Impact of class size on student
engagement: literature review
and preliminary data analysis
Advantages of a small class
•
•
•
•
•
•
Knowing your students
Easier to have discussion rather than lecture
Number of assignments
Exam type
Larger classes may have lower attendance
Easier to not respond in a large class
Literature review
The impact of class size on grades
• Small better: Small class size has a positive effect on
odds of getting a good grade (Scheck et al., 1994;
Westerlund, 2006; Gibbs et al., 1996; Johnson, 2010)
• No impact on grade due to class size (Hancock, 1996)
• Large better: Students performed better in a large
mega-section (150 students) than a small section
(30 students)
– the mega-section had additional technology tools, and
an additional hour of small group meeting to cover
problem solving and study skills (Brusi et al., 2013)
• Effect of class size flattens as class size increases and
almost ceases to exist when class reaches 50 for
some disciplines. (Johnson, 2010)
Exam scores, standardized test scores
• Small better: Better final exam score for
students in smaller course (Schattke and McAllister,
1962)
• No impact of size (Arias and Walker, 2004; Baldwin,
1993; Bowling et al., 2008)
• Large better: Students in large class
outperformed small when attendance and
GPA were taken into account (Hill, 1998)
• Large better: Students in larger classes scored
better on a standardized economics test (TUCE
III) (Lopus and Maxwell, 1995)
Long term retention, grades in future courses
• Small better Students in a larger macroeconomics
classed had lower grades in the second course than
students in the small intro course (Raimondo et al., 1990)
• No impact: Class size had no impact on the long term
retention of material (Siegel et al., 1960; Siegfried and Kennedy,
1995), no impact on the proportion of students who
changes majors (Baldwin, 1993), no impact on the grades
in the next course or an intermediate level course
(Baldwin, 1993), and no impact on the grade in a
microeconomics sequence (Raimondo et al., 1990)
• Large better: A larger proportion of accounting
students in the large class continued into the next two
classes (Baldwin, 1993)
Experimental
design
What is the relationship between
class size and student engagement
in classes with greater than 30
students at Juniata College?
Benefits of engagement
• A pathway to success in college (Hu, 2011) for
both performance and persistence (Gasiewski et
al., 2012)
• May have a more significant impact on lower
achieving students, students of color (Kuh et al.,
2008) and non-traditional students (Gilardi and
Guglielmetti, 2011)
• The lowest-ability students benefit more from
engagement (Carini et al., 2006).
• Positive (but weak) linkages between
engagement, critical thinking and grades (Carini
et al., 2006)
Engagement
• Behavioral engagement: participation in the
classroom (attending class, paying attention, asking
questions), extracurricular events, or social activities
(Fredricks et al., 2004; Gasiewski et al., 2012).
• Emotional engagement: a student’s feelings (positive
or negative) to faculty, classmates, school (Fredricks et
al., 2004), and their feelings of boredom, anxiety or
excitement in class (Gasiewski et al., 2012).
• Cognitive engagement: the student’s level of
commitment to learning, including willingness to
work hard to master the material (Fredricks et al., 2004).
Study design
• Survey students in classes of 30 and up.
• List of courses generated by registrar,
volunteers solicited.
• Six different departments, all 100 or 200 level
classes (THANK YOU!!)
• Faculty provided information on teaching
practices and perceptions of engagement
• On-line survey given to students in that class
between 11/1 and 11/21
Number of courses
Results: classes
25 courses total surveyed
Number of students enrolled in course
Number of students
Results: students
986 responses
Number of students enrolled in course
Graduation year
Freshman
Sophomore
Junior
Senior
Number of students
Results: graduation year
Distribution within FSHN
Disclaimers
• Small sample size by class
• No indication of cause and effect
• Avoid over generalization
60-79
≥80
Elective for
distribution
Elective in POE
40-49
Required for 2ndary
Required for my POE
Elective for
distribution
<40 students
Elective in POE
Required for 2ndary
Required for my POE
Elective for
distribution
Elective in POE
Required for 2ndary
Required for my POE
Percentage of students in
that size group
Is this course required?
50-59
Engagement
• Behavioral engagement: participation in the
classroom (attending class, paying attention, asking
questions), extracurricular events, or social activities
(Fredricks et al., 2004; Gasiewski et al., 2012).
• Emotional engagement: a student’s feelings (positive
or negative) to faculty, classmates, school (Fredricks et
al., 2004), and their feelings of boredom, anxiety or
excitement in class (Gasiewski et al., 2012).
• Cognitive engagement: the student’s level of
commitment to learning, including willingness to
work hard to master the material (Fredricks et al., 2004).
Behavioral engagement
I attend all the class sessions
Strongly agree
Strongly disagree
Is there are relationship between class size
and the amount of texting?
Almost every
class period
Often
Sometimes
Never
Similar pattern for e-mail, social media, and paying
attention in class
Behavioral engagement
How often do you ANSWER questions posed by the
instructor in class?
Almost every
class period
Often
Sometimes
Never
Behavioral engagement
How often do you ASK the instructor a question in class?
Almost every
class period
Often
Sometimes
Never
Engagement
• Behavioral engagement: participation in the
classroom (attending class, paying attention, asking
questions), extracurricular events, or social activities
(Fredricks et al., 2004; Gasiewski et al., 2012).
• Emotional engagement: a student’s feelings (positive
or negative) to faculty, classmates, school (Fredricks et
al., 2004), and their feelings of boredom, anxiety or
excitement in class (Gasiewski et al., 2012).
• Cognitive engagement: the student’s level of
commitment to learning, including willingness to
work hard to master the material (Fredricks et al., 2004).
Emotional engagement
I feel like the instructor cares about and supports my
efforts to learn
Strongly agree
Strongly disagree
Emotional engagement
My instructor knows who I am (e.g., knows my name,
recognizes me)
Strongly agree
Strongly disagree
Emotional engagement
I like my instructor
Strongly agree
Strongly disagree
Emotional engagement
Strongly agree
Instructor cares
about my
learning
Strongly disagree
strongly
disagree
strongly
agree
Emotional engagement
Strongly agree
Instructor cares
about my
learning
Strongly disagree
strongly
disagree
strongly
agree
Emotional engagement
I feel anxious or nervous about this class
Strongly agree
I feel anxious or
nervous about
this class
Strongly disagree
In this class, how often so you…
Every
Often
Some
Every
Often
Some
Never
Every
Often
Some
Never
Every
Often
Some
Never
feel angry?
feel frustrated?
laugh?
Never
Number of students
feel bored?
Never, Sometimes, Often, Almost every class
Emotional engagement
How often do you feel BORED in this class?
Almost every
class period
Often
Sometimes
Never
Emotional engagement
How often do you feel ANGRY in this class?
Almost every
class period
Often
Sometimes
Never
Emotional engagement
How often do you LAUGH in this class?
Almost every
class period
Often
Sometimes
Never
Emotional engagement
How often do you feel FRUSTRATED in this class?
Almost every
class period
Often
Sometimes
Never
Emotions: relationships
Almost every
class period
Often
Sometimes
Never
strongly
disagree
strongly
agree
Emotions: relationships
Almost every
class period
Often
Sometimes
Never
Never
Almost every
class period
Engagement
• Behavioral engagement: participation in the
classroom (attending class, paying attention, asking
questions), extracurricular events, or social activities
(Fredricks et al., 2004; Gasiewski et al., 2012).
• Emotional engagement: a student’s feelings (positive
or negative) to faculty, classmates, school (Fredricks et
al., 2004), and their feelings of boredom, anxiety or
excitement in class (Gasiewski et al., 2012).
• Cognitive engagement: the student’s level of
commitment to learning, including willingness to
work hard to master the material (Fredricks et al., 2004).
Cognitive engagement
• I see the value in learning the material
covered in this course
• I consider myself a motivated student in this
course
• I attempted all assigned course work
• I completed the required readings or
preparatory assignments prior to class.
Cognitive engagement
I completed the required readings or
preparatory assignments prior to class.
Strongly agree
Strongly disagree
Does class size impact future interest
in subject?
Summary: relationship to class size
•
•
•
•
•
No relationship
Amount of texting,
social media and e-mail
Attendance
Boredom, anger,
frustration
Cognitive engagement
Future interest in
subject
Relationship
•Answer questions
(upper limit)
•Ask questions (-)
•Instructor cares – limit on
largest classes?
•Knows my name (-)
•I like my instructor
(upper limit)
•Anxiety (+ lower limit)
Does class size
influence teaching
style?
Teaching style and class size
How often do you discuss questions with
your peers in class?
Almost every
class period
Often
Sometimes
Never
Teaching style and class size
How often do you discuss questions with
your peers in class?
Almost every
How
often
class period
do you interact with your peers
to solve problems?
Often
How often do you discuss class related
topics with your classmates DURING class?
Sometimes
Never
Class time spent on lecture (%)
Time in lecture vs class size
91-100%
81-90%
71-80%
61-70%
51-60%
41-50%
31-40%
21-30%
11-20%
0-10%
Estimation by faculty
How often do you feel bored in this class?
Is lecture boring?
Almost every
class period
Often
Sometimes
Never
0-10%
91-100%
Summary: teaching style related to
class size
• There appears to be a limit to the amount of
non-lecture used in large classes compared to
medium classes.
What’s next?
More analysis of collected data
• At risk individuals
• Untangling relationships
• Impact of field
What mitigates potential negative effects of
large classes?
Collect more data?
• Smaller class sizes
• Spring classes
• Additional years (replicates)
Many thanks…
The James J. Lakso Center for the Scholarship of
Teaching & Learning
Faculty who participated in the project
Arias, J.J., Walker, D.M., 2004. Additional Evidence on the Relationship between Class Size and Student Performance. J. Econ. Educ. 35, 311–329.
Baldwin, B.A., 1993. Teaching Introductory Financial Accounting in Mass-Lecture Sections: Longitudinal Evidence. Issues Account. Educ. 8, 97–
111.
Bowling, B.V., Huether, C.A., Wang, L., Myers, M.F., Markle, G.C., Dean, G.E., Acra, E.E., Wray, Jacob, G.A., 2008. Genetic Literacy of
Undergraduate Non–Science Majors and the Impact of Introductory Biology and Genetics Courses. BioScience 58, 654–660.
Brusi, R., Portnoy, A., Toro, N., 2013. Student Engagement and Completion in Precalculus Precalculus Mega Section: Efficiently Assisting Student
Engagement and Completion with Communications and Information Technology. J. Stem Educ. Innov. Res. 14, 20–25.
Carini, R.M., Kuh, G.D., Klein, S.P., 2006. Student Engagement and Student Learning: Testing the Linkages*. Res. High. Educ. 47, 1–32.
Fredricks, J.A., Blumenfeld, P.C., Paris, A.H., 2004. School Engagement: Potential of the Concept, State of the Evidence. Rev. Educ. Res. 74, 59–
109.
Gasiewski, J., Eagan, M., Garcia, G., Hurtado, S., Chang, M., 2012. From Gatekeeping to Engagement: A Multicontextual, Mixed Method Study of
Student Academic Engagement in Introductory STEM Courses. Res. High. Educ. 53, 229–261.
Gibbs, G., Lucas, L., Simonite, V., 1996. Class size and student performance: 1984-94. Stud. High. Educ. 21, 261.
Gilardi, S., Guglielmetti, C., 2011. University Life of Non-Traditional Students: Engagement Styles and Impact on Attrition. J. High. Educ. 82, 33–
53.
Hancock, T.M., 1996. Effects of class size on college student achievement. Coll. Stud. J. 30, 479.
Hill, M.C., 1998. Class size and student performance in introductory accounting courses: Further evidence. Issues Account. Educ. 13, 47–64.
Hu, S., 2011. Reconsidering the Relationship Between Student Engagement and Persistence in College. Innov. High. Educ. 36, 97–106.
Johnson, I.Y., 2010. Class Size and Student Performance at a Public Research University: A Cross-Classified Model. Res. High. Educ. 51, 701–723.
Kuh, G.D., Cruce, T.M., Shoup, R., Kinzie, J., Gonyea, R.M., 2008. Unmasking the Effects of Student Engagement on First-Year College Grades and
Persistence. J. High. Educ. 79, 540–563.
Lopus, J.S., Maxwell, N.L., 1995. Teaching tools: Should we teach microeconomic principles bef. Econ. Inq. 33, 336.
Raimondo, H.J., Esposito, L., Gershenberg, I., 1990. Research in Economic Education Introductory Class Size and Student Performance in
Intermediate Theory Courses. J. Econ. Educ. 1986-1998 21.
Schattke, R., McAllister, L., 1962. Large Versus Small Classes in Elementary Accounting. Account. Rev. 37, 557.
Scheck, C.L., Kinicki, A.J., Webster, J.L., 1994. The effect of class size on student performance: Development and assessment of a process model.
J. Educ. Bus. 70, 104.
Siegel, L., Adams, J.F., Macomber, F.G., 1960. Retention of subject matter as a function of large group instructional procedures. J. Educ. Psychol.
51, 9–13.
Siegfried, J.J., Kennedy, P.E., 1995. Does Pedagogy Vary with Class Size in Introductory Economics? Am. Econ. Rev. 85, 347–351.
Toth, L.S., Montagna, L.G., 2002. Class Size and Achievement in Higher Education: A Summary of Current Research. Coll. Stud. J. 36, 253.
Westerlund, J., 2006. Class Size and Student Evaluations in Sweden. Ssrn Work. Pap. Ser.
Behavioral engagement
Number of students
How often do you text during class time?
Never Sometimes Often
Almost every
class period
Behavioral engagement
Number of students
How often have you checked e-mail during class time?
Never Sometimes Often
Almost every
class period
Behavioral engagement
Number of students
How often have you checked social media
(Facebook, Twitter, etc.) during class?
Never Sometimes Often
Almost every
class period
Relationships
Almost every
class period
Often
Sometimes
Never
Never
Sometimes
Often
Almost every
class period
Relationships
Almost every
class period
Often
Sometimes
Never
Never
Sometimes
Often
Almost every
class period
Behavioral engagement
Number of students
I attend all the class sessions
Strongly
disagree
Strongly
agree
Higher level learning skills
• Theoretically, students were better trained
higher level thinking skills in the smaller class
size. Conclusion is based on significant
difference in grade in upper level course
dependent on class size for the
macroeconomic sequence but not the
microeconomic sequence. (Raimondo et al.,
1990)