13th August 2017 1:00
By Blue Tutors
There are very few topics in education that have been researches as extensively as class size, and yet there is still not definitive answer as to whether increasing class sizes has a positive or detrimental effect on learning outcomes, if any at all. Yet, in recent years, politicians have touted funding for smaller classes over increasing teacher pay and conditions as it is far more popular with voters, but why?
People are labouring under the misapprehension that a smaller class is always a positive move. In reality, it is not that simple. Studies have been conducted, naturally occurring data on this topic has been studied, and there has been no definitive conclusion either way. In some cases, reducing class size was good for student learning, some it was not, but for most, there was no statistically significant effect at all on learning outcomes. It turns out it depends on the size of the class whether decreasing numbers of students will have a positive outcome; very large classes do see some improvement when numbers are reduced, but, conversely, smaller classes suffer from lower numbers, particularly at the lower achievement end.
The relationship between class size and performance is in fact an inverted U shape, a phenomenon that is common in behavioural economics and appears in many parts of society. This means that at one end, when increasing numbers of students in small classes, there is a positive effect on performance, whereas at the other extreme in large classes, there is a negative effect (smaller classes would be better), but in the middle, there is very little correlation between class size and academic performance. There is one caveat to this, which is that students with special educational needs always benefited from a smaller more tailored teaching environment.
So, there is, in the end, an optimal class size. Most teachers and researchers would agree that this is in the early 20s, with 18 and 24 being appreciated for their ability to divide into groups of 2, 3, 4 and 6. At this size, a class has enough diversity for discussions yet is small enough for a teacher to know and manage individual personalities. Above this number, the group takes on the form of an ‘audience’ where the teacher is separate and it becomes less easy to ensure all students are focussed on the task at hand. Equally, the workload for a teacher marking more tests and homework leaves less time to spend on lesson planning or helping individual students.
Yet, equally dangerous, is a small class. Without the critical numbers to get a certain energy in the classroom, it becomes extremely difficult to ensure participation and a variety of opinions in discussions. Somewhat counterintuitively, shyer classmates are in fact less likely to speak in the less anonymous small classroom, and boisterous characters are more likely to dominate. It has been shown that those at the lower end of achievement suffer the most from small classrooms as they do not have enough peers at a similar level to learn from and with, making the material and success seem even more unattainable.
Ultimately, given that the majority of classes are within the range where class size makes little to no difference, the money spent on decreasing class size would probably be more wisely spent in recruiting and retaining skilled teachers.