To begin with, we often hear that money spent on education has a huge impact on academic achievement of pupils and governments in many countries are encouraged to finance education. And it is right because without a proper funding it's impossible to provide schools with necessary equipment needed for comprehensive studying such as furniture, new textbooks, different devises of new technology like computers and so on. Of course, if there's no such provision, it will bear concerns. But studies show that the amount of money a country can afford to spent has less than you might think to do with how well-educated its children are because extra funding cannot improve the skill level of pupils.
Turning to the time spent on subject, I can say that pupils capacities are known to differ enormously and every pupil needs his own amount of time to work at his pace. That's why one child has to spend much time doing his subject, and other one is just talented and his marks will be the best even if he doesn't do anything. Some studies show that there is little correlation between time spent on a subject and performance of pupils in tests but it's not the case in my view.
The academic performance is acknowledged to be better if there are fewer students in a class. It is really so, because the teacher can deliver lectures better, it’s easier to govern pupils conduct and everyone can be asked at every lesson. On the whole, the fewer pupils in a class, the better they study.
And the last point to be mentioned is teaching methods. There is no doubt teaching methods play significant role in studying and a teachers choice of which one to use influences immensely the process of studying and particularly...