We have plenty of evidence supporting the fewer kids per teacher the better the scores.
I also suspect the more a teacher cares the better the scores.
As mentioned, from the evidence, there’s already a solid correlation.
I think with the additional details the causation is likely also there (less students per teacher, highly motivated and engaged teacher). Anyone debating that point IMO is intentionally misleading. There is a clear causation between homeschooling and better outcomes. The only “question” I’ve seen in articles (none in reality) has to do with socioeconomic status. However, if you control for that, you’ll still see better outcomes (aka homeschooled kids in socioeconomic category Y will still out perform public school kids in socioeconomic category Y)
> Anyone debating that point IMO is intentionally misleading.
No need to poison the well with unfounded accusations of bad faith.
> There is a clear causation between homeschooling and better outcomes.
As I've said, causality has not been established. Even if we stipulate that smaller class sizes have a causal positive effect, it's nowhere near enough to account for the improvement in scores when home schooling. Selection effects are most likely to dominate, as they do in almost all education research.
Home-schooling isn't solely positive, it is also associated with worse outcomes in STEM. This is not surprising as most home schoolers don't got enough STEM knowledge to properly teach the subject. The net benefit you tend to see comes when you average all grades, since STEM is a fairly small portion the net is still positive, but you still see a significant decrease in STEM ability in home-schooled kids
This has not been determined. Homeschooling is correlated with better outcomes, but I'm quite certain causality has not been established here.