Introduction
One of the most enduring and vociferous debates in education over recent years has been
about the educational advantages of small class sizes. Opinion has been consistently
polarised between those who claim that small classes lead to a better quality of teaching
and learning, and those who argue that the effects are likely to be modest at best and that
there are other more cost effective initiatives. The first view is consistent with the view
of many teachers and was given support by the Tennessee STAR research study which
employed a powerful design involving random allocation of pupils and teachers to three
classes within schools: 1. small, 2. ‘regular’, and 3. ‘regular’ with teacher aide. Children
were followed for four years from kindergarten to Grade 3. It was found that children in
small classes performed better in literacy and maths, and that there were particular
benefits for children from ethnic minorities (Finn and Achilles, 1999; Nye, Hedges and
Konstantopoulos, 2000). Recently some academics have argued in support of smaller
classes as a cornerstone of educational policy (Achilles, 1999; Wang and Finn, 2000).
This view has led to costly class size reduction initiatives in a number of States in the
USA, notably California, as well in other countries around the world. It is also reflected
in the UK Government’s commitment to a maximum of 30 in a class at reception and
KS1 (5-7 years).
The second view has found expression in the opinions of politicians and policy makers,
worried by the enormous costs involved in hiring extra teachers. In the UK, the
Government agency OFSTED (1995), on the basis of inspectors’ reports, concluded that
class size made little difference and this was used by Government ministers of the day to
support no change in investment in smaller classes. This sceptical view of the effect of
class size has also been taken by academics like Slavin (1989) and Hanushek (1999)
who have argued in support of alternative uses of funding, e.g., teacher training.
The debate shows no signs of being settled, and the need for research evidence to inform
policy is still pressing. Even though in the UK there is a cap on class sizes above 30 in
the early years, a recent OECD report has shown that class sizes and pupil teacher ratios
in the UK are still amongst the highest in terms of international comparisons (Education
at a Glance, 2002). Moreover there is still a lot of variability in class sizes. Many
teachers would consider that 29 children in a class, when aged 5 -7 years, is still too
many.
There is a need to distinguish between the effects of class size and pupil teacher
ratios, which are allied but distinct entities (Blatchford, Goldstein and Mortimore,
1998). Put simply, is a class of 30 with two adults equivalent to two small classes of
15? If so then this would mean that it is the number of teachers to children that is
crucial rather than the size of class. However, it may be, as argued by Wang and Finn
(2000) that there is something special about a small class. It may encourage more
shared responsibility and less distraction, and this makes it different in kind, and not
reducible to a simple ratio of children to teachers. Debate about the effects of class
size differences has also, in the UK at least, become connected to the recent
Government investment in more Teaching Assistants in classrooms. The drive to
increase their numbers is controversial, with the teaching unions uneasy about what
they see as a possible devaluation of the teacher’s role.