When my brother went to the new high school in the 70s it was large open
spaces for teaching many kids at the same time. When I went 7 years later
the large rooms were divided into classrooms. It's even worse at a lower
level because it's hard to keep kids (8-10 year olds) focused. I know from
experience.

Joel. phx

Then there was the time I took a data communications course in college.
They were videotaping it for later presentations and 2 classes were in side
rooms with monitors (our mikes were cut off too so we couldn't even ask
questions). We had the most fun mocking his mistakes.

"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
t...
"Dan Caster" wrote in message
m...
I didn't say anything about teaching fewer classes...... I was trying
to say that one teacher could spend less time presenting material if
he/she were able to present the material to all students at the same
time. Then the teacher could spend more time in small groups getting
and providing feedback.

It sounds like you're coming around to the value of the "small groups."
How
about a videotaped mass presentation, and then small classes?

Certainly you can divide material into things that can be delivered as a
mass lecture and things that are best taught interactively, a few students
at a time. The point is, it's the small groups that make the difference.
That's what the research shows.


I also don't remember saying anything about faster-moving classes.

Faster-moving is one way to say that more material is presented and
absorbed
in a given amount of time. The original complaint, or a major one, is that
US high-school graduates are behind students of other countries by the
time
they graduate.

I said that in college there are lots of large classes. And since they
seem to work well in college, I don't see why they would not work in
high school and middle school( if middle school is the right word. I
lived in a place and time where there were no middle schools ).

Remember that in college you're dealing with more mature kids and much
more
strongly motivated kids, and they're a selection of better-performing
students to begin with. How that would work with younger kids who
represent
the whole population is a speculative issue. It sounds to me like an
opportunity for many of them to tune out, if the classes get large enough.


We might as well drop this. I can see that neither of us is likely to
change our opinions.


Ok. I try to avoid opinions, though. We were originally discussing the
facts, based on the research. I think that part of it is quite clear. As
for
the speculations, they're interesting to consider, and all ideas need to
be
thrown into the pot. Lord knows, we could use some better ideas. But
"opinion" isn't going to provide us with any answers. Only things that
might
be worth trying, and then more questions.

Ed Huntress