Can Downsizing College Class Sizes Augment Student Outcomes? An Investigation of the Effects of Class Size on Student Learning

Abstract

This investigation uses student course evaluations to examine the relationship between class size and perceived student learning, after student effort and instructor quality have been taken into account. This study found that despite the efforts by students and instructors, class size had a significant negative relationship with perceived student learning.

One Size Does Not Fit All: Toward an Evidence-Based Framework for Determining Online Course Enrollment Sizes in Higher Education

“…It invokes an evaluation of education production versus education costs, consequential implications for resource generation and allocation . The effects of class size on the degree and quality of learning have been debated and studied for decades at the K-12 level of formal education (e.g., Blatchford, Bassett, & Brown, 2011;Sapelli & Illanes, 2016), and, more recently, in higher education (Chapman & Ludlow, 2010;Richardson et al, 2015;Tynan, Ryan, & Lamont-Mills, 2015;Watson, Handel, & Maher, 2016). To this day, however, there has been no conclusive evidence by which university administrators determine enrollment sizes for online courses (Udermann, 2015).…”

“…Recommends studies on class size and students' critical thinking abilities. [ Chapman, L., & Ludlow, L. (2010). Can downsizing college class sizes augment student outcomes?…”

“…In large classes, negative but nonsignificant relationships were found for critical thinking, availability of the instructor, perceived respect the instructor had for students, and provision of feedback (Ravenna, 2012;Sorensen 2014Sorensen , 2015. Student positive evaluations of instructors and satisfaction with courses Bedard & Kuhn, 2008;Chapman & Ludlow, 2010;Cheng, 2011;Kingma & Keefe, 2006;Lee et al, 2011;Mandel & Sussmuth, 2011;Monks & Schmidt, 2011;Sapelli & Illanes, 2016;Shaw, 2013;Udermann, 2015;Walls, 2016 14 Better student learning and performance De Giorgi et al, 2012;Diette & Raghav, 2015;Horning, 2007;Johnson, 2010;Maringe & Sing, 2014;Monks & Schmidt, 2011;Shaw, 2013;Walls, 2016 9 Higher perceived student learning Chapman & Ludlow, 2010 1 Positive effects on faculty associated with workload (e.g., sufficient time to interact, provide feedback, assess/ evaluate student work); responsiveness to students; and higher student evaluations of instructors Chapman & Ludlow, 2010;Curriculum Committee, 2012;Freeman, 2015;Goldman, 2012;Tynan et al, 2015 5 Sense of group cohesion and connectedness, and faculty participation that encouraged student participation Colwell & Jenks, 2004;Haynie, 2014;Monks & Schmidt, 2011 3 In summary, the research reviewed for this study consistently linked smaller online classes to student development; student engagement with challenging material; higher order thinking;...…”

“…New learning technologies developed in the early 21st century prompted universities to develop distance learning strategies. Many university administrators pursued market expansion through the development of online courses, and with them an increase in student enrollment for purposes of revenue generation and/or cost reduction Chapman & Ludlow, 2010;Colwell & Jenks, 2004;Diette & Raghav, 2015;Jones, 2015;Maringe & Sing, 2014;Mupinga & Maughan, 2008;Pelech et al, 2013;. In the rapidly changing technology-driven conditions within universities, an upward creep of online class sizes emerged and began to raise faculty concerns that educational effectiveness could be threatened (Jones, 2015;Ravenna, 2012;Seethamraju, 2014;Smith, Brashen, Minor, & Anthony, 2015;Snowball, 2014).…”

“…Alternatively, perhaps findings on class sizes could lead to implications that would be perceived as a threat to university finances, or pique political sensitivities regarding varying populations' access to equal educational opportunity (Colwell & Jenks, 2004;Curriculum Committee, 2011Diette & Raghav, 2015;Maringe & Sing, 2014;. Whatever the reasons, no existing convergence of research evidence provides guidance for determining optimal online class sizes at different educational levels and under varying contextual conditions-that is, no one size fits all (Beattie & Thiele, 2016;Bettinger, Doss, Loeb, Rogers, & Taylor, 2017;Bristol & Kyarsgaard, 2012;Chapman & Ludlow, 2010;Cheng, 2011;Colwell & Jenks, 2004;Curriculum Committee, 2012;Freeman, 2015;Haynie, 2014;Hewitt & Brett, 2007;Horning, 2007;Johnson, 2010;Kim, 2013;Lee, Dapremont, & Sasser, 2011;Liu, 2012;Mandernach & Holbeck, 2016;Morrison, 2015;Mupinga & Maughan, 2008;Parks-Stamm, Zafonte, & Palenque, 2016;Qiu, Hewitt, & Brett, 2012;Ravenna, 2012;Roby, Ashe, Singh, & Clark, 2013;Seaton & Schwier, 2014;Shaw, 2013;Sorensen, 2014Sorensen, , 2015Taft, Perkowski, & Martin, 2011;Tynan et al, 2015;Walls, 2016;Watson et al, 2016).…”