The College Board might be the most corrupt organization I have ever come in contact with in my life.

The College Board is, of course, the organization that offers the SAT, but perhaps what they are more popular for nowadays, at least, is their administering of Advanced Placement (AP) tests. Students can enroll in an AP class during high school, and, come the end of the school year, they can test their knowledge in the subject by taking a standardized test that is available to every student in the country enrolled in that same AP course. Scores are given on a 1-5 scale, with 1 being the lowest score possible and 5 being the highest. In order to pass the exam, students must garner a score of 3 or higher. The initial goal of the AP exam (or what people thought the goal was, at least) was to allow the students who passed to gain credit for a college course in that subject area. After all, these AP courses were supposed to be taught at a college-level. However, numerous flaws with the system arose in a rather short period of time.

For starters, the whole idea that these AP courses were supposed to be taught at a college-level did not come to fruition. There are AP courses out there that are quite challenging for high school students, but there are also plenty of AP courses that are not. Former college professor and current high school teacher John Tierney once said that AP courses don’t “hold a candle” to the college courses he taught. In his eyes, the teachers of these classes simply didn’t demand enough of their students. Speaking from personal experience, I took an AP course in high school because I was told it was a GPA-booster. Sure enough, the large majority of the activities we did in class dealt with arts and crafts, and this was no art class. We barely learned anything the entire year. Nearly everybody in the class got high grades on their report cards, but when it came time to take the AP test, none of us were truly prepared. Consequently, a large portion of us didn’t even pass; the scores of those who did weren’t that impressive, either. But the problem with my personal experience, as is the problem with lots of students’ experiences across the country, was that we weren’t actually given a college education in that course. So many people didn’t receive college credit, which, again, was supposed to be the whole goal of the course. And the people who did receive college credit didn’t deserve it; they just happened to get lucky on a standardized test.

This brings up another concern: Those who pass the exam, whether they’re lucky or legitimately prepared, are not guaranteed college credit anymore. The situation used to be pretty cut and dry—if you scored a 3 on the exam, you received credit in the college course that corresponded with the AP subject. This is no longer the case, though. Somewhere along the way, specific colleges decided that, in some AP subjects, they were only going to give credit to students who scored a 4 or higher. Some colleges only accepted 5’s, while others decided they weren’t going to award college credit to anybody. The bottom line was that there was no longer any uniformity with the system, and there still isn’t. According to the College Board, among the 4,000 U.S. colleges that accept AP scores, there are 51,000 separate policies on awarding credit for the exams. Some colleges realized rather quickly that these AP courses were not up to par. Other colleges realized that these AP courses were losing them a great deal of money in some cases. Students could gather a bunch of credit through AP courses and enter with a second semester standing; some could even enter as a sophomore. These students could graduate early and forgo paying tuition for a couple semesters, which did not please a number of universities. These colleges decided to change their policies, and the College Board couldn’t do anything about it.

Sticking with the concept of money, it’s important to dive into the financial side of the College Board. They are supposedly a non-profit organization, yet in 2017, they generated over $1 billion in total revenue. Their president, David Coleman, is also expected to earn roughly $750,000 this year. The vast majority of this money comes from exam fees. Each AP exam in 2018 cost $94, which was a $1 increase from 2017. The $93 in 2017 was a $1 increase from the year before. Essentially, the price raises a dollar every year, which results in millions of dollars in additional revenue for the College Board. But the price of the exam was expensive to begin with. I was fortunate to go to a school where the district paid for all of our exams, but other districts didn’t have that luxury. There are plenty of gifted students whose families simply can’t afford the fees for each AP exam. And the people who can afford to take the exams may spend $94 just to gain zero college credit, even if they pass. But that doesn’t matter to the cash cow that is the College Board. They have a monopoly over education, and they’re going to continue to reap the benefits.

I hope you now see why the College Board is so terrible.

The size of a class can have profound effects on a child’s learning. Typically speaking in the United States, a larger concentration of students in a classroom yields less growth compared to a smaller concentration. The concept has been tested on multiple occasions, and the overwhelming data that supports smaller class sizes has been noted. So why is it, then, that we commonly see classrooms consisting of numbers above world averages?

The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) is a relatively unique forum where governments of 34 democracies with market economies work with each other, along with 70 other non-member economies to promote economic growth, prosperity, and sustainable development. A little under ten years ago, the OECD released new data regarding teachers’ working hours, pay, and demographics. Also included in the data was the average class size in public schools within each of the OECD member countries. The average class size in OECD countries is 21.4, while the average class size in the United States is 23.1. This disparity may not seem like a lot, but it’s one of the main reasons why the U.S. doesn’t even crack the top 10 in the vast majority of global education system rankings.

If there are less kids in a classroom, there is more opportunity for interaction between teachers and students. This interaction is vital for a number of reasons. For starters, a bond with a teacher can help alleviate some of the pressures of school life. It helps to know there is an adult there to help you with certain problems, both in and outside of the classroom. Secondly, a bond with a teacher can result in greater motivation for the student to do their best. The teacher may push a pupil or a pupil may fear disappointing their teacher. Or both. And a teacher can also inspire a student to care about the material they are learning. Above all, a bond with a teacher allows for a more 1-on-1 style of learning.

Traditionally, a better way of attaining that 1-on-1 style of learning for children in America has been to put them through private schools. That is, of course, if their families could afford private schools. The average tuition of a private school in the United States is upwards of $10,000 per year. However, if one could attain this level of education for their child/children, it certainly does pay off in the case of classroom size. As mentioned above, the average class size in American public schools is 23.1 students. The average class size in public primary schools, however, is 23.6. This class size consists of over four more students than the average private primary school (19.4). Those in private schools are getting more 1-on-1 interaction with their teachers, which is resulting in learning opportunities that public school students simply cannot receive.

If a family can’t afford private schooling for their child/children, perhaps they could send them to a tutor. This, too, would help a student gain more of a personal connection during their studies. Yet again, though, this costs money—money that most families in America don’t have. The ironic part about this situation is that lots of the families in most need of money for education are the ones who are most affected by large class sizes.

A recent study by The Education Trust shows that in more than half of the states in America, the poorest school districts do not receive funding to address their students’ individual needs. Moreover, school districts with the highest rates of poverty receive roughly $1000 less per student than those with the lowest rates of poverty. With this lack of funding, poorer school districts are not able to employ an adequate number of teachers. With less teachers comes less classes. And with less classes comes more students per class. We’ve seen an alarming amount of public schools shut down in recent years, simply because they have become overcrowded; there aren’t enough funds to hire teachers and maintain control over students. These are the students who most desperately need private schooling or tutoring, but they are at an incredible disadvantage financially.

Now, whenever the topic of classroom size is brought up, it’s hard to ignore countries in Asia. Japan, for example, is home to a booming population and has no choice but to overpack their classrooms. Their class sizes are among the largest in the world, yet their education system is consistently one of the best. This is due to the fact that there are differing norms in Japanese culture. There is more of a structured set of roles within a classroom, and there is a higher emphasis placed on education, as a whole. Large classrooms may work over in Japan, but they’re not working here.

Studies have shown repeatedly that smaller American class sizes are the best route to aid student growth. Therefore, smaller class sizes are what we should strive to create for the betterment of this country and its children.