Resources and Annotated Studies
Achilles, C. M. & Price, W. J. (1999). Can your district afford smaller classes in grades K-3? School Business Affairs, 65 (1), 10-16.
Achilles and Price provide an overview of the issue by discussing class-size initiatives in Indiana, Tennessee, and Texas. The authors distinguish between pupil-teacher ratio (PTR) and the actual number of students taught in a classroom by one teacher. The second half of the article discusses potential cost savings brought about by the class-size reduction. Achilles and Price suggest reflecting on the following cost savings: (1) reduced grade retention; (2) reduced costs incurred for behavior problems such as vandalism and detention; (3) fewer remediation projects; (4) early identification of each learner's special needs; and (5) increased teacher attendance and reduced substitute costs resulting from improved teacher morale.
Brewer, D. J., Krop, C., Gill, B. P., & Reichardt, R. (1999). Estimating the cost of national class size reductions under different policy alternatives. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 21(2), 179-192.
In this article, the authors offer cost estimates for introducing reduced class sizes nationwide. Specifically, Brewer et al. estimate that class-size reduction would cost between $2 billion and $11 billion annually. Costs of reducing class size can be broken into both operational and facilities costs. Operational (noncapital expenditure) costs include money needed to supply the necessary number of teachers, aides and resources to meet the class-size reduction policy of each state. Facilities (capital expenditure) costs includes the money needed to build more classrooms or classroom space. The focus of this article is operational costs.
According to the authors, several factors present difficulties in producing an accurate cost estimate for class-size reduction. First, each state has a different target number for class-size reduction (e.g., 15, 18, or 20 students to each teacher). Further complicating the issue of estimating costs is how class-size reduction is defined. For example, some states define class size by average pupil-to-teacher ratios while other states view actual students in a classroom. The authors suggest that relevant areas affecting costs are: what grade levels are affected by class reduction, eligibility of schools and districts, implementation period or how long change is expected to occur, and the level of class-size reduction.
Brewer et al. developed an estimate for the number of new classes needed for class-size reduction from 1998-99 to 2007-2008. Their estimate is based on the total number of students attending school in each state in addition to assuming that a new class would be created for each student above the minimum class-size level within that state. Assuming a "middle-ground" set of teacher salaries and benefits, the cost of class-size reduction would be $2.127 billion for 20 students per teacher, $5.049 billion for 18 students per teacher, or $11.047 billion for 15 students per teacher for the 1998-99 school year.
According to the authors, the following assumptions were made in the calculation of these cost estimates. Brewer et al. did not consider teacher aging, or that significant retirement would occur during the next decade. The authors assume that as classes are added, additional aides and support staff would be added as well. In addition, the authors assume that teachers can be added without an increase in their price or a reduction in the quality of teachers. A fifth and final assumption was grounded in a belief that a federal class-size reduction program would be fully funded.
Finn, J. D., & Achilles, C. M. (1999). Tennessee class size study: Findings, implications, misconceptions. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 21(2), 97-109.
Finn and Achilles revisit the results of the Tennessee Student/Teacher Achievement Ratio (STAR) study that indicated statistically significant achievement gains in academic achievement for students who participated in smaller class sizes in all subjects areas and at every level (K-3). The authors also present evidence that a carryover effect exists in all subject areas through seventh grade for those who participated. Furthermore, the authors contend that these achievement differences were most profound for minority students.
The authors raise the fundamental issue of defining class size and class-size reduction. For example, there are distinct differences between class-size reduction and changing student-to-teacher ratios. As the authors acknowledge, the research shows reducing student-to-teacher ratios has little to no effect on student learning. Since these ratios most frequently are identified as the number of students divided by the number of professional educational staff in a school or district, these studies don't necessarily illustrate the immediate classroom interactions between teacher and student. Class-size reduction, as illustrated in the STAR and in other studies, influenced classroom practices when teachers taught fewer children in the classroom. As the authors write on page 103:
When class sizes are reduced, the pressure is increased for each student to participate in learning, and every student becomes more salient to the teacher. As a result, there is more instructional contact, and student learning behaviors are improved. Further research is needed to collaborate these conclusions.
Hanushek, E. A. (1999). The evidence on class size. (Occasional Paper No. 98-1.) Rochester, NY: University of Rochester, W. Allen Wallis Institute of Political Economy. [Online.] Available: http://www.edexcellence.net/library/size.html
In this report, Hanushek notes that research has yet to validate any connection between class size and higher academic achievement.
Hanushek, E. A. (1999). Some findings from an independent investigation of the Tennessee STAR experiment and from other investigations of class size effects. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 21(2), 143-163.
Hanushek discusses the range of evidence available on the effect of class size on student performance with special attention to Project STAR. Although assignment experimentation has considerable conceptual appeal, the methodological and implementation problems associated with the STAR study introduce large uncertainty about any policy implications. "It is difficult to assess with any precision the impact of the various sampling and selection issues that arise in STAR," the author writes. Project STAR combined with other evidence does not provide a persuasive case for the widescale class-size reductions currently being debated.
Hedges, L. V., Laine, R. D. & Greenwald, R. (1994). Does money matter? A meta-analysis of studies of the effects of differential school inputs on student outcomes. Educational Researcher, 23(3), 5-14.
This analysis is a replication of an earlier study conducted by Eric Hanushek. The authors discuss education production functions and present an analysis of the effect of a variety of inputs, including teacher-pupil ratios, per-pupil expenditure, teacher experience, teacher education, teacher salary, administrative inputs, and facilities. In contradiction of Hanushek's earlier findings, Hedges et al. conclude that for each increase in the input variable, there is a slight positive improvement in student achievement.
Mississippi Department of Education. (1998). Reducing Class Size: Strategies and Implications for Mississippi. Jackson, MS: Office of Academic Education.
This pamphlet produced by the state discusses five strategies for reducing class size, including: (1) hiring more teachers and building more space; (2) reducing the scope of class-size reduction; (3) rearranging scheduling priorities; (4) rearranging staff priorities; (5) increasing the benefits of reduced class size through effective professional development. Each strategy includes a comparison of costs (including financial and time factors of costs) between two hypothetical districts.
Molnar, A., Smith, P., Zahorik, J., Palmer, A., Halbach, A., & Ehrle, K. (1999). Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 21(2), 165-177.
The authors explore the Wisconsin Student Achievement Guarantee in Education (SAGE) program. Project SAGE, mandated by law, began as a five-year K-3 project in the 1996-97 school year reducing the pupil-teacher ratio within a classroom to 15 to 1. SAGE was targeted toward schools that have at least 30 percent of students living below the poverty line.
Classrooms in the SAGE project have been single classes of 15 student to one teacher, classes of 30 students with two teachers, and, in some cases, classes of 45 students with three teachers working collaboratively. As the authors note, there were no significant differences between first-grade classes of 15 students with one teacher or 30-student classes with two teachers. If this finding is supported by further research, then reduced class size may be achievable without the capital costs of building additional classrooms.
Results from the authors' analysis found that attendance at a SAGE school was a significant predictor of student achievement. As was found in the STAR study, minority students benefited from reduced class size (i.e., African American students scored significantly higher on post-tests than their counterparts in non-SAGE schools).
In addition to examining learning gains through a pre-test/post-test design, the SAGE analysis examined teacher perceptions through surveys and interviews. From the results, teachers mentioned several areas of the teaching/learning process that were most affected by reduced class size: knowledge of students, discipline, instruction, individualization, and learning activities.
Due to class-size reduction, teachers were more aware of students' individual personalities as well as their unique learning abilities. Having fewer students in a class meant that class discipline was easier to manage. Reduced discipline problems allowed for more instructional time for students. In addition, as a consequence of knowing each child's strengths and weaknesses, teachers were more able to individualize teaching and learning. Finally, teachers mentioned an increased ability to introduce student-centered activities.
Full and summary reports of SAGE are available at http://www.uwm.edu/SOE/centersprojects/sage
Nye, B., Hedges, L. V. & Konstantopoulos, S. The long-term effects of small classes: A five-year follow-up of the Tennessee class size experiment. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 21(2), 127-142.
The authors present the findings of the Lasting Benefits Study (LBS), a follow-up longitudinal study of students who participated in the Tennessee STAR study. According to the LBS analysis, there exists a lasting positive benefit in regard to reading, mathematics, and science achievement for those children who participated in STAR class-size reduction in the early grades of K-3. Researchers found that the benefit lasts through eighth grade. In addition, those students who dropped out of the K-3 program actually achieved higher levels of achievement than those who remained in STAR, suggesting that the measured achievement differences between those in smaller class size and those in larger classes was not due to attrition.
Stecher, B. M., & Bohrnstedt, G. W. (Eds.) (1999). Class size reduction in California: Early evaluation findings, 1996-98. (CSR Research Consortium, Year 1 Evaluation Report.) Palo Alto, CA: American Institutes for Research. [Online]. Available: http://www.classize.org/summary/summaryrpt.pdf
This research summary provides an overview of the positive gains and potential concerns brought about by California's multibillion-dollar class-size reduction initiative ($1 billion initially in 1996 followed by $1.5 billion annually). From the evaluation, the issue of teacher-quality emerged. For example, due to the need for more teachers (an increase of 38%), half of the teachers who were hired had little experience in the classroom. In addition, issues of equity were raised. For example, the evaluation found that the most ethically diverse and poverty-stricken schools had the most difficulty moving quickly to implement smaller class sizes. In fact, between 1995 and 1997, the difference between all schools and those in the bottom economic quartile in regard to the number of teachers without full state-certified credentials increased approximately ten-fold.
Stecher, B. M., & Bohrnstedt, G. W. (Eds.) (2000). Class size reduction in California: The 1998-99 evaluation findings. Sacramento, CA: California Department of Education. [Online]. Available: http://www.classize.org/summary/summaryrpt.pdf
This report indicates that CSR efforts are approaching full implementation, with preliminary results indicating small improvements in third-grade student achievement persisting into fourth grade, but a decline in teacher-qualification levels, especially in the elementary grades. More individualized instruction was noted, but the curriculum did not change. The report emphasizes that findings are preliminary and cautions that conclusions on cost-effectiveness and benefits cannot be made yet on the largest-scale class-size reduction program in the United States.
Online Resources and Summaries
California Legislative Analyst's Office: Class Size Reduction. [Online]. Available: http://www.lao.ca.gov/class_size_297.html
Provides background to California Class Size Reduction program initiated in 1996- 1997 Budget Act, offers analysis of costs versus benefits, and sets forth recommendations for refinements to the program.
California Legislative Analyst's Office: Class Size Reduction. [Online]. Available: http://www.middleweb.com/ClassSize.html
Explores links and issues to relating to smaller class size from the middle-school perspective.
WestEd. (August 1998). Class Size Reduction: Lessons Learned from Experience. [Online]. Available: http://www.wested.org/policy/pubs/full_text/pb_ft_csr23.htm
Analyzes the experiences of class-size reduction programs across the country.
Education Week: Class Size (2000). [Online]. Available: http://www.edweek.org/context/topics/issuespage.cfm?id=44
Provides a brief overview on the issue of class-size reduction and provides links to other resources on the Web.
National Conference of State Legislators. (1998). Class size reduction. [Online]. Available: http://www.ncsl.org/programs/educ/class.htm
An overview publication provides information on class-size reduction research as well as costs. In reviewing the research literature, this document discusses the results of Project STAR in Tennessee as well as SAGE in Wisconsin. In addition, the paper provides an overview of costs incurred in California and Michigan, with more extensive data on Nevada and Indiana. Analysis of cost in the article is exclusive of capital expenditure or other local costs.
National PTA Background Brief: Class Size Reduction. [Online]. Available: http://www.pta.org/programs/bbclass.htm
Gives background on federal support of class-size reduction initiatives providing support to the PTA's position that such initiatives ought to be supported.
Oregon School Boards Association: Class size reduction: Is less really more? Available: http://www.osba.org/hotopics/classize/states.htm
This site summarizes class-size reduction efforts in 12 states.
U.S. Department of Education: Reducing Class Size: What Do We Know? (1998, May 8; revised 1999, March). [Online]. Available: www.ed.gov/pubs/ReducingClass
The authors examine research on class-size reduction, specifically from California's CSR program and Tennessee's Project STAR. They conclude: "Overall, the pattern of research findings points more and more clearly toward the beneficial effects of reducing class size."
Federal and State Class-Size Reduction Web Sites
Federal
http://www.ed.gov/PressReleases/07-1999/wh-0720a.html
http://www.ed.gov/PressReleases/11-1999/wh-1108a.html
http://165.224.220.253/MailingLists/EDInfo/msg00400.html
http://www.eric.ed.gov/contentdelivery/servlet/ERICServlet?accno=ED259454
http://www.ed.gov/offices/OESE/ClassSize/
http://www.ed.gov/offices/OESE/ClassSize/research.html
http://www.ed.gov/offices/OESE/ESEA/themes/cc-title-vi.html
http://www.ed.gov/offices/OESE/ClassSize/Guidance/A.html#effective
http://www.ed.gov/offices/OESE/ClassSize/Guidance/A.html#progress
http://www.ed.gov/offices/OESE/ClassSize/Guidance/H.html
Alabama
http://www.us.net/mccpta/classize.html
California
http://www.cde.ca.gov/classsize/
http://www.classize.org/techreport/index-00.htm
http://pace.berkeley.edu/california_class_size_redu.htm
Iowa
http://www.state.ia.us/educate/fed_class_size/
Nebraska
http://www.nde.state.ne.us/EEO/CSR/welcome.htm
New York
http://www.nysed.gov/nycscs/early.htm
Oklahoma
http://region7.ou.edu/powerpoints/Money/sld001.htm
Oregon
http://www.osba.org/hotopics/classize/states.htm
Policy
http://www.policy.com/issuewk/1999/0830_90/detail650.html
Electronic data collection
Other Class-Size Reduction Publications and Resources
Achilles, C. (1999). Let's put kids first, finally: Getting class size right. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Hanushek, E. (1996). A more complete picture of school resource policies. Review of Educational Research, 66(3),397-409.
Johnston, J., & Davis, T. (1989). Inside the black box: The effects of class size on quality of work life for teachers and children. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, CA.
Maier, P., Molnar, A., Smith, P., & Zahorik, J. (1997). First year results of the Student Achievement Guarantee in Education program. Milwaukee, Wl: Center for Urban Initiatives and Research, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee.
Molnar, A., Smith, P., & Zahorik, J. (1998). 1997-98 results of the Student Achievement Guarantee in Education (SAGE) program evaluation. Milwaukee, Wl: School of Education, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee.
Robinson, G., & Wittebols, J. (1986). Class size research: A related cluster analysis for decision making. (Research Brief). Arlington, VA: Educational Research Service.
Slavin, R. (1989). Class size and student achievement: Small effects of small classes. Educational Psychologist, 24, 99-110.
Word, E., Johnston, J., Bain, H., Folton, B., Zaharias. J., Achilles, C., Lintz, M., Folger, J., & Breda, C. (1994). The state of Tennessee's Student/Teacher Achievement Ratio (STAR) project: Technical report 1985- 1990. Nashville, TN: Tennessee Department of Education.
 |
