Education: Critiquing the critiques.This weblog entry is part of a continuing paragraph by paragraph critique of Jay Greene’s essay about myths in education.

The introduction is here.

Jay Greene’s “Education Myths,” paragraph 30
The class size myth (continued)

The centerpiece of class-size research was the STAR project, a 1980s experiment conducted by the state of Tennessee. Students were randomly assigned to one of three types of classes as they progressed from kindergarten through third grade. The first type was a regular-sized class of around 24 students with one teacher. The second option was a regular-sized class with a teacher plus a teacher’s aide. The third alternative was a small class of around 15 students with one teacher.

Here’s a bit more detail about Project STAR. It involved over 6,000 students, in 329 classrooms in 79 schools, in the first year, and almost 12,000 students overall took part in this 4 year study. Students were randomly assigned to small classes (13-17), a regular class (22-26), or a full-size class with a teacher’s aide. Of course, to some teachers, 22-26 would be great. There are school districts dealing with 30-40 elementary students per class. Project STAR was an intensive study that provided a lot of information about the benefits of class size.

Jay Greene’s “Education Myths,” paragraph 31
The class size myth (continued)

The study found that students in the small classes showed a one-time benefit in test scores as compared to students in regular-sized classes (the teacher’s aide resulted in no significant difference). The increase, however, was not large–the equivalent of an eight-percentile-point improvement in performance for a student starting in the middle of the pack. But follow-up research found that 44 percent of students in STAR’s small classes took college entrance exams, compared to 40 percent among regular-class students–not so trivial a difference. If we could be reasonably sure that this increase resulted from smaller classes, and could be replicated on a large scale without sacrificing other educational priorities, then class-size reduction would be solidly supported. Unfortunately, the evidence does not allow us to reach those conclusions.

Greene is wrong about the results. He claims the benefits were modest, and that it had only a one-time benefit. Jeremy D. Finn, professor in the Graduate School of Education, State University of New York, Buffalo, who was an external evaluator for the study, says differently:

…kindergarten students who attended small classes were about one-half month ahead of students who attended larger classes in reading and about 1.6 months ahead in mathematics. In grade 1, the small-class advantage was 1.3 months in reading and 2.8 months in mathematics. By spring of grade 3, the advantage in reading was 4.5 months (or about half a school year). [1]

Half a school year is hardly a modest gain by anyone’s standards, I would think. Besides this gain, students who where placed in small classes continued to reap the benefits in later years.

Post-experimental years (4-8). After all students returned to full-size classes, the benefits of small classes continued to be statistically significant through all subsequent grades in all subject areas. [2]

Although not an emphasis of the study, other benefits where found when class size is small:

  • teacher morale is improved in small classes;
  • teachers spend more time on direct instruction and less on classroom management when classes are smaller;
  • there are fewer disruptions in small classes and fewer discipline problems;
  • students’ engagement in learning is increased;
  • in-grade retentions are reduced;
  • dropout rates may be reduced;
  • and, greater numbers of students who attend small classes in the early grades elect to take SAT or ACT tests in high school — that is, aspirations to attend college are increased, especially among African American students. [3]

Smaller class size in the primary grades is not just a luxury, it helps children succeed.

Notes & References:

  1. Finn, Jeremy D. March 202. “Small Classes in American Schools: Research, Practice, And Politics,” Phi Delta Kappan, Vol. 82, No. 7, March 2002, pp. 551-560. p. 553.
  2. Ibid. p. 553.
  3. Ibid. p. 555.