The idea that all teachers are good teachers is not true. There are a lot of teachers who simply are not as smart as their pupils. They may know more facts, but their intelligence level is less. You cannot teach what you do not know, and if your understanding of math, reading, writing, or any other subject is limited to what the text book says, then you are woefully unprepared to really engage, inspire, and TEACH the material. As a teacher, I have seen plenty of teachers who do not truly understand the subject matter.

Alternatively, the idea that in the 1950s everyone knew all of their tables and they were all straight 'A' students is ludicrous. The problem with the debate is that many people involved in it were excellent students when they were in school and therefore assume everyone else was too - they weren't. There have always been those who failed out. The difference is that in the 1950s (at least here in the States) those students were just left behind to drop out.

Cary Kirby, Gainesville, Florida, USA

The last line- "often the strictest ones) who produce the most progress in their pupils. But if in the process they switch pupils off learning, however, how good are they really?" assumes that strictly managed classrooms will turn off kids.

I teach a hard subject (computer science) in a regular high school to 18-17 year olds and have found over the years that the kids APPRECIATE a well-managed classroom. Oh, they might have fun for a week or two with a "cool" teacher that lets them do what they want, but in the end, they're wiser consumers of education than adults would give them credit for. Students WANT to be challenged and they don't want their time wasted. If a teacher is fair, dedicated and knows his subject, the kids will rise to the level demanded of them, sometimes kicking and moaning, but they'll learn... and over the years I've noticed the lax teachers don't have graduates coming back to thank them, either.

alice, salado, us/tx

If small class size makes no difference then why would private schools have a low pupil to teacher ratio?
My daughter attends a state school where her class size has never been over 17 pupils and one can sense the friendliness of the class and school, everyone knows everyone else and trouble is virtually non-existant. Although not scientific, in my opinion I adamantly believe that small class sizes engender a better learning atmosphere. We feel very priveliged that our daughter attands such a school.

Richard Tucker, Cotter, Arkansas, USA

In my expeirence as a parent ,more than the class size, the quality of teachers matters. My son studied in a state primary school and the class size then was 25. He brought home the work he did and left at that he would have been ill-prepared to go to secondaryschool. We had to sit with him a couple of hours to 'undo' what the teacher had done. Though an attentive boy, he learnt very little in the class. Later in a secondary comprehensive,our experience was similar. We had to spend hours with him tutoring so that he had a chance of getting good grades in his GCSEs. Our experience is that there are very many bad teachers who are protected by their unions, and head teacher and the governors are simply scared to get rid of them.
If you point out examples of independent schools and children's superior learning experience there, the teachers unions repeat the mantra of small class sizes. In fact, these schools have good quality teachers, otherwise parents will vote with their feet

Norman, Manchester,

As a teacher myself, I can tell you that class size does matter. It matters not only because you can control the class better. It matters because you can get to know your students better, to pay more attention to them. Imagine you have 4 classes of 40, as I have here in Singapore. You have 160 students every week, there is no way you can get to know all of them, their strong/weak points, etc, by the end of a term.

The question of teacher recruitment is a straw argument. Teachers always start off being "bad" teachers somewhere. It's a question of patience with them, letting them gain experience on the job. Most teachers join the profession for the joy of teaching. If school administrators are patient with them, and provide them with guidance and support, there is no reason why teachers cannot improve.

Bertrand Lee, Singapore,

Class sizes impacts enormously on (i) personal performance (ii) ability to provide individual attention (iii) managing classroom discipline (iv) marking test papers (v) administrative workload (vi) the list could go on and on. That's why I left my job as an ICT Teacher and went onto a successful career as a corporate trainer where the average classroom size is SIX.

Maurice., Golders Green,

No one seems to be able to anwer the most basic of questions, how was it that in the 1950's class sizes for 10-11 year olds was typically 35 to 40. All kids knew their mathematical tables from 2 to 12, and all started their secondary shcools being able to read Dickens, Jack London etc. People who say standards havn't slipped are not of this world.
BobD, Reaup Lisse, France

Bob Dubery, Reaup Lisse, France

As a parent I have experienced teachers not being able to spell or use correct grammar, as the norm rather than the exception. Teachers Learning Assistants are sometimes only vaguely literate and are certainly not appropriately trained. I frequently have to correct what my child is being taught. Standards are unbelievable.

gertrude, petersfield, uk

I personally do not agree that small class sizes produce better results per sae. What is important is the quality of the teachers, the teaching materials and the ability for the teacher to control the class. Good teachers are able to hold pupils spell bound by their presence. I also feel the modern idea of having half the class at any one time facing away from the teacher leads to loss of control. While I appreciate a small group of children together working as a team can produce good results you need a high teacher to pupil ratio to make this work.
When all the children are facing the same way i.e. to wards the teacher can hold some discipline over the class.
When idea of course is do away with schools altogether and let the child sit in front of a computer all day like most of them will end up doing at work anyway, and let the computer teach the child. A bit like correspondence teaching.

Ernie Goody, Haverhill, U

Class sizes matter. Even if you are one of the "best teachers" and without the issues of behaviour management, the time, energy and 1:1 support you can give students in a smaller group enables better learning and a better experience all round. Academic results in fee paying schools show that the smaller the group the better results.

Changing the pay scale to results led pay would be very divisive and would kill the team ethos, the community and cooperation that exists between teachers and makes the job enjoyable.

In my experience there are very few "bad teachers" - most teachers work incredibly hard to get the best results they can from the pupils they have, sometimes under incredibly difficult circumstances. Pay all teachers decently. Give support to newly qualified teachers. Allow teachers to use their professional judgement and experience to raise standards within their classroom and cap the number of students in each group to 25 at KS3, 20 at KS4 and 10 at KS5.

am, london,

Flexible pay structures would be ideal but are probably not practical politics with present union and government attitudes.

Instead we need to maximise recruitment of quality teachers and give the best possible support. Perhaps the most immediate low-cost improvement would be to empower each teacher to determine their own classroom discipline. The school or LEA would, of course, have to provide solutions for any pupils excluded. But the teacher would then have a real responsibility for the learning result.

Stephen Orr, Richmond, Surrey