CLASS SIZE IN CORRELATION WITH STUDENTS’ PERFORMANCE IN ENGLISH LANGUAGE

1785

AMERICAN RESEARCH THOUGHTS ISSN: 2392 – 876X Available online at: www.researchthoughts.us

http://dx.doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.1425134

Volume 1 │ Issue 7 │ May 2015

Impact Factor: 2.0178 (UIF)

CLASS SIZE IN CORRELATION WITH

STUDENTS’ PERFORMANCE IN ENGLISH

LANGUAGE

Hysen Kasumi, Ph.Dc.

English Faculty, AAB University, Prishtinë, Kosovë

Abstract: Numerous indicators of crucial role exist for improvements of the students' performance

during the learning process in classrooms, to include the level of teaching and learning, teachers’

performance, students’ motivation and teaching methods. However, the class size has its impact over

the successful performance of students, which is the main topic of this scientific research. Regarding

the impact of class size, or more precisely, the number of students in the classroom, in student

performance, has developed an empirical research which results are reflected in this paper. The survey

was conducted in several schools of higher education in some Kosovo municipalities. by the outcomes

introduced it is intended to prove a dilemma that has existed for a long time for classes with smaller

number of students which tend to be more successful compared to the classes with higher number of

students. Furthermore, the review of the literature, is an important part of the paper, where intertwine

various theories regarding this issue, bringing different experiences of OECD countries regarding the

impact of class size on student performance. Finally, the performance of the students was tested in

different class sizes at the end of the school year to see if there is a difference in their outcome.

Key Words: class size, teaching, student performance, schools in Kosovo.

INTRODUCTION

The class size is not controversial only in the Republic of Kosovo, but almost in most

European countries and beyond. Classes with a smaller number of students often

perceived in a way that allows teachers to focus more on the individual needs of

students and to reduce the amount of time in the classroom, teachers spend on other

things; as in discipline, or disruptions between students. There are a lot of authors who

did research if the class size has an impact on students’ outcomes. However, there are

http://www.researchthoughts.us/

Hysen Kasumi- CLASS SIZE IN CORRELATION WITH STUDENTS’ PERFORMANCE IN ENGLISH

LANGUAGE

1786 AMERICAN RESEARCH THOUGHTS- Volume 1 │ Issue 7 │2015

still debates which go on and which will continue. What we did in our research work

was the literature review about the class size as well as an empirical research to see if

there is really a big gap in students’ performance based on the class size or with other

words if the big number of students in class has an impact on the decline of students’

performance.

LITERATURE REVIEW

Class size is controversial not only in Kosovo, but almost even in most European

countries and beyond. According to (OECD, "Class Size and Ratio of Students to

Teaching Staff" Education at a Glance , 2006), the classes with smaller number of

students is often perceived to allow teachers to focus more on the individual needs of

students and to reduce the amount class time, teachers spend on other things such as

discipline or disruption among students. Also, class size has to do with quality of class

as well as students' own performance.

A number of factors influence the interaction between teachers and students in

the classroom such as: educational course, the division of the teacher's time between the

teaching and other tasks and grouping of students within the classroom and teaching

practice in groups or teams.

Referring to my teaching experience where the number of students exceeds 40

students in class, work in groups is almost impossible, compared with private schools

of foreign languages where the number of students does not exceed the number 15

where the possibility of interactivity between teacher and students as well as between

students themselves is many times higher. At the same time, the teacher can spend

much more time with each student individually, as in consultations and as well

working with them, which would be almost impossible in the public schools where

classes are overcrowded with students, and the teacher will spend more time on

discipline, motivating students in learning and their concentration on a task. At the

same time, the assessment of students can be different.

Small class (with fewer students), the teacher has an idea, anticipation and

complete records for each student and also for their achievements or full performance.

On the other hand, large classes (with more than 40 pupils), the motivation of learning

and also the assessment of learning cannot be at the right level, because in most of the

time the assessment is made only through tests or essays as teacher does not have an


LANGUAGE


idea in advance, or assessment for his students during the academic year due to the

large number of students in class.

The same aspect can be found in (OECD, "Class Size and Ratio of Students to

Teaching Staff" Education at a Glance, 2006) stating that there is a sufficient change in

class size to assess the real impact of this variable in student performance. Also, the low

performance policies to groups of students in smaller classes in order to pay more

attention to them can be compensated for the increased performance profit from classes

with smaller number of students.

On the other hand, the classroom organization should allow teachers and

students to organize and develop group work and practical activities. Different teaching

tools should be available to students in the classroom and in other parts of the school

building (corridors, library, reading room, etc.). Schools should provide students easy

access to the rooms and in different learning environments; they must be organized in

such a way that communication between directors, teachers and students to be

facilitated. Students should be provided with a suitable place for meetings, discussions,

learning and other social activities.

According to OECD statistics (OECD, http://www.oecd.org, 2011), at a primary

level or school, the average class size has about 21 students per class. This number is

about 34 students in Korea and drops in Denmark, Greece, Iceland, Luxembourg,

Portugal, the Slovak Republic and Switzerland, where the number of students per class

is about 20. Whereas, in lower secondary schools in OECD countries the number of

students in an average class size is around 24 students per class.

The number of students in the classroom according to OECD is accounted in this

way: in a school with 48 full-time students and also with eight full-time teachers, the

ratio of students to teaching staff is equal to six. In this case, if the hours of work for the

teachers are estimated to be 35 hours, including 10 hours of teaching and if instruction

time for each student is 40 hours per week, then whatever the grouping of students will

be, the average size of the number of students in school must be calculated as follows.

Estimated class size 6 students per teacher (40 hours of instruction per student) 10 hours

of teaching per teacher = 24 students per class. (OECD, "Class Size and Ratio of Students

to Teaching Staff" Education at a Glance, 2006, pp. 360- 372) Kennedy and Siegfried

(1997) cited by (Chapman, L., & Ludlow, L., 2010) found out that the classes with the

bigger number of students had no impact on the decline of their students’ performance

in their economy classes. While other scientists have found that classes with large


LANGUAGE


numbers of students actually associated with a decline in achievement and student

performance. Also according to Millet, Payne, Dwoer, Sticker & Alexian, (2008, p, 18)

found out that it is discouraging to think that external factors such as class size may

have an impact with a more negative significance in learning.

Also, (Jepsen, C., & Rivkin, S., 2009) stated that in 1996 California had a very

expensive reform in education in US history. They did the reduction of the number of

students per class for 10 students, from 30 to 20 students. In the research, they used

social experiment and innovative statistical methods to identify the causal effects of

classes with few students holding constant the quality of teachers.

According to studies by Algrist and Lovy (1999), Hoxby (2000) and Rivkin,

Hanusheh and Kain (2005) cited by (Chapman, L., & Ludlow, L., 2010) they identified

reliable exogenous variation for class size the reason to learn more about the effect

(impact) class sizes in students’ outcomes or performance, in Israel, Connecticut and

respectively in Texas. Except Toxby (2000), studies found out that classes with fewer

students significantly upgrade their achievements in early grades (grade 5 and below)

and the effects tend to be larger for students with smaller benefits in learning. Johnson

states that the performance was slightly better in essay writing and mid-term exams in

small classes (Johnson, 2010).

However, performance on quizzes and final exams was better in larger classes.

Zietz and Cochron (1997) found out that the increase in class sizes beyond 30 students

had a negative impact on classroom tests. Large classes are less likely to make

compositions and oral presentations and more likely to mark students with multiple-

choice-exams and tests. Also, in large classes instructors-teachers generally use lectures

as the only method of teaching, despite the small classes which are more interactive and

more appealing (attractive) and individualized and with the great personal

involvement. (Ludlow 1996; Marsh 1987; Glass and Smith 1979). Many authors have

shown that the class size varies according to the type of interaction in the classroom.

Classes that require active participation of students are small. Smaller classes tend to be

effective since students actively process the material rather than just listen and read

(Johnson, 2010). The author emphasizes that the constructivists and behaviorists see the

class size from different perspectives. Constructivist point out that smaller classes are

more productive as we give more emphasis on student engagement and interaction or

working in pairs and groups among students by having more effect on their learning.


LANGUAGE


On the other hand, the behaviorists think that the lessons in large classes are more

productive because they represent the behavior of teachers as primary/basic factors in

the students’ outcome. But recognizing the effects of learning (Johnson, 2010) states that

they are contingent by the goals of teaching and teachers themselves provides

substantial interconnections between class size and class activities and furthermore

provides that small classes are better suited as constructivist point out.

Small classes would also be found in the working of (Dills, A. K., & Mulholland,

S. E., 2010) when comparing learning in public and private schools. They believe that

private schools were better due to three aspects: private schools put students with lower

skills (low-Ability-Students), in small classes rather than other students, private schools

also put in small classes students with poor or bad behavior and third reason or aspect

is that private schools impose teachers with special features to deal with such students.

All these characteristics mentioned above had a reason which is: students with lower

skills and also problematic students to be equal with other students, always by working

in small classes and at the same time with special-feature teachers chosen only to

enhance students’ performance.

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

The literature was consulted regarding the impact of class size on the students’

achievements. We analyzed the MEST statistics on the number of students per class in

high schools.

An experiment in urban and rural classes was conducted to see the changes in

student performance while teaching with different teaching methods, as well as in

classes with different number of students.

A sample of 150 students was part of the experiment for our experimental and

control groups in urban school "Hivzi Sylejmani" in Fushë Kosovo and rural school

"Ulpijana" in Gadime – Lypjan.

At the beginning of the academic year the students of tenth grade were tested

with KET test (Key English Test). This testing was applied to see if the students of tenth

grade have the necessary knowledge which is required for the tenth grade according to

the Kosovo curriculum. At the end of the academic year, students’ knowledge was

tested again, with PET test (Preliminary English Test) not only to measure the students’

performance, but also to compare the experimental group’s performance who were


LANGUAGE


taught using different teaching methods and at the same time to see if class size has

played any role in students’ outcome.

RESULTS

Regarding the impact of class size or (number of students per class) in students’

performance it is concluded that the experimental groups as well as control groups in

urban and rural area, where the number of students per class was significantly different

there was not a significant impact in the students’ final performance/outcomes.

This can be proven as follows: urban experimental group was r = 53 which mean

that there were 53 students in the experimental class and rural group was r = 15 or 15

students in the class. Skills performance was as follows: reading skill M = 12.68 for the

urban group and M = 13.95 for rural group, with only M = 1.27 differences. Writing skill

for the urban group M = 4.20 and M = 4.73 rural groups, with the margin M = 0:53.

Listening skill for urban group M = 11.71 and for rural group M = 11.26 with a

difference of M = 0.45. Talking skill for the urban group M = 18.65 while rural group

mean was of M = 19:58 with a mean difference of only M = 0.93.

These means in English skills give us an overall performance result for both

groups as urban and rural areas with these statistics: urban group experimental total

mean is M = 47.26 while rural group’s experimental total mean is M = 49.53. This leads

to a mean difference of only M = 2.27. Based on this data, we come to the conclusion

that the difference between the experimental group and rural urban experimental with

mean of M = 2.27 is not a high significance, so we can say that the number of students in

the class had no impact on their final performance regarding the English language.

Even with two control groups in urban and as well as in rural areas, there were

no significant differences in terms of student performance in English language where r

= 51 for urban group and r = 17 for the rural group. There was no difference in the

performance of students in terms of language skills and also on their performance in

their final outcome. This can be proven as follows: the skill of reading in urban control

group with r = 51, (51 students in the class) reached a mean of M = 8:52 and rural control

group where r = 17, (17 students in the class) had a mean of M = 10.79. The difference in

terms of reading skill between groups was of M = 2.27.

It should be noted that the performance in terms of CEFR for every skill is 25%.

Regarding the writing skill of controlling urban group the mean was of M = 2.98 and


LANGUAGE


control rural group with a mean of M = 1.70. The difference between the groups in

terms of the skill of writing was M = 1.28. Listening skill mean for urban control group

was M = 8.25, despite the rural control group which had a mean performance of M =

6:41, which lead us to come to the conclusion that the difference between groups for the

skill of writing was of M = 1.84. Speaking skill for control urban group had the mean of

M = 10.85 while the control rural group had the mean of M = 12.79.

The difference of performance in the speaking skill for both groups was M = 1.94.

Eventually statistics show that the total performance of the control group in terms of the

English language was almost similar where there was no statistically significant

difference. The urban control group according to statistics had a mean of overall

students’ performance of M = 30.62 while rural control group’s overall performance had

a mean of M = 31.71. The overall difference in performance for both groups was a mean

of M = 1.09. This difference of M = 1.09 is not considered of high significance in terms of

the impact of class size (number of pupils per class) in total students’ performance.

Therefore, without doubt we came to the conclusion that the class size did not

affect the performance of students in neither of the groups which were involved in our

research. Neither in the experimental groups, where the difference in the number of

students per class was about 3 to 1 and where the difference in mean was only M = 2.27,

nor in control groups where ratio between the number of students per class was also 3

to 1 for urban group. Finally, again the overall difference in students’ performance was

with the mean of M = 1:09, which was not significantly important.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

To conclude, there is always a doubt that the classes are very big in Republic of Kosovo

schools and a lot of scholars take this as a reason why our students sometimes are not

so good in their performance of English language. Through the literature review, we

found out that Kosovo is not the only country in the world that has big classes. Korea is

a country that has 34 students per class, and still is considered as a country with one the

best educational system in the world. Furthermore, referring out to empirical research

we can conclude that neither in experimental groups, nor in control groups there was

no significant difference in the final students’ performance. Finally, the class size neither

had correlation, nor impact with the students’ outcome related to lessons of English

language.


LANGUAGE


REFERENCES

1. Chapman, L., & Ludlow, L. (2010). Can Downsizing College Class Sizes

Augment Student Outcomes? An Investigation of the Effects of Class Size on

Student Learning. Journal Of General Education, 59(2), 105-123.

2. Dills, A. K., & Mulholland, S. E. (2010). 4. A Comparative Look at Private and

Public Schools' Class Size Determinants. Education Economics, 18(4), 435-454.

3. Flower, A., McDaniel, S. C., & Jolivete, K. (2011). A literature Review of Research

Quality and Effective Practices in Alternative Education Settings. Education and

Treatment of Children, 34(4), 489-510.

4. Jepsen, C., & Rivkin, S. (2009). Class Size Reduction and Student Achievement:

The Potential Tradeoff between Teacher Quality and Class Size. Journal Of

Human Resources, 44(1), 223-250.

5. Johnson, I. Y. (2010). Class Size and Student Performance at a Public Research

University: A Cross-Classified Model. Research In Higher Education, 51(8) , 701-

723.

6. OECD. (2006). "Class Size and Ratio of Students to Teaching Staff" Education at a

Glance. Paris: OECD publishing.

7. OECD. (2011). http://www.oecd.org. Retrieved Decembar Friday, 2014, from

http://www.oecd.org/edu/skills-beyond-school: http://www.oecd.org/edu/skills-

beyond-school/48631144.pdf