----

##  Capitalizing on Small Class Size. ERIC Digest Number 136.                    

Efforts to reduce class size, particularly in the primary grades,               have been at the forefront of discussions about education for over              two decades. In recent years talk has turned to action as at least              21 states and the federal government have initiated                             class-size-reduction (CSR) initiatives. For the 2000-2001 school                year, the federal government has allocated $1.3 billion to CSR in               grades K-3, up from $1.2 billion the previous year. States are                  contributing even more money; the annual cost of California's CSR               initiative alone is now over $1.5 billion. 
Thousands of schools               across the country suddenly have smaller classes, and now school                boards and administrators face a new challenge: making sure the                 enormous investment in CSR pays off in higher student achievement.              Should school officials rest content in the hope that achievement               gains will be an automatic byproduct of smaller classes? Or should              they proactively initiate strategies to capitalize on CSR? 
This               Digest explores several topics that are prominent in school                     districts' efforts to derive the greatest benefit from smaller                  classes. WHAT TEACHING STRATEGIES ARE MOSST EFFECTIVE IN SMALL                CLASSESResearch does not yet give a clear answer to this                    question. As a consortium of researchers that is evaluating the                 progress of CSR in California points out, "This issue is largely                unexplored, and the designers of professional development programs              are largely without guidance. Not surprisingly, districts seem                  unaware of how they might better support teachers in small classes              in terms of practice" (Bohrnstedt and Stecher 1999). 
Research                 consistently has found that teachers do not significantly change                their teaching practices when they move from larger to smaller                  classes. This is the case in California, where researchers found                that teachers' content coverage, grouping practices, and pedagogical            strategies did not substantially change under CSR. The teachers in              smaller classes did spend a little less time disciplining students              and somewhat more time with poor readers (Bohrnstedt and                        Stecher). 
Achilles (1999) contends that, because classroom                    management is easier with fewer students, teachers do not need to               change their instructional practices to achieve the benefit from                CSR. That benefit comes automatically, he reasons, because teachers             have more time to use strategies that are effective in any setting,             such as instruction guided by a preplanned curriculum, clear and                focused instruction, close monitoring of learning progress,                     repetition until children understand the content, positive personal             interactions, and appropriate use of instructional                              groups. 
Tennessee's Student Teacher Achievement Ratio (STAR)                  project teachers reported that smaller classes increased their                  ability to monitor student behavior and learning, give more                     immediate and more individualized reteaching, offer more enrichment,            achieve a better match between their instruction and each child's               ability, gain more detailed knowledge of each child's needs as a                learner, and use a variety of instructional approaches to meet                  learners' needs (Bain and Achilles 1986). Other teachers have cited             the use of "participation in establishing classroom rules, learning             centers, field trips, and peer tutors" as further tools that promote            success in the smaller classroom (Achilles 1999). 
Finally,                    Ornstein (1995) points to Benjamin Bloom's 1984 synthesis of                    research on teaching and instruction as an enduring guide to                    effective classroom practices. According to Bloom, the five                     variables having the greatest effect on student achievement are                 tutorial instruction (1:1 ratio), instructional reinforcement,                  feedback and correction, cues and explanations, and student class               participation. Other effective variables are improved reading and               studying skills, cooperative learning, graded homework, classroom               morale, and initial cognitive prerequisites. WHY IS PROFESSIONAL              DEVELOPMENT ESSENTIAL?High-quality instruction is crucial to the            success of CSR; without an adequate supply of trained, competent                instructors to fill the new classrooms, CSR may actually do a                   disservice to students. An evaluation of CSR in California found                that the number of teachers without full credentials-meaning that               they were hired with emergency permits, waivers, or internship                  credentials-rose from 1 percent to over 12 percent                              statewide (Bohrnstedt and Stecher 1999). 
Another recent                       study (Shields and others 1999) found that more than 1 million of               California's 5.7 million students are enrolled in schools staffed by            such a large percentage of underqualified teachers that the schools             are effectively "dysfunctional." These numbers illustrate how                   serious the issue of underqualified teachers can become. School                 districts can combat this "dysfunction" by offering professional                development for all teachers. 
Teacher training in Success Starts              Small, an observational study of teaching behaviors in small classes            during 1993-94, offers an example of successful professional                    development. During the first year of CSR in Tennessee, teachers                spent twenty hours studying strategies to promote active learning in            first-grade students. The seminars included "thematic planning,                 language approaches, seminar discussions, using blocks,                         manipulatives, and computer-assisted learning." After the seminars              ended, teachers visited small classes in another district and                   participated in weekly, grade-level collaboration (Achilles and                 others 1995). 
Joan McRobbie (1996) emphasizes that staff                      development should be "on-going, school-based and geared to create a            professional community where teachers find out together what works              for their particular students." This approach to teacher training               allows teachers and administrators optimum flexibility. Along with              teamwork, many studies have pointed to mentoring as a tool for                  education of novice teachers. WHERE CAN SCHOOLS FIND THE                      FACILITIES FOR NEW CLASSROOMS?CSR, on top of growing enrollments            in many areas, has created a nationwide need for new classrooms. The            most common source of extra classroom space is portables. Portables             generally house one fully functional classroom and are able to fit              on extra school property like field areas, playgrounds, and parking             lots. The approximate cost of a portable is between $28,000                     and $54,000. 
Some school districts have chosen to reconfigure                 present facilities, sometimes sacrificing other programs. Schools               have remodeled libraries, art classrooms, science labs, gyms,                   computer labs, music rooms, and faculty lounges into                            classrooms. 
Upon exhausting all onsite resources, Oakland schools             sought facility donations from churches and other nonprofit                     organizations (McRobbie 1996). Some districts have chosen to reopen             closed schools and enter into joint-use agreements with local public            entities. These agreements allow schools to share the use of                    libraries, parks, auditoriums, and recreation facilities with the               public (Joint Legislative Audit Committee 1999). 
When it is not               possible to add classroom space (or even hire new teachers), schools            may try to obtain the benefits of small class size by creating                  smaller instructional groups through team teaching or creative                  scheduling. The goal is to assign a qualified teacher to a smaller              group of students for at least part of a day, focusing on                       high-priority topics such as reading and math. HOW CAN SMALL                  SCHOOLS BEST USE THE CSR FUNDS THEY RECEIVE?State and federal               CSR funds allow many school districts to hire new teachers and build            new classrooms, but when the money is allocated in proportion to                student population (the allocations are based 80 percent on poverty,            20 percent on enrollment), smaller districts do not have these                  options. Consider the 90-student Arthur County, Nebraska, school                district, which receives $1,417 for its federal allotment-not enough            to hire even a half-time teacher (Arfstrom 2000). What can small                schools like this do to make the most of the funds they will                    receive? 
Starting in school year 200-2001, districts can use 25               percent of federal CSR funds for professional development, up from              15 percent the first year. Waivers are available for other uses of              funds also. Under Department of Education guidelines for the next               school year, options include helping teachers learn new skills to               take advantage of smaller class size; reducing the size of                      kindergarten classes; providing extra pay for veteran teachers who              serve as mentors to newly recruited teachers; combining the funds               with Title I schoolwide programs; and preparing teachers to work                with diverse student populations, including students with                       disabilities and limited English proficiency. Small districts that              do not receive sufficient funds to hire a teacher may use all their             funds to support professional development. 
To gain some of the                small-class benefit, smaller schools could implement a parallel                 block schedule. In this system, one-half of the class arrives at                school one hour before the other students, and the half that arrives            on time stays an hour after the "early-birds" are dismissed. With               this system, the district can reduce class size for one hour every              day, without the need to hire another teacher (Egelson and others               1996). WHAT SHOULD BE THE FOCUS OF DISTRICT-LEVEL CLASS-SIZE                  POLICY?Gaining the benefit from smaller classes begins with a               districtwide policy that establishes concrete goals (such as a                  maximum of 18 students in K-3 classes) and sets clear priorities on             use of funds. Consider the following points when creating a                     policy: 
* Target money and other resources to minority and                    low-income students who stand the most to gain from CSR. Districts              can target their federal CSR funds to the neediest schools. 
* Make            better teaching and learning the cornerstone of CSR. "No                        organizational arrangement, including small class size, can                     compensate for poor teaching" (McRobbie, Finn, and Harman 1998). Use            some funding for training inexperienced teachers. 
* Assess                    facility needs and plan for reconfiguration of existing physical                plants or for new construction. Decide whether CSR is worth                     displacement of other programs or activities. 
* Apply for waivers             to leverage federal and state funds in pursuit of district                      priorities. Set aside funds for activities such as community                    meetings, teacher training, and curriculum planning. 
* Continually            evaluate the results of CSR. Monitor not just changes in                        pupil-teacher ratios but teachers' classroom practices, the                     unforeseen displacement of other programs, and unexpected                       costs. 
As well as weighing the costs and benefits of CSR                      implementation, policymakers should have a list of "decision rules"             allowing them to weigh the advantages and disadvantages of expanding            and modifying CSR policy. Among these issues should be the pace of              implementation, the teacher supply and demand, and the targeting of             resources for the students most in need (Bohrnstedt and Stecher). A             flexible CSR policy allows the most beneficial transition to smaller            classes. RESOURCESAchilles, Charles M. Let's Put Kids First,              Finally: Getting Class Size Right. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press,             1999. 219 pages. ED 432 057. 
Achilles, C.M.; Karen Kiser-Kling;               Ann Aust; and Jean Owen. "A Study of Reduced Class Size in Primary              Grades of a Fully Chapter 1-Eligible School, Success Starts Small."             San Francisco: American Educational Research Association,                       1995. 
Arfstrom, Kari. "Small Districts Overlooked by Class Size               Initiative." The School Administrator (February 2000): 55. 
Bain,              H. P., and C. M. Achilles. "Interesting Developments on Class Size."            Phi Delta Kappan 67 (May 1996): 662-65. 
Bohrnstedt, George W., and            Brian Stecher, Eds. Class Size Reduction in California: Early                   Evaluation Findings, 1996-1998. Palo Alto, California: CSR Research             Consortium, 1999. 157 pages. 
Bradley, Ann. "Quality Crisis Seen in            California Teaching Ranks." Education Week XIX, 15 (December 8,                 1999): 1, 9. 
Egelson, Paula; Patrick Harman; and C.M.                         Achilles. "Does Class Size Make a Difference?" Greensboro, NC: South            Eastern Regional Vision for Education, 1996. 
Joint Legislative                Audit Committee. "California's Public Schools: A Needs Assessment."             Sacramento, California: Author, 1999. 
McRobbie, Joan. "Smaller                Classes Aim to Launch Early Literacy." Focus Magazine. (WestEd).                Fall 1996. ED 423 604. 
McRobbie, Joan; Jeremy D. Finn; and Patrick            Harman. "Class Size Reduction: Lessons Learned from Experience."                Policy Brief No. 23. (WestEd). August                                           1998. (http://www.wested.org/policy/pb_ft_csr23.htm) 
Ornstein,                Allan C. "Teaching Whole-Group Classrooms: What Principals Should               Know." NASSP Bulletin 79, 570 (April  1995): 70-81. EJ 501                      279. 
Shields, Patrick  M.; Camille E.  Esch; Daniel C. Humphrey;              Viki M. Young; Margaret Gaston; and Harvey  Hunt. Teaching and                  California's Future. The Status of the Teaching Profession: Research            Findings and Policy Recommendations. A Report to the Teaching and               California's Future Task Force. Santa Cruz, California: The Center              for the Future of Teaching and Learning, 1999. 158 pages. 
A                   Product of the ERIC Clearinghouse on Educational Management, College            of Education, University of Oregon, Eugene, Oregon                              97403-5207 
This publication was prepared with funding from the                Office of Educational Research and Improvement, U.S. Department of              Education, under contract No. ED-99-C0-0011.  The ideas and opinions            expressed in this Digest do not necessarily reflect the positions or            policies of OERI, ED, or the Clearinghouse. This Digest is in the               public domain and may be freely reproduced. The text of this Digest             may be viewed electronically at http://eric.uoregon.edu (EA 030 338).        **Title:** Capitalizing on Small Class Size. ERIC Digest Number 136.                    **Document Type:** Information Analyses---ERIC Information Analysis Products (IAPs) (071); Information Analyses---ERIC Digests (Selected) in Full Text (073); **Available From:** ERIC Clearinghouse on Educational Management, 5207 University of                Oregon, Eugene, OR 97403-5207.                                               **Descriptors:** Board of Education Policy,  Class Size, Educational Facilities,                 Elementary Secondary Education, Professional Development, Teacher               Student Ratio,  Teaching Methods                                             **Identifiers:**  Class Size Reduction, ERIC Digests                                          
###
[Return to ERIC Digest Search Page]