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

Results: classes

Number of students enrolled in course

Num

ber o

f cou

rses 25 courses total surveyed

Results: students

Number of students enrolled in course

Num

ber o

f stu

dent

s

986 responses

Results: graduation year

Num

ber o

f stu

dent

s

Graduation year

Fres

hman

Soph

omor

e

Juni

or

Seni

or

Distribution within FSHN

Disclaimers• Small sample size by class• No indication of cause and effect• Avoid over generalization

Is this course required?

≥80

<40 students 40-49 50-59

60-79

Perc

enta

ge o

f stu

dent

s in

th

at s

ize

grou

p

Requ

ired

for m

y PO

E

Requ

ired

for 2

ndar

y

Elec

tive

in P

OE

Elec

tive

for

dist

ributi

on

Requ

ired

for m

y PO

E

Requ

ired

for 2

ndar

y

Elec

tive

in P

OE

Elec

tive

for

dist

ributi

on Requ

ired

for m

y PO

E

Requ

ired

for 2

ndar

y

Elec

tive

in P

OE

Elec

tive

for

dist

ributi

on

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 engagementI 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 engagementHow often do you ANSWER questions posed by the

instructor in class?Almost every class period

Often

Sometimes

Never

Behavioral engagementHow 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 engagementI feel like the instructor cares about and supports my

efforts to learnStrongly agree

Strongly disagree

Emotional engagementMy instructor knows who I am (e.g., knows my name,

recognizes me)Strongly agree

Strongly disagree

Emotional engagementI like my instructor

Strongly agree

Strongly disagree

Emotional engagementStrongly agree

Instructor cares about my learning

Strongly disagree

strongly stronglydisagree agree

Emotional engagementStrongly agree

Instructor cares about my learning

Strongly disagree

strongly stronglydisagree agree

Emotional engagement

Strongly agree

I feel anxious or nervous about this class

Strongly disagree

I feel anxious or nervous about this class

In this class, how often so you…feel bored? feel angry?

laugh?

Nev

er

Som

e

Oft

en

Ever

y

Never, Sometimes, Often, Almost every class

Nev

er

Som

e

Oft

en

Ever

y

Nev

er

Som

e Oft

en

Ever

yNum

ber o

f stu

dent

s

Nev

er

Som

e Oft

en

Ever

y

feel frustrated?

Emotional engagementHow often do you feel BORED in this class?

Almost every class period

Often

Sometimes

Never

Emotional engagementHow often do you feel ANGRY in this class?

Almost every class period

Often

Sometimes

Never

Emotional engagementHow often do you LAUGH in this class?

Almost every class period

Often

Sometimes

Never

Emotional engagementHow often do you feel FRUSTRATED in this class?

Almost every class period

Often

Sometimes

Never

Emotions: relationshipsAlmost every class period

Often

Sometimes

Never strongly stronglydisagree agree

Emotions: relationshipsAlmost 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 engagementI 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 sizeNo 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 sizeHow often do you discuss questions with your peers in class?

Almost every class period

Often

Sometimes

Never

Teaching style and class sizeHow often do you discuss questions with your peers in class?

Almost every class period

Often

Sometimes

Never

How often do you interact with your peers to solve problems?How often do you discuss class related topics with your classmates DURING class?

Time in lecture vs class size91-100%81-90%71-80%61-70%51-60%41-50%31-40%21-30%

11-20%0-10%Cl

ass

time

spen

t on

lect

ure

(%)

Estimation by faculty

Is lecture boring?Almost every class period

Often

Sometimes

Never How

oft

en d

o yo

u fe

el b

ored

in th

is c

lass

?

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 fieldWhat 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 engagementHow often do you text during class time?

Num

ber o

f stu

dent

s

Never Sometimes Often Almost every class period

Behavioral engagementHow often have you checked e-mail during class time?

Num

ber o

f stu

dent

s

Never Sometimes Often Almost every class period

Behavioral engagementN

umbe

r of s

tude

nts

Never Sometimes Often Almost every class period

How often have you checked social media (Facebook, Twitter, etc.) during class?

RelationshipsAlmost every class period

Often

Sometimes

Never

Never Sometimes Often Almost every class period

RelationshipsAlmost every class period

Often

Sometimes

Never

Never Sometimes Often Almost every class period

Behavioral engagementI attend all the class sessions

Strongly Strongly disagree agree

Num

ber o

f stu

dent

s

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)