Recent budget cuts to ICSD, compiled with staffing shortages and low teacher retention, have forced the implementation of minimum class size requirements which have led to complete removal of some IHS courses and fewer sections of others, subsequently increasing class sizes. Excessively, forty students are enrolled in a single section of Calculus this year. This shift has raised concerns among educators and students about the continuation of quality of instruction and student engagement. When classrooms are crowded, the ability to provide personalized, effective learning experiences diminishes. Both research and firsthand accounts from teachers suggest that smaller class sizes allow for more tailored instruction, stronger relationships, and better academic outcomes. Class size should be reduced due to its obstruction of quality education delivery, and it is crucial for administration to explore solutions that prioritize student learning, even amid financial limitations.
In smaller classrooms, teachers can provide more individualized attention, adapt instruction to meet diverse learning needs, and foster deeper student engagement. Students are more likely to participate actively when they feel seen by their instructors and peers—conditions that are increasingly difficult to maintain in overcrowded classrooms. Studies, such as those from the Tennessee STAR (Student/Teacher Achievement Ratio) project, have shown that students in smaller classes perform better academically, when comparing cognitive testing scores, such as on the SAT and BSF, and that these benefits persist over time. Rani Marie Sethupathy ’27 talked about her experience in AP Spanish at IHS: “My class is very small and the small environment encourages me to participate in class discussions and advocate when I need help. I feel much more comfortable and successful in the classroom setting.” Additionally, smaller classes allow for timely intervention when students struggle and for stronger teacher-student relationships. In these settings the teacher is no longer teaching at the students but with them, an experience leaving everyone more fulfilled and informed.
These advantages are not just experienced from the student’s perspective; IHS teachers report how teaching changes drastically in smaller settings. Shaun, who teaches Precalculus BC and Honors Geometry, explained that “too large a class size means you are out of touch with what students may want and need.” This statement underscores that preserving smaller class sizes should be viewed as a fundamental component of quality education. Mr. Fellman who teaches AP Physics 1 and C added that a small reduction in class size, as was a reality prior to budget cuts, “has a tremendous impact.” In larger classes, he explained, “I can implement as many resources as possible but it is much harder to know what a student is going through and to support them.”
Despite the clear benefits of small class sizes, following the budget cuts, administration made the call to cut all courses with fewer than seventeen students enrolled. This minimum class size is what has forced IHS into cutting AVID, an essential class prepping students for life beyond high school by developing their academic and organizational skills. Language courses have also been cut, such as Mandarin and Latin, and teachers are left responsible for managing larger student cohorts. Subsequently, this reduces the time instructors can spend with each student, weakens equal participation, and increases the likelihood that individual needs will go unnoticed.
To the extreme, only one section of Calculus BC is being taught this year, a class so large it was initially held everyday in Upper York and left some students on a waiting list for class admission. The class has been moved multiple times since, at one point leaving students with regents exam desks completely inadequate for testing let alone for classroom learning. Now Calculus is held in a science classroom, utilizing all desks and lab benches. Unsurprisingly, students in the class report frustrations. Julia Kleinberg ’27 told the board, “I’m grateful to be in the class, but it’s difficult because everyone has questions and there’s just not enough time to answer all of them. It’s also frustrating to keep having to move rooms, especially because none of them make it easier to see the board or hear the person next to me when everyone is talking.” Furthermore, with fewer, or even solely one class section available, students opportunities grow limited with an uptick of scheduling conflicts prohibiting more individualized course selections.
It’s important to note this issue extends beyond advanced courses. Foundational and required classes—those taken by the majority of students—are often at full capacity. District wide, the average class size of Earth Science, a graduation requirement, increased from 21 to 27 kids in the past three years. This means students who most benefit from individualized attention are the first to lose it.
The topic of class size is critical and must be addressed whenever district funds are allocated or the master schedule is designed. This means balancing teacher workloads, not by cutting student enrollments, but by distributing them more evenly across additional course sections. If we are serious about delivering equitable, effective education, then class size must remain a central consideration. Fewer class sections and larger class sizes may appear to save money and teacher’s work-life well-being; however, the cost is lost learning and failing our students. Investing in smaller classes is an investment in student success. When class sizes grow too large, teachers are stretched thin and left managing more students with the same amount of limited time and resources, and students’ learning environments degrade. Students must be distributed more evenly across additional course sections—even if that requires creative staffing, scheduling or reallocation of funds.