House Education Committee debates class-size minimums, no vote taken

Members of the Vermont House Education Committee spent much of their March 20 meeting debating proposed class-size minimums tied to district reorganizations and the state’s foundation funding work, but the committee took no formal vote.

Committee members and staff discussed multiple proposals for minimum class sizes, repeatedly returning to a set of numbers advanced in testimony from the Vermont School Boards Association (VSA) and the Agency of Education (AOE). The options discussed included kindergarten at about 12 students; grades 1–5 at about 15; and secondary grades in a range from about 18 to 25 depending on the speaker. Lawmakers also discussed alternative breakdowns — for example, 1–5 at 15, middle grades at 18–20, and high school at 20–25 — and several members urged tiered or phased implementation tied to the creation of new districts and the operationalization of a foundation formula.

Committee members stressed this would be a minimum standard, not a cap. Several members flagged the disproportionate effect on rural and geographically isolated schools that already operate with very small enrollments; they said some schools could need to send small cohorts to neighboring schools or seek waivers. Members repeatedly said the State Board of Education or AOE should be able to review cases where a school cannot meet the minimums for multiple years and make determinations about exemptions or next steps.

Participants cited research and prior testimony. The committee referenced VSA/BSA recommendations and earlier AOE materials that staff had circulated; members urged colleagues to review the packet of testimony and research the committee received in January and a set of resources circulated by staff. A few speakers described classroom- and facility-level constraints (square footage or room size) that could make larger classes impractical even if statutory minimums were adopted.

No formal motion, roll-call, or recorded vote occurred during the session. The committee agreed to continue discussion at a later meeting and asked staff to re-send the research and testimony packets for members to review.

Practical details discussed

- Proposed minimums frequently referenced in testimony and discussion: kindergarten ≈12; grades 1–5 ≈15; secondary grades variously discussed between ≈18 and ≈25. - Some members proposed tiered increases over several years so that target minimums ramp up after new districts and the foundation formula are in place. - Members emphasized that minimums are intended as education-quality standards and that districts could still choose class sizes larger than the minimum if they have local policy and capacity. - Committee members asked for review criteria for “small by necessity” versus “small by choice,” suggesting the State Board of Education should have a role in adjudicating persistent cases where schools cannot meet the minimums.

Next steps and staff directions

Committee members asked staff to re-circulate the packet of AOE and VSA materials and research links. Members agreed to resume the conversation at a subsequent meeting, with several asking for explicit language tying any timeline or implementation steps to the creation of new districts and to a future check-back on educational outcomes and fiscal impacts.

No formal action was taken at this meeting; members discussed compromise ranges for minimums and asked staff to provide additional data and testimony for follow-up meetings.