effect of student-teacher ratio on third grade ... sara.… · significant difference (p-value of...

EFFECT OF STUDENT-TEACHER RATIO ON THIRD GRADE COMMUNICATION ARTS

MAP SCORES IN NORTHWESTERN MISSOURI

By

SARA WILLIS AND JESSICA KNOTT

Submitted to

The Faculty of the Department of Professional Education

Northwest Missouri State University Missouri

College of Education and Human Services

Maryville, MO 64468

Dr. Timothy Wall, Research Paper Supervisor

Submitted in Fulfillment for the Requirements for

61-682 Improvement of Instruction through Action Research and 61-683 Action

Research Paper

April 26, 2014

ABSTRACT

STUDENT-TEACHER RATIO AND THIRD GRADE CA MAP SCORES

The purpose of this research was to describe the difference between the 3rd

grade Communication Arts MAP scores of smaller and larger student–teacher ratios.

The study used existing data from the Missouri Assessment Program for third grade

Communication Arts, which was provided by the Missouri Department of

Elementary and Secondary Education. The Department of Education gathers MAP

data from all the schools in the state of Missouri, which is public information. The

mean percent of Advanced and Proficient 3rd grade CA MAP scores were collected

and combined from forty-five school districts in Northern Missouri over a time

period from 2009-2013. Of these districts, twenty were rural, from the Harrison-

Davies Conference and Grand River Conference, and twenty-five were suburban,

from the Midland Empire Conference. Also collected from these districts were the

class sizes over a period from 2009-2013. The researchers then separated the data

into three groups, based on class sizes. Group 1 included classes of 0-14 students,

Group 2 included classes with 15-18 students, and Group 3 included classes with

19-22 students. The researchers used the ANOVA to determine that there is not a

significant difference (p-value of 0.125) in student achievement on the MAP test

between smaller student-teacher ratios and larger student-teacher ratios.

Therefore, the action researchers do not suggest that school districts use student-

teacher ratio reduction as a means to improve third grade CA Arts scores on the

MAP test.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

2


LIST OF FIGURES AND TABLES …………………………………………………………….... 5

CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY ………...…………………………...6

Background ……………………………………… …………………………….6

Conceptual Underpinning …………………………………………………...8

Statement of the Problem ………………………………………………….10

Purpose of the Study …………………………………………………….......11

Research Questions. ……………………………………………………….....11

Null Hypothesis ………………………………………………………………...11

Anticipated Benefits of the Study ………………………………….......12

Limitations and Delimitations of the Study ………………………...12

Definition of Terms …………………………………………………………...12

Summary ……………………………………………………………………….…14

CHAPTER TWO: REVIEW OF LITERATURE ……………………………………………...15

Overview …………………………………………………………………………………….15

Student-Teacher Ratio ………………………………………………………………...15

Standardized Testing …………………………………………………………………...21

Small Group Learning …………………………………………………………………..22

Research Methodology …………………………………………………………………24

Summary ……………………………………………………………………………………..25

CHAPTER THREE: RESEARCH AND DESIGN METHODOLGY ……………………..26

Research Design …………………………………………………………………………...26

Variables Used in the Study …………………………………………………………26

Research Questions …………………………………………………...........................26

3


Null Hypothesis ………………………………………………………………………….26

Study Group ……………………………………………………………………………….27

Data Collection and Instrumentation …………………………………………...27

Statistical Analysis Strategies ……………………………………………………..27

Summary …………………………………………………………………………………..28

CHAPTER FOUR: PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS OF DATA …………………..30

Presentation of the Data Analysis by Research Questions …………….30

Findings ……………………………………………………………………………………30

Summary …………………………………………………………………………………..33

CHAPTER FIVE: FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND RECCOMENDATIONS .......34

Overview ………………………………………………………………………………….34

Restatement of Purpose …………………………………………………………….34

Discussion of Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendations ………35

Summary ………………………………………………………………………………….36

REFERENCES ………………………………………………………………………………………37

APPENDIX …………………………………………………………………………………………..42

LIST OF FIGURES AND TABLES

4


Table 1: Summary of Descriptive Statistics for MAP Communication Arts Scores for

3rd Grade Students over Five Years………………………………………………………………….30

Figure 1: A chart displaying the mean of 3rd grade Communication Arts MAP

Percentage of Students Scoring Advanced and Proficient..………………………………..32

Table 2: Source of Variance …………………………………………………………………………….32

CHAPTER ONE

5


INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY

Background

Researchers have conducted numerous studies comparing the standardized

achievement test scores between students with larger average class sizes and those

with smaller average class sizes. In the 1970’s research showed reductions in class

sizes across the nation might have been responsible for the substantial test score

gains among poor and minority students (Haimson, 2014). Although researchers

found that class size reduction narrowed the achievement gap, the cost of reform

has hindered the implementation of smaller class sizes over the years (Adams,

2014).

Schools with high numbers of minority students tend to have class sizes of 25

or more students per teacher. While the United States Department of Education has

found no evidence that a particular class size is most beneficial to increase student

performance the higher student teacher ratios tend to lead to a decrease in students

time spent actively engaged in learning activities (Haimson, 2014). Former Vice

President Al Gore led a campaign to reduce average class sizes to no more than 15

students per teacher, especially in the primary grades. This class size reduction was

believed to begin a domino effect in standardized test scores, which would impact

students through middle and high school (Achilles, 2007). Researchers found that

when comparing students in classes of 22 to 25 students to classes with less than 20

students, students with smaller class sizes scored significantly higher on

standardized tests in grades K-3 (Adams, 2014).

6


Standardized testing has long been used to compare students’ achievement

at the district and state levels. With the implementation of the Common Core State

Standards, students test scores will now be compared nationwide (Dietel, 2012).

This does not take into account the socioeconomic status of all of the school districts

across our nation. When looking at our nation’s educational system, researchers

have found a wide variance in student demographics, English language abilities, and

the level of teacher education and experience (Condon et al, 2012). The highest-

ranking school districts, based on standardized test scores, are those that employ

highly educated professionals that have had thorough training in their subject area.

These teachers are trained to match different student learning styles, and provide a

more tailored education to their students. Less prepared teachers who lack

experience have been found to have students with lower standardized test scores

(Black, 2001).

The researchers seek to investigate the relationship between student-teacher

ratios, which are directly correlated with the socioeconomic level of school districts

and have a direct impact on the amount of individualized educational time devoted

to each student. It is likely additional small group learning time and individualized

attention devoted to students will lead to higher standardized test scores. Students

working in smaller groups are given the opportunity to share their knowledge with

their peers, while learning from them at the same time, which promotes higher

order thinking skills among all students (Center for Teaching and Learning, 1999).

Researchers have found that students working in larger groups are likely to

see an increase in behavioral disruptions, and a lack of organization, which can lead

7


to a decrease in highly engaging instructional time for students (Alhusen, Belsky,

Booth-La-Force, Bradley, Brownwell, and Burhinal, 2004). This is a concern for

educators who are working to provide an equally high quality education for all of

their students.

This study will examine student achievement as measured by the MAP in the

3rd grade CA section of the test in forty-five school districts in Northwest Missouri.

It will include 3rd grade test scores from the Midland Empire Conference, Harrison-

Davies Conference, and Grand River Conference, which include a variety of student

teacher ratios ranging from 6:1 to 22:1. The study will attempt to determine if

student-teacher ratios have a significant impact on the number of students who

score Proficient or Advanced on the MAP test.

Conceptual Underpinning

Students learn better when they are working in smaller groups. When

students are working in small groups they are able to learn from each other, share

their knowledge, build better personal relationships with their peers and the

teacher, and stay more engaged in learning activities (Alhusen et al, 2004; Center for

Teaching and Learning, 1999; Fan, 2012; Kelly, 2014). This educational belief was

supported by theorist, Lev Vygotsky. Vygotsky felt that people learn better when

involved in social interaction. He thought that the learning process should take place

between the teacher and the students together. When the student-teacher ratios are

lowered there is allowance for teachers and students to work more closely together

and build a stronger learning community between the students and teachers, in turn

8


producing increased student cognition (Calatta, 2013; Elvira et al, 2010; Kozulin,

2011).

Vygotsky also felt that people, (students) learn when they are working with

in their Zone of Proximal Development, (ZPD). The ZPD is what can be accomplished

successfully with the assistance of an adult or help from a peer, surpassing what can

be done alone. What learners can accomplish is dependent upon the level of social

interaction and the amount of time spent working in the ZPD (Culatta, 2013).

There have been multiple studies investigating student performance when

the student-teacher ratio has been lowered. A study conducted by the state of

California, investigating the effect of lower student-teacher ratio, found that when

the student-teacher ratio was lowered, there were fewer interruptions because of

behavior and small student gains in performance. The Tennessee STAR Project,

reduced class sizes to below 18 students in a class. This study did find success in

student achievement when class sizes were reduced. This information is vital to the

research paper because the above-mentioned studies investigate things similar to

this project. The three studies mentioned are building a foundation upon which this

action research project will be built. There is an ongoing study being conducted in

Florida, looking into the effect of passing legislation to mandate that class sizes have

a ratio no larger than 22:1. The research hopes that decreasing class sizes will

increase student performance (Adams, 2014).

When looking into how Vygotsky’s theory lines up with today’s testing

standards, Kozulin (2011) states what we term as Dynamic Testing is the way that

ZPD is presented in today’s educational format. Vygotsky’s thoughts on assessment

9


suggest the way he felt about assessing reveals itself in how schools today are

choosing to transition testing; through Dynamic Assessment embedded in Common

Core State Standards (Dietel, 2012). Kozulin states, Vygotsky believed in assessing

relative learning throughout the school year along with the end of the year

standardized tests (2011). This is currently happening and is known as progress

monitoring, benchmarking, along with formative and summative assessments. This

principle also lines up with Dietel’s account of optional testing throughout the

school year. It seems as though Vygotsky was a man beyond his years, representing

what is currently happening in today’s education.

Statement of the Problem

Many researchers have investigated the effect of teacher-student ratio and

small group education. There has also been research on standardized testing, but

there is a lack of research, from elementary schools in Northwest Missouri, on the

effect of the number of students per classroom teacher when considering third

grade Communication Arts standardized test scores. This study will fill in a gap in

the knowledge and provide evidence to inform best educational practices.

School districts implement small group interventions to aid struggling

students in learning. The reason for this implementation is because studies have

found that small group learning is more focused and intense when considering

student academic growth, (Alhusen et al, 2004; Bresnahan et al, 2011; Center for

Teaching and Learning, 1999). Students are also able to have more 1:1 attention

from the teacher and learn from their peers within a smaller group ratio. According

to Vygotsky’s theory, students are able to make larger gains in academics when they

10


are working more closely with an adult or higher level peer (Culatta, 2013). Will

having fewer students in the classroom act as a small group model and increase

student performance on standardized tests? Will teachers be able to provide the

same kind of focused instruction as small group interventions, when class sizes are

small and the student-ratio is decreased? Will student scores vary when compared

between students from the MEC, HDC, and GRC? These are some of the question the

researchers are hoping to answer.

Purpose of the Study

When considering lowering student-teacher ratio, there are factors to

consider, such as budgetary constraints and the need to determine student

performance. It is important to look into the performance of the students before

deciding to do something that could cause districts to incur financial strain. Students

must be able to show increased achievement for school districts to justify taking on

the financial burden of hiring more teachers to allow for districts to lower student-

teacher ratio.

Research Questions

RQ: Is there a difference between 3rd grade Communication Arts MAP scores

when considering the number of students to classroom teacher in the MEC,

HDC, and GRC conferences?

Null Hypothesis

Ho: There is no difference between 3rd grade Communication Arts MAP

scores when considering the number of students to classroom teacher in the

MEC, HDC, and GRC conference.

11


Anticipated Benefits of the Study

The benefit of this study will provide information about whether lowering

the student-teacher ratio in classrooms, in the HDC conference, MEC conference, or

GRC conference, will improve the performance of third grade students on the

Communication Arts section of the MAP test. Another benefit may include

discovering if it is cost effective to reduce student-ratio in order to increase student

performance. We are assuming that smaller class size means higher levels of student

engagement and that the schools being examined have similar socioeconomic

situations, with similar student backgrounds and teachers with similar levels of

experience.

Limitations and Delimitations of the Study

Limitations

There are several limitations to this study. This study only included 3rd grade

students from three athletic conferences in Northern Missouri. Student’s abilities

upon entering the 3rd grade were not considered. Student transiency rates were not

considered, along with student socioeconomic status, location of the conferences

with-in the state of Missouri, student backgrounds, and/or the teacher’s level of

experience.

Delimitations

This study only included data from third grade student taking the

communication arts section of the MAP test, enrolled in schools in the MEC, HDC,

and GRC conference, in Northern Missouri, from the 2009 to 2013 school year.

Definition of Terms

12


• Student-teacher ratio: The number of students who attend an institution divided

by the number of teachers in the institution.

• Accommodation: A physical or environmental change that helps the student

overcome or work around a disability.

• Modification: A reduction of the expectation from the student.

• Socioeconomic Status (SES): The economic situation of a family or student,

related to income.

• Missouri Assessment Program (MAP): the standardized assessment administered

to all public school students in grades 3-8, unless other wise approved by the

Missouri Department of Education for special circumstances.

• Advanced: A student is exceeding the state mandated expectation on MAP test,

defined as a numeric score of 673-790.

• Proficient: A student is meeting the state mandated expectation on the MAP test,

defined as a numeric score of 648-672.

• Communication Arts (CA): An assessment of the reading comprehension and

writing skills learned in schools in Missouri.

• Midland Empire Conference (MEC): A group of similar sized suburban schools

that compete against each other in athletics, academics, and music in

Northwestern Missouri.

• Harrison-Daviess Conference (HDC): A group of similar sized rural schools that

compete against each other in athletics, academics, and music in Northwestern

Missouri.

13


• Grand River Conference (GRC): A group of similar sized rural schools that

compete against each other in athletics, academic, and music in Northwestern

Missouri.

Summary

This study investigated whether there was a difference in 3rd grade CA MAP

scores in three athletic conferences, in Northwestern Missouri, when considering

student–teacher ratio. There are several studies investigating the effect of student-

teacher ratio on student performance. The Tennessee STAR program and California

Class Size Reduction program found that when the student-teacher ratio is reduced,

student performance is increased (Haimson, 2014; Jackson and Page, 2014). This is

supported by Vygotsky’s theory of Zone of Proximal Development(Kozulin, 2011).

When students are able to have more 1:1 time with their teachers and interactions

with their peers they are able to make larger gains in education than those who do

not have as many of those opportunities (Culatta, 2013). In this study the student-

teacher ratio in the MEC, HDC, and GRC will be divided to see whether it makes an

impact on 3rd grade CA arts scores on the MAP test, from 2009-2013.

14


CHAPTER TWO

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

Overview

When class sizes are smaller, student achievement is higher. The teacher has

more time to dedicate to building relationships with students, which in turn will

produce higher achievement scores on standardized tests (Cifcili et al, 2011). These

personal relationships built when working as small groups will allow students to

gain confidence, which leads to student success (Helm, 2007). The researchers

found that the literature generally supports smaller student-teacher ratios,

especially in the primary grades.

This chapter will present literature related to student teacher-ratios,

standardized testing, and small group learning. The researchers will specifically

focus on the benefits and shortcomings that the literature suggests of smaller class

sizes versus larger class sizes, when considering students’ academic performance.

There will be discussion of the benefits of learning in small group settings. The

action researchers will also look at expert’s views of standardized testing and their

effects on today’s educational system. The last topic to be covered in this section will

be the benefits of small group learning.

Student-Teacher Ratio

There are multiple advantages and disadvantages to creating lower student-

teacher ratios. The researchers will first look into the positive aspects of lowering

student-teacher ratios. Some of those benefits include: increased student

achievement, (Hamison, 2014; Adams, 2014), less “teacher turn over,” (Hamison,

15


2014), higher graduation rates, when students are in small class sizes in primary

grades, (Adams, 2014), students are more engaged in educational activities during

the school day, (Elvira et al, 2010), teachers have more time to dedicate to each

student, (Elvira et al, 2010; Johnson, 2002), and less disruptive student behavior,

(Cifcili, 2011; Elvira et al, 2010; Fan, 2012).

Vygotsky’s theory supports the idea that devoting more time to students will

enhance their ability to learn more complex concepts. Students are able to learn

better when they are working with an adult or collaborating with a peer. When

knowledge is beginning to come forth, is the best stage of learning for students to

have assistance from an adult or work with a peer. This stage would become known

by Vygotsky as the Zone of Proximal Development. The ZDP is a period of

development when the learner is able to complete a task successfully with

assistance. It is dependent on social interaction with adults or peers.

Vygotsky’s thoughts on education spill over into testing as well. He felt that

learners should be tested on an interactive learning platform. This lines up with the

new push to move towards Dynamic Assessment procedures, an interactive method

of assessment (Culatta, 2013; Kozulin, 2011). Many of Vygotsky’s thoughts point

toward lowering the student-teacher ratio. As stated above, lowering the student-

teacher ratio would allow students to be more engaged in educational activities

during the school day, (Elvira et al, 2010) and teachers would have more time to

dedicate to each student, (Elvira et al, 2010; Johnson, 2002).

Although it is thought that there is no “magic” number linked to student

achievement and student-teacher ratio, (Hamison, 2014), it is believed that when

16


the student- teacher ratio is 18:1, (Fan, 2012), or even as low as 15:1, (Achilles,

1997), there will be increased student achievement. Some researchers would even

agree as long as classes have less than twenty students they are thought to be small

classes, (Elvira et al, 2010), and the student achievement will be increased

compared to students in larger class sizes. This is thought to be especially true for

students in primary grades, (Biddle and Baringer, 2002). Biddle and Baringer also

believe that when students are in smaller class sizes, in primary grades, the students

will be able to retain the information throughout the middle school years, (2002).

Not only does student-teacher ratio impact student success in primary

grades, it also affects student success at the middle and high school level. Student

test scores are higher and the rate of students that drop out of school is lower,

(Hamison, 2014). When class size is reduced it found that the variance in student

growth is smaller. This is particularly true when class sizes are smaller than 25

students, (Hamison, 2014). Lose et al, even went as far as to compare students in

group sizes from 1:3, 1:5, and 1:10. The researchers found that growth was similar

for all of the group sizes compared, (2012).

Along with student benefits there are benefits for the teacher, when

considering smaller class sizes. When teachers have smaller class sizes they are able

to build stronger relationships with their students, (Fan, 2012). Stronger

relationships could lead to students working to please their teacher by trying harder

to make achievement gains, (Helm, 2007). Stronger student-teacher relationships

can also lead to less behavioral outburst, allowing the teacher to spend more time

teaching content, (Cifcili et al, 2011; Jackson and Page, 2014). Classes that have

17


smaller student-teacher ratios also have teachers with a more positive outlook

towards students and their work, (Elvira et al, 2010). The teachers are more willing

to try new things and work harder to collaborate with parent or guardians,

(Achilles, 1997).

Student-teacher ratio is a powerful force in deciding student success, (Cifcili

et al, 2011). Helm noted that researchers Sanders and Rivers, found that having an

effective teacher over the course of several years can lead to increased standardized

test scores. The increase in student learning can be as much as 50 percentile points,

(2007). Fan found that students in smaller class sizes had increased success in

reading and math, (2012). The largest student growth in small class sizes was found

to happen with students that started out with lower academic ability than more

advanced peers in the same grade level, (Pedder, 2006).

The research has discussed three different studies done on student-teacher

ratio and the effects of student achievement. Those three studies were in California,

Tennessee, and Florida. In California, the results of the study found that when class

size was reduced, student test scores improved, (Achilles, 1997). It was also found

that when the class was reduced there was less time spent on discipline and an

increase in parent-teacher contact. The study in California was not without

disadvantages though. There was a struggle to find enough classrooms to house the

additional classes created by forming smaller class sizes, (Bascia and Faubert,

2012). It was also difficult to attain skilled teachers to teach the additional classes.

This often left the positions open to less than qualified individuals, (Johnson, 2002).

The study in Tennessee, called Project STAR, did find a significant difference

18


in student achievement, when class size was reduced to fall below eighteen

students, (Johnson, 2002). The average test score, of the student’s in smaller class

sizes, was improved during the time of the study. The students who seemed to

improve the most were at-risk students or students with low socio-economic status,

(Biddle and Berliner, 2002; Fan, 2012; Jackson and Page, 2014). Although,

researchers found that, in Kindergarten and first grade there were no documented

benefits that seemed to be related to class size. The difference in test scores

appeared to be between races, (Jackson and Page, 2014). Growth was noted for both

boys and girls in small class sizes, although there was not an exact number noted

(Biddle and Berliner, 2002). According to Charles Achilles, “The results of this study

were considered commonsensical…,” (1997). The reason Tennessee did not

mandate a requirement to require small class sizes was due to budget constraints.

This means the schools could not afford to hire enough qualified staff to support the

small class sizes.

It is unfortunate the districts could not afford to fund the small class sizes.

The study found that the fourth grade students participating in the study showed

about a six-month gain compared to larger class sizes, (Achilles, 1997).

The final study, in Florida, was done by passing a law that required class

sizes to be reduced in grades k-2, to class sizes of no more than 22 and in grades 4-8,

class sizes must be less than 25. The study in Florida is ongoing and the effect is still

unknown. The expected result is that performance will show an eternal increase,

(Adams, 2014).

19


Factors other than student-teacher ratio can influence student performance,

(Bascia and Faubert, 2012). Some of the factors mentioned in the research include:

the amount of teacher experience, the amount of professional development, and the

amount of education a teacher has acquired, (Bascia and Faubert, 2012; Cifcili et al,

2011; Helm, 2007; Lose et al, 2012), the school curriculum, (Lamdin, 1995;), student

self-esteem, (Helm, 2007), student background, (Cifcili, et al, 2011; Lose et al, 2012),

and school district policy, (Bascia and Faubert, 2012). Many of the mentioned

factors are beyond the school district’s control. However, increased teacher training

and education can help schools increase their achievement levels.

While there are researchers that support low student-teacher ratios, there

are others that argue that it does not make a difference in student performance,

unless the research considers what is taking place in the classroom, (Pedder, 2006).

If researchers do not consider the activities that take place in the classroom, the

research cannot accurately portray student success or lack of success, (Pedder,

2006). Pedder also found research to be inconsistent and misused by politicians. He

feels that because of the inconsistency of educational research, politicians misuse

educational research to manipulate the educational views of others. Thus, they are

convincing others to agree with their political point of view, (2006). Johnson feels

that class sizes are unable to be dwindled down small enough to make a difference

in student performance, (2002). This issue is related to the funding argument that

Achilles presented with the Tennessee STAR project research. School districts will

need to be able to pay for highly skilled educators to teach the small class sizes, in

turn, lowering the student teacher ratio. So far, researchers have not found a source

20


to provide the needed financial support needed to lower student-teacher ratio with

the intent of improving standardized test scores.

Standardized Testing

When comparing standardized testing scores among students from smaller

class sizes versus larger class sizes, the action researchers have found that there are

many more factors that have an impact on student achievement. Student’s

socioeconomic status, gender, and their first language have also been shown to have

a significant impact on their standardized test scores (Condon et al, 2012). It has

been found that students with a higher socioeconomic status are more adept at

testing, because they have been prepared for standardized testing. These districts

also have teachers that have been deeply groomed in their subject area in order to

prepare students for standardized testing, which is an option that low income

school districts do not have (Black, 2001).

Many of these low SES students dislike standardized testing, because they

are not given the same opportunities as their peers. This aversion towards testing is

also evident in students test scores; those who do not feel that the testing is

important are less likely to put effort into the test (Driscoll, 2011). Another

inequality when comparing students standardized test scores is when students

provided accommodations and modifications are compared with the rest of the

student population. Changes to the administrations guidelines for standardized

tests may affect the reliability and validity of the test.

When student’s tests have been modified, or accommodations have been

made during testing, their scores should not be compared with those who did not

21


receive the same accommodations and modifications (Farah et al, 2013). The action

researchers have found that many schools have turned from institutions of learning

to test preparation centers, which has skewed our nation’s view of schools that have

been “Distinguished with Excellence.” The No Child Left Behind federal mandate

has raised the expectations placed upon our students, and has become the driving

force behind the changing of guidelines across the nation (U.S. Department of

Education, 2009).

The school districts included in this study use the Missouri Assessment

Program, or MAP test, because it is the standardized test for the state of Missouri.

All public school districts in the state are required to administer this assessment

(Department of Elementary and Secondary Education, 2013). Researchers have

found that educators are neglecting the 3 R’s of Education, Reasoning, Resilience,

and Responsibility, in an attempt to raise standardized test scores. In order to

better serve all students equally, schools need to redirect their focus from

standardized test scores to promoting reasoning, resilience, and responsibility

(Sternberg, 2008). By doing so schools will increase standardized test scores. A

useful method on reducing teacher responsibility and increasing teacher resilience

is working with students in a small group setting.

Small Group Learning

There are many benefits of small group learning for students in all grades,

especially those in the primary grades. Small group learning leads to students

learning to problem solve independently by allowing them to work with their peers

to resolve their differences through conflict resolution (Kelly, 2014). The students

22


are able to learn from each other, think more deeply than their independent

working peers, and work collaboratively (Bresnahan, 2011; Center for Teaching and

Learning, 1999) Students working collectively should be grouped in groups of no

more than four to six, for prime results, (Center for Teaching and Learning, 1999)

and should be grouped by ability level. They must then learn the different

responsibilities involved with group learning, and be held accountable for their

performance as a group (Center for Teaching and Learning, 1999). The students

should take turns experiencing leadership roles and managing their peers. The

students will be working toward reaching a communal goal. This is a skill that will

be helpful to students throughout their entire education along with the

communication skills that are acquired while working in small groups (Kelly, 2014).

When students are fulfilled and involved in activities, they do not feel the

need to act out. It has been recognized that students engaged in small group

learning are more actively engaged, (Bresnahan, 2011) and are less likely to have

behavioral disruptions during instructional time (Alhusen et al, 2004). The ability to

solve problems with peers partners with improved ability to communicate with

peers and solve problems with less support from teachers (Kelly, 2014). When there

are less behavioral outbursts, the teacher has more time to focus on instruction,

benefiting the group as a whole. The outcome of can have a positive impact on

standardized test scores. (Alhusen et al, 2014) This supports the idea that smaller

classes allow teachers to be able to build stronger relationships with students and

engrossing them in greater learning pursuits (Alhusan et al, 2014). The students

23


who showed the largest growth in achievement, while learning in small groups,

were student with a lower socio-economic background (Alhusan et al, 2014).

Research Methodology

There are three authors which contributed to the structure of this paper. The

review of literature section was formatted using John Creswell’s format of writing a

review of literature. He gives an overview of the format and guides the writer in the

formation of the section. The statistics used in this study are descriptive. They

describe the student-teacher ratio from the schools chosen to be analyzed. The MAP

scores are also descriptive. The scores describe the student performance of the third

grade students at each elementary school involved in the study. The study is a

causal-comparative, non-experimental design. Since the data was collected from the

DESE website, the study is considered non-experimental. The action researchers did

not create any of their own data. It is considered causal-comparative because the

study looks at data and compares the information to decide if the IV caused the DV

to change (Trochim, 2006).

The statistical test chosen when running the data was the ANOVA, analysis of

variance. The ANOVA is a statistical analysis test that evaluates the data after it has

been separated into more than two separate groups. When the P-value, produced by

the ANOVA is less than 0.05 the researcher must reject the null hypothesis. This

means what the researchers were investigating was found to be supported by the

data. Once the initial test was finished the researchers had to conduct a Post Hoc

analysis to decide if the, “difference is significant enough to make a change,”

(Kranzler, 2011). The researchers are then expected to write up an analysis of the

24


findings and conclusions of the data. This information can be found in chapters four,

Findings and five, Conclusions and Recommendations for Further Study.

Summary

This chapter presented literature related to student-teacher ratio,

standardized testing, small group learning, and the relationships that have been

proven to exist between the three. Also included was the research methodology

used to structure this paper, and the statistical test chosen to analyze the data. The

research in this chapter specifically focused on the pros and cons of smaller class

sizes versus larger class sizes when students’ academic performance is under

consideration. Students in grades 3-8 in Missouri are required to participate in the

MAP test each spring, which enables the state to compare districts statewide (Dietel,

2012; Missouri Department of Education, 2013). Students with smaller class sizes

have been given the opportunity to build their problem solving skills, which leads to

a higher level of confidence, (Kelly, 2014). This heightened confidence aids students

when participating in the MAP test. Within this review of literature, students’ scores

on the 3rd grade communication arts MAP assessment have been studied by multiple

researchers. The action researchers have found a relationship to occur between

student-teacher ratio and the number of students achieving a score of Proficient or

Advanced on the MAP test. Generally speaking, the action researchers believe that

students from smaller class sizes have higher standardized test scores than those

from larger classes.

25


CHAPTER THREE

RESEARCH AND DESIGN METHODOLOGY

Research Design

The research design used in this study was causal-comparative, non-

experimental. The results were used to analyze whether lower-student-teacher

ratios caused increased student performance. The variables in this study had

already transpired. (Trochim, 2006)

Variables Used in the Study

Independent and Dependent variables were used in this study. Independent

variables are variables that are manipulated. Dependent variables are variables that

changed based on the change that occurs with the independent variable.

Independent Variable (IV): The independent variable in this study is the

student-teacher ratio for each third grade classes.

Dependent Variable (DV): The dependent variable in this study is 3rd grade

student performance at each school, more specifically the student performance on

the CA section of the MAP test from 2009-2013.

Research Questions




Null Hypothesis

26





Study Group

This study group consisted of 3rd grade students that were enrolled in

schools in the MEC, HDC, and GRC athletic conferences, from 2009-2013. There we

45 schools included in this study, with data covering five years of Missouri

Assessment Program scores per school. There were 25 schools located in suburban

Northwestern Missouri and 20 schools were located in rural Northwestern

Missouri. In this study, 100% of the schools had students who scored advanced or

proficient on the CA MAP test, with the mean being 42.9% of students scoring in this

range when looking at all 25 schools. Based on the research, it was assumed that

lower student-teacher ratios would relate to increased student performance.

Data Collection and Instrumentation

The data used in this study was retrieved from the Department of Education

website. The 3rd grade student’s names were not included in the database. All of the

scores collected were from students who scored either proficient or advanced on

the 2009-2013 Communication Arts MAP test. The MAP test is the standardized

Missouri state assessment. The results are used to compare school performance

within the state of Missouri. The student scores all came from rural and suburban

schools in the MEC, HDC, and GRC athletic conferences.

Statistical Analysis Strategies

27


The data was analyzed by first gathering the data from the Missouri

department of education website, next the data was input into a Microsoft Excel

spreadsheet and separated by student-teacher-ratio. The final step was completed

by running an ANOVA, using EZ Analyze software. The data was separated into

groups from 0-14 students represented by the number 1, 15-18 students

represented by the number 2, 19-22 students represented by the number 3. The

groups were chosen based on the number of schools that fell with in the restrictions

of each group. The groups consist a similar number of schools. The largest student-

teacher ratio in the study was 22 student per teacher.

For the research question an Analysis of Variance, ANOVA, was run on the

data and compared CA MAP scores in each of the groups included in the ANOVA. An

ANOVA is used to test for statistical differences in a group of data consisting of three

or more groups. The p-value was set at 0.05 to ascertain if there was a significant

difference between the groups labeled 1,2,and 3 (Kranzler, 2011).

Summary

This chapter discussed the Research Design, Variables Used in the Study,

Research Questions, Null Hypothesis, Study Group, Data Collection and

Instrumentation, and Statistical Analysis Strategies.

The study will attempt to determine if there is a statistically significant

difference in student-performance on the CA MAP assessment, when considering

student-teacher ratio. Data from 45 different schools, from 2009-2013, was

collected from the Misouri Department of Education website. An ANOVA was run,

using EZAnalyze software, in an attempt to reveal a difference in student

28


performance based on student-teacher ratio. The p-value was set at 0.05 to

determine if there was a significant difference in the data groupings.

Upon analysis, the action researchers plan to share this information with the

administration of the school districts, in which the action researchers are employed.

The data will be presented in the hopes that the school districts may use the data to

base their decisions on student-teacher ratio for future school years.

29


CHAPTER FOUR

PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS OF DATA

Presentation of the Data Analysis by Research Questions







The action researchers chose to run an Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) to

determine if the class size made a difference in students’ 3rd grade MAP

Communication Arts scores. The ANOVA enabled researchers to compare the three

groups. The results of the ANOVA are summarized below.

Table 1

Summary of Descriptive Statistics for MAP Communication Arts scores for 3rd grade students over five years. School Type N Mean SD

1-rural 78 42.612 16.93

2 – suburban 80 40.87 10.83

3 – urban 67 45.78 15.50

Findings

30


Table one gives a summary of descriptive statistics for the 3rd grade MAP

Communication Arts assessment over a period of five years. Group one consisted of

classroom sizes of 0-14 students, group two had 15-18 students, and group three

had 19-22 students. Group one consisted of 78 student teacher ratio samples and

had a mean score of 42.62. Group two consisted of 80 student teacher ratio samples

and had a mean score of 40.87. Group 3 consisted of 67 student teacher ration

samples, and had a mean score of 45.78. The mean score of group three (students

with class sizes of 19-22 students) had the highest mean, which may indicate that

there is insufficient evidence to determine if smaller class sizes do not improve

student achievement on standardized tests.

31


Figure 1: A chart displaying the mean of 3rd grade Communication Arts MAP percentage of students scoring Advanced and Proficient.

Table 2

Summary of ANOVA Test of Significant Results for 3rd Grade MAP CA Test Scores.

42.62

40.87

45.78 y = 1.58x + 39.93 R² = 0.40

38.00

39.00

40.00

41.00

42.00

43.00

44.00

45.00

46.00

47.00

1 2 3

Mea

n of

3rd

Gra

de C

omm

unic

atio

n Ar

ts M

isso

uri A

sses

smen

t Pr

ogra

m P

erce

ntag

e of

Stu

dent

s Sc

orin

g Ad

vanc

ed a

nd

Prof

icie

nt

Groups - Class Sizes 1-14=1; 15-18=2; 19-22=3

ANOVA Graph of 3rd Grade Communication Arts Missouri Assessment Program Percentage of

Students Scoring Advanced and Proficient by Groups - Class Sizes 1-14=1; 15-18=2; 19-22=3

Source of Variance

SS df MS F p-value

Between Groups

890.845 2.000 445.422 2.095

Within Groups

47197.337 222.000 212.578

Total 48083.181 .125

32


Table 2 contains a summary of the ANOVA test of significant results for 3rd

Grade MAP CA Results. The independent variable was the student-teacher ratio for

each 3rd grade class in the study. The dependent variable in this study is 3rd grade

student performance at each school, more specifically the student performance on

the CA section of the MAP test from 2009-2013. The sum of squares between the

groups was 890.85 and the degree of freedom was 2. The sum of squares within the

groups was 47,197.34 and the degree of freedom was 222. The mean square

between the groups was 445.42, and within the groups was 212.58, with an f-value

of 2.10, which indicates the variance of the group means. The alpha level was .05

and the p-value was .125. Using the threshold of .05 a criterion on which to base

acceptance or failure to accept the null, the researchers failed to reject the null

hypothesis since .125 exceeded the minimum threshold to test for significant

differences between and among group means. This states that there is not a

significant difference between the groups. A Post Hoc Analysis was not conducted

because the researchers failed to reject the null hypothesis.

Summary

In summation, the ANOVA analysis showed no significant difference between

the three groups of class sizes. Group 1 (0-14 students), Group 2 (15-18 students),

and Group 3 (19-22 students) all fell within a range of about 5% of students who

scored Advanced or Proficient within the study. This presents the researchers with

the notion that class size does not impact 3rd grade students’ performance on the CA

section of the MAP test. The action researchers failed to reject the null hypothesis

based on these findings.

33


CHAPTER FIVE

FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND RECCOMENDATIONS

Overview

This study was designed to investigate the effects of student-teacher ratio on

3rd grade Communication Arts MAP scores. The action researchers found no

significant difference in smaller student-teacher ratios and larger student teacher

ratios. The ANOVA results reported the p-value = 0.125. This was larger than the

action researcher set p-value = 0.05, allowing the action researchers to fail to reject

the null.

Student-teacher ratio was thought to have an impact although based on the

results of this study. Based on this study, there is insufficient evidence to support

the claim that smaller class sizes lead to differences in third grade Communication

Arts test score differences fro the institutions studied from 2009-2013. Based on the

financial strain that can be incurred by employing additional teachers in the hope

that lower student-teacher ratio would increase student performance, it is

recommended that school districts look into other factors that positively impact

student MAP performance.

Restatement of Purpose

When considering lowering student-teacher ratio, there are factors to

consider, such as budget and student performance. It is important to look into the

performance of the students before deciding to do something that could possibly

cause districts to assimilate financial strain. Students must be able to show

34


increased achievement for school districts to justify taking on the financial burden

of hiring more teachers to allow for districts to lower student-teacher ratio.

Discussion of Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendations

The ANOVA results of this study suggest that there is not a statistically

significant difference in Advanced and Proficient, 3rd grade CA MAP scores, when

considering the student-teacher ratio, for schools in the MEC, HDC, and GRC

conferences. The p-value = 0.125 was above the action researcher set p-value of

0.05, therefore the action researchers failed to reject the null, based on the findings.

There was no significant difference in 3rd Grade CA MAP scores, when considering

student-teacher ratio in the MEC, HDC, and GRC conferences.

This study showed that school district should not focus their attention on

student-teacher ratio for the purpose of increasing student performance on the CA

section MAP test. There was no significant difference found between lower student-

teacher ratio and higher student-teacher ratio, when considering Communication

Arts MAP results. There are other factors that could influence third grade

Communication Arts MAP scores.

Recommendations

Further research should be conducted using a larger sample size and

considering other variables that were not investigated in this study. Some other

variables that may be looked into may include the free and reduced lunch rate per

school, when looking at standardized test scores. Future researchers may consider

including urban, suburban, and rural, in the same data samples. Other researchers

may be interested in discovering the level of teacher education or level of

35


experience in the field of education, when considering student performance on the

MAP assessment. Additionally, further researchers might use a similar methodology

to investigate the relationship between class size and other subject matter areas or

grade-level examinations. Finally, impact of educational technology might be a topic

worthy of investigation as it relates to differences in student success levels

demonstrated on Missouri Assessment Programs.

Summary

At this time, it appears this study did not provide evidence on which to base a

claim that student-teacher ratio significantly affects 3rd grade student performance

on the Communication Arts section of the Missouri Assessment Program at the

institutions studied from 2009 to 2013. It is recommended that further research be

conducted to solidify these findings for use education practitioners. It is

recommended that future researchers investigate 3rd grade Math MAP scores when

considering the number of students to classroom teacher in the Midland Empire

Conference, Harrison-Davies Conference, and the Grand River Conference.

36


REFERENCES

Achilles, Charles M. (1997). Small Classes, Big Possibilities. The School

Administrator. Retrieved February 9, 2014, from

https://www.aasa.org/SchoolAdministratorArticle.aspx?id=15680

Adams, C. (2014). Class Size Crunch. Administrator Magazine: Leadership. Retrieved

February 9, 2014, from

http://scholastic.com/browse/article.jsp?id=3755248&print=1

Allhusen, V., Belsky, J., Booth-LaForce, C.L., Bradley, R., Brownwell, C.A., Burchinal,

M., & Weinraub, M. (2004). Does Class Size in First Grade Relate to Children’s

Academic and Social Performance or Observed Classroom Processes?.

Developmental Psychology, 40(5), 651-664. Retrieved February 9, 2014 from

the EbscoHOST database. DOI: 10.1037/0012-1649.40.5.651.

Bascia, N., & Faubert, B. (2012). Primary class size reduction: how policy space,

physical space, and spatiality shape what happens in real schools. Leadership

and Policy in Schools, 11(3), 344-364. Retrieved February 17, 2014, from the

EbscoHOST database. DOI: 10.1080/15700763.2012.692430

Biddle, B. J., & Berliner, D. C. (2002). Small class size and its effects. Educational

Leadership, 59(5), 12-23. Retrieved February 16, 2014, from the EbscoHOST

database.

Black, S. (2001). Child or Widget. Journal of Staff Development, 2001(22), 4.

Retrieved February 15, 2014, from the EbscoHOST database.

Center for Teaching and Learning. (1999). Cooperative Learning: Students Working

in Small Groups. Stanford University Newsletter on Teaching, 10(2). Retrieved

37

https://www.aasa.org/SchoolAdministratorArticle.aspx?id=15680

http://scholastic.com/browse/article.jsp?id=3755248&print=1


February 9, 2014 from http://www.stanford.edu/dept/CTL/cgi-

bin/docs/newsletter/cooperative.pdf

Conderman, G., Bresnahan, V., & Hedin, L. (2011). Promoting Active Involvement in

Today's Classrooms. Kappa Delta Pi Record, 47(4), 174-180. Retrieved

February 13, 2014, from the EbscoHOST database.

Condon, C., Greenberg, A., Stephan, J., Williams, R., Gerdeman, R. D., & Molefe, A.

(2012). Performance in Science on the Minnesota Comprehensive

Assessments-Series II for Students in Grades 5 and 8. Issues and Answers, 138,

3-5. Retrieved February 19, 2014, from http://ies.gov/ncee/edlabs

Creswell, J. W. (2008). Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods

Approaches. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publication Inc.

Culatta, R. (n.d.). Social Development Theory (Lev Vygotsky). Social Development

Theory. Retrieved March 18, 2014, from

http://www.instructionaldesign.org/theories/social-development.html

Dietel, R. (2012). Goodbye to the Number 2 Pencil?. Kapp Delta Pi Record, 48(1), 23-

28. Retrieved March 17, 2014, from the EBSCOhost database.

Driscoll, H. (2013). Power, Protests, and Posters. Our Schools/Our Selves, 22(3), 29-

46. Retrieved February 15, 2014, from the EbscoHOST database.

Ergodane, Giorgetti, F. M., & Çifcili, V. (2011). Predictors of the Elementary School

Proficiency Exams and Issues of Equality in Educational Facilities.

Educational Sciences: Theory and Practices, 11(1), 224-228. Retrieved

February 15, 2014, from the EbscoHOST database.

38

http://www.stanford.edu/dept/CTL/cgi-bin/docs/newsletter/cooperative.pdf

http://www.stanford.edu/dept/CTL/cgi-bin/docs/newsletter/cooperative.pdf

http://ies.gov/ncee/edlabs

http://www.instructionaldesign.org/theories/social-development.html


Facts and Terms Every Parent Should Know About NCLB. (2009, February 2).

ED.gov. Retrieved March 17, 2014, from

http://www.2.ed.gov/nclb/overview/intro/parents/parentfacts.html

Fan, F. (2012). Class Size: Effects on Student Academic Achievements and Some

Remedial Measures. Research in Education, 87(1), 95-98. DOI:

10.7227/RIE.87.1.7

Farah, Y. N. (2013). Through Another's Eyes. Gifted Child Today, 36(3), 209-212.

Retrieved February 18, 2014, from the EbscoHOST database. DOI

10.1177/1076217513485584

Folmer-Annevelink, E., Doolaard, S., Mascareno, M., & Bosker, R. J. (2010). Class Size

Effects on the Number and Types of Student-Teacher Interactions in Primary

Classrooms. Journal of Classroom Interactions, 45(2), 30-38. Retrieved

February 14, 2014, from the EbscoHOST database

Haimson, L. (2014). Why Class Size Matters. Parents Across America. Retrieved From

http://parentsacrossamerica.org/what-we-believe-2/why-class-size-

matters/#sthash.2oMvVMAV.dpuf

Helm, C. (2007). Teacher Dispositions Affecting Self-Esteem and Student

Performance. The Clearing House, 80(3), 109-110. Retrieved March 3, 2014,

from the EbscoHOST database.

Johnson, K. (2002). The Downside to Small Class Policies. Educational Leadership,

59(5), 27-29. Retrieved March 3, 2014, from the EbscoHOST database.

Kelly, M. (2014). Benefits of Cooperative Learning: Cooperative Learning and

Student Achievement. National Education Association. Retrieved from

39

http://parentsacrossamerica.org/what-we-believe-2/why-class-size-matters/%23sthash.2oMvVMAV.dpuf

http://parentsacrossamerica.org/what-we-believe-2/why-class-size-matters/%23sthash.2oMvVMAV.dpuf


http://712educators.about.com/od/cooplearning/pt/Benefits-Of-

Cooperative-Learning.htm

Kozulin, A. (2011). Introduction to Vygotsky's 'The Dynamics of the Schoolchild’s

Mental Development in Relation to Teaching and Learning. Journal of

Cognitive Education and Psychology, 10(2), 195-197. Retrieved March 18,

2014, from the EBSCOhost database. DOI: 10.1891/19458959.10.2.195

Kranzler, J. H. (2011). Analysis of Variance (ANOVA). Statistics for the Terrified (5th

ed., pp. 126-135). Upper saddle river, N.J.: Pearson Prentice Hall.

Lamdin, D. J. (1995). Testing for the Effect of Schools Size on Student Achievement

Within a School District. Education Economics, 1(33), 33-43. Retrieved March

3, 2014, from the EbscoHOST database.

"Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Education." Missouri

Department of Education News. N.p., 11 Sept. 2013. Web. 21 Mar. 2014.

<http://dese.mo.gov/divimprove/sia/dar/mapprocedures.htm>

Page, M., Jackson, E. (2014). Small Class Sizes Yield Higher Test Scores Among Young

Children. UC Davis Center for Poverty Research. Retrieved February 19, 2014

from http://poverty.ucdavis.edu/policy-brief/small-class-sizes-yield-higher-

test-scores-among-young-children

Pedder, D. (2006). Are Small Classes Better? Understanding Relationships Between

Class Size, Classroom Processes and Pupils' Learning. Oxford Review of

Education, 32(2), 213-234. Retrieved March 3, 2014, from the EbscoHOST

database. DOI: 10.1080/03054980600645396

40

http://712educators.about.com/od/cooplearning/pt/Benefits-Of-Cooperative-Learning.htm

http://712educators.about.com/od/cooplearning/pt/Benefits-Of-Cooperative-Learning.htm

http://poverty.ucdavis.edu/policy-brief/small-class-sizes-yield-higher-test-scores-among-young-children

http://poverty.ucdavis.edu/policy-brief/small-class-sizes-yield-higher-test-scores-among-young-children


Schwartz, R. M., Schmitt, M. C., & Lose, M. K. (2012). Effects of Teacher-Student Ratio

in Response to Intervention Approaches. The Elementary School Journal,

112(4), 547-567. Retrieved March 3, 2014, from the EbscoHOST database.

Sternberg, R. J. (2008). Excellence For All. Educational Leadership, 66(2), 14-19.

Retrieved February 24, 2014, from the EbscoHOST database.

Trochim, W. M. (n.d.). Home. Research Methods Knowledge Base. Retrieved March 3,

2014, from http://www.socialresearchmethods.net/kb

41


APPENDIX

42


43


44


45


46


47


48

effect of student-teacher ratio on third grade ... sara.… · significant difference (p-value of...

Documents