|
|
Previous Page
Does School Size Effect Student Performance?
Why is this question important? Over the past 75 years schools in the United States have increased in average enrollment more than 400% (Gardner, Ritblatt, & Beatty, 2000). It is important stakeholders be aware of what effects this may have on student achievement including the rate of student dropout rates.
See further discussion below.

The
Impact of High School Size on Math Achievement and Drop Out Rates (Werblow & Duesbery, 2009)
Source:
Graph #1: Average
Enrollment – 2006 Digest of Education Statistics, Education
Statistics, National Center for Education Statistics, U.S. Department of
Education Statistics - http://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d06/tables_2.asp#Ch2Sub4
NAEP Scores: 2005-06
Nations Report Care, National Center for Education Statistics, U.S. Department
of Education - http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/nde/criteria.asp
Graph #2: The Impact of High School Size on Math Achievement and Drop
Out Rates, Werblow , J. & Duesbery, L., 2009
- http://muse.jhu.edu/login?uri=/journals/high_school_journal/v092/92.3.werblow.html
Source:
Graph #1: Average
Enrollment – 2006 Digest of Education Statistics, Education
Statistics, National Center for Education Statistics, U.S. Department of
Education Statistics - http://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d06/tables_2.asp#Ch2Sub4
NAEP Scores: 2005-06
Nations Report Care, National Center for Education Statistics, U.S. Department
of Education - http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/nde/criteria.asp
Graph #2: The Impact of High School Size on Math Achievement and Drop
Out Rates, Werblow , J. & Duesbery, L., 2009
- http://muse.jhu.edu/login?uri=/journals/high_school_journal/v092/92.3.werblow.html
Wing Institute
Literature Review: The Wing Institute conducted an analysis of 25 studies
on the relationship between school size and student performance.
- Sixteen studies were found to be relevant to the
topic of school size and student performance and included in this report
- All of the eight major studies conducted since
1980
- The papers are as follows:
- three of the studies consisted of literature
reviews
- one study identified as meta-analyses
- ten studies were characterized as individual
studies
- two studies were identified as Hierarchical Linear Modeling (HLM)
- one study was a case study
Studies of School Size on Student Performance
Study
|
Type of Study
|
Variables/methods
|
Finding
|
Limitations
|
Links
|
Eberts,
Keyhole, & Stone, 1984 - The effects of school size on student outcomes
|
An
individual study
|
A study
of 287 elementary schools. Dependent variable: achievement scores.
Independent variables: size, climate characteristics
|
Small
schools under 200, medium 400-600 had little impact on student performance,
performance declined as schools topped 800
|
Did not
control for schools locations
|
Go to article |
Lee
& Smith, 1997 - Effects of High School Restructuring and Size on Gains in
Achievement and Engagement for Early Secondary School Students
|
An
individual study
|
A study
of 9,812 set of student records from 789 high schools. Dependent variables:
math and reading achievement. Independent: size and SES
|
Students
in schools smaller than 600 and larger than 900 expressed lower scores. The
effect stronger for low SES.
|
Did not
account for school input data (counts of teachers, support staff, &
classrooms. Data could be biased
|
Go to article |
Lindsay,
P. 1982 - The effects of High
School Size on Student Participation, Satisfaction, and Attendance
|
An
individual study
|
A study
of 14,668 students in 328 elementary schools. Dependent variable:
extra-curricular participation, student satisfaction, & attendance.
Independent: size, student ability, & average. SES
|
Schools
with 100 pupils or less in both urban and rural areas had higher
extra-curricular activity rates, satisfaction, & attendance, controlling
for SES and ability.
|
The use
of survey data. Did not include a variable for suburban schools, instead
pooled results for urban and suburban.
|
Go to article |
Monk
& Haller, 1993 - Predictors of High School Academic Course Offerings: The
Role of School Size
|
An
individual study
|
A study
of survey data from 682 New York state public high schools. Dependent
variable: high school course offerings. Independent: size, location, union,
graduating class-size, and average. SES
|
In both
rural and urban, high schools with 100 students per graduating class were
large enough to offer a diversified curriculum.
|
Did not
include a variable for suburban schools. Additionally, curricular diversity
was defined as the "total number" of academic and vocational
offerings, and did not account for quality.
|
Go to article |
Wendling,
W. & Cohen, J., 1981 - Education Resources and Student Achievement: Good
News for Schools
|
An
individual study
|
A study
of 1,021 New York State elementary schools. Dependent variables: reading and
math achievement. Independent: size, teacher-pupil ration, SES, and years of
parental schooling.
|
High-achieving
schools has a mean size of 447 students, and low achieving had a mean of 776.
Controlling for SES, size had a negative effect on achievement
|
The
study only examined the third grade.
|
Go to article |
Kathleen
Cotton 1996 - School Size, School Climate, and Student Performance
|
A
Meta-analysis
|
Comprised
of 103 studies: achievement - 31, attitudes - 19, social behavior - 14,
extra-curricular activity - 17, belonging - 6, interpersonal relations 14,
attendance - 16, and dropout rate - 10, self-concept - 9, college related
variables - 6
|
There
is no clear agreement of the optimum school size, There is a large base of
information, but little on the issue of schools within schools (SWS). There
is little evidence to suggest larger is more cost effective, Achievement is
at least as good in small as large. Attendance is better in small. Dropout
rates higher in large. Low-SES are adversely affected by large.
|
Many of
the studies had methodological problems
|
Go to article |
John
Slate & Craig Jones 2005 - Effects of School Size: A review of the
Literature with Recommendations
|
A literature
Review
|
The
review focused on studies of effects of size on cost, diversity of
curriculum, achievement, and related variables.
|
The
assumption that larger schools are more cost effective is flawed appears as a
curvilinear relationship with small and large schools the most expensive, The
preponderance of data did not support a curricular advantage for either size
model, and achievement is represented as curvilinear relationship when the
SES status of schools is correlated with size.
|
Many of
the studies had methodological problems and that school size is an indirect
causal factor impacting school quality
|
Go to article |
Lindsay
Page, Carolyn Layzer, Jennifer Schimmenti, Lawrence Bernstein, and Leslie
Horst 2002 - National Evaluation of Smaller Learning Communities
|
A
literature review
|
Included
in the review were: 3 cost studies, 25 case studies, and 27 outcome based
studies (2 experimental designed and 3 quasi-experimental). They were able to
establish effect sizes for nine studies.
|
Academic
achievement: small sizes were positively correlated to students with low-SES
status and larger schools correlated to a minimal positive impact for
students of high-SES status. Smaller schools had lower dropout rate, higher
graduation rates, and higher attendance. Small and large schools were determined
to be equally costly effective.
|
The
effect size tables could not be obtained through ABT Associates, the
organization sponsoring the research.
|
Go to article |
Craig
Howley 1996 - Compounding Disadvantages: The Effects of School and District
Size on Student Achievement in West Virginia
|
An
individual study
|
A
replication of the California study by Friedkin & Necochea 1988. Both
schools and districts were analyzed across the state of West Virginia.
Students in the 3rd, 6th, 9th, and 11th grade were included. Dependent
variable: Student achievement. Independent: size, and SES
|
The
study indicated a pattern of interaction between size and SES consistent with
the results of Friedkin & Necochea 1988. Large schools correlated with
low achievement of low-SES and higher achievement for higher-SES. The pattern
was less in the lower grades and more pronounced in the higher grades
|
More
robust measures of SES would be needed for West Virginia. Small size by
itself is not a solution to the problems of low-achieving student with
low-SES status.
|
Go to article |
Craig
Howley & Robert Bickel 1999 - The Matthew Project National Report
|
An
individual study
|
The
study examines data for school size in four additional states: Ohio, Georgia,
Texas, and Montana. The dependent variable: Student achievement and the
independent size and SES. The method was to use the data in regression
equations to identify possible effects of size by showing the effects of
achievement on differing SES communities.
|
The
study shows that an interaction exists between SES status and improved
student achievement for smaller schools in the states of Ohio, Georgia, and Texas.
A weaker effect was found for Montana. This data was consistent for all grades.
This work supports the data that had been found for studies in West Virginia,
Alaska, and California.
|
This
study is not capable of providing a definite answer for policy makers
regarding the issue of school size. A key question remains regarding the key
question, What is the source of the interaction effect found in these
studies?
|
Go to article |
Jacob
Werblow & Luke Duesbery 2009 - The Impact of High School Size on Math
Achievement and Drop Out Rates
|
Hierarchical
Linear Modeling (HLM) and Hierarchical Generalized Linear Modeling (HGLM)
techniques
|
The
study examines the effectiveness of various practices used in creating
smaller learning communities (SLCs).
|
The
study found support for reduced drop out rate of 12% for smaller schools. The
impact of size on math performance offered curvilinear results with students
attending smaller and larger schools demonstrating the best performance in
math. The size of the effect was unfortunately, making an improvement of only
5% of the difference in math growth over two years.
|
There
were issues with the differences in the two years of the ELS data that may
confound the results. The ELS data could not differentiate small schools from
small learning communities that could impact the results, as some of these
models may not be as effective as small schools.
|
Go to article |
Gregory,
T., 1992 - Small is Too Big: Achieving a Critical Anti-Mass in the High
School
|
A case
study
|
The
case study of Jefferson County Colorado and the effects of size on the
county's schools
|
The
study found small schools benefit school climate and reduced costs
|
The
case study provides little in knowledge that can be generalized to other
settings.
|
Go to article |
Toenjes,
L.A., 1989 - Drop out Rates in Texas School Districts: Influences on School
Size and Ethnic Groups
|
An
individual study
|
Longitudinal
dropout rates (LDR's) for public school students and LDR's of pupil ethnic
grouping based on two Texas Education Agency reports.
|
Findings
dispel the prevalent perception of the dropout problem as primarily a
nonwhite problem and school size being a strong factor in determining degree
of dropout risk.
|
The
study was not available for review.
|
Go to article |
Pittman,
R.B. & Haughwout, P. 1987 - Influence of High School Size on Drop out
rate
|
An
individual study
|
The
study used NCES statistics to establish link between school size and drop out
rate. Data from 744 public high schools was used test the influence of school
size on school climate and dropout rate.
|
The
study suggests a potential links between school size and dropout rate
attributable to the social climate.
|
The
schools were not selected randomly impacting on the ability generalize the
results
|
Go to article |
Lee,
VS.. & Loeb, J., 2000 - School Size in Chicago Elementary Schools:
Effects on teachers' attitudes and students' achievement
|
Hierarchical
linear modeling (HLM)
|
A study of data from 5,000 teachers
and 23,000 6th and 8th-grade students in 264 K-8 Chicago schools. The data
were collected through 1997 surveys and annual standardized tests to
determine student learning and students' yearly gains in math achievement
scores and teacher attitudes.
|
On both
outcomes, small schools (enrolling fewer than 400 students) are favored
compared with medium-sized or larger schools. Learning was also higher in
schools with higher levels of collective responsibility.
|
The
schools were not randomly selected limiting the generalizability of the
results
|
Go to article |
2007,
The Educational Impact of the Size of Primary Schools
|
A
literature Review
|
The
Dublin City University School of Education Studies conducted this review. 60
studies were reviewed to determine the optimum size of schools for costs and
impact on students.
|
Student
achievement is marginally greater for small schools, Students exhibit fewer
incidents of disruptive behavior, but larger schools can favor advantaged
students
|
The
review appears adequate and includes the majority of studies identified in
the common literature reviews.
|
Go to article |
Friedkin
& Necochea, 1988 - School System Size and Performance: A Contingency
Perspective
|
An
individual study
|
Data
for third, sixth, eighth, and twelfth graders from the 1983-84 California
Assessment Program are examined in this study. The variables included were
school size, student SES status, and school performance.
|
This
study finds a relationship between a student’s socioeconomic status (SES) and
school size.
|
Advances
in hierarchical linear modeling (HLM) could offer additional understand the
relationship between school sizes, and student achievement.
|
Go to article |
Citations:
Cotton, K. (1996). School size, school climate, and student performance. School improvement Research Series Portland, OR: Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory. Retrieved November 23, 2009, from http://www.apexsql.com/_brian/School%20Size%20Matters.pdf
Dublin City University School of Education Studies. (2007). The Educational Impact of the Size of Primary Schools. Retrieved November 23, 2009, from http://www.educatetogether.ie/pdf_downloads/Research-%20lit%20review%20school%20size.pdf
Eberts, R. W., Kehoe, E., & Stone, J. A. (1984). The Effect of School Size on Student Outcomes. Final Report. (ED245382). Retrieved November 30, 2009 from ERIC database.
Friedkin, N. E. & Necochea, J. (1988). School System Size and Performance: A Contingency Perspective. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 10(3), 237-249.
Gregory, T. (1992). Small Is Too Big: Achieving a Critical Anti-Mass in the High School. (ED361159). Retrieved November 30, 2009 from ERIC database.
Howley, C. (1996). Compounding disadvantage: The effects of school and district size on student achievement in West Virginia.
|
|