Hacker News Reader

Comment by jack-r-abbit | Hacker News Reader

> it needs to hire thousands of new teachers, counselors, teaching assistants and librarians.

More teachers and assistants I get. Same number of students in smaller classes means more classes which means more teachers (and their assistants). But more counselors and librarians? Those people generally don't have a dedicated class. The librarians are in charge of the library. The smaller class size isn't going to mean more students. So why would you suddenly need more librarians to serve the same books to the same students? Same with counselors. Why would you suddenly need more counselors to counsel the same number of students?

View on HN

You'll likely need more schools to handle smaller class sizes or to expand existing schools. If the former, then you'd definitely need additional counselors and librarians since a new school would need its own support services. If the latter, then you only need additional counselors and librarians if the expansion to the school also brings in additional students and doesn't just spread the existing students across more rooms. On the other hand, you may need to expand the library to accommodate more classes needing access to it simultaneously. I know my high school had two libraries largely for that reason (also because it was a poorly designed building, but the space was well utilized for social studies and English courses).

Since opening a new school has far more cost than just hiring more teachers, it didn't even occur to me that it would have been the route they would take. But I do realize that a new school facility is going to need a full set of faculty to support it. That includes principals, janitors, admins, etc. I just assumed they'd be expanding existing schools with "portables" and such.

It's not like schools are full of empty rooms. If you're going to reduce class size by hiring more teachers that means you're also going to need more room, that will probably translate to more schools.

More schools need more of everything that makes a school run.

> The smaller class size isn't going to mean more students

Larger class sizes are in part because of more students and no money spent on growth.

Well, in the district where my mom is a school psychologist, she is essentially responsible for about 4-5000 students spread across 4 schools. Part of her job is to screen kids for special education. Most of her day is spent convincing teachers in various schools that Timmy doesn't have a learning disability just because he acts out occasionally, and that even if he did a Special Ed classroom may well cripple him for the rest of his life. She only has about a day per week per school to administer assessments, provide classroom seminars, and manage confused teachers.

Librarians have a similar problem. Many districts in Washington can't afford even one per school anymore. The library in those districts is either closed or at reduced capacity if the librarian is not in.

I voted for I1135 mainly because it would increase funding for classified staff again, and not because it reduced class sizes.

Then this article is a poorly written piece. It makes no mention of that. I'm not in WA so I've no clue what was in that initiative. But the article sure does make it sound like it was just for reduced class sizes. I feel like the author is against it and her bias is seeping through.

You ask as if there are genuine reasons. Do you not see this is a money grab, and if you don't also pay the librarians and the counselors they aren't going to support the cause?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com