Tennessee's Class Size Study: Findings, Implications, Misconceptions

Abstract

After years of debate, speculation, and research, Tennessee's Project STAR produced clear answers to the question, “Do small classes result in improved academic achievement in the elementary grades?” This article describes the features that made STAR unique and summarizes the findings with regard to pupil performance and behavior. New analyses show the magnitudes of the “small-class advantage” during and after the 4-year experimental period. The positive findings of STAR have been greeted with enthusiasm by the education community and are providing impetus for class size reduction (CSR) efforts in many districts. At the same time, some detractors continue to oppose the idea. Although they usually do not take issue with the strength of the STAR design, they disagree that the findings warrant CSR initiatives in most cases. This article examines those arguments critically. Finally recommendations are offered for policymakers, education practitioners, and researchers for using the information learned to date about the relationship of class size with students' academic achievement.

A systems framework for understanding social settings

“…Tennessee's Project Star included 79 schools and 329 classrooms (Finn & Achilles, 1999). All participating schools had space to create additional classrooms, additional teachers were by and large available to staff the classes, and the state provided funds to hire the additional teachers.…”

The Centrality of Context in Learning from Further Class Size Research

“…By the end of fifth grade, small class students were about 5 months (about a half of a school year) ahead of larger class students in literacy, math, science, and study skills (Finn & Achilles, 1999). In sum, a number of analyses of the STAR data have produced several arguments in favor of reducing class sizes for elementary school students.…”

“…Class size and teacher-pupil ratio are two entirely different constructs. As Finn and Achilles (1999) write, "they represent different aspects of resource distribution among schools and should not be used interchangeably." The substitution of pupil-teacher ratio for class size may weaken the treatment effects, as class sizes are invariably higher than the teacher-pupil ratios.…”

Evaluating the Impact of National Educational Policy to Reduce Retention and Increase Achievement in Compulsory Education

“…In a summary of all empirical evidence available until 1994, including 277 estimates from 59 rigorous studies of the impact of class size on academic achievement, Hanushek (1999) reported that only 15% of all studies presented significant positive estimates of impact, while 13% of studies presented significant negative estimates-a pattern most likely to represent a null effect of the policy. Experimental evidence from the Student/Teacher Achievement Ratio, or STAR, experiment (Finn & Achilles, 1999;Hanushek, 1999;Krueger, 1999) indicated that performance on standardized tests increased significantly for students in small classes compared to students in regular classes, particularly after just one year of class size intervention (Krueger, 1999). Other studies exploring natural class size variation have demonstrated that reductions of 30 to 15 students did not have a significant impact on student performance on state tests (Hoxby, 1998(Hoxby, , 2000.…”

“…The best way to solve this empirical problem would be to randomly assign schools that applied to the program to PMSE or a comparison group, and then evaluate their outcomes, as was the case with the Student/Teacher Achievement Ratio, or STAR, experiment (Finn & Achilles, 1999;Hanushek, 1999;Krueger, 1999). However, because randomization is not applicable to programs already at scale, such as PMSE, researchers have applied econometric techniques that take advantage of the natural variation in educational processes to achieve estimates of the true impact of class size policies (Angrist & Lavy, 1999;Dobbelsteen et al, 2002;Hoxby, 1998Hoxby, , 2000McEwan & Urquiola, 2005).…”