Nursing Students’ Perception of Class Size and Its Impact on Test Performance: A Pilot Study

Abstract

The combination of increasing student enrollment in baccalaureate nursing programs and the faculty shortage has contributed to larger class sizes that may affect both student satisfaction and learning. The purpose of this study was to identify baccalaureate nursing students' satisfaction with enrollment in small and large nursing courses. The authors also sought to determine whether a significant difference existed between test scores of students enrolled in small and large nursing courses. A survey was completed by 110 students, and test scores were compared between students in a small and a large nursing class using analysis of variance. The findings indicated that perceived satisfaction of students was significantly higher for those enrolled in the small nursing course versus the large course; however, no significant difference was found between test scores. To improve student satisfaction that can positively affect student retention, further research is needed on class size in the nursing discipline.

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

“…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;...…”

“…Occurs between faculty and students and among students. Batts, 2008;Beattie & Thiele, 2016;Colwell & Jenks, 2004;Goldman, 2012;Haynie, 2014;Hewitt & Brett, 2007;Holzweiss et al, 2014;Horning, 2007;Jones, 2015;Kim, 2013;Kingma & Keefe, 2006;Lee et al, 2011;Maringe & Sing, 2014;Parks-Stamm et al, 2016;Qiu et al, 2012;Ravenna, 2012;Shaw, 2013;Sorensen, 2014Sorensen, , 2015Tynan et al, 2015;Udermann, 2015;Walls, 2016 30 Example of interactive pedagogy: Student learning about how to do research is heavily dependent on interaction. Students arrive at the challenge of conducting research by first acquiring foundational knowledge about types of research, research methods, data collection, statistical and qualitative data analysis, and drawing inferences from results.…”

“…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).…”

The influence of context on the teaching and learning of undergraduate nursing students: A scoping review

“…This sub-theme relates to all the structural issues -the ways in which the parts of a system are arranged -that may influence the creation of an environment conducive to learning. Physical factors that negatively influenced learning experiences included large class sizes [21] and lack of restrooms, facilities, space, equipment and learning tools. [11,[22][23][24][25] A specific physical aspect that improved learning experiences was the availability of infrastructure to enable the use of technology in teaching and learning.…”