Instead, the article is about a school's unilateral focus on language arts and the way that this helped changed test scores. But, (1) it doesn't say anything about classroom size, and (2) it doesn't follow, simply because a few large schools managed, as a result of curriculum change, to become successful in areas where they previously were not, that the principle "smaller is better" is wrong.
I thought you might find this interesting because of its logical form and shortcomings, although it seems like the emphasis on "language arts" might also be of interest, given how difficult philosophical texts are simply to read.
