Running head: CLASS SIZE: IMPACT AND METHODS 1

Impact of Class Size on Lower Elementary Students & Methods for Individual Engagement

Makayla Kathleen Hobbs

Azusa Pacific University

Abstract

This paper explores the impact of class size on lower elementary students (K-3rd grade) and then

discusses methods for individual engagement. Through an analysis of several studies, including

the STAR project, is it made clear that lower elementary school students enrolled in small class

sizes have an advantage over those in large class sizes. These sources connect smaller class sizes

to academic achievement, social improvements, fewer dropouts, and equal opportunities for

impoverished and minority students. The most successful “small” class in the STAR study had a

15:1 student-teacher ratio. In California, lower elementary classes can hold as many as 33

students. California is attempting to cut class sizes, but the current action to cut class sizes from

35 to 30 will not bring substantial outcomes. Since the ideal small class sizes are not being met,

it is imperative that methods are used to keep students from falling behind. The following two

sections propose tangible methods to individually engage students in large class sizes. The first

will discuss the “Gradual Release of Responsibility.” The next section proposes teacher training

as a method to overcome problems common to large class sizes. Studies reveal that pedagogy

quality is the most important key to student engagement and achievement. If teachers learn how

to manage and produce quality plans for their large classes, their students will be more readily

engaged and able to reach their full potential without the size of their class holding them back.

The final section discusses this topic in light of a Christian worldview. Stress and declining

teaching quality are connected to large class sizes. A Christian worldview offers tools to help

teachers overcome these obstacles.

Keywords​: class size, lower elementary, engagement

Impact of Class Size on Lower Elementary Students & Methods for Individual Engagement

Crayons are strewn haphazardly across a classroom packed with students. Three kids

crawl under their desks as their teacher frantically tends to a crying child in the back of the room.

The noise volume of the student-mob grows to resemble that of a howler monkey troop in the

jungle. This scene is not unique to classrooms across the United States. Large lower elementary

class sizes have become a pertinent issue here; teachers are losing hope for control as a plethora

of students fall rapidly behind. After a thorough analysis of what class size entails, this paper sets

out to define the impact of class size on lower elementary students through the examination of

several different research projects. It then expounds concrete strategies to help teachers

overcome the snares of large class sizes--strategies capable of transforming

howler-monkey-classrooms into places of optimal growth and learning.

Literature Review

The articles in this paper were discovered through Azusa Pacific University’s library

database system, using the key terms: class size, engagement, and lower-elementary. Cited books

were either found in Google Books or purchased from the APU Bookstore. PDF files were

accessed through APU’s “Text Finder” feature, powerpoint citations can be traced back to files

from Wilder’s EDLS 496 course on Canvas, and videos were acquired on YouTube.

According to Achilles’ ​Let’s Put Kids First, Finally: Getting Class Size Right​, class size

is “the number of youngsters who regularly appear in a teacher’s classroom and for whom that

teacher is primarily responsible and accountable” (Achilles, 1999, p. 14). In simple terms, class

size refers to the children listed on a teacher’s class attendance sheet. Many states in the U.S. use

Education Codes, orECs, to regulate class sizes (California Department of Education, 2018).
CLASS SIZE: IMPACT AND METHODS 4

Within these laws, penalties are often utilized to enforce participation. Sections 41376 and 41378

of California’s EC contain state-specific regulations and penalties for the number of students

allowed in a given classroom according to their grade level. These sections state that

Kindergarten classes can have up to 30 children, but may not exceed 33. First through third grade

may have up to 30 students, but no more than 32 (California Department of Education, 2018). If

school districts exceed class size restrictions within their state’s EC, the state is required to step

in and present penalties. In California, The Superintendent of Public Instruction must lower that

district’s “revenue limit apportionment for each student over the limit” if class sizes go over

these laws (California Department of Education, 2018). In simple terms, each student over the

limit will receive less funding from the state. The California Department of Education

specifically notes, “The intent of these laws is to encourage the reduction of class size and the

ratio of students to teachers” (California Department of Education, 2018). These laws are in

place to push districts toward building smaller class sizes. Why are United States Education

Agencies pushing for smaller class sizes? What are the benefits of putting lower elementary

students in smaller learning communities?

Do Smaller Class Sizes Impact Lower Elementary Students?

“Some California Test Scores Fall Along with Class Size,” “Smaller Classes Serve a

Larger Purpose,” “Educators and Parents Reset the Class Size Debate,” “WE NEED A LITTLE

CLASS” (Hoff, David, Olson, Lynn, Sack & Joetta, 2002; Vincenti, 2017; Walker, 2019;

Achilles, 1997). As exposed by the years and names of these articles, controversy over class size

is a pressing topic and has been for quite some time. Parents, teachers, and students have been

told repeatedly that class size doesn’t matter or that smaller classes won’t solve larger academic
CLASS SIZE: IMPACT AND METHODS 5

problems and outcomes within lower elementary classrooms. Are these arguments valid? ​Why

are small class sizes so actively sought after?

Literature Review

Let’s Put Kids First, Finally: Getting Class Size Right​ by Charles M. Achilles is a book

that covers a collection of studies and conclusions about small class sizes in lower elementary

grades. It highlights the findings of several important studies regarding class size. This paper will

focus on the Student Teacher Achievement Ratio (STAR) Project of Chapters 1 & 2, and will

look at the conclusions of this study mapped out in a separate article titled ​Small-Class Research

Supports What We All Know (So, Why Aren't We Doing It?)​.

The benefits of small lower elementary class sizes are affirmed by a multitude of

research. Among the most cited and thorough of these is a study conducted over the course of

four years. Project “STAR,” or the Student Teacher Achievement Ratio Study, ran from 1985 to

1989 (Achilles, 1999, p. 24). In this project, STAR researchers observed over 11,600 children

and 1000 teachers in randomized class assignments in Tennessee Public Schools (Achilles, 1999,

p. 24). Participants were randomly split into classrooms that fell under three groups: students

were either placed in a small class (S) with a 15:1 student to teacher ratio, an average class (R)

with a 25:1 student to teacher ratio (the control group), or an average class (RA) with a 25:1

teacher to student ratio with a full-time aide (Achilles,1999, p. 25). This study measured the

experiment through in-class observation, the use of teacher logs, student data including

“attendance, behavior, age, race, sex, free lunch, etc.,” regulated tests of student outcomes and

progress, and teacher data (Achilles ,1998). The results were long and conclusive: students of the

S group had the best overall outcomes (Achilles, 1998). C.M. Achilles’ article ​Small-Class
CLASS SIZE: IMPACT AND METHODS 6

Research Supports What We All Know (So, Why Aren't We Doing It?)​ provides a lovely 7 point

summary of STAR’s extensive results:

○ “Small classes benefit all students (Equality factor), but minority and
traditionally hard-to-teach students receive approximately twice the
benefit from the same investment and treatment. (Equity factor).
○ Small classes benefit students, teachers, parents; they improve instruction
and provide a basis for systemic change in education (Quality factor).
○ Students in small classes are far less likely to be retained in grade than are
those in large classes.
○ Unlike in focused projects, students in small classes achieve better on all
measures, rather than just in reading, or math, or whatever the focused
project is about.
○ Benefits obtained in K-3 remain with the students [measured through
grade 12].
○ In small classes, teachers identify student learning needs quickly, address
these needs, and thus help keep students out of later special education
classes.
○ Besides higher test scores, students from smaller classes have far better
behavior (as measured by discipline referrals), and far greater participation
in school-related things (clubs, athletics, etc.) than do students who started
school in larger classes” (1998, p.5).

STAR went on to have two other phases, including “Project Challenge” where 17 of Tennessee's

most financially broken school districts received funding to build small classes for students in

kindergarten to third grade (Mosteller, 1995, p. 113). This study yielded the same results, the

most significant of which showed a rise in all 17 districts end-of-year standing, the majority of

which moved from “well below average” to above average in both reading and mathematics

(Mosteller, 1995, p. 122).

Literature Review

The Why’s of Class Size: Student Behavior in Small Classes​ is a collection of research

published by the American Educational Research Association. It begins with the idea that small

class sizes can heavily influence student engagement, provides support with a review of studies
CLASS SIZE: IMPACT AND METHODS 7

and then looks to sociological and psychological research on student group behavior to get at

why smaller class sizes help students engagement.

They define engagement in two ways: “academic engagement” is where students are on

task, attentive, and involved in lessons, and “social engagement” is where students interact well

with the teacher and classmates (Finn, Pannozzo, & Achilles, 2003, p. 323). Positive academic

and social engagement directly coincide with academic performance (Finn, Pannozzo, &

Achilles, 2003, p. 323). Finn, Pannozzo, & Achilles dissect 11 studies on student engagement

and class size to back up the idea that small classes equal greater engagement, and their

conclusion supports this hypothesis! Eight out of the 11 projects were conducted in lower

elementary classrooms (Kindergarten-3rd grade), where all eight highlighted better engagement

as a product of reduced class size (Finn, Pannozzo, & Achilles, 2003, p. 334). They found that

class size reduction had a lower effect on upper elementary grades: “Of the studies that examined

behavior beyond Grade 3, little if any impact of class size was found” (Finn, Pannozzo, &

Achilles, 2003, p. 334). It was noted that the smaller classes had signs of decreasing antisocial

behavior and a rise in prosocial behavior (Finn, Pannozzo, & Achilles, 2003, p. 340).

The study then turns to psychology and social science to uncover the big “why” behind

the research. Finn, Pannozzo, & Achilles consolidate what they find into two laws and name

them “visibility of the individual” and “sense of belonging” (2003, p. 344). These principles

connect class size with student behavior. “Visibility of the individual” is a huge factor in small

class engagement. In a small class, children feel more responsible for their actions, and are

therefore more likely to behave than in large classrooms where they can get away with more

(Finn, Pannozzo, & Achilles, 2003, p.346). The second component, “Sense of belonging” helps
CLASS SIZE: IMPACT AND METHODS 8

students engage, because “smaller groups are more unified in their purposes and actions than are

larger groups and because individual members often feel that they are more closely affiliated

with the group, receiving guidance and support from other group members” (Finn, Pannozzo, &

Achilles, 2003, p. 348).

Discussion

The class size discussion, specifically for kindergarten through 3rd grades, remains a

critical topic in the United States. Education Agencies within the United States advocate for

small class sizes through policies regulating student-teacher ratios per grade level. The mere

existence of Education Codes suggests that large class sizes have disadvantageous effects. The

STAR Project’s results strongly affirm this assertion. The small class (S) group’s participation,

academic achievements, and behavioral outcomes all highlight the profits made more available

within a small learning community. This study explains why small class sizes are fervently

sought after and proves that class size does indeed have a significant impact on a child’s

education. The STAR project has several limitations. Including a larger class (thirty and over)

may have been helpful to compare to the small class. It would have strengthened the findings of

this project, but the results are still conclusive without this add on. Though the STAR project

may be considered dated, this is a “tightly controlled longitudinal experiment of class size that

corrected for many of the weaknesses identified in prior class-size studies” that remains

especially valuable in today’s educationally broken state (Achilles, 1999, p. 154). As Harvard’s

Professor, Emeritus Frederick Mosteller, put it after a year of researching STAR, “The

Tennessee class size project...illustrates the kind and magnitude of research needed in the field of

education to strengthen schools...It is important that both educators and policymakers have
CLASS SIZE: IMPACT AND METHODS 9

access to its statistical information and understand its implications” (as cited in Achilles, 1999,

p.155). It may be old, but its findings are solid.

The results from both sections of ​The Why’s of Class Size: Student Behavior in Small

Classes​ support the idea that a smaller class size renders greater student engagement, especially

in lower elementary classrooms. The principles,“visibility of the individual” and “sense of

belonging,” are intriguing theorems that teachers need to take into account when leading any

class size. This study was published in 2003 and includes studies up to 2002. Though several

years have passed, the information presented by Finn, Pannozzo, & Achilles still ring true today

and should be used to help teachers navigate how to best lead big and small classes.

The most successful “small” class in the STAR study had a 15:1 student-teacher ratio. In

California, lower elementary classes can hold as many as 33 students. Cutting a really large class

down to a large class will not altar student achievement. California’s demands to cut class sizes

from 35 to 30 are, therefore, unlikely to yield significant results. Since the ideal small class sizes

are not being met, how can we help students within larger classes succeed? Is it possible to apply

small class tactics to our large classes?

The Gradual Release of Responsibility

Studies conclude that small classrooms are advantageous when compared to their larger

counterparts, but U.S. public school districts often cannot afford to build the 15-and-under

student-sized classrooms that yield the highest successes in these studies. Large class sizes are a

reality for many teachers in the United States--teachers who yearn to see their bright-eyed

students excel, but may not know efficient tactics to create the environment their students need

for success. This paper will introduce an instructional method called the “Gradual Release of
CLASS SIZE: IMPACT AND METHODS 10

Responsibility,” also known as “I do, we do, two do, you do.” This method utilizes small class

size techniques and integrates them into large class sizes in order to help lower elementary

students individually engage in large class sizes.

As noted in the previous paper, a “sense of belonging” and “visibility of the individual”

are the components behind the prosperity of small sizes. These key principles lead to student

success and are most commonly seen in small class sizes. The “Gradual Release of

Responsibility” allows for the presence of these two principles within large classes.

Literature Review

The ​Gradual Release of Responsibility​ is a structure for instruction created by Pearson &

Gallagher. These educators modeled it after the theories of Lev Vygotsky, a Russian

psychologist responsible for many advances in the world of education (Pearson & Gallagher,

1983; Vygotsky, 1962; Buehl, 2005). This learning framework “[moves] from explicit modeling

and instruction to guided practice and then to activities that incrementally [position] students into

becoming independent learners” (Buehl, 2005). Though it has evolved over time, including the

addition of a new section, the present model includes four stages that can be used in or out of

order: focused instruction (I do), guided instruction (we do), collaborative learning (two do), and

independent learning (you do) (Fisher, 2013). These sections serve to engage students in any

class size while helping them get the most out of class time. In a lecture titled: ​Gradual Release

of Responsibility,​ Doug Fisher argues that “all components [of this recipe] must be present in

every lesson every day for learning to occur” (2013).

I do. ​In the focused instruction (“I do”) section of the Gradual Release of Responsibility,

the teacher gives direct instructions, sets clear goals and makes the purpose known, models, and

thinks out loud, providing students with “a window into the wisdom and strategy employed by

an accomplished thinker…” (Levy, 2007; Buehl, 2005). When solving a problem or working

through a process, the teacher models their thinking by “[opening] up [their] brain” (Fisher,

2013). The teacher uses I statements, such as, “I can make the following prediction since the

character tells us______,” and leads students to learn through metacognition (thinking about our

thinking) (Fisher, 2013). Students are only required to listen, take notes, and ask clarifying

questions in this space (Levy, 2007). In the focused instruction section, teachers are able to

model thought processes they want their students to imitate when faced with similar activities:

“By thinking aloud, teachers demonstrate effective comprehension strategies and, at least as

importantly, when and when not to apply them” (Duke & Pearson, 2002, p. 110). Teacher

modeling is most powerful when it leaves little room for student thinking and when it provides

strategies to utilize instead of strict formulas (Duke & Pearson, 2002, pp. 110-111). There have

been several studies that deem focused instruction important in teaching, including the Informed

Strategies for Learning (ISL) program (Paris, Cross, & Lipson, 1984), the reciprocal teaching

approach, and the SAIL program (Duke & Pearson, 2002, pp.110-111).

We do. ​The next step in the gradual release of responsibility is guided instruction, or “we

do.” Vygotsky introduces the idea that humans have a “Zone of Proximal Development,” where

they need the help of others to learn certain matters that cannot be discovered individually

(Vygotsky, 1962, p. 35). Guided instruction makes this learning possible. Students take what was

modeled in the previous section, and are then able to “converse with [the teacher] and with other
CLASS SIZE: IMPACT AND METHODS 12

classmates to clarify their thinking and practice their new routines” (Buehl, 2005). This section is

much more interactive than the first and includes various types of “collaboration between

teachers and students or students and their peers” (Bennett, 2019). Students may be inserted into

groups or pulled from the group for small group lessons with the teacher (Fisher, 2013). Here,

teachers discover errors and misconceptions in their student’s learning, but instead of telling

students the answers, they strategically use “questions, prompts and cues” to get students to do

the cognitive work on their own (Fisher, 2013). Students are challenged to actively participate in

this level, instead of just listen like the previous step. This section also allows for formative

assessment to take place, where teachers may decide if more modeling is necessary or if they can

advance. According to the ​Effective Use of the Gradual Release of Responsibility Model,

evidence supports that, thought guided instruction can be implemented in a whole-class setting, it

works best in small groups, especially in regards to reading instruction (Fisher, 2008).

Two do. ​Collaborative learning, also called “Two do,” was added to the Gradual Release

of Responsibility learning structure by Fisher and Frey. In this stage, students pair up and

“interact with academic language” through “student to student learning” (Fisher, 2013). Fisher

explains that learning a new language is impossible without participating in speaking that

language: “we learn language from producing language” (Fisher, 2013). In school, students have

to learn multiple different languages: the discipline of mathematics, history, and science to name

a few. For this reason, it is vital that collaborative language is prioritized in lessons. It is

important that the teacher builds individual accountability into collaborative learning so that one

of the two students doesn’t do all of the work (Fisher, 2013).

You do. ​The purpose of teaching a student is to “empower them to be able to accomplish

important and sophisticated tasks without the support of the teacher and their classmates” (Buehl,

2005). The final section of the Gradual Increase of Responsibility structure is independent

learning, or “you do.” This step is the driving force behind the entire system, where students

apply what they were taught on their own. By doing so, they are able to “synthesize information,

transform ideas, and solidify their understanding” (Fisher, 2008). The student is responsible for

working alone, for learning to complete the assignment before them, and for taking full

responsibility for the outcome of their work (Levy, 2007). The teacher’s job is to give helpful

feedback, evaluate their student’s work, and determine the class’ level of understanding (Levy,

2007).

Discussion

Large class sizes are a pressing issue in the United States today, but they do not have to

be. Many teachers are unaware of effective methods that will help individual scholars within

their sea of students engage and achieve. The Gradual Release of Responsibility method is a

solution to this predicament. This structure exposes students to multiple modelings of expert

behavior in focused instruction and good strategies to use as they eventually solve problems or

create products. In guided instruction, students are given the opportunity to use freshly learned

information within the help of groups. In collaborative learning, students are able to practice, and

therefore, learn, academic languages. Here, students can use one another to experiment and apply

new material. Finally, independent learning allows students to stand on their own two feet and

accomplish important tasks without the aid of their teacher and peers. These four steps are

capable of encouraging engagement, confidence, achievement, and responsibility within large

and small class sizes, and provide effective flow and structure to lesson plans of all shapes and

sizes. The one flaw of this study is Fisher’s argument that all four components must be targeted

in every lesson for learning to take place. Though this sounds great, applying these to every

lesson and every subject may not be realistic. Skipping one part doesn’t mean that the students

will not or can not learn. The key is varying teaching methods, which happens if you include a

few or all components of the Gradual Release of Responsibility.

Pearson and Gallagher’s study and incorporation of Vygotsky’s ideas in this structure

build a strong foundation for the success of this project.

Pedagogy Training to Improve Large Class Teacher Quality

The findings thus far yield that class size plays a large part in the achievement and

engagement of lower elementary students, but there is a factor proven more critical to student

success: the teacher. This section of this paper will unpack several studies that affirm that teacher

quality is the most critical influence on student education. Then, it will highlight training points

that serve to strengthen the management and instruction of teachers in large class sizes.

Literature Review

In ​Educational Research for Policy and Practice,​ Jennifer Buckingham ciphers through a

multitude of studies based on class size and teacher quality. The conclusion of her research

supports the following assertion: teacher quality is the single most critical influence in regard to

student achievement (2003, p.13). This claim does not come without support. The following

studies show the weight quality teachers have on student engagement and academic progress.

Principals often try to assure parents that their kids will succeed under the instruction of

any of their teachers, but this simply is not true. Because the quality of teachers varies greatly
CLASS SIZE: IMPACT AND METHODS 15

from classroom to classroom, the education of students also varies from classroom to classroom.

According to a study conducted by Eric Hanushek of the University of Rochester, “The

difference in student performance in a single academic year from having a good as opposed to a

bad teacher can be more than one full year of standardized achievement” (Hanushek, 1992, p.

113).

The director of the Value-Added Research and Assessment Center at the University of

Tennessee, William Sanders (1998), studied the impact of teacher effectiveness on student

learning (p.5). He separated teachers into “quintiles based on their effectiveness in producing

student learning gains” (Haycock, 1998, p.5). The observed students had similar low

achievement levels prior to the study. The data reveals that the least effective teachers helped

their students advance by 14 percentile points over the course of the school year (Haycock, 1998,

p.5). Those categorized as being the most effective teachers averaged 53 percentile points during

the year (Haycock, 1998, p.5). The students went in with similar achievement levels but came

out with “vastly different academic outcomes as a result of the sequence of teachers to which

they [were] assigned” (Haycock, 1998, p.6). The graph below illustrates these findings.

Another study conducted in Tennessee followed 3rd-grade students until after they completed the

5th grade. The project concluded that “even two years after the fact, the performance of
CLASS SIZE: IMPACT AND METHODS 16

fifth-grade students is still affected by the quality of their third-grade teacher” (Haycock, 1998,

6).

Discussion

These studies support two key notions: (1) teacher excellence varies from teacher to

teacher, and (2) teachers are highly responsible for the success of their students.

Teacher excellence (or lack of) varies significantly from teacher to teacher, and the effect

teachers have on their kids sticks with them. The quality of a teacher may be impaired by their

fear of leading large groups of students. If a teacher is uncomfortable or unable to function under

the stress of the large class size, their students’ engagement and achievement are more

susceptible to damage. This means that if a teacher cannot reach students because the class size

is too big, that student will fall behind peers in different classrooms, and the impact of that

teacher may follow them for years to come. School districts must recognize these difficult

realities and make an effort to educate and professionally develop their teachers so that students

can achieve in large class sizes.

The second notion is that teacher quality is the key to student success, not class size.

Quality teachers are capable of individually engaging students in large class sizes. Large class

sizes do not have to put our students at an academic disadvantage to those in small classes! We

may not be able to afford 15-student-class-sizes, but we can afford to educate and prepare

teachers to efficiently reach each student in a large class. Though large class sizes have

challenges smaller classes do not, proper training and focus on instruction (found in quality

teachers) have the power to make class size a problem of the past. These sources proclaim the
CLASS SIZE: IMPACT AND METHODS 17

need for teacher training and make way for the following tips introduced by the INCLASS

research project.

Literature Review

The International Network for Class Size Studies, or INCLASS, based in Thailand

conducted a research project to uncover the main fears leaders of large class sizes face

(Allwright, 1989). With the use of detailed questionnaires completed by teachers, INCLASS

researchers condensed the most common problems that teachers face when facilitating large

classes into the following five groups: “discomfort, control, individual attention, evaluation, and

learning effectiveness” (Hayes, 1997, pp. 108-110). With this information, they created

development courses with an “emphasis on relevant, practical, classroom-centered content, [that

is] clearly focused and explained” (Hayes, 1997, p.108). These courses, or in-service training

sessions, are meant to be picked up by school districts to help large class teachers overcome

fears, prepare, and develop into the quality leaders their students need them to be.

Discomfort​ is​ ​the first stressor large class teachers face. This concern came up frequently

during the probing portion of the study. Many teachers are worried about the limited amount of

space they have when leading large classes compared to smaller ones. Because there is less room

to move around, teachers feel unable to promote student interaction (Hayes, 1997, p.108). Some

teachers reportedly noted that they have to speak very loudly, that students can’t move around

easily and get away with not doing the activities because of the large size of the class. This

discomfort may lead teachers to feel “frustrated, tired, and hopeless to manage the class

successfully” (Hayes, 1997, p. 108).

There are many solutions to discomfort in large class sizes. The first is to strategically

position furniture in the classroom to create an environment where students have personal space,

can see the board, and can move about with ease. There are many arrangements that will give the

teacher the ability to move around more easily to observe what’s going on (Hayes, 1997, p.108).

According to INCLASS, arranging the class in groups is the best way to accomplish these things

(Hayes, 1997, p.111). To do this most efficiently, INCLASS recommends using a “large scale

plan on manila card and groups of 'desks' attached with blu-tack” to “show how the positioning

of desks at an angle to the board rather than head-on can make a difference to lines of vision”

(Hayes, 1997; p. 111).

Control​ is another major concern of large class teachers. Because there are more

students, teachers fear that there will be more talking, and when there is more talking, they

assume it will be more difficult to control what is happening (Hayes, 1997, p.112).

There are several solutions to avoid losing control of a large classroom. INCLASS

explains the importance of group and pair activities as a method to bring control to the

classroom. It is also important to provide students with clear signals and rules for when it is their

time to talk and when it is their time to listen (Hayes, 1997, p.112). INCLASS provides

instructional tips he had seen from teachers with great control. The teacher should “never

[attempt] to compete with the class by shouting for attention,…[they should] always [wait] for

quiet before [they begin],....[they should encourage] the class to speak at normal levels, and [try]

to quiet them if they [become] too boisterous... [if] necessary [they should] address individuals

by name.” They should also invite students to come up with their own signals for different

problems regarding control, especially a signal to use when they get too loud (Hayes, 1997, p.
CLASS SIZE: IMPACT AND METHODS 19

112). INCLASS remarks on the importance of involving students in classroom management.

Giving students duties to pass out paper, clean the board, or collect materials at the end of an

activity can help things run smoothly (Hayes, 1997, p. 112).

Individual engagement​ is a concern many teachers have for their students, and many

teachers fear that some students may be left behind because they don’t have time to get to

everyone (Hayes, 1997, 113). INCLASS presents several solutions to help students feel seen and

to make sure they get the help they need. The first is to use student names as frequently as

possible to show that they are important and valued. The second training tip is to avoid

“teacher-fronted” activities as much as possible. Group work and pair activities allow teachers to

walk around and help struggling students. It is important that teachers see that “not all students

need individual attention in every lesson: for some, a quick check that they are doing the activity

correctly will often be enough, whereas others will need closer guidance” (Hayes, 1997, p.113).

Evaluation​ ​is a source of stress for many teachers, according to INCLASS. They want to

check all of their students’ work during class, but doing so is time-consuming. INCLASS’ advice

on checking each students’ work during class is “don't do it” (Hayes, 1997, p.114)! Instead,

teachers are advised to involve the students in in-class evaluations. To tangibly execute this,

INCLASS recommends having students “[exchange] books or [correct] their own work while the

teacher gives the answers” (Hayes, 1997, p.114). It is recommended that teachers have students

write the answers to problems on the board while peers correct them and check work in pairs

before the teacher gives the answer (Hayes, 1997, p.114).

Learning Effectiveness​ ​is the final section addressed by INCLASS. This project’s

research found that many teachers leading large classes fear that they will not be able to tell who
CLASS SIZE: IMPACT AND METHODS 20

is learning and who is not (Hayes, 1997, p.114). INCLASS discloses that the majority of teachers

prefer small over large class sizes. As a teacher of a large class size, it is important to avoid a

mindset that believes having a large class is more difficult that small. It then examines the

perception many teachers have that students do not learn as well in a large class as in a small one

and argues that teachers must “modify their own classroom behavior” while leading their

students to do the same (Hayes 1997, p. 114). Finally, INCLASS proposes an activity to help

prompt these changes: he encourages teachers to take all that they learned from the previous

sections and use them to “devise an action plan” for the next year.

Discussion

To improve the engagement and achievement of lower elementary students in large class

sizes, school districts must focus on building teachers who are prepared to manage and instruct

all of their students. The research conducted by INCLASS offers districts and teachers training to

produce such leaders. One shortcoming of this project is that it was conducted among elementary

school teachers working in Thailand and this paper is specific to lower elementary classrooms in

the United States. The five problems INCLASS came out with are not unique to Thailand, so this

does not discredit the value of these findings in application to the US. The findings of this project

and use of teacher training sessions have the ability to promote quality teachers around the globe.

School districts in the United States are so wrapped up in the debate over cutting class sizes that

they are losing sight of what really matters: raising good teachers.

In the end, it is much better to have a great teacher leading a large classroom than a

plethora of so-so teachers in front of smaller class rooms. Though smaller class sizes are

financially unrealistic for the United States, our students are not doomed! We can help individual
CLASS SIZE: IMPACT AND METHODS 21

students learn in large class sizes by empowering their teachers. If teachers learn how to manage

and produce quality lesson plans for their large classes, their students will have no problem with

engagement and will be able to reach their full potential without the size of their class holding

them back.

Worldview

Worldview is a “commitment, a fundamental orientation of the heart...which we hold

(consciously, or subconsciously, consistently or inconsistently) about the basic constitution of

reality and that provides the foundation on which we live and move and have our being” (Ryken,

2013). It is the lens by which a person perceives the world and everything in it. The beliefs that

an individual holds determines their worldview. A Christian’s belief in God has them perceive

the world and everything in it through the lens of God’s love and mercy. As an aspiring teacher

and follower of Christ, my Christian worldview has greatly influenced my attitude and passion

for this topic.

Within a Christian worldview, truth is found in “the teachings of scripture,” and Jesus’s

actions in the New Testament serve as a model for how to live (Wilder). In scripture, Jesus cares

for all, regardless of age, faith, race, or rank. He encourages those around him to seek justice

where there is mistreatment, care for outcasts, and love the unloved. Through the Parable of the

Lost Sheep in Matthew 18, Jesus shares that all humans have inherent value. He tells an

anecdotal tale of a shepherd looking after a flock of 100 sheep. When a single sheep goes

missing, he drops everything to find and save it.

The individual engagement and achievement of lower elementary students in large class

sizes is especially significant when explored through a Christian worldview. Studies show that
CLASS SIZE: IMPACT AND METHODS 22

children are being left behind in large class sizes. A Christian worldview highlights the urgency

of seeking after struggling students, as they are valuable and as worthy of a good education as

the others. If one student is falling behind, teachers must do everything they can to bring that

child back to the flock. At the end of the parable, Jesus’ shepherd finds the lost sheep and he

rejoices over it (Matthew 18:3, ESV)! This encourages teachers to love their students as much as

Jesus’ anecdotal shepherd loved his hypothetical sheep, and to look forward to the celebrations

that will take place when students catch-up to their peers.

A foundation of Christianity says strength comes from the Lord: “I can do all things

through him who strengthens me” (Philippians 4:13, ESV). In John 15:5, Jesus says, “Apart from

me you can do nothing” (ESV). A Christian worldview means depending completely on Christ,

and accepting that the only way to bear fruit is to put on humility and obey Him. In ​Mere

Christianity​, Lewis explores the idea of living out a Christian worldview, where Christ “is

actually operating through [believers]...and [where] the whole mass of Christians are the physical

organism through which Christ acts” (Lewis, 1960, p.36). The pressures stemming from life are

not meant to be dealt with alone. In Book two of Mere Christianity, Lewis reminds Christians

that Christ is a part of our very being, which means that we are not holding our burdens alone.

A Christian worldview promotes the importance of contentment and positivity. Ephesians

4:22 says, “You were taught, with regard to your former way of life, to put off your old self,

which is being corrupted by its deceitful desires; to be made new in the attitude of your minds;

and to put on the new self, created to be like God in true righteousness and holiness” (NIV). This

means that instead of falling into patterns of stress and sin, Christ calls his people to choose a

Christ like attitude of hope. Christ calls us to avoid conforming to the world and instead to “be
CLASS SIZE: IMPACT AND METHODS 23

transformed by the renewal of your mind” (Romans 12:2, ESV). In life, there are many high

points and low points. The secret of being content through all of life’s seasons in a Christian

worldview is revealed in Philipians 4:12-13: “I can do all things through him who strengthens

me” (ESV).

Studies reveal that “larger class sizes tend to increase teacher stress and decrease

perceived teaching efficacy” (French 1993 as cited in O'Donnell, Lambert & McCarthy, 2008,

p.153). This is due to pressure from “a combination of students’ parents, school and state

administration, and society in general” (Moriarty, Edmonds, Blatchford, & Martin, 2001 as cited

in O'Donnell, Lambert & McCarthy, 2008, p.153).

Pressure from the principal, pressure from parents, pressure from the district, pressure

from the state administration, pressure from society: this is a lot to deal with! A Christian

worldview helps teachers approach leading large class sizes. Instead of allowing the expectations

of others to burden or dictate how to lead a class, a Christian worldview instructs followers to

first go to the Lord. This is affirmed in Philippians 4:13 (“I can do all things through him who

strengthens me”), John 15:5 (“Apart from me you can do nothing”) (ESV). Lewis’ words from

Mere Christianity ​that are noted above talk about living through a Christian worldview where

Christ is a part of you. This means that the pressures stemming from leading a large class size are

heavy, but a Christian worldview promotes the understanding that we are not handling them in

isolation!

Ephesians 4:22, as mentioned above, accentuates that we have control over our attitudes,

and must choose to trust in God instead of give in to lies and desires. Leading a large class is

difficult, and there may be a strong temptation to compare experiences to smaller classes.
CLASS SIZE: IMPACT AND METHODS 24

Teachers with a Christ-centered worldview are led to have a hopeful mindset and are challenged

to avoid dwelling on having what they cannot have and to focus on what they do have. This hope

is capable of great transformation.It is easy to spiral under the complexities large class sizes

promote, but this decreases teaching efficacy. Instead of comparing the realities of one class to a

smaller one or sitting in self-pity, teachers with a Christian worldview are challenged to choose

to be content and move forward from there.

Throwing off pressure from outside sources, choosing contentment, and focusing on

students is made possible with Christ. A pessimistic mindset will only foster bitterness. This

mindset does not deny that leading a larger class size is challenging, but acknowledges the

strength we have in Christ to overcome difficulties. Dealing with stress and choosing positivity is

not always as easy as just “giving it to God.” It takes dedication and time, but when teachers

acknowledge that they alone cannot overcome large-class struggles, the Lord is able to step in. 2

Cor. 12:9-10 says, “[The Lord’s] grace is sufficient for [me], for [His] power is perfected in

weakness…For the sake of Christ, then, I am content with weaknesses, insults, hardships,

persecutions, and calamities. For when I am weak, then I am strong” (ESV).

Conclusion

Large class sizes are a prevalent disadvantage in the U.S., but with the proper methods,

children and teachers have the ability to overcome any obstacles their situation may present. By

equipping teachers with the knowledge they need to become quality leaders of large classes and

following The Gradual Release of Responsibility model, students will each be able to learn and

thrive within a sea of classmates. Through contentment and love for their students, leaders of
CLASS SIZE: IMPACT AND METHODS 25

large class sizes can overcome the pressures and burdens connected to the number of scholars

under their instruction, and enjoy the challenge, diversity, and beauty before them.
CLASS SIZE: IMPACT AND METHODS 26

References

Achilles, C. M. (1997). ​Small classes, big possibilities: a researcher laments the lack of action

​ etrieved from ​https://www.aasa.org

/SchoolAdministratorArticle.aspx?id=15 680&terms=Small+Classes%2C+Big+Possibi

lities%2C

Achilles, C. M. (1998). ​Small-class research supports what we all know (so, why aren’t we doing

​ etrieved from ​https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED419289.pdf

Achilles, C. M. (1999). ​Let’s put kids first, finally getting class size right​. Thousand Oaks, CA:

Corwin Press.

Allwright, R. (1989).​ Is class size a problem?​ Retrieved from

http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED322754.pdf

Bennett, C. (2019). ​Gradual release of responsibility creates independent learners.​ ThoughtCo.

Retrieved from ​https://www.thoughtco.com/gradual-release-of-responsibility-4153992

Buckingham, J. (2003). ​Class size and teacher quality​. Educational Research for Policy and

Practice (2) 71–86. Retrieved from

https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1023%2FA%3A1024403823803.pdf

Buehl, D. (2006). ​Scaffolding.​ Reading Room. Retrieved from ​http://weac.org/artic les/readin

groom_scaffolding/

California Department of Education. (2018, September). ​Class size penalties. ​Retrieved from

https://www.cde.ca.gov/fg/aa/p a/cefcsp.asp

Duke, N. & Pearson, P. (2002). ​Effective Practices for Developing Reading Comprehension​.
CLASS SIZE: IMPACT AND METHODS 27

Newark, DE: International Reading Association. pp. 205-242. Retrieved from

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/0022057409189001-208

Finn, J. D., Pannozzo, G. M., & Achilles, C. M. (2003). ​The “why’s” of class size: student

behavior in small classes​. ​review of educational research,​ 73(3), 321–368. Retrieved

from ​https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/3516038.pdf?ab_segments= 0%252Fbasic _SY

C-4341%252Fcontrol&refreqid=excelsior%3A522b62b491451cf4e89627dc3c788e0a

Fisher, D. (2008). ​Effective use of the gradual release of responsibility model​. New York, NY:

Macmillan/McGraw-Hill. Retrieved from https://www.mheonline.com /_trea sure s/pdf/d

ouglas_fisher.pdf

Fisher, D. [FisherandFrey]. (2013, May 11). ​Gradual release of responsibility

[​https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cjURdvzty4c​]

French, N. (1993). Elementary teacher stress and class size. ​Journal of

Research and Development in Education​, 26, 66–73.

Hanushek, E. (1992). ​The trade-off between child quantity and quality​. Journal of Political

Economy. Retrieved from

http://hanushek.stanford.edu/publications/trade-between-child-quantity-and-quality

Haycock, K. (1998). ​Good teaching matters.​ Retrieved from

https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED457260.pdf

Hayes, David. (1997). ​Helping teachers to cope with large classes.​ Elt Journal. 51. 106-116.

Retrieved from ​https://www.researchgate.net/publication/240584144_

Helping_teachers_to_cope_with_large_classes

Hoff, David J., Olson, Lynn, Sack, Joetta L. (2002). Some Calif. Test Scores Fall Along With
CLASS SIZE: IMPACT AND METHODS 28

Class Size. ​Education Week,​ 29(42), 12.

Levy, E. (2007). ​Gradual release of responsibility: I do, we do, you do. ​Retrieved from

https://www.washoeschools.net/cms/lib/NV019122 65/Centricity/Dom

ain/257/Certified%20Hiring/GradualReleaseResponsibilityJan08.pdf

Lewis, C. S. (1960). ​Mere Christianity.​ New York, NY: Macmillan.

Moriarty, V., Edmonds, S., Blatchford, P., & Martin, C. (2001). Teaching young children:

Perceived satisfaction and stress. ​Educational Research,​ 43, 33–46.

Mosteller, F. (1995). The Tennessee study of class size in the early school grades. ​The Future of

Children​, 5, 113-127. Project Challenge. Retrieved from

https://www.jstor.org/stable/1602360?seq=1#metadata_info_tab_contents

O'Donnell, M., Lambert, R. G. & McCarthy, C. J. (2008). School poverty

status, time of year, and elementary teachers' perceptions of stress, ​The Journal of

Educational Research,​ 102:2, 152-160. Retrieved from

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.3200/JOER.102.2.152-160?casa_token=ej7Jk9I

9q30AAAAA:0Awz5IjM9H11Zod0gMXmi8oGihIRUqE1ThMSprME9d-9B0mcpBmbO

hkGlpP2L_LsJJxrqtC4085FFhU

Pearson, P. D. & Gallagher, M. (1983). The Instruction of Reading Comprehension.

Contemporary Educational Psychology.​ pp. 317-344.

Ryken, P. G. (2013). ​Christian worldview: a student's guide.​ Wheaton, IL: Crossway.

Sanders, W. & Rivers, J. (1996). ​Cumulative and residual effects of teachers on future students

academic achievement​. Table 1, p.9.

Vincenti, M. (2017). ​Smaller classes serve a larger purpose: a former teacher’s impassioned
CLASS SIZE: IMPACT AND METHODS 29

case for smaller classes. Retrieved from ​https://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2017/

10/25/smaller- classes-serve-a-larger-purpose.html

Walker, Tim. (2019). ​Educators and parents reset the class size ‘debate.’ Retrieved from

http://neatoday.org/2019/02/08/educators-and-parents-reset-the-class-size-debate/

Wilder, C. (2019). ​EDLS 496: Session one: Fall 2019​ [PowerPoint slides]. Retrieved from

https://canvas.apu.edu/courses/13688/files?preview=1372925

Vygotsky, L. S. (1962). ​Thought and language.​ Cambridge, UK: MIT Press. Retrieved from

http://s-f-walker.org.uk/pubsebooks/pdfs/Vygotsky_Thought_and_Language.pdf