www.ccsenet.

org/ass

Asian Social Science

Vol. 7, No. 6; June 2011

Class Size and Academic Achievement of Secondary School

E-mail: [email protected]

Philias Olatunde Yara PhD

E-mail: [email protected]

Accepted: January 19, 2011

doi:10.5539/ass.v7n6p184

Abstract
The study looked at the class size as it relates to academic performance of students in Ekiti state of Nigeria between
1990 and 1997. The study population was the results of the West African School Certificate Examinations
(WASCE) conducted between 1990 and 1997 in 50 secondary schools in both rural and urban areas of the state.
One validated instrument Students Class Size Questionnaire (SCSQ) was used for data collection. One
hypothesis was formulated and answered. Data were analysed using mean and t test. The result showed that there
was no significant difference in the academic achievement of students in small and large classes from urban
schools (t = 1.49; p < 0.05); there is no significant difference between performance of students from rural large and
rural small classes (t = 0.58; p < 0.05). It was recommended that policy makers and government should ensure that
more classrooms are built and number of students in a class should not be more than 30. The Parent Teacher
Association (PTA), philanthropist and other charitable organizations are also implored to compliment the effort of
the government to boost the performance of students in SSCE by building more class rooms and buildings.
Keywords: Class size, Academic achievement, Secondary school, Ekiti state
1. Introduction
As school population increases class sizes also increase, the performances of students become an issue.
According to Dror (1995), class size has become a phenomenon often mentioned in the educational literature as
an influence on pupils feelings and achievement, on administration, quality and school budgets. In his words he
noted, that class size is almost an administrative decision over which teachers have little or no control. Most
researchers start from the assumption that size of the class would prove a significant determinant of the degree of
success of students. In fact, with the exception of a few, many studies have reported that under ideal situation,
class size in itself appears to be an important factor. The first issue that calls for immediate clarification is what
number of students should constitute a large group and what should be described as a small group? In describing
a small group, Bray (1990) observed that they have few teachers with small pools of talent; offer limited range of
subjects and characteristically finding it hard to justify costly investment on libraries their pupils lack
competition and interest with relatively few peers as they get stucked with same teacher for an entire school
career.
The description appears to be an anti-type of what obtains in large group. Large school/class size on the other
hand are often impersonal, having broader curricula with teachers being given wider support, while students may
suffer discipline problems as teachers cannot get to know their students very easily. They find it easy to stream
students according to ability while commitment to work may stand a test of time. In terms of numerical strength,
the National Policy on Education (1977 revised in 1981) specified 20 in pre-primary, 30 in primary and
maximum of 40 in secondary schools. These directives appear unrealistic in urban areas as a result of high
population. From studies conducted, the size of large classes range from 30-336 and small from 8-45 (Kolo,
1991). The empirical literature on class size and its relationship to academic achievement has been unwieldy and

184

ISSN 1911-2017

E-ISSN 1911-2025

www.ccsenet.org/ass

Asian Social Science

Vol. 7, No. 6; June 2011

confusing. According to Jordan (1964), in his analysis of the inter-relationship of intelligence, achievement and
socio-economic status of high schools, concluded that School Location among other variables was directly
related to mean achievement level of students in all the sampled subjects. However, the report by some
researchers on elementary school pupils revealed that the size of school and length of attendance have little or no
effect upon pupils achievement when educational opportunities are comparable. In his conclusion, he asserted
that teachers generally, have definite preference for the size of schools in which they wish to teach and that the
larger the size, the lower the level of students achievement will tend to be. The observation which agrees with
the findings of Sitkei (1968) and Walberg (1969) that a significant and consistent relationship exist in the
achievement of students in small classes of about 1-20 pupils that obtained higher scores in science tests than
their counterparts in large classes are necessary for student achievement.
Expressing a divergent view, Silver as cited by Bolton (1988) found that there was no significant difference in
post test achievement scores between large classes and small classes control groups; he concluded that larger is
sometimes better. Earlier, Keeves (1978) acceded that type of school did not make a contribution to academic
achievement, however, Carpenter and Western (1984) found that school type makes a difference in students
academic achievement. Hatis and Spay citing Smith and Glass and Glass et al as a corollary to the above
statement indicated through meta-analyses that, compare to larger classes, small classes lead to higher pupils
achievement, more favourable teacher effects (e.g morale, attitude towards students) greater attempts in
individualized instruction, a better classroom climate and more favorable student effects (e.g self concept,
participation). In another development, Finn and Achilles (1990) observed in a longitudinal analysis of a portion
of their large scale experiment (describing Kindergarten and teachers) that students in small classes out-perform
their peers in kindergarten classes of regular size (regular class size here means large classes). According to a
study conducted in United States, Campbell (1980) remarked that students from large schools were exposed to
large number of school activities and the best of them achieved standards that were unequaled by students in
small schools. However, he observed that students in small schools participated in more activities, (both
academics and extra- curricular activities). The study concluded that the versatility and performance of pupils in
small schools were consistently higher. The assertion made by Campbell appears confusing as he failed to
pin-point the one that is more reliable.
In his contribution, Ornstein (1990) discovered that in a 10-year study of high schools in Illinois, the lowest
achievement on three separate standard tests occurred in schools with fewer than 495 students. The highest
achievement, however, was found in schools with 495 to 1,280 students. The situation was slightly different
from this in Ekiti State where schools with fewer students recorded better results, than schools with larger
students population (Owoeye, 1991) factors such as socio-economic status and geographical location were
accounted for but these were eliminated as possible explanations. Similar view had earlier been expressed by
George (1958) when he reported in his research on high school class rank and academic performance that
graduate from high school seem to perform better academically in college when the high school from which the
student graduated has a large graduating class. Edge (1980) identifies two problems that are posed by large class
teaching; (a) the provision of an opportunity for discussion or for any kind of oral input to the written work is
difficultand; (b) the amount of marking involved can dissuade even the most enthusiastic teacher from setting
the amount of written work that he feels would benefit the students.
In another development, a comprehensive study conducted by Glass and Smith (1979) on the relationship
between class size and achievement gathered 80 studies, read and separated their results to meta-analysis
procedures. He concluded from the results he obtained that reduced class size and greater pupil achievement are
related. Researchers using meta analysis to integrate research findings of Glass and Smith meta-analytical
techniques to describe relationship between class size and academic achievement or classroom processes, their
analyses never suggested substantial changes in conclusions originally drawn in Glass and Smith (1979) and
Smith and Glass (1980). Similarly, Tupen cited in Onocha (1985) reported that the possession of larger and
better equipped laboratories, libraries and opportunity for collaboration between two or more teachers may be
some of the major reasons accounting for the variance in achievement between large and small schools. This
statement has only established that differences exist between large and small schools without actualizing the
particular one.
The Encylopaedia research on class size opined that whether the benefits of reducing class size are regarded as
worth their cost or a second choice in improving education depends almost entirely on how the outcomes of
pupil achievement, pupils attitude and teachers satisfaction are weighed in arriving at a general measure of
utility. Clearly, different groups of individuals weigh these factors differently. Most tax-payers are likely to
minimize considerations of teacher satisfaction and argue that class size reductions are not worth the price.
Published by Canadian Center of Science and Education

185

www.ccsenet.org/ass

Asian Social Science

Vol. 7, No. 6; June 2011

Teachers are likely to disagree that smaller classes produce more learning and provide the environment in
which teachers can become more creative and not burn out so early in their careersp.1156.
The conclusion is that the controversy over class size has not subsided, academic quibbling about statistics aside.
Ajayi and Ogunyemi (1990) in their study of the relationship between instructional resources and students
academic performances in Ogun State, found no significant relationship between class size and students
academic performance. Pitts (1977) on school location issue, reveal that school location whether large or small
high school, was not related to academic achievement of pupils in a standardized achievement test in
Mathematics, reading and language. However, Aluko (1992) observed that many schools nowadays are more
than 20 per cent short of staff and at the mercy of Parents Teachers Association (PTA) to hire teachers even in
the sensitive subject areas like English Language, Mathematics and some of the science subjects. He concluded
that with a crowd of 70 per cent in a class, records of continuous assessment are often unreliable. In their
contribution Bryk and Driscoll (1988) found that small school location contributed to higher Mathematics
achievement in a National survey sample. They attributed the advantage to a greater sense of commitment in the
small school including shared beliefs, values and collegiality among staff members.
Researchers (NCTE Secondary Section, 1990) have identified the following encouraging results from reducing
class size and improving instructional methods:

Smaller classes result in increased teacher-student contact.

Students in smaller classes show more appreciation for one another and more desire to participate in
classroom activities.

In smaller classes, more learning activities take place.

Smaller classes foster greater interaction among students, helping them understand one another and
increasing their desire to assist one another.

Smaller classes allow for potential disciplinary problems to be identified and resolved more quickly.

Smaller classes result in higher teacher morale and reduced stress.

Less retention, fewer referrals to special education, and fewer dropouts are the ultimate rewards of
class-size reduction.

Adeyela (2000) found in her study that large class size is not conducive for serious academic work. In the same
vein, Afolabi (2002) found no significant relationship among class size and students learning outcomes. Yara
(2010) in his study on class size and academic achievement of students in mathematics in Southwestern Nigeria
found out that the performance of students in large classes was very low (23%) compared to those students in
smaller classes (64%). There was difference in the performance of male and female students in either group. He
therefore recommended that policy makers and government should ensure that more classrooms are built and
number of students in a class should not be more than 30. The foregoing differing findings, opinions and
observations call for further investigation into the relationship between class size and student academic
achievement in Ekiti State, which this present study was out to do.
2. Method and material
2.1 Research questions
The study answered the following research hypothesis.
There is no significant difference in the performance of students in rural and urban secondary schools in term of
whether they are in small or large classes.
2.2 Research design
The research design for this study is descriptive survey design of the ex-post facto type. This is because the
researchers will not be able to manipulate the variables for simple reason that they have already occurred.
Population and sampling procedure
The research respondents for this study were final year students of schools in the rural and urban areas of Ekiti
state, Nigeria. A total of 50 secondary schools formed the target population comprising 4 Federal unity schools
and 64 public schools. The schools were those that sat for the West African School Certificate Examinations
(WASCE) between 1990 and 1997.

186

ISSN 1911-2017

E-ISSN 1911-2025

www.ccsenet.org/ass

Asian Social Science

Vol. 7, No. 6; June 2011

2.3 Instrument
The research instrument was Student Class Size Questionnaire (SCSQ) designed by the researchers. It has
section A with seven items dealing with profile of the respondents such as gender, age, school type (rural/urban),
grade among others. Section B has eight items that measured the number of students in class in rural and urban
schools, number of periods taught by teachers among others. The respondents were asked to respond to the
questions on a four point Likert Scale of strongly agree, agree, disagree and strongly disagree.
3. Results
The results of the findings are discussed in relation to tables 1 and 2.
Tables 1 and 2 attempted to establish whether or not a significant difference exists between urban large and
urban small; rural large and rural small classes in relation to academic achievement in SSCE as indicated in the
hypothesis. In Table 1, the result showed that all urban small classes had mean achievement core of 1.4000 while
the urban large classes had mean achievement score of 1.7765 with the t-value of 1.49. The result showed that
there was no significant difference in their achievement scores. Table 2 compared the school certificate
examination achievement score between rural large and rural small classes and also established the significant
difference or otherwise in their scores. The result of the t-test statistic employed showed that the rural large and
rural small classes were not significantly different with their respective mean scores of 1.4737 and 1.5300 at
t-value of 0.58. Therefore the hypothesis was accepted at alpha level of 0.05.
4. Discussion
In discussing the findings emanating from the two hypotheses, two important facts were revealed. First and as
indicated in Table 1, that there was no significant difference in the achievement scores of both urban large and
urban small classes. Actually, one would expect that one should perform better than the other but with the
findings of Obe (1984) that a lot of coaching experienced in urban pupils, who culminated in spirit of
competition and rivalry is relevant. Two, some findings have established that small class size performed better
than larger counterpart but the findings in tables 1 and 2 established that there was no significant difference in
the achievement scores not only in urban set up but also in rural locations. The result of the findings also agrees
with the findings of Ajayi and Ogunyemi (1990) and Pitts (1977) that School Location whether large or small
high school, was related to academic achievement of pupils. The finding of Howells (1982) is also relevant that
there was no evidence to support the view that small schools were any less educationally viable than large
schools. These findings also tend to agree with Bolton (1988) who found no significant difference in post-test
achievement scores between large classes and small classes control groups. The finding is also consistent with
Ayodele (1988) who claimed that in the location of schools, the severely dis- advantaged and heavily congested
urban schools produce better results than the relatively disadvantaged rural schools.
However, the findings disagree with the earlier findings of Harold (1958) and Kolawole (1982) who observed
that the relationship between class-size and students academic achievement was negative such that the larger the
size, the lower the level of students achievement, assertion which is in agreement with Sitkei (1968) and
Walberg (1969).
5. Conclusion
From the results, it can be seen that there is no difference in the performance of students in rural and urban
schools. Even though research findings showed that there are no difference in the performance of students in
agricultural science from both rural and urban schools there is the need to make the number of students to be
taught in our agricultural science classes to be moderate so that the teacher can be able to manage the class
effectively and be able to give individual attention to students who may have problem of assimilating the
concepts of what has been taught. The issue of class size has been addressed in some states of Nigeria like in
Oyo state who made an educational policy that the maximum number of students in a class should be 20. It is
therefore recommended that our educational policy makers should formulate policies that will ensure that the
number of students in a class should not exceed 30 students. This in turn will make the government to provide
enough classrooms for the schools. The Parent Teacher Association (PTA), philanthropist and other charitable
organizations are also implored to compliment the effort of the government to boost the performance of students
in SSCE by building more classes.
References
Adeyela, J. (2000). Problems of teaching science in large classes at the Junior secondary school level.
Implications for learning outcomes. Unpublished M.Ed thesis University of Ibadan, Ibadan

Published by Canadian Center of Science and Education

187

www.ccsenet.org/ass

Asian Social Science

Vol. 7, No. 6; June 2011

Afolabi, F. (2002). School factors and learner variables as correlates of senior secondary Physics achievement
in Ibadan. Unpublished Ph.D thesis, University of Ibadan, Ibadan.
Ajayi,K and Ogunyemi B. (1990). he Relationship Between Instructional Resources and Socio-Economic Status
in selected Population of High Schools in Lagos State. Dissertation/Abstract International, Vol. 25, No. 2.
Aluko, S. (1992). Nigeria: The Way Forward Lecture Obafemi Awolowo Foundation Dialogue, pp 73-74.
Ayodele, S.O. (1988). A study of the Relative Effects of the Problems of Class Sizes and Location of Schools on
Performance of Pupils. Nigerian Journal of Curriculum Studies, Vol. VI, No. 2.
Bolton, J.K. (1988). Larger is Sometimes Better Approach to the Smaller classes A paper presented at the
Annual Convention of Teachers of English to Speakers of the Languages. Chicago, Illinois.
Bray, M. (1990). School Location in the International Encyclopaedia of Education. Husen T, Postlethwaile,
T.N.(Eds) Great Britain.
Bryk, A.S. & Dirscoll, M.E. (1988). The High Schools as Community: Contextual influences and Consequences
for Students and Teachers. Madison, W.I, National Centre on Effective Secondary Schools.
Campell, R.N. (1980). The Oral Approach with large Classes Language Learning, Vol. X, No. 122, pp.41-46.
Carpenter, P.G. and Western J.S. (1984). The Process of Academic Achievement. Educational Research and
Perspectives, 11(2), 63-79.
Dror, Y. (1995). School Location as a Function of Uniqueness, Autonomy Integration and Comprehensiveness :
A Historical Model with current Implication. Journal of Education Administration and History, 27 (1).
Edge, J. (1980). Teaching Writing in Language Classes ELT Journal Education: A harvest of Crisis in National
Concord Tuesday, 17, 1996, P.19 xxxiv(2), 146-148.
Federal Republic of Nigeria. (1981). National Policy of Education. Yaba, Lagos NERC Press.
Finn, J.D. and Achilles, C.M. (1990). Answers and questions about class Size: A state-wide Experiment.
American Educational Research Journal, 27 (3), 557-577.
George, A.K. (1958). High School Class rank and Academic performance in College. Dissertation Abstract
international, 20 (9), 3575.
Glass, G.V and smith, M.L. (1979). Meta-analysis of Research on Class Size and Achievement. Educational
Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 1, 2-16.
Harold, F.S. (1958). Achievement in Intermediate Algebra Associated with class size at the University Wichita.
Dissertation Extract International, Vol. 1, No. 3.
Jordan, B.H. (1964). Analysis of the Interrelationship of Intelligence, Achievement and Socio Economic Status
in selected Population of High School. Dissertation Abstract International, 25(2).
Keeves, J.P. (1978). Approaches to the Goal of Educational Equality in Renewal of Australian Schools: A
changing perspective in Educational Planning. In J.V.D. Crus and P.J Sheehan (eds), Melbourne ACER, 92-107.
Kolo, T.N. (1991). Relative effects of class size, Social Educational Background and Attitude on Oral English
Proficiency in Nupe Students. Unpublished Ph.D Thesis, University of Ibadan.
NCTE. (1990). Students Rights should dictate class size. The English Journal, 88(5), 18 20. [Online] Available:
https://www.jstor.org/stable/821771.
Obe, E.O. (1984). Urban Rural and Sex Differences in Scholastic Aptitude of primary School Finalists in Lagos
State. Education and Development, 4 (1 & 2).
Onocha, C.O. (1985). Patterns of Relationship between Home and School Factors and Pupils Learning
Outcomes in Bendel Primary Science Project. A Ph.D Thesis in the International Centre for Educational
Evaluation, Institute of education, University of Ibadan.
Ornstein, A.C. (1990). How BIG should Schools and Districts Be? The Education Digest, 56(2).
Owoeye, J.S. (1991). A Study of the Relationship between class size and Educational Quality in Ondo State.
Unpublished M.Ed Thesis, University of Lagos.
Pitts, D.L. (1977). A study of the relationship among financial efficiency and school location, school level and
academic achievement in selected Texas Districts. Unpublished Ph.D Thesis, University of Houston.
Sitkei, E.G. (1968). The Effect of Class Size: A Review of Research. Washington, D.C.

188

ISSN 1911-2017

E-ISSN 1911-2025

www.ccsenet.org/ass

Asian Social Science

Vol. 7, No. 6; June 2011

Smith, M.L. and Glass, G.V. (1980). Meta-Analysis on class size and its relationship to attitude and instruction.
American Educational Research Journal, 17, 419 433.
Walberg, H.J. (1969). The Social Environment as a Mediator of Classroom Learning. Journal of Educational
Psychology, p.60.
Yara, P.O. (2010). Class size and students Mathematics Achievement of senior secondary schools in
Southwestern Nigeria. The Social Sciences Journal (TSS), 5(2), 108 112.
Table 1. Comparison of Academic Achievement of Urban large and Urban small classes.
Variable

Mean

SD

Rural

29

1.7207

0.201

Urban

21

1.9619

DF

T-value

Sig T

48

2.73

0.009

0.414

*sig at p <0.05
Table 2. Comparison of Academic Achievement of Rural Large and Rural Small Classes
Variable

Mean

SD

Rural Small

19

1.4737

0.256

Rural Large

10

1.5300

DF

T-value

Sig T

27

0.58

0.556

NS

0.231

*sig at p <0.05

Published by Canadian Center of Science and Education

189