improved since last yearc. No changed. Somewhat worse since last yeare. Much worse since last year

22. Teacher-administrator interaction and support.a. Much improved since last yearb. Somewhat improved since last yearc. No changed. Somewhat worse since last yeare. Much worse since last year

23. Overall academic improvement among students.a. Much improved since last yearb. Somewhat improved since last yearc. No changed. Somewhat worse since last yeare. Much worse since last year

Traditional Class Size Classrooms19. Effectiveness of teacher planning and preparation.

a. Much improved since last yearb. Somewhat improved since last yearc. No changed. Somewhat worse since last yeare. Much worse sine last year

20. Quality of contacts with parents.a. Much improved since last yearb. Somewhat improved since last yearc. No changed. Somewhat worse since last yeare. Much worse sine last year

21. Physical environment (space, facilities, noise level, etc.)a. Much improved since last yearb. Somewhat improved since last yearc. No changed. Somewhat worse since last yeare. Much worse sine last year

22. Teacher-administrator interaction and support.a. Much improved since last yearb. Somewhat improved since last yearc. No changed. Somewhat worse since last yeare. Much worse sine last year

23. Overall academic improvement among students.a. Much improved since last yearb. Somewhat improved since last yearc. No changed. Somewhat worse since last yeare. Much worse sine last year

24. Obviously, reductions in class size are an expensive undertaking. Do you think that the benefits of reduced class sizeare worth the expenditures?a. Yesb. Noc. Don't know

APPENDIX A


PART III: If you have reduced class sizes in your building, please write your response to the following questions using thespace provided. If all of your classrooms are of traditional size, please do not answer Part III.

25. What do you like best about class size reduction?

26. What do you like least about class size reduction?

27. What would you change about the class size reduction efforts to improve its effectiveness?

28. What unexpected results have you observed as a result of reduced class size? If appropriate, please mention bothpositive and negative unexpected results.

Positive results:

16

20

APPENDIX A


Negative results:


Please return to the Evaluation, Testing & Research Department by Friday, May 5, 2000.


School Where You Teach:

APPENDIX A

CLASS SIZE SURVEYTeacher Survey

Introduction: Thank you for taking the time to complete this questionnaire. The purpose of this survey is to determine theperceptions of teachers with regard to either reduced class size (grade 1 = 18 or less, and grade 2 = 21 or less) or traditionalclass size in the first or second grades. Your responses will be used to help us to evaluate and improve our early elementaryefforts. All answers will be kept in confidence and only grouped findings will be reported.


PART I

1. How long have you been teaching?a. First yearb. 1 2 yearsc. 3 10 yearsd. 11 20 yearse. More than 20 years

2. What grade do you teach?a. Firstb. Second

3. What grade did you teach last year?a. Firstb. Secondc. Thirdd. Upper Elementary

4. How many students are in your class?a. 21 or moreb. 19 - 20c. 17 - 18d. 15 - 16e. 14 or fewer

5. How many months, if any, have you been teaching 18 or few students (2nd grade, 21 or fewer students)?a. Less than a monthb. 1 - 3 monthsc. 4 - 6 monthsd. More than six monthse. I have more than 18 (2nd grade, 21) students in my class

APPENDIX A

Teacher SurveyPage 2

PART II: Please indicate the extent to which the following factors have changed from last school year to this school year.

6. Student time-on-task.a. Much improved since last yearb. Somewhat improved since last yearc. No changed. Somewhat worse since last yeare. Much worse since last year

7. Monitoring student progress and providing feedback to students.a. Much improved since last yearb. Somewhat improved since last yearc. No changed. Somewhat worse since last yeare. Much worse since last year

8. Small group instruction.a. Much improved since last yearb. Somewhat improved since last yearc. No changed. Somewhat worse since last yeare. Much worse since last year

9. One-on-one instruction.a. Much improved since last yearb. Somewhat improved since last yearc. No changed. Somewhat worse since last yeare. Much worse since last year

10. Use of hands-on activities and manipulatives.a. Much improved since last yearb. Somewhat improved since last yearc. No changed. Somewhat worse since last yearf. Much worse since last year

11. Effectiveness of remedial activities.a. Much improved since last yearb. Somewhat improved since last yearc. No changed. Somewhat worse since last yeare. Much worse since last year

12. Effectiveness of enrichment activities.a. Much improved since last yearb. Somewhat improved since last yearc. No changed. Somewhat worse since last yeare. Much worse since last year

19

23 BEST COPY AVAILABLE

APPENDIX A


13. Introducing students to computers and technology.a. Much improved since last yearb. Somewhat improved since last yearc. No changed. Somewhat worse since last yeare. Much worse since last year

14. Student attendance.a. Much improved since last yearb. Somewhat improved since last yearc. No changed. Somewhat worse since last yeare. Much worse since last year

15. Classroom discipline.a. Much improved since last yearb. Somewhat improved since last yearc. No changed. Somewhat worse since last yeare. Much worse since last year

16. Social interaction among your students.a. Much improved since last yearb. Somewhat improved since last yearc. No changed. Somewhat worse since last yeare. Much worse since last year

17. Social/personal interactions between the teachers and students.a. Much improved since last yearb. Somewhat improved since last yearc. No changed. Somewhat worse since last yeare. Much worse since last year

18. Teacher moral.a. Much improved since last yearb. Somewhat improved since last yearc. No changed. Somewhat worse since last yearf. Much worse since last year

19. Effectiveness of teacher planning and preparation.a. Much improved since last yearb. Somewhat improved since last yearc. No changed. Somewhat worse since last yeare. Much worse since last year

20

BEST COPYAVAILABLE

APPENDIX A


20. The amount of paper and record keeping.a. Much improved since last yearb. Somewhat improved since last yearc. No changed. Somewhat worse since last yeare. Much worse since last year

21. Your interaction with other teachers at your school.a. Much improved since last yearb. Somewhat improved since last yearc. No changed. Somewhat worse since last yeare. Much worse since last year

22. Teacher-administrator interaction and support.a. Much improved since last yearb. Somewhat improved since last yearc. No changed. Somewhat worse since last yeare. Much worse since last year

23. Number and quality of contacts with parents.a. Much improved since last yearb. Somewhat improved since last yearc. No changed. Somewhat worse since last yeare. Much worse since last year

24. Physical environment (space, facilities, noise level, etc.).a. Much improved since last year

b. Somewhat improved since last yearc. No changed. Somewhat worse since last yeare. Much worse since last year

25. Overall academic improvement among students.a. Much improved since last year

b. Somewhat improved since last yearc. No changed. Somewhat worse since last yeare. Much worse since last year

21 25

APPENDIX A


PART III: Using the space provided, please write your response to the following questions.

26. What do you like best about this year's class versus last year's class?

27. What do you like least about this year's class versus last year's class?

28. What would you change to improve classroom effectiveness?

APPENDIX A


29. What unexpected results have you observed in this year as compared to last year? If appropriate, please mention bothpositive and negative results.

Positive results:

Negative Results:

30. List any professional development activities in which you have participated that would help you to be moreeffective in reduced sized classrooms.

31. List any professional development activities/topics you believe would be helpful in reduced sized classrooms.

Thank you for your honest response!Please return to the Evaluation, Testing & Research Department by Friday, May 5, 2000.

APPENDIX B



(First Grade Students)Dear Parents:





Circle your child's grade level: first second Experimental (N=49)Control (N=56)



1. What is the size of the classroom your child attends?Experimental Control# % # %

a. 25 - 30 students 4 8.2 33 58.9b. 21 - 24 students 6 12.2 15 26.8c. 15 - 20 students 28 57.1 2 3.6d. Less than 15 students 5 10.2 0 0.0e. Don't know 3 6.1 5 8.9f. No response 3 6.1 1 1.8

TOTAL 49 99.9* 56 100.0

PART II: These are a few classroom questions.Experimental Control

2. How has your child's learning to read changed this year? # % # %a. Much improved 39 79.6 43 76.8

b. Somewhat improved 7 14.3 10 17.8

c. No change 3 6.1 2 3.6

d. Somewhat worse 0 0.0 0 0.0

e. Much worse 0 0.0 0 0.0

f. Don't know 0 0.0 1 1.8

TOTAL 49 100.0 56 100.0


TOTAL

*Rounding 24

28

Experimental Control# % #

30 61.2 40 71.416 32.7 11 19.6

3 6.1 3 5.40 0.0 1 1.8

0 0.0 0 0.00 0.0 1 1.8

49 100.0 56 100.0

APPENDIX B

First Grade Parent SurveyPage 2

Experimental Control4. How has your child's learning in mathematics changed this year? # %

a. Much improved 30 61.2b. Somewhat improved 14 28.6c. No change 2 4.1d. Somewhat worse 2 4.1e. Much worse 0 0.0f. Don't know 1 2.0

TOTAL 49 100.0

# %41 73.211 19.62 3.60 0.00 0.02 3.6

56 100.0

5. How has your child's learning to talk and express himself or herself changed this year?Experimental Control

a. Much improvedb. Somewhat improvedc. No changed. Somewhat worsee. Much worsef. Don't know

TOTAL

# % # %23 46.9 22 39.320 40.8 25 44.6

5 10.2 8 14.30 0.0 1 1.80 0.0 0 0.01 2.0 0 0.0

49 99.9* 56 100.0

6. How has your child's learning with and about computers and technology changed since last year?


TOTAL

7. How have your child's grades in school changed this year?


TOTAL

8. How has your child's like for school changed this year?


TOTAL

25*Rounding

29

Experimental Control# % # %

11 22.5 10 17.812 24.5 16 28.615 30.6 23 41.1

1 2.0 1 1.80 0.0 0 0.0

10 20A 6 10349 100.0 56 100.0


22 44.9 25 44.615 30.6 14 25.07 14.3 11 19.61 2.0 4 7.22 4.1 2 3.62 4.1 0 0.0

49 100.0 56 100.0


24 49.0 21 37.56 12.2 11 19.6

13 26.5 16 28.64 8.2 6 10.71 2.0 2 3.61 2.0 0 0.0

49 99.9* 56. 100.0

APPENDIX B


9. How has the way your child gets along with other students changed this year?Experimental Control# % # %

a. Much improved 17 34.7 16 28.6b. Somewhat improved 15 30.6 14 25.0c. No change 14 28.6 24 42.8d. Somewhat worse 2 4.1 1 1.8e. Much worse 0 0.0 0 0.0f. Don't know 1 2.0 1 1.8

TOTAL 49 100.0 56 100.0

10. How has your child's interest in learning changed this year? Experimental Control# % # °A

a. Much improved 34 69.4 23 41.1b. Somewhat improved 8 16.3 16 28.6c. No change 6 12.2 9 16.1d. Somewhat worse 1 2.0 4 7.3e. Much worse 0 0.0 2 3.6f. No Response 0 0.0 2 3.6

TOTAL 49 99.9* 56 100.3*

11. How has your involvement in school as a parent changed this year?Experimental# %


TOTAL

13

16

16

3

01

49

26.532.732.7

6.10.02.0

100.0

Control# %6 10.7

12 21.232 57.1

3 5.40 0.03 5.4

56 99.8*

12. How has the communication you have had with your child's teacher changed this year?Experimental Control


TOTAL

# % # %22 44.9 16 28.614 28.6 16 28.611 22.5 18 32.10 0.0 4 7.12 4.1 0 0.00 0.0 2 3.6

49 100.1* 56 100.0

13. A reduction in class size is expensive. Do you think the benefits are worth the extra

a. Yesb. Noc. Don't knowd. No response

TOTAL

26*Rounding

Experimentalmoney?

Control# % # %

42 85.7 44 78.64 8.2 4 7.23 6.1 5 8.90 0.0 3 5.4

49 100.0 56 100.1*

30

APPENDIX B




Comments Experimental ControlComputer labs/more computers 3 2

Foreign language instruction 1 0

More sports 1 0Better checks for head lice 1 0Introduce Accelerated Reader 2 0

Longer lunch hours 1 0

Smaller class size/more one-on-one instruction 7 16

Aides 1 4Put prayer back in school 1 0

More homework 1 0

Not enough attention to special education needs 2 0

More sensitive/better teachers 6 2

Better discipline 2 1

Parent involvement activities 2 2

Less homework initially 0 2

Better lunch program/better food/better training oflunchroom aides to respect each child 1 1

After school tutoring program/activities 1 3

More emphasis on mathematics 1 0

More field trips 1 0

Better feedback to parents 0 2

More consistency in substitute teachers 0 2

New principal/better principal 0 3

Stop half days twice/month 0 1

Don't agree with reading test 1 1

Compulsory school uniform 0 1

Keep home schools open that have low enrollment topreserve the neighborhood school concept 1 0

Don't like split classes 0 1

Avoid favoritism 1 0

Go back to basics; don't try to teach so much at 1'grade 0 1

Better communication of staff to parents 0 1



27 31

APPENDIX B



(Second Grade Students)Dear Parents:





Circle your child's grade level: first second Experimental (N=14)Control (N=24)



1. What is the size of the classroom your child attends?Experimental Control# % # %

a. 25 - 30 students 6 42.8 11 45.8b. 21 - 24 students 4 28.6 7 29.2c. 15 - 20 students 2 14.3 1 4.2d. Less than 15 students 2 14.3 0 0.0e. Don't know 0 0.0 2 8.3f. No response 0 0.0 3 12.5

TOTAL 14 100.0 24 100.0

PART II: These are a few classroom questions.Experimental Control

2. How has your child's learning to read changed this year? # % # %a. Much improved 8 57.1 15 62.5b. Somewhat improved 5 35.7 6 25.0c. No change 1 7.1 2 8.3d. Somewhat worse 0 0.0 1 4.2e. Much worse 0 0.0 0 0.0f. Don't know 0 OM 0 0.0

TOTAL 14 99.9* 24 100.0


TOTAL

*Rounding 2832


4 28.6 14 58.38 57.1 7 29.22 14.3 2 8.30 0.0 1 4.20 0.0 0 0.00 0.0 0 0.0

14 100.0 24 100.0

APPENDIX B

Second Grade Parent SurveyPage 2

Experimental Control4. How has your child's learning in mathematics changed this year? # %

a. Much improved 6 42.8b. Somewhat improved 5 35.7c. No change 3 21.4d. Somewhat worse 0 0.0e. Much worse 0 0.0f. Don't know 0 0.0

TOTAL 14 99.9*

# °A9 37.5

11 45.84 16.70 0.00 0.00 0.0

24 100.0

5. How has your child's learning to talk and express himself or herself changed this year?Experimental Control


TOTAL

# % # %5 42.8 8 33.36 35.7 9 37.53 21.4 6 25.00 0.0 1 4.20 0.0 0 0.00 0.0 0 OM

14 99.9* 24 100.0

6. How has your child's learning with and about computers and technology changed since last year?


TOTAL

7. How have your child's grades in school changed this year?


TOTAL

8. How has your child's like for school changed this year?


TOTAL

29*Rounding 33

Experimental Control# % # %2 14.3 6 25.07 50.0 9 37.53 21.4 4 16.70 0.0 0 0.00 0.0 0 0.02 14.3 5 20.8

14 100.0 24 100.0

Experimental Control# % # %3 21.4 10 41.77 50.0 8 33.32 14.3 3 12.5

1 7.1 3 12.51 7.1 0 0.00 0.0 0 0.0

14 99.9* 24 100.0

Experimental Control# % # %4 28.6 10 41.72 14.3 7 29.25 35.7 4 16.72 14.3 2 8.31 7.1 1 4.20 0.0 0 0.0

14 100.1* 24 100.1*

APPENDIX B


9. How has the way your child gets along with other students changed this year?Experimental Control

a. Much improved 3 21.4 7 29.2b. Somewhat improved 4 28.6 9 37.5c. No change 5 35.7 5 20.8d. Somewhat worse 0 0.0 1 4.2e. Much worse 2 14.3 0 0.0f. Don't know 0 0.0 2 8.3

TOTAL 14 100.0 24 100.0

10. How has your child's interest in learning changed this year? Experimental Control

a. Much improved 5 35.7 10 41.7b. Somewhat improved 4 28.6 7 29.2c. No change 3 21.4 4 16.7d. Somewhat worse 1 7.1 3 12.5e. Much worse 1 7.1 0 0.0

TOTAL 14 99.9* 24 100.1*

11. How has your involvement in school as a parent changed this year?Experimental Control


TOTAL

12. How has the communication you have had with your child's


TOTAL

# %2 14.35 35.76 42.81 7.1

0 0.00 0.0

14 99.9*

teacher changed thisExperimental

# %4 16.76 25.0

12 50.02 8.30 0.00 0.0

24 100.0

year?Control

5 35.7 6 25.02 14.3 6 25.05 35.7 7 29.22 14.3 3 12.50 0.0 2 8.30 0.0 0 0.0

14 100.0 24 100.0

13. A reduction in class size is expensive. Do you think the benefits are worth the extra money?Experimental Control

a. Yesb. Noc. Don't know

TOTAL

*Rounding30

34

11 78.61 7.12 14.3

14 100.0

19 79.20 0.05 20.8

24 100.0

APPENDIX B




Comments Experimental ControlComputer labs/more computers 2 1

Longer lunch hours 1 0Smaller class size/more one-on-one instruction 1 6Aides 0 1

More homework 1 1

Not enough attention to special education needs 2 0More sensitive/better teachers 1 1

Better discipline 1 1

Better lunch program/better food/better training oflunchroom aides to respect each child 0 1

After school tutoring program/activities 1 2

More music/arts/crafts for express 0 1

Better feedback to parents 2 2

More consistency in substitute teachers 0 3

Stop half days twice/month 0 1



31

35


School Where You Teach:

APPENDIX B

CLASS SIZE SURVEYTeacher Survey

Experimental (N=12)Control (N=13)

Introduction: Thank you for taking the time to complete this questionnaire. The purpose of this survey is to determine theperceptions of teachers with regard to either reduced class size (grade 1 = 18 or less, and grade 2 = 21 or less) or traditionalclass size in the first or second grades. Your responses will be used to help us to evaluate and improve our early elementaryefforts. All answers will be kept in confidence and only grouped findings will be reported.


PART I

1. How long have you been teaching? Experimental Control%# % #

a. First year 1 8.3 0 0.0b. 1 2 years 0 0.0 3 23.1c. 3 10 years 5 41.7 2 15.4d. 11 - 20 years 2 16.7 3 23.1e. More than 20 years 4 33.3 5 38.5f. No response 0 0.0 0 0.0

TOTAL 12 100.0 13 100.1*

2. What grade do you teach? Experimental Control%# % #

a. First 8 66.7 10 76.9b. Second 3 25.0 3 23.1c. No response 1 8.3 0 0.0

TOTAL 12 100.0 13 100.0

3. What grade did you teach last year? Experimental Control# % # %

a. First 7 58.3 7 53.8b. Second 5 41.7 3 23.1c. Third 0 0.0 1 7.7d. Upper Elementary 0 0.0 0 0.0e. No response 0 0.0 2 15.4

TOTAL 12 100.0 13 100.0

4. How many students are in your class? Experimental Control°A# % #

a. 21 or more 1 8.3 13 100.0b. 19 20 2 16.7 0 0.0c. 17- 18 5 41.7 0 0.0d. 15 - 16 4 33.3 0 0.0e. 14 or fewer 0 0.0 0 0.0f. No response 0 0.0 0 0.0

TOTAL 12 100.0 13 100.0

*Rounding32

36

APPENDIX B


5. How many months, if any, have you been teaching 18 or few students (2nd grade, 21 or fewer students)?

a. Less than a monthb. 1 - 3 monthsc. 4 - 6 monthsd. More than six monthse. I have more than 18 (2nd grade, 21)

students in my classf. No response

TOTAL

Experimental Control# % # %1 8.3 3 23.10 0.0 0 0.02 16.7 0 0.06 50.0 0 0.0

3 25.0 9 69.20 0.0 1 7.7

12 100.0 13 100.0

PART II: Please indicate the extent to which the following factors have changed from last school year to this school year.Experimental Control

6. Student time-on-task.a. Much improved since last yearb. Somewhat improved since last yearc. No changed. Somewhat worse since last yeare. Much worse since last yearf. No response

TOTAL

# %10 83.30 0.01 8.30 0.00 0.01 8.3

12 99.9*

# %1 7.73 23.16 46.22 15.40 0.01 7.7

13 100.1*

7. Monitoring student progress and providing feedback to students.Experimental Control

a. Much improved since last yearb. Somewhat improved since last yearc. No changed. Somewhat worse since last yeare. Much worse since last yearf. No response

TOTAL

# %9 75.01 8.31 8.30 0.00 0.01 8.3

12 99.9*

# %

0 0.05 38.52 15.45 38.50 0.01 7.7

13 100.1*

8. Small group instruction. Experimental Control


TOTAL

# %

10 83.31 8.30 0.00 0.00 0.01 8.3

12 99.9*

9. One-on-one instruction. Experimental# %

a. Much improved since last year 8 66.7b. Somewhat improved since last year 2 16.7c. No change 1 8.3d. Somewhat worse since last year 0 0.0e. Much worse since last year 0 0.0f. No response 1 83

TOTAL 12 100.0

*Rounding 33

# %

0 0.03 23.15 38.53 23.11 7.71 7.7

13 100.1*

Control# %

1 7.73 23.12 15.44 30.82 15.41 7.7

13 100.1*

APPENDIX B


10. Use of hands-on activities and manipulatives. Experimental# %

a. Much improved since last year 0 0.0b. Somewhat improved since last year 4 33.3c. No change 1 8.3d. Somewhat worse since last year 0 0.0e. Much worse since last year 0 0.0f. No response 7 58.3

TOTAL 12 99.9*

11. Effectiveness of remedial activities. Experimental# %


TOTAL 12 100.0

12. Effectiveness of enrichment activities. Experimental# %


TOTAL 12 99.9*

Control# %1 7.70 0.07 53.83 23.11 7.71 7.7

13 100.0

Control# %1 7.73 23.14 30.83 23.11 7.71 7.7

13 100.1*

Control# %0 0.04 30.85 38.52 15.41 7.71 7.7

13 100.1*

13. Introducing students to computers and technology. Experimental Control%# % #

a. Much improved since last year 3 25.0 0 0.0b. Somewhat improved since last year 2 16.7 1 7.7c. No change 5 41.7 5 38.5d. Somewhat worse since last year 0 0.0 2 15.4e. Much worse since last year 1 8.3 4 30.8f. No response 1 8.3 1 7.7

TOTAL 12 100.0 13 100.1*

14. Student attendance.


TOTAL

*Rounding

Experimental Control# %2 16.74 33.35 41.70 0.00 0.01 8.3

12 100.0

34

38

# %0 0.00 0.08 61.54 30.80 0.01 7.7

13 100.0

APPENDIX B


15. Classroom discipline. Experimental Control%# % #


TOTAL 12 100.0 13 100.0

16. Social interaction among your students. Experimental Control# % # %


TOTAL 12 100.0 13 100.1*

17. Social/personal interactions between the teachers and students.Experimental Control# % # %


TOTAL 12 100.0 13 100.1*

18. Teacher morale. Experimental Control# % # %

a. Much improved since last year 8 66.7 2 15.4

b. Somewhat improved since last year 2 16.7 0 0.0

c. No change 0 0.0 5 38.5

d. Somewhat worse since last year 0 0.0 4 30.8

e. Much worse since last, year 1 8.3 1 7.7

f. No response 1 8.3 1 7.7

TOTAL 12 100.0 13 100.1*

19. Effectiveness of teacher planning and preparation. Experimental Control0/0# % #

a. Much improved since last year 8 66.7 2 15.4

b. Somewhat improved since last year 3 25.0 7 53.8c. No change 0 0.0 2 15.4

d. Somewhat worse since last year 0 0.0 1 7.7

e. Much worse since last year 0 0.0 0 0.0

f. No response 1 8.3 1 7.7

TOTAL 12 100.0 13 100.0

*Rounding 3539

APPENDIX B


20. The amount of paper and record keeping. Experimental Control# % # %


TOTAL 12 100.0 13 100.1*

21. Your interaction with other teachers at your school. Experimental Control# % # %


TOTAL 12 100.0 13 100.1*

22. Teacher-administrator interaction and support. Experimental Control# % # %


TOTAL 12 99.9* 13 100.0

23. Number and quality of contacts with parents. Experimental Control# % # %

a. Much improved since last year 4 33.3 0 0.0b. Somewhat improved since last year 3 25.0 2 15.4c. No change 4 33.3 7 53.8d. Somewhat worse since last year 0 0.0 3 23.1e. Much worse since last year 0 0.0 0 0.0f. No response 1 8.3 1 73

TOTAL 12 99.9* 13 100.0

24. Physical environment (space, facilities, noise level, etc.).Experimental Control# % # °A

a. Much improved since last year 6 50.0 1 7.7b. Somewhat improved since last year 3 25.0 0 0.0c. No change 1 8.3 6 46.2d. Somewhat worse since last year 1 8.3 4 30.8e. Much worse since last year 0 0.0 1 7.7f. No response 1 8.3 1 73

TOTAL 12 99.9* 13 100.1*

36*Rounding

40

APPENDIX B


25. Overall academic improvement among students. Experimental Control# % # %


TOTAL 12 99.9* 13 100.0

PART III: Using the space provided, please write your response to the following questions.

26. What do you like best about this year's class versus last year's class?

Comments Experimental Control

Planning time 0 1

Student teacher 0 1

Less students than last year 0 1

Confidence based on teaching the grade before 0 1

Better listeners 0 2Better parents 1 1

More time for one-on-one instruction 6 0Less discipline problems/distractions 5 4More academic success 1 0Better academic achievement 3 1

Better classroom atmosphere 1 1

More time to monitor students 1 0

27. What do you like least about this year's class versus last year's class?


Too many students/wide range of student abilities 0 5

Lacked materials 0 2

Behavior problems with children 1 3

Irresponsible parents 0 2

More special education students in room 1 0Attendance and tardiness still a problem 1 0Too many "after school" meetings 1 0Text leveling useless unless done in a quiet one-to oneenvironment 1 0

Academically lower then typical students of this grade level 0 2

*Rounding 37 41

APPENDIX B


28. What would you change to improve classroom effectiveness?


Lower class size/more teachers so all classes are small 1 8

Hire paraprofessional/aide 0 3

Materials readily available 1 1

Parenting classes 0 1

Stricter requirements for promotion from kindergarten 0 3More individual instruction 0 1

Ways to identify students needing extra help 1 0Fewer benchmarks 0 1

Classroom computers 2 0Science kits arrive in a more timely fashion 1 0More support with discipline/police carried out/betterdiscipline 3 0Keep to compensatory education schedule do not allowchange 1 0Better lead time when changing grades 0 1

Have a team do text leveling to provide consistency 1 0

29. What unexpected results have you observed in this year as compared to last year? If appropriate, please mention bothpositive and negative results.

Positive results:


Reading and writing improvement 6 4Better student interaction 4 0Increased parent conference attendance/more parentinvolvement 1 0Mathematics improvement 2 1

Time on task increased 2 0

Able to cover more material 1 0Better class environment/happier students 2 0Less stress 1 0Allowed more time to work on problem solving skills 1 0

Negative Results:


Large class size limits the amount of individual help 0 2Less parent involvement 0 2

Behavior problems with kids 1 1

Too many special education students 1 0Poor attendance 1 0No negative results only positive results 1 0Lack of interest on the part of teachers 0 1

38 42

APPENDIX B


30. List any professional development activities in which you have participated that would help you to be moreeffective in reduced sized classrooms.


Four block 3 4Reading Recovery 0 2

Integrated curriculum 1 1

Math/reading inservices for new program 2 1

Strategies to better implement smaller class size 1 0

CLF (Community for Learning) 1 0

ALEM (Adaptive Learning Environments Module) 1 0

First Grade Convention (conference) in Lansing 2 0

More training in use of music, art, drama 0 1

DRA kit meetings 1 0

Parenting classes 0 1

31. List any professional development activities/topics you believe would be helpful in reduced sized classrooms.


Small group activities/centers 2 1

Cooperative learning 1 1

Class management 0 1

Four block update or expansion 1 2

Text leveling instruction/Reading Recovery 4 0

Individualized instruction 1 0

Math Their Way 1 0

A first grade conference 1 0

Conflict resolution 0 1

More thematic inversion 0 1

Thank you for your honest response!Please return to the Evaluation, Testing & Research Department by Friday, May 5, 2000.


School:

APPENDIX B

CLASS SIZE SURVEYPrincipal Survey

(N=14)

Introduction: Thank you for taking the time to complete this questionnaire. The purpose of this survey is to determine theperceptions of principals with regard to either reduced class size (grade 1 = 18 or less, and grade 2 = 21 or less) or traditionalclass size in the first or second grades. Your responses will be used to help us to evaluate and improve our early elementaryefforts. All answers will be kept in confidence and only grouped findings will be reported.


PART I1. At what grade levels have class size reductions been implemented at your school?

a. First grade only 6 42.8a. Grades 1 & 2 2 14.3b. Second grade only 0 0.0c. None GO TO PART II 6 42.8

TOTAL 14 99.9*

2. What is the average number of months, if any, that class size reduction classes have been in operation atyour school?a. Noneb. Less than a monthc. 1-3 monthsd. 4-6 monthse. More than six months

TOTAL

# 0/0

0 0.00 0.00 0.01 12.57 87.58 100.0

3. What percent of your reduced size classrooms are using a team-teaching format?

a. 0% to 20% 4 50.0b. 21% to 40% 1 12.5

c. 41% to 60% 0 0.0d. 61% to 80% 0 0.0e. More than 80% 3 37.5

TOTAL 8 100.0

4. What percent of your reduced size classrooms are taught by first year teachers?

a. 0% to 20% 7 87.5b. 21% to 40% 0 0.0c. 41% to 60% 0 0.0d. 61% to 80% 0 0.0e. More than 80% 1 12.5

TOTAL 8 100.0

5. What percent of your reduced size classrooms are taught by teachers who taught at the same grade level last year?%

a. 0% to 20% 0 0.0b. 21% to 40% 1 12.5c. 41% to 60% 0 0.0d. 61% to 80% 1 12.5e. More than 80% 6 75.0

TOTAL 8 100.0

* Rounding40 4 4

Prin

cipa

l Sur

vey

Page

2

PAR

T I

I: T

hink

ing

only

of

your

fir

st g

rade

cla

ssro

oms

(sec

ond

if y

ou h

ave

low

cla

ss s

ize

in th

at g

rade

), p

leas

e in

dica

te th

eex

tent

to w

hich

the

follo

win

g fa

ctor

s ha

ve c

hang

edfr

om la

st s

choo

l yea

r to

this

sch

ool y

ear.

If

you

have

bot

h R

educ

ed a

nd T

radi

tiona

l cla

ssro

oms

mar

k th

e qu

estio

ns in

each

col

umn.

If

only

Red

uced

or

Tra

ditio

nal

Cla

ssro

oms

mar

k th

e qu

estio

ns in

the

appr

opri

ate

colu

mn.

Red

uced

Cla

ss S

ize

Cla

ssro

oms

6.St

uden

t tim

e-on

-tas

k.a.

Muc

h im

prov

ed s

ince

last

yea

rb.

Som

ewha

t im

prov

ed s

ince

last

yea

rc.

No

chan

ged.

Som

ewha

t wor

se s

ince

last

yea

re.

Muc

h w

orse

sin

ce la

st y

ear

f. N

o re

spon

seT

OT

AL

7.M

onito

ring

stu

dent

pro

gres

s an

d pr

ovid

ing

feed

back

to s

tude

nts.

a. M

uch

impr

oved

sin

ce la

st y

ear

b. S

omew

hat i

mpr

oved

sin

ce la

st y

ear

c. N

o ch

ange

d. S

omew

hat w

orse

sin

ce la

st y

ear

e. M

uch

wor

se s

ince

last

yea

rf.

No

resp

onse

TO

TA

L

8.Sm

all g

roup

inst

ruct

ion.

a. M

uch

impr

oved

sin

ce la

st y

ear

b. S

omew

hat i

mpr

oved

sin

ce la

st y

ear

c. N

o ch

ange

d. S

omew

hat w

orse

sin

ce la

st y

ear

e. M

uch

wor

se s

ince

last

yea

rf.

No

resp

onse

TO

TA

L

9.O

ne-o

n-on

e in

stru

ctio

n.a.

Muc

h im

prov

ed s

ince

last

yea

rb.

Som

ewha

t im

prov

ed s

ince

last

yea

rc.

No

chan

ged.

Som

ewha

t wor

se s

ince

last

yea

re.

Muc

h w

orse

sin

ce la

st y

ear

f. N

o re

spon

seT

OT

AL

45

#%

450

.01

12.5

225

.00

0.0

00.

01

12.5

810

0.0

#%

562

.50

0.0

00.

02

25.0

00.

01

12.5

810

0.0

#%

450

.02

25.0

112

.50

0.0

00.

01

12.5

810

0.0

#%

562

.51

12.5

112

.50

0.0

00.

01

12.5

810

0.0

Tra

ditio

nal C

lass

Siz

e C

lass

room

s6.

Stu

dent

tim

e-on

-tas

k.a.

Muc

h im

prov

ed s

ince

last

yea

rb.

Som

ewha

t im

prov

ed s

ince

last

yea

rc.

No

chan

ged.

Som

ewha

t wor

se s

ince

last

yea

re.

Muc

h w

orse

sin

ce la

st y

ear

f.N

o re

spon

seT

OT

AL

7.M

onito

ring

stu

dent

pro

gres

s an

d pr

ovid

ing

feed

back

to s

tude

nts.

a. M

uch

impr

oved

sin

ce la

st y

ear

b. S

omew

hat i

mpr

oved

sin

ce la

st y

ear

c. N

o ch

ange

d. S

omew

hat w

orse

sin

ce la

st y

ear

e. M

uch

wor

se s

ince

last

yea

rf.

No

resp

onse

TO

TA

L

8. S

mal

l gro

up in

stru

ctio

na.

Muc

h im

prov

ed s

ince

last

yea

rb.

Som

ewha

t im

prov

ed s

ince

last

yea

rc.

No

chan

ged.

Som

ewha

t wor

se s

ince

last

yea

re.

Muc

h w

orse

sin

ce la

st y

ear

f. N

o re

spon

seT

OT

AL

9. O

ne-o

n-on

e in

stru

ctio

n.a.

Muc

h im

prov

ed s

ince

last

yea

rb.

Som

ewha

t im

prov

ed s

ince

last

yea

rc.

No

chan

ged.

Som

ewha

t wor

se s

ince

last

yea

re.

Muc

h w

orse

sin

ce la

st y

ear

f. N

o re

spon

seT

OT

AL

#%

00.

04

44.4

555

.60

0.0

00.

00

0.0

910

0.0

#%

111

.12

22.2

555

.61

11.1

00.

00

0.0

910

0.0

#%

00.

03

33.3

555

.61

11.1

00.

00

0.0

810

0.0

# 00.

01

11.1

777

.81

11.1

00.

00

0.0

910

0.0

46

Prin

cipa

l Sur

vey

Page

3 Red

uced

Cla

ss S

ize

Cla

ssro

oms

Tra

ditio

nal C

lass

Siz

e C

lass

room

s10

. Use

of

hand

s-on

act

iviti

es a

nd m

anip

ulat

ives

.#

10. U

se o

f ha

nds-

on a

ctiv

ities

and

man

ipul

ativ

es.

#%

a. M

uch

impr

oved

sin

ce la

st y

ear

337

.5a.

Muc

h im

prov

ed s

ince

last

yea

r1

11.1

b. S

omew

hat i

mpr

oved

sin

ce la

st y

ear

225

.0b.

Som

ewha

t im

prov

ed s

ince

last

yea

r3

33.3

c. N

o ch

ange

225

.0c.

No

chan

ge4

44.4

d. S

omew

hat w

orse

sin

ce la

st y

ear

00.

0d.

Som

ewha

t wor

se s

ince

last

yea

r1

11.1

e. M

uch

wor

se s

ince

last

yea

r0

0.0

e. M

uch

wor

se s

ince

last

yea

r0

0.0

f. N

o re

spon

se1

12.5

f. N

o re

spon

se0

0.0

TO

TA

L8

100.

0T

OT

AL

999

.9*

11. E

ffec

tiven

ess

of r

emed

ial a

ctiv

ities

.#

%11

. Eff

ectiv

enes

s of

rem

edia

l act

iviti

es.

#%

a. M

uch

impr

oved

sin

ce la

st y

ear

337

.5a.

Muc

h im

prov

ed s

ince

last

yea

r0

0.0

b. S

omew

hat i

mpr

oved

sin

ce la

st y

ear

225

.0b.

Som

ewha

t im

prov

ed s

ince

last

yea

r5

55.6

c. N

o ch

ange

225

.0c.

No

chan

ge3

33.3

d. S

omew

hat w

orse

sin

ce la

st y

ear

00.

0d.

Som

ewha

t wor

se s

ince

last

yea

r1

11.1

e. M

uch

wor

se s

ince

last

yea

r0

0.0

e. M

uch

wor

se s

ince

last

yea

r0

0.0

f. N

o re

spon

se1

12.5

f. N

o re

spon

se0

0.0

TO

TA

L8

100.

0T

OT

AL

910

0.0

12. E

ffec

tiven

ess

of e

nric

hmen

t act

iviti

es.

#%

12. E

ffec

tiven

ess

of e

nric

hmen

t act

iviti

es.

#%

a. M

uch

impr

oved

sin

ce la

st y

ear

337

.5a.

Muc

h im

prov

ed s

ince

last

yea

r1

11.1

b. S

omew

hat i

mpr

oved

sin

ce la

st y

ear

225

.0b.

Som

ewha

t im

prov

ed s

ince

last

yea

r2

22.2

c. N

o ch

ange

112

.5c.

No

chan

ge3

33.3

d. S

omew

hat w

orse

sin

ce la

st y

ear

00.

0d.

Som

ewha

t wor

se s

ince

last

yea

r1

11.1

e. M

uch

wor

se s

ince

last

yea

r0

0.0

e. M

uch

wor

se s

ince

last

yea

r0

0.0

f. N

o re

spon

se2

25.0

f. N

o re

spon

se2

22.2

TO

TA

L8

100.

0T

OT

AL

999

.9*

13. I

ntro

duci

ng s

tude

nts

to c

ompu

ters

and

tech

nolo

gy.

#%

13. I

ntro

duci

ng s

tude

nts

to c

ompu

ters

and

tech

nolo

gy.

#%

a. M

uch

impr

oved

sin

ce la

st y

ear

112

.5a.

Muc

h im

prov

ed s

ince

last

yea

r2

22.2

b. S

omew

hat i

mpr

oved

sin

ce la

st y

ear

225

.0b.

Som

ewha

t im

prov

ed s

ince

last

yea

r0

0.0

c. N

o ch

ange

337

.5c.

No

chan

ge5

55.6

d. S

omew

hat w

orse

sin

ce la

st y

ear

00.

0d.

Som

ewha

t wor

se s

ince

last

yea

r1

11.1

e. M

uch

wor

se s

ince

last

yea

r0

0.0

e. M

uch

wor

se s

ince

last

yea

r0

0.0

f. N

o re

spon

se2

25.0

f. N

o re

spon

se2

22.2

TO

TA

L8

100.

0T

OT

AL

910

0. 1

*

* R

ound

ing

47

Prin

cipa

l Sur

vey

Page

4 Red

uced

Cla

ss S

ize

Cla

ssro

oms

Tra

ditio

nal C

lass

Siz

e C

lass

room

s14

. Stu

dent

atte

ndan

ce.

#4)

/014

. Stu

dent

atte

ndan

ce.

#%

a. M

uch

impr

oved

sin

ce la

st y

ear

112

.5a.

Muc

h im

prov

ed s

ince

last

yea

r1

11.1

b. S

omew

hat i

mpr

oved

sin

ce la

st y

ear

450

.0b.

Som

ewha

t im

prov

ed s

ince

last

year

00.

0c.

No

chan

ge1

12.5

c. N

o ch

ange

555

.6d.

Som

ewha

t wor

se s

ince

last

yea

r0

0.0

d. S

omew

hat w

orse

sin

ce la

st y

ear

111

.1e.

Muc

h w

orse

sin

ce la

st y

ear

00.

0e.

Muc

h w

orse

sin

ce la

st y

ear

00.

0f.

No

resp

onse

225

.0f.

No

resp

onse

222

.2T

OT

AL

810

0.0

TO

TA

L9

100.

0

15. C

lass

room

dis

cipl

ine.

#15

. Cla

ssro

om d

isci

plin

e.#

%a.

Muc

h im

prov

ed s

ince

last

yea

r2

25.0

a. M

uch

impr

oved

sin

ce la

st y

ear

00.

0b.

Som

ewha

t im

prov

ed s

ince

last

yea

r2

25.0

b. S

omew

hat i

mpr

oved

sin

ce la

stye

ar0

0.0

c. N

o ch

ange

112

.5c.

No

chan

ge5

55.6

d. S

omew

hat w

orse

sin

ce la

st y

ear

00.

0d.

Som

ewha

t wor

se s

ince

last

year

111

.1e.

Muc

h w

orse

sin

ce la

st y

ear

00.

0e.

Muc

h w

orse

sin

ce la

st y

ear

00.

0f.

No

resp

onse

237

.5f.

No

resp

onse

333

.3T

OT

AL

810

0.0

TO

TA

L9

100.

0

16. S

ocia

l int

erac

tion

amon

g yo

ur s

tude

nts.

16. S

ocia

l int

erac

tion

amon

g yo

ur s

tude

nts.

#%

a. M

uch

impr

oved

sin

ce la

st y

ear

225

.0a.

Muc

h im

prov

ed s

ince

last

yea

r0

0.0

b. S

omew

hat i

mpr

oved

sin

ce la

st y

ear

112

.5b.

Som

ewha

t im

prov

ed s

ince

last

year

111

.1c.

No

chan

ge2

25.0

c. N

o ch

ange

555

.6d.

Som

ewha

t wor

se s

ince

last

yea

r0

0.0

d. S

omew

hat w

orse

sin

ce la

stye

ar0

0.0

e. M

uch

wor

se s

ince

last

yea

r0

0.0

e. M

uch

wor

se s

ince

last

yea

r0

0.0

f. N

o re

spon

se3

37.5

f. N

o re

spon

se3

33.3

TO

TA

L8

100.

0T

OT

AL

910

0.0

17. S

ocia

l/per

sona

l int

erac

tions

bet

wee

n th

e te

ache

rsan

d st

uden

ts#

%17

. Soc

ial/p

erso

nal i

nter

actio

ns b

etw

een

the

teac

hers

and

stu

dent

s#

%

a. M

uch

impr

oved

sin

ce la

st y

ear

450

.0a.

Muc

h im

prov

ed s

ince

last

yea

r0

0.0

b. S

omew

hat i

mpr

oved

sin

ce la

st y

ear

112

.5b.

Som

ewha

t im

prov

ed s

ince

last

yea

r2

22.2

c. N

o ch

ange

112

.5c.

No

chan

ge4

44.4

d. S

omew

hat w

orse

sin

ce la

st y

ear

00.

0d.

Som

ewha

t wor

se s

ince

last

yea

r1

11.1

e. M

uch

wor

se s

ince

last

yea

r0

0.0

e. M

uch

wor

se s

ince

last

yea

r0

0.0

f.N

o re

spon

se2

25.0

f.N

o re

spon

se2

22.2

TO

TA

L8

100.

0T

OT

AL

999

.9*

* R

ound

ing

491/

4.50

Prin

cipa

l Sur

vey

Page

5 Red

uced

Cla

ss S

ize

Cla

ssro

oms

Tra

ditio

nal C

lass

Siz

e C

lass

room

s18

. Tea

cher

mor

ale.

#%

18.

Tea

cher

mor

ale.

#%

a. M

uch

impr

oved

sin

ce la

st y

ear

450

.0a.

Muc

h im

prov

ed s

ince

last

yea

r0

0.0

b. S

omew

hat i

mpr

oved

sin

ce la

st y

ear

225

.0b.

Som

ewha

t im

prov

ed s

ince

last

yea

r1

11.1

c. N

o ch

ange

00.

0c.

No

chan

ge5

55.6

d. S

omew

hat w

orse

sin

ce la

st y

ear

00.

0d.

Som

ewha

t wor

se s

ince

last

yea

r1

11.1

e. M

uch

wor

se s

ince

last

yea

r0

0.0

e. M

uch

wor

se s

ince

last

yea

r0

0.0

f. N

o re

spon

se2

50.0

f. N

o re

spon

se2

22.2

TO

TA

L8

100.

0T

OT

AL

910

0.0

19. E

ffec

tiven

ess

of te

ache

r pl

anni

ng a

nd p

repa

ratio

n.#

%19

. Eff

ectiv

enes

s of

teac

her

plan

ning

and

pre

para

tion.

#%

a. M

uch

impr

oved

sin

ce la

st y

ear

337

.5a.

Muc

h im

prov

ed s

ince

last

yea

r2

22.2

b. S

omew

hat i

mpr

oved

sin

ce la

st y

ear

450

.0b.

Som

ewha

t im

prov

ed s

ince

last

yea

r2

22.2

c. N

o ch

ange

00.

0c.

No

chan

ge4

44.4

d. S

omew

hat w

orse

sin

ce la

st y

ear

00.

0d.

Som

ewha

t wor

se s

ince

last

yea

r0

0.0

e. M

uch

wor

se s

ince

last

yea

r0

0.0

e. M

uch

wor

se s

ince

last

yea

r0

0.0

f. N

o re

spon

se1

12.5

f.N

o re

spon

se1

11.1

TO

TA

L8

100.

0T

OT

AL

999

.9*

20. Q

ualit

y of

con

tact

s w

ith p

aren

ts.

#%

20. Q

ualit

y of

con

tact

s w

ith p

aren

ts.

#%

a. M

uch

impr

oved

sin

ce la

st y

ear

112

.5a.

Muc

h im

prov

ed s

ince

last

yea

r0

0.0

b. S

omew

hat i

mpr

oved

sin

ce la

st y

ear

337

.5b.

Som

ewha

t im

prov

ed s

ince

last

yea

r1

11.1

c. N

o ch

ange

225

.0c.

No

chan

ge5

55.6

d. S

omew

hat w

orse

sin

ce la

st y

ear

00.

0d.

Som

ewha

t wor

se s

ince

last

yea

rI

11.1

e. M

uch

wor

se s

ince

last

yea

r0

0.0

e. M

uch

wor

se s

ince

last

yea

r0

0.0

f. N

o re

spon

se2

25.0

f. N

o re

spon

se2

22.2

TO

TA

L8

100.

0T

OT

AL

910

0.0

21. P

hysi

cal e

nvir

onm

ent (

spac

e, f

acili

ties,

nois

e le

vel,

etc.

)#

OA

21. P

hysi

cal e

nvir

onm

ent (

spac

e, f

acili

ties,

nois

e le

vel,

etc.

)#

°A

a. M

uch

impr

oved

sin

ce la

st y

ear

337

.5a.

Muc

h im

prov

ed s

ince

last

yea

r0

0.0

b. S

omew

hat i

mpr

oved

sin

ce la

st y

ear

112

.5b.

Som

ewha

t im

prov

ed s

ince

last

yea

r0

0.0

c. N

o ch

ange

225

.0c.

No

chan

ge7

77.8

d. S

omew

hat w

orse

sin

ce la

st y

ear

112

.5d.

Som

ewha

t wor

se s

ince

last

yea

r1

11.1

e. M

uch

wor

se s

ince

last

yea

r0

0.0

e. M

uch

wor

se s

ince

last

yea

r0

0.0

f.N

o re

spon

se1

12.5

f. N

o re

spon

se1

11.1

TO

TA

L8

100.

0T

OT

AL

910

0.0

51*

Rou

ndin

g52

Prin

cipa

l Sur

vey

Page

6 Red

uced

Cla

ss S

ize

Cla

ssro

oms

Tra

ditio

nal C

lass

Siz

e C

lass

room

s22

. Tea

cher

-adm

inis

trat

or in

tera

ctio

n an

d su

ppor

t.#

%22

.Tea

cher

-adm

inis

trat

or in

tera

ctio

n an

d su

ppor

t.#

%a.

Muc

h im

prov

ed s

ince

last

yea

r0

0.0

a. M

uch

impr

oved

sin

ce la

st y

ear

00.

0b.

Som

ewha

t im

prov

ed s

ince

last

yea

r3

37.5

b. S

omew

hat i

mpr

oved

sin

ce la

st y

ear

222

.2c.

No

chan

ge3

37.5

c. N

o ch

ange

555

.6d.

Som

ewha

t wor

se s

ince

last

yea

r0

0.0

d. S

omew

hat w

orse

sin

ce la

st y

ear

00.

0e.

Muc

h w

orse

sin

ce la

st y

ear

00.

0e.

Muc

h w

orse

sin

ce la

st y

ear

00.

0f.

No

resp

onse

225

.0f.

No

resp

onse

222

.2T

OT

AL

810

0.0

TO

TA

L9

100.

0

23. O

vera

ll ac

adem

ic im

prov

emen

t am

ong

stud

ents

.#

23. O

vera

ll ac

adem

ic im

prov

emen

t am

ong

stud

ents

.#

a. M

uch

impr

oved

sin

ce la

st y

ear

225

.0a.

Muc

h im

prov

ed s

ince

last

yea

r1

11.1

b. S

omew

hat i

mpr

oved

sin

ce la

st y

ear

225

.0b.

Som

ewha

t im

prov

ed s

ince

last

yea

r0

0.0

c. N

o ch

ange

225

.0c.

No

chan

ge6

66.7

d. S

omew

hat w

orse

sin

ce la

st y

ear

00.

0d.

Som

ewha

t wor

se s

ince

last

yea

r0

0.0

e. M

uch

wor

se s

ince

last

yea

r0

0.0

e. M

uch

wor

se s

ince

last

yea

r0

0.0

f. N

o re

spon

se2

25.0

f.N

o re

spon

se2

22.2

TO

TA

L8

100.

0T

OT

AL

910

0.0

24. O

bvio

usly

, red

uctio

ns in

cla

ss s

ize

are

an e

xpen

sive

und

erta

king

. Do

you

thin

k th

at th

e be

nefi

ts o

f re

duce

d cl

ass

size

are

wor

th th

e ex

pend

iture

s?

a. Y

esb.

No

c. D

on't

know

TO

TA

L

53

#%

787

.51

12.5

00.

089

100.

0

54

APPENDIX B


PART III: If you have reduced class sizes in your building, please write your response to the following questions using thespace provided. If all of your classrooms are of traditional size, please do not answer Part III.

25. What do you like best about class size reduction?

COMMENTS NUMBERMore time for one-on-one instruction 8

Teacher morale seems higher 2

Less discipline problems/distractions 2

More academic success 1

More time spent with each child in various activities 2

Fewer student conflicts 1

26. What do you like least about class size reduction?

COMMENTS NUMBERSome resentment from upper grade levels 1

Potentially could be for an "elite" class 2

Possible some students who need a smaller class size will not get it; smallclass size for all 2

27. What would you change about the class size reduction efforts to improve its effectiveness?

COMMENTS NUMBERLower class size/more teachers so all classes are small 4

More parent involvement 1

More individual instruction 1

Ways to identify students needing extra help 1

More hands on activities 1

Identification of ways administration can support low class size teachers 1

28. What unexpected results have you observed as a result of reduced class size? If appropriate, please mention bothpositive and negative unexpected results.

Positive results:COMMENTS NUMBER

Reading and writing improvement 3

Better student interaction 1

Less referral to special education 1

Increased parent conference attendance/more parent involvement 4

Better class environment/happier students 2

Opportunity for teachers to use "Best Practices" 1

Better student attendance 1

Negative results:COMMENTS NUMBER

Large classroom limits the amount of individual help 1

Less parent involvement 1

Need to increase teacher expectations 1


Please return to the Evaluation, testing & Research Department by Friday, May 5, 2000

46 55

Sum

mar

y S

tate

men

t of P

art 1

1 Q

uest

ion

Par

ent 1

"

Cha

nges

in le

arni

ng to

rea

dC

hang

es in

lear

ning

to w

rite

Cha

nges

in le

arni

ng m

ath

Cha

nges

in v

erba

l exp

ress

ion

Cha

nges

in te

chno

logy

ski

llsC

hang

es in

gra

des

Cha

nges

in s

choo

l atti

tude

Cha

nges

in s

tude

nt in

tera

ctio

nC

hang

es in

inte

rest

in le

arni

ngC

hang

e in

par

ent i

nvol

vem

ent

Cha

nges

in p

aren

t/tea

cher

inte

ract

ion

Is it

wor

th th

e ex

tra

mon

eyC

hang

e in

stu

dent

tim

e on

task

Cha

nge

in m

onito

ring/

feed

back

to s

tude

nts

Cha

nge

in s

mal

l gro

up in

stru

ctio

nC

hang

e in

one

on

one

inst

ruct

ion

Cha

nge

in h

ands

on

inst

ruct

ion

Cha

nge

in e

nric

hmen

t act

iviti

esC

hang

e in

atte

ndan

ceC

hang

e in

dis

cipl

ine

Cha

nge

in s

tude

nt/te

ache

r in

tera

ctio

nC

hang

e in

mor

ale

Cha

nge

in e

ffect

ive

of p

lann

ing

Cha

nge

in a

mou

nt o

f pap

erw

ork

Cha

nge

in a

dmin

istr

atio

n/te

ache

r in

tera

ctio

nC

hang

e in

phy

sica

l env

ironm

ent

E=

Exp

erim

enta

l (R

educ

ed C

lass

Siz

e)C

= C

ontr

ol (

Nor

mal

Cla

ss S

ize)

94%

impr

ovem

ent

92%

impr

ovem

ent

91%

impr

ovem

ent

86%

impr

ovem

ent

47%

impr

ovem

ent

73%

impr

ovem

ent

59%

impr

ovem

ent

59%

impr

ovem

ent

E: 8

5.7%

; C: 6

9.7%

impr

ovem

ent

E: 5

2.9%

; C: 3

1.9%

impr

ovem

ent

E: 7

3.5%

; C: 5

7.2%

impr

ovem

ent

82%

Yes

AP

PE

ND

IX C

Par

ent 2

nd

90%

impr

ovem

ent

E: 2

8.6%

; C: 5

8.3%

muc

h im

prov

ed81

% im

prov

emen

t62

% im

prov

emen

t63

% im

prov

emen

t73

% im

prov

emen

tE

: 42.

9%; C

: 70.

9% im

prov

emen

t58

% im

prov

emen

t68

% im

prov

emen

t46

% im

prov

emen

t50

% im

prov

emen

t.1

-- 7

9% Y

es

BE

ST

CO

PY

AV

AIL

AB

LE

Tea

cher

E: 4

1.7%

; C: 7

.7%

impr

ovem

ent

E: 8

3.3%

; C: 1

5.4%

impr

ovem

ent

E: 7

5.0%

; C: 1

5.4%

impr

ovem

ent

Prin

cipa

l

E: 3

7.5%

; C: 2

2.2%

impr

ovem

ent

E: 5

0.0%

; C: 1

1.1%

impr

ovem

ent

E: 3

7.5%

; C: 1

1.1%

impr

ovem

ent

E: 5

8.3%

; C: 1

5.4%

impr

ovem

ent

E: 5

0.0%

; C: 1

1.1%

impr

ovem

ent

87.5

% Y

esE

: 83.

3%; C

: 30.

8% im

prov

emen

tE

: 62.

5%; C

: 44.

4% im

prov

emen

tE

: 83.

3%; C

: 38.

5% im

prov

emen

tE

: 62.

5%; C

: 33.

3% im

prov

emen

tE

: 91.

6%; C

: 23.

1% im

prov

emen

tE

: 75.

0%; C

: 33.

3% im

prov

emen

tE

: 83.

4%; C

: 30.

8% im

prov

emen

tE

: 75.

0%; C

: 11.

1% im

prov

emen

tE

: 33.

3%; C

: 7.7

% im

prov

emen

tE

: 62.

5%; C

: 44.

4% im

prov

emen

tE

: 83.

3%; C

: 30.

8% im

prov

emen

tE

: 62.

5%; C

: 33.

3% im

prov

emen

tE

: 50.

0%; C

: 0.0

% im

prov

emen

tE

: 62.

5%; C

: 11.

1% im

prov

emen

tE

: 66.

7%; C

: 15.

4% im

prov

emen

tE

: 50.

0%; C

: 0.0

% im

prov

emen

tE

: 91.

7%; C

: 23.

1% im

prov

emen

tE

: 62.

5%; C

: 22.

2% im

prov

emen

tE

: 83.

4%; C

: 15.

4% im

prov

emen

tE

: 75.

0%; C

: 11.

1% im

prov

emen

tE

: 91.

7%; C

: 69.

2% im

prov

emen

tE

: 87.

5%; C

: 44.

4% im

prov

emen

tE

: 66.

7%; C

: 15.

4% im

prov

emen

tE

: 58.

3%; C

: 23.

1% im

prov

emen

tE

: 37.

5%; C

: 22.

2% im

prov

emen

tE

: 75.

0%; C

: 7.7

% im

prov

emen

tE

: 50.

0%; C

: 0.0

% im

prov

emen

t

57

APP

EN

DIX

D

Sum

mar

y St

atem

ent o

f Pa

rt I

II Q

uest

ion

Pare

nt I

"Pa

rent

2nd

Tea

cher

Prin

cipa

l

Wha

t do

you

like

best

Wha

t do

you

like

leas

t

Wha

t cha

nges

wou

ld y

ou r

ecom

men

d

Any

une

xpec

ted

posi

tive

resu

lts

Any

une

xpec

ted

nega

tive

resu

lts

Pro

fess

iona

l dev

elop

men

t tak

en

Pro

fess

iona

l dev

elop

men

t wan

ted

E=

Exp

erim

enta

l (R

educ

ed C

lass

Siz

e)C

= C

ontr

ol (

Nor

mal

Cla

ss S

ize)

58

E &

C: M

ore

Ito I

inst

ruct

ion

E: M

ore

sens

itive

/bet

ter

teac

hers

E: I

) B

ette

r fe

edba

ck to

par

ents

2) B

ette

r at

tent

ion

to s

peci

al n

eeds

3) M

ore

com

pute

rsC

: Mor

e I t

o I i

nstr

uctio

n

E: m

ore

time

for

I to

I ins

truc

tion

E &

C: l

ess

disc

iplin

e pr

oble

ms

E: n

o co

mm

on r

espo

nse

Mor

e tim

e fo

r I t

o I i

nstr

uctio

n

I) P

oten

tial f

or a

n el

ite c

lass

C: t

oo m

any

dive

rse

stud

ents

2) M

ost n

eedy

may

not

be

in r

educ

ed

E: M

ore

disc

iplin

eC

: Mor

e re

duce

d cl

asse

s

E &

C: I

mpr

ovem

ent i

n re

adin

gan

d w

ritin

g

E: n

o co

mm

on r

espo

nse

C: 1

) Le

ss p

aren

t inv

olve

men

t2)

Les

s in

divi

dual

atte

ntio

n

E &

C: F

our

bloc

k

E: T

ext l

evel

ing

inst

ruct

ion

C: F

our

bloc

k up

date

/exp

ansi

o

Mor

e re

duce

d cl

asse

s

1) In

crea

sed

pare

nt in

volv

emen

t2)

Impr

ovem

ent i

n re

adin

g an

d w

ritin

g

No

com

mon

res

pons

e

59

Printed by theSaginaw Public SchoolsPrinting Department

60

U.S. Department of EducationOffice of Educational Research and Improvement (OERI)

National Library of Education (NLE)

Educational Resources Information Center (ERIC)

NOTICE

Reproduction Basis

O

ERIC

This document is covered by a signed "Reproduction Release(Blanket)" form (on file within the ERIC system), encompassing allor classes of documents from its source organization and, therefore,does not require a "Specific Document" Release form.

This document is Federally-funded, or carries it8 own permission toreproduce, or is otherwise in the public domain and, therefore, maybe reproduced by ERIC without a signed Reproduction Release form(either "Specific Document" or "Blanket").

EFF-089 (3/2000)

Ps og.43,

reproductions supplied by edrs are the best that …summary statement of question parent 1'...

Documents