-> I teach in San Jose, California. California does have the largest
-> class sizes in the nation, I believe, or close to it.  K-3 class
-> sizes top out at 32 in my district, and grades 4-6 at 34.  It is very
-> seldom that classes are not at the maximum.
California currently has the largest class sizes in the nation (or did
one or two years ago...probably still does). However, the large class
sizes took a few years to develop as state funding was cut. At the
beginnings of the Whole Language movement in California (1990?) I
believe the classes were somewhat smaller.
-> In addition, California has probably the most diverse population in
-> the nation.  In my 1-2-3 multi age classroom last year, I had
-> students whose first languages were Vietnamese (2), Chinese (2),
-> Spanish (3), Italian (1), Tagalog (1), Korean (1), and Assyrian (2).
-> Some of these students were still struggling with oral communication
-> in English, but we were required to include them in our standardized
-> testing in the spring. California tests 14% of their limited English
-> proficient students; no other state in the United States tests more
-> than 9% of their limited English students.
This is true. We have an extremely diverse population in California.
Moreso than in any other state in the nation. However, we had this
problem before the Whole Language programs in California began. Since
this is not something that has changed in Pre-Whole Language to
Post-Whole Language in our state, it cannot reasonably be pointed to as
an explanation why reading scores have dropped in our state.
Possibly what it does indicate is that in a non-native English speaking
population, which is a significant portion of the population in
California, Whole Language is not the best program (I am sorry, but
although you object to the term "program" in reference to Whole
Language, it is the term I feel is most appropriate for this discussion,
since California did implement it as though it were a program) for these
types of students. More traditional reading instruction likely works
better for such students, since California reading scores were higher
before the Whole Language movement hit our classrooms.
from Dan Triplett:
-> I also heard that the state has passed a law that limits class size
-> to around 22.
from San Jose teacher:
-> Recently, a bill was passed in the state legislature providing money
-> for school districts who lower class sizes in first, second, and
-> third grade.  The amount of money provided is not enough to cover
-> teachers' salaries, and many schools in California are already
-> overcrowded, but districts all over the state are scrambling to lower
-> class sizes, especially in first grade (the legislation states that
-> districts must start with first grade.)  In order to receive the
-> money, class sizes must be no lower than 20 students by Feb. 16,
-> 1997.
This is accurate. My children's school is only attempting to lower grade
1 class sizes, and will do so by doubling up classes (40 students) and
putting two teachers in the room until more portables or other space can
be found. I will post later the letter from our principal that we
received for school opening information for this year, which adresses
some of this topic.
-> I don't think that the state curriculum was poorly designed as much
-> as it was poorly implemented by a populace of teachers who were not
-> believers in whole language theory, who resisted change, and who
-> never received the kind of training they needed in order to make the
-> necessary paradigm shift.
->
-> It's a lot of variables, for which whole language is taking the
-> blame.
This seems like an accurate take on the situation to me. You can't force
teachers who don't buy into a certain philosophy to practice
effectively, especially when they haven't received sufficient training
in it.
Sheila
--- PCBoard (R) v15.22/M 10
---------------