The literature Review:

The title of the literature review * DOES CLASS SIZE MATTER IN TEACHING ESL
STUDENTS?* evokes a lot of questions which will be answered in this paper. The first
question that taps into our minds is which is better teaching bigger or smaller
classes? What are the effects of reducing class size on educational outcomes and
student learning? Are these effects vital? If not what are the main reasons for
improving the quality of education without the need to reduce class size? The study
of class size actually began as early as (Rice, 1902). Jamison, Suppose and Wells
reviewed this literature and they discovered that 35 studies preferred smaller
classes, 32 unconvincing however, 18 preferred larger classes. They concluded that
dropping class size may only do very little to progress (see also Blake, 1954;
Fleming, 1959; Sitkei, 1968). Hanushek (1988) aptly sums up this literature which
turned out as the following:
a) The results are scientifically small.
b) There is much difficulty in merging the small effects with rhetoric about the
positive and many profound effects;
c) The effects of reducing class size may or may not be higher on teacher and
student work-related conditions which may or may not translate into effects on
student learning;
d) We should trust past evidence (literature review and meta-analyses) which are
based as investigation of what has been and not necessarily what could be.
There have been many studies asking these simple and critical questions * what is
the effect of
reducing class size*? We will outline some of the most important studies that have
tackled this precise question. According to Hattie ( 2005) , the advances in research
over the last fifty years has been the advent of meta-analysis which refers to former
studies by estimating the size of the effect on the outcome and then evaluating the
impact of various moderators on these effects. Glass and Smith (1978)
manufactured 77 studies, all to a total of 725 effect-sizes. The average effect-size
when class sizes were reduced from 25 to 15 was .09, but, more importantly, there
was a non- linear effect. They continued another study in (1980) on 59 studies
covering 371 effects relating to class size and non-achievement based outcomes
such as self-concept, interpersonal regard, engagement, quality of instruction,
teacher attitude, and school climate. The average effect-size for these nonachievement outcomes was .24. Both concluded that achievement, attitude,
teacher morale, and student satisfaction gains were significant in smaller classes
(i.e., 10-15 students)with insignificant increase from dropping class sizes from 40

to 20 students. This effect was bigger in secondary rather than in primary schools,
but similar in all subjects and different ability levels. Another study done by
McGiverin, Gilman, and Tillitski (1989) conducted a meta-analysis of 10 studies of
Indianas Prime Time project. The study was not a success since it had little controls,
it wasnt clear that small classes were reserved small for the whole day, and, while
the average class size for the smaller classes was set at 18, actual small class
sizes ranged from 18 to 31, and classes of 24 were considered small if there was a
teacher aide to assist the teacher. A lot of studies and projects continued to study
the effect of class size and we mentioned three studies only. To conclude with Hattie
(2005) paper research which included a lot of studies from around the world, like
recent ones done in the UK and Australia. A study in Australia similar to Blatchford
et al. and United Kingdom studies * Blatchford, Goldstein, Martin and Browne
(2002)* in which it has been difficult to find studies identifying differential effects on
achievement relating to class size. Johnson, Jensen, Feely and Methakullawat (2003)
used one bigger data sets based in Victoria based on 1232 primary schools, 264
secondary schools, and 44 primary and secondary schools. They concluded and I
quote their words that we have been unable to find any evidence that class size is
an important determinant of academic performance in primary or secondary
schools (p. 33). Nowhere did they find systematic effects of class size, with most
effects centering around zero, and certainly rarely important (p. 27).

B) WHAT ARE THE EFFECTS OF REDUCING CLASS SIZE ON EDUCATIONAL OUTCOMES

AND STUDENT LEARNING

Fuller (1987) reviewed nine studies in developing countries (Botswana, Thailand,

India, Chile, Iran, Egypt, Kenya, Malaysia, Puerto Rico, Tanzania, Bolivia, and
Argentina). The studies all used primary students, the class size was 44, and he
found no difference in learning outcomes relating to class size. He added that in five
studies, students working within bigger classes functioned at higher levels than in
smaller classes, and Fuller only identified one study that found smaller classes at
primary level significantly related to higher achievement (in Columbia). Wmann
and West (2002) investigated the effect of class size on student achievement across
many countries using the Third International Mathematics and Science Study
(TIMSS). These findings were quite interesting since
There were incapable to distinguish a major outcome of class size on student
achievement for most school systems This lead them to their own conclusion, that
the evidence on class size effects presented in this paper suggests that capable
teachers are able to promote student learning equally well regardless of class size
(at least within the range of variation that occurs naturally between grades). In
other words, they are capable enough to teach well in large classes. Less capable

teachers, however, while perhaps doing reasonably well when faced with smaller
classes, do not seem to be up to the job of teaching large classes (Wmann &
West, 2002, p.30).
Other studies such as Christopher Jepsen and Steven Rivkin (2002) showed that
small classes are equal to big classes.

C) WHY IS THIS DIFFERENCE SO SMALL?

There is little research in this area of why the difference in comparing class size and
students achievement is so small, also it appears that it is related to quantity than
quality (e.g., more on-task behavior, less student-student interactions) * Hattie
2005* . There are three major interrelated reasons to why this effect is very small
and I quote his words:
*a) it is difficult to find studies whereby the nature of classroom experiences are
differentially related to class size;
b) Teachers tend to use the same teaching methods regardless of class size; and
c) There may be greater attention to peer effects in smaller classrooms.*
To be able to work through these studies more the author uses the Project STAR
data of classroom behaviors. Evertson and Folger (1989) stated that students in
smaller classes made more acquaintances with the teacher for reasons such as:
clarification, gave a lot of answers to questions that were addressed to the entire
class, they also asked the teacher privately for help, were more on-task, and spent
short time waiting for the next assignment (see also Achilles, Kiser-Kling, Owen, &
Aust, 1994; Kiser-Kling, 1995). Regardless of the fact that teachers didnt change
their fundamental teaching strategies when given a small class (Finn & Achilles,
1999). Finnet al. (2001) found that teachers in STAR small classes spent increased
time in direct instruction, even though less time on administrative organizational
tasks (Evertson & Folger, 1989; Achilles, Kiser- Kling, Owen, & Aust, 1994).
In Canada, Shapson, Wright, Easom, and Fitzgerald, (1980) examined 62 fourthand fifth-grade Classes in which students were randomly assigned to class sizes of
16, 23, 30, or 37 students. The outcome revealed that there was no there were no
differences between class size and student
engagement or classroom atmosphere. Similarly in Australia, Bourke (1986)
found no association
between class size and student engagement, other than teachers in big classes
spent more time on classroom management. Yet, the time spent in classroom
management wasnt related to achievement. Bourke (1986) found more He found

more total group teaching and less individualization in smaller classes. Smaller
classes were correlated with smaller number of teacher-student interactions and
less questions from the students, less lecturing from the teacher, and more prying
and waiting for responses when teachers asked questions.
In a national survey covering similar grade levels, Betts and Shkolnik (1999)
obsereved 2,170 mathematics classes and students from grades 7 through 12 in the
late 1980s through to the early
1990s.. They found no relationship between class size and text treatment and,
likewise, no more time dedicated to new material in classes of one size or another.
On the other hand, smaller classes had a tendency to use up more time on analysis.
On the contrary, teachers appear to react to increases in class size by guarding the
time they devote to new material, while cutting back on review time (p. 200).
Indeed, they demonstrated that teachers could make small classes considerably
more effective if they did not reduce group instruction to the extent that they do
(Betts & Shkolnik, 1999, p. 209). Generally, both argued that, for the reason that
teachers change their time to such a small extent, this may explain why it has
been so hard in most past research to identify a positive and significant impact of
class size reduction on student achievement (p. 209).

D) ELEMENTS THAT CAN OVERCOME CLASS SIZE:

Hanushek, and Kain (2000) stated that the variation in teacher quality swamp(ed)
any conflicting
Factors such as class size (see also Hanushek, 1992). Further, as shown from the
1996 Californian example, simply employing additional teachers, without paying
attention to quality merely imitates the outcomes as if the class sizes had not
changed (Stecher & Bornstedt, 1999).
Smith, Baker, Hattie, and Bond (in review) examined the attitude of 65 teachers in
their classroom practices, beliefs, and actions and it turned out that the class size
doesnt matter as we shall see in

Table 6: Attributes of teachers influenced by class size:

Not influenced by class size

Somewhat influenced by class size

Respect for students

Ensure students understand and follow teachers
management procedures
Have high levels of sense of Ability to identify and use the most relevant
information
Enhance student self-efficacy
Display passion
Engage in problem solving about their teaching
Test hypotheses about student learning
Deep representation of pedagogical knowledge
Use of Knowledge
High levels of anticipation and improvisation
Motivate students towards more challenging goals
A positive, engaging and rule-clear classroom climate Sensitive to the task
demands and social situations of the classroom
Emphasis student efficacy and not indulge in blaming behaviors
Higher achievement outcomes
Greater depth of learning
Multidimensional perspective of classes
Anticipate difficulties students may
Experience
control Monitoring & provide feedback
Emphasize students responsibility for
their own learning

Also, Hess (2001) states that large classes have many advantages since the number
of the student is so huge which means more communication and interaction in the
classroom moreover, a diversity of human assets. In addition, outstanding students
will cooperate and their weak peers. Ur (1996) clarifies that while the teacher has a
big number of students and can not provide help to all the students, nevertheless
students can expand strategies to be better by doing peer-teaching and group
effort, thus benefiting and nurturing an environment of cooperation and mutual aid.

E) CONCLUSIONS:
Sid Gilbert (1995) states that the early literature reviews suggested that class size
has little or no impact on the achievement of academic skills Hamilton (1980).
According to L K. Wood, A.S. Linsky and M.A. Straus who both state that class size is
much less important that the qualities of the instructor, the way and the style of the
course being taught .Sid Gilbert (1995) answers the questions that were raised at
the beginning of the literature review which supports the idea of the quality of the
instructors rather than the matter of the class size. More recent studies indicate that
students' attitudes toward large classes are influenced more by course content,
organization and instructor ability than by size since some students seem to prefer
large classes, also the class size matters if the instructors are inexperienced
One could conclude that the experienced, full-time faculty is able to adapt their
teaching such that class size has no independent impact on the favorability of their
ratings. Hamilton (1980)
Studies of teaching efficiency have already found that instructor practices and
course organization are far more vital than class size in producing positive student
outcomes. Students point out better learning and greater pleasure in courses in
which instructors encourage critical thinking and reasoning.
Teachers can improve themselves through improving the quality of the material
presented and providing help needed for weaker students. Excellent teachers
support acquaintances with students, encourage vigorous learning, make students
relate it to their every day lives, offer beneficial feedback on performance and
respect the way students learn and understand. Tell me, and Ill listen.
Show me, and Ill understand. Involve me, and Ill learn. (Teton Lakota Indian saying
quoted in P.J. Frederick, Student involvement: active learning in large classes in
Maryellen Gleason Weimer Teaching Large Classes Well. San Francisco: Jossey Bass,
1987: 45)
According to D.H. Wulff, J.D. Nyquist and R.D. Abbott (1987) and I quote their words
Comparisons of large classes with small classes suggested, then, that students
perceived the instructors effectiveness in teaching the subject matter, organization

and clarity and use of examples and illustrations to be of significantly higher quality
in the best large classes.
Instructors interest in student learning and instructor/student interaction, however,
were rated of significantly higher quality in the best small classes.
Finally, We conclude our paper with the words of Ernest Boyer (1987) The central
qualities that make for successful teaching can be simply stated: command of the
material to be taught, a contagious enthusiasm for the play of ideas, optimism
about human potential, the involvement of ones students, and - not least sensitivity, integrity, and warmth as a human being. When this combination is
present in the classroom, the impact of a teacher can be powerful and enduring.
(Ernest Boyer, College: The Undergraduate Experience in America. 1987: 154)
We as teachers should relate what goes on in our classrooms to student learning
and outcomes. Such procedures would symbolize significant indicators of quality
education. Sometimes it is not sufficient enough to be acquainted with the
instructor eagerness, understanding, clarity, concern for students and course goals,
organization, meaningful involvement and contact, active learningetc . These
qualities need to be improved and accomplished to be of benefit to everyone. A
great inspection of what works and what doesnt work in the classroom will help us
in creating a professional atmosphere of learning and answer all our inquires
relating to the educational field.
REFERENCE:
Achilles, C.M., Kiser-Kling, J., Owen, J., & Aust, A. (1994). Success starts small: Life
in a small class. Small grant-field-based Research Final Report. Greensboro, NC:
University of North Carolina.
Betts, J.R., & Shkolnik, J.L. (1999). The behavioral effects of variations in class size:
The case of math teachers. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 21(2), 193213.
Blake, H. (1954). Class size: a summary of selected studies in elementary and
secondary public schools, PhD dissertation, Columbia University
Blatchford, P., Goldstein, H., Martin, C., & Browne, W. (2002). A study of class size
effects in English school reception year classes, British Educational Research
Journal, 28 (2), 169-185.
Bourke, S. (1986). How smaller is better: Some relationships between class size,
teaching practices,
and student achievement. American Educational Research Journal, 23(4), 558-571.

Everston, C.M., & Folger, J.K. (1989). Small class, large class: What do teachers do
differently? Paper
at American Educational Research Association, March, 1989, San Francisco.
Finn, J.D., & Achilles, C.N. (1999). Tennessees class size study: Findings,
implications,
misconceptions. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 21(2), 97-109.
Fleming, C. M. (1959). Class size as a variable in the teaching situation. Educational
Research, 1, 35-48.
Frederick, P.J.Student involvement: active learning in large classes in Maryellen
Gleason Weimer Teaching Large Classes W ell. San Francisco: Jossey Bass, 1987: 54.
Fuller, B. (1987). What school factors raise achievement in the third world? Review
of Educational
Research, 57(3), 255-292.
Everston, C.M., & Folger, J.K. (1989). Small class, large class: What do teachers do
differently? Paper
at American Educational Research Association, March, 1989, San Francisco.
Gilbert, Sid (1995) Quality Education: Does Size Class Matter? Research File.
www.aucc.ca/_pdf/english/publications/researchfile/1995-96/vol1n1_e.pdf Glass, G. V., & Smith, M. L. (1978). Meta-analysis of research on the relationship of
class size and achievement. San Francisco: Far West Laboratory for Educational
Research & Development.
Hanushek, E.A. (1992). The trade off between child quantity and child quality.
Journal of Political
Economy, 100, 84117.
Hanushek, E.A. (1998). The Evidence on Class Size. Rochester, NY: W. Allen Wallis
Institute of
Political Economy. Occasional Paper 98-1. http://petty.econ.rochester.edu/eah.htm.
Hamilton, L.C. (1980) Grades, class size and faculty status Teaching Sociology,
8:1, 1980: 57.
Hattie, J. (2005) The paradox of reducing class size and improving learning
outcomes. International Journal of Educational Research, v43 n6 p387-425 2005

Hess, N (2001).Teaching large multilevel classes. New York: Cambridge University

Press.
Jepsen, C., & Rivkin, S. (2002). What is the trade-off between smaller classes and
teacher quality? NBER Working Papers, #9205. Retrieved from http://www.nber.org/
papers/w9205
Johnson, D., Jensen, B., Feeny, S. & Methakullawat, B. (2004). Multivariate analysis
of performance of Victorian schools. Paper presented in Paper presented in Making
Schools Better Submit Class size 31 of 33 Conference, 26-27 August, Melbourne
Institute of Applied Economics and Social Research,
Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
Kiser-Kling, K. (1995). Life in a small teacher-pupil ratio class. Unpublished Ed.D.
dissertation. University of North Carolina, Greensboro.
McGiverin, J., Gilman, D., & Tillitski, C. (1989). A meta-analysis of the relation
between class size
and achievement. Elementary School Journal, 90, 47 56.
Rice, J.M. (1902). Educational research: A test in arithmetic. The Forum, 34. 281297. In Cram, B.
M., An investigation of the influence of class size upon academic attainment and
student satisfaction (Doctoral Dissertation, Arizona State University, 1968).
Dissertation Abstracts International, 29/04A, 1066.
Shapson, S.M., Wright, E.N., Easom, G., & Fitzgerald, J. (1980). An experimental
study of the effects
of class size. American Educational Research Journal, 17(2), 141-152.
Sitkei, E.G. (1968). The effects of class size: A review of the research. Research
Series, 1967-1968. Los Angeles: Los Angeles County Superintendent of Schools.
(ERIC Document reproduction: ED 043 124)
Stecher, B.M. & Bohrnstedt, G.W. (Eds.). (2000). Class size reduction in California:
The 1998-99
evaluation findings. Sacramento, CA: California Department of Education.
Ur, P. (1996). A course in language teaching: Practice and theory. Cambridge:
Cambridge University
Press.

Wmann, L., & West, M.R. (2002). Class-size effects in school systems around the
world: Evidence
from between-grade variation in TIMSS. Retrieved on 5 May 2005 from
ftp://repec.iza.org/RePEc/Discussionpaper/dp485.pdfWood, K. & Linsky, A.S. &.
Straus, M.A.Class size and student evaluations of faculty Journal of Higher
Education, 45:7, 1974: 524-534.
Wulff, D.H & Nyquist, J.D. & Abbott, R.D. Students perceptions of large classes in
Maryellen Gleason Weimer Teaching Large Classes W ell. San Francisco: Jossey Bass,
198