Late last month, when Mitt Romney told teachers in Philadelphia that small class sizes don’t help students, I had dinner with a friend, a teacher who has spent 20 years in the classroom. Her most recent class consisted of 29 kindergarteners, with no aide or outside help. All I could think was how much I would like to see Romney trade places with her – while I have no doubt she could run a great campaign, I would be shocked if he lasted long with 29 five-year-olds!
Not surprisingly, Romney’s position drew immediate criticism from teachers in Philadelphia and beyond. But his position is not just campaign rhetoric – it was reflected time and again in his actions as Massachusetts governor. By his second year in office Massachusetts schools saw the nation’s second largest per-pupil cuts. Romney also attempted to cut funding for early literacy and kindergarten programs, vetoed a bill to create universal pre-kindergarten in Massachusetts, and even questioned the value of early education. I know because I was living in Massachusetts at the time and helped fight against his damaging education policies.
While student success certainly hinges upon many factors, students, parents, teachers and administrators widely agree about the value of smaller classes. Romney’s argument and record otherwise ignores the real challenges facing students and schools today in favor of quick-fix cost-saving measures that are about the bottom line, not about an investment in our students’ – and our country’s – future.
What do you think about Romney’s position that class size doesn’t matter? (Note – a different version of this post first appeared last week on Sarasota Patch.)