In class, bigger is very rarely better

There is fresh evidence that student performance starts to tumble as university class numbers rise.The brightest still do well but others begin to fall behind.

If you are five years old, it is accepted that class size matters. If you are a higher education student, it isn't, although the evidence that larger classes depress undergraduate performance is increasingly clear.

The latest contribution to the debate comes from Hugh Fletcher, a biological scientist at Queen's University, Belfast. He is shortly to publish a study of the performance of students in a first-year genetics class. His analysis was possible because the particular course he chose to look at had not changed significantly over a seven year period between 1988/9 and 1995/6, and nor had the staff.

What had changed dramatically was the number of students in the class, which had shot up from 68 to 151. As numbers rose, there was a consistent downward trend in marks until in 1996 only half the students sitting the final exam passed, although most got through at the second attempt. The numbers of successful students gaining over 65 per cent remained unchanged, but overall, the mean final mark fell by 16.6 per cent, in spite of the fact that the A-level grades demanded for entry to the course had not declined.

So what had happened in this genetics course and, by implication, in other courses at Queen's and elsewhere where, Fletcher says, colleagues report similar trends? One obvious result of larger class sizes, Mr. Fletcher points out, is that there is less opportunity for lecturers to offer individual help to students. Given that practical classes were reduced as numbers rose, that removed another opportunity for staff to discuss work individually with those students who had problems.

Another explanation, he suggests, could be that as numbers rose, the proportion of weaker students increased. But entry requirements for the course had not changed, the standard requirement still remaining at three C grades (18 points), including chemistry and biology. Good A-level grades were a consistent predictor of success on the course, but some students who had the minimum C grades also went on to do well.

So what went wrong? A survey of students and staff suggested that a lack of motivation, discipline and application to work were the factors which contributed most to underperformance. And class size is extremely important in this respect. Most of these first-year students had transferred from A-level classes of between eight and 20 students to a class which this year hit 240.

It is perhaps not surprising that in a situation where individual attention is the exception rather than the rule, problems over motivation, attendance, inability to work independently and - in spite of the A-level scores - an apparently wider spread of ability in the class lead to failure on a first year course.

Hugh Fletcher's work on class size is not unique. Larger studies, including one which looked at 2,000 modules over 10 years at Oxford Brookes University, have shown that increasing class sizes depresses students' marks. The most detrimental impact is on social science subjects where a reduction in discussion and debate seems to be particularly damaging. And there is concrete evidence that the recent expansion of higher education, without a corresponding increase in resources, is putting staff under severe strain.

The Association of University Teachers surveyed lecturers earlier this year reported that over half of those questioned felt "constantly under strain" and 45 per cent had seriously considered getting out of higher education at some time over the previous three years.

But as staff student ratios have increased by 60 per cent, according to the AUT, many staff feel more distressed by the fact that their students are getting a raw deal than by the fact that they are stressed themselves. "Some staff have increased the number of seminars they teach while reducing the number available to any individual student. That's more work for the teacher but a poorer deal for the student, but many believe it is preferable to having large and ineffective group sizes," says David Triesman, general secretary of the AUT.

"Those most likely to lose out by being in huge groups are those for whom access to higher education itself has been an achievement."

Students feel stressed out, too. According to Oliver Chapman, vice-president for education at the University of Birmingham Guild of Students, performance must be affected by financial pressures which mean that the majority of students now have a job during term-time, many of them until the small hours of the morning. Large classes, the lack of tutorials, book shortages, the high cost of photo-copying and even a lack of classrooms, make it harder for students to perform well, he says. "The quality of education is being constantly eroded."

So is a decline in the quality of teaching and learning inevitable as student numbers increase still further? Individual institutions have responded to growing student numbers in different ways. Bill Schwarz, reader in cultural studies at Goldsmiths College, London, says that increasing stress on students and staff there has led to experiments in teaching methods.

"We still use the mass lecture but we also try to get students into the habit of learning in small, self-sufficient groups in seminars. If you do that, it is perfectly feasible for one tutor to move from one group to another. In fact, we find that when the tutor moves out, all sorts of interesting learning starts to happen. But it does need preparation, structure and guidance. We also buy in help from postgraduate students for seminars and for second marking, in order to back up the lecturers."

The Higher Education Funding Council works on the assumption that larger numbers necessitate changes in teaching methods. It is funding 63 national projects on teaching and learning, some of which focus particularly on the impact of increasing class sizes. But according to Graham Gibbs of the Open University, an expert on teaching methods, most of higher education is still operating on the assumption that as student numbers go up, nothing needs to change.

"The Open University spends most of its time on course development because of the nature of distance learning," he says. "But in a conventional university, lecturers are not rewarded for paying attention to their teaching. In fact, the result may be that they they are even punished for teaching more efficiently by being given an extra class to teach."

What is needed, he thinks, are incentives for universities to plan for change and introduce some of the teaching methods which have been expressly designed to deal with larger classes. "The solutions are lying around waiting to be used," he says.

THE STUDENT

Teaching standards and facilities are worse than 12 months ago, says Jane

Jane is in her second year of a politics degree course at one of the civic universities. For medical reasons she is repeating her second year, and has been shocked at the deterioration over 12 months. Tutorial classes once a week are run for at least 12 students. But she is most alarmed about the reduction in seminar groups which are intended to follow up on work introduced in lectures. Last year there was one seminar a week for 20 students. This has now been reduced to one every four weeks.

"This means that we are trying to pack far too much into the time available. There is no time for debate or discussion. Only a minority of the class gets the chance to contribute.

"People have complained about the new arrangements but the university says there is no money to offer more.

"I am lucky in that I can get hold of my tutor, but I know other people find it almost impossible to make contact.

"It's even hard to get the books you need. The library lends on four- hour loans because everyone needs the same books at the same time."

THE LECTURER

Staff are overwhelmed by the increasing numbers and demands, says Steve

Steve Bradley is a former lecturer in psychology at the University of Wales, Swansea. Psychology, he says, is a very popular subject and universities generally have capitalised on that by packing students in.

"Large classes are a fact of life, and there have been changes in other areas, too. Tutorials that used to include seven or eight students now have 12 or 13, and where we used to be responsible for supervising three or four final-year projects, staff now have to take on nine or 10.

"Increasing numbers mean that the student population is much more heterogeneous than it used to be. People come in with different A-levels or, in the case of mature students, none at all. This is fine in theory, but in practice it is difficult to offer the range of support all these different students need.

"Staff take their responsibilities very seriously but some are simply overwhelmed by the numbers coming through the doors.

"Access to staff has been seriously diminished. Students are much more anonymous now because staff are pressured by essay and practical marking, extra tutorial sessions, and everything that goes with such a massive expansion without the resources it needs."