Does Class Size and Student:Teacher Ratio Matter?

by Andrew Wang, Pharm.D, PGY1 Pharmacy Practice Residency, Howard County General Hospital

Does class size and student:teacher ratio affect student performance? How should this factor affect how we teach? This issue is relevant whether we are teaching elementary or secondary or post-secondary schools.  There has been an ongoing dialog about the value of reducing class size and student:teacher ratio versus the cost of education.¹ While proponents for each side of the debate point out the advantages and disadvantages of each position, does the focus on the number of teachers or the number of students really lead to improvements in student performance? The focus of this blog post isn’t to compare which is better but rather, it is using data to examine the benefits and limitations of both. In examining both sides of this issue, we as educators can make better choices with regard to instructional design and teaching style.

Why is class size so important? Some state governments have pushed for smaller class sizes as a means of improving student test scores and overall success. Class size affects a host of variables when it comes to teaching. For example, class size can impact teacher-student interactions, both quantitatively and qualitatively. It is highly unlikely that in a class of 200 students, one professor would have the ability to spend much time directly interacting with each student. Moreover, those teacher-student interactions will be lacking in quality. Thus, class size is an environmental factor teachers must consider when determining the methods of instruction and when making instructional design decisions.² The approach a teacher should take in a large class differs from that of a small class.

Proponents of higher student:teacher ratios argue that strong evidence is lacking regarding the benefits of smaller classes, particularly in the setting of undergraduate and graduate education.  One meta-analysis suggested that student performance was independent of class size.⁴  Could student achievement and class size really be independent? The key conclusion made by this study was the fact that it focuses on post-secondary education. In classes where students already possess higher-level thinking abilities, class size may not impact student performance.  Indeed, there may be some benefits to larger class sizes such as greater competition, more ideas, more resources, and more efficient use of resources.

Proponets of smaller class size and lower student-teacher ratios argue that more and purposeful student-teacher interactions result in enhanced learning, particularly when it comes to helping students develop their higher-order thinking and complex reasoning skills.⁵  When the class size is larger, the teacher has less influence over teaching and places more responsibility on students to learn.⁶ In larger classes it is harder for the teacher to have command over the environment. Lastly, class size may play a role in the teacher’s attitude and commitment.  In smaller classes, the teacher is more likely to be committed to every student’s success whereas in a larger class setting, the focus may not always be teaching.⁷

How should class size influence our approach to teaching? It starts with the instructional design. One must consider the desired result and goal of the class. For example, in a larger class setting, knowledge transmission may the goal and it may sufficient to completely and logically present information in the form of a lecture.   In smaller class setting, the desired result may go beyond mere knowledge transmission.  The approach to achieving the desired result may also differ in a smaller vs. larger class size. For example, in a smaller class size, informal interactions and one-on-one customized learning activities can be used while in a larger class size, a more structured lesson plan might be needed. Some modes of delivery might include lecturing, video media, and group discussions. It is important to note that in larger class settings, the same material must be provided to everyone.⁸  In a smaller class environment, it is possible for information to be conveyed differently to each student, which allows the educator evaluate each student’s needs and give additional assistance as needed.

Lastly, the evaluation process usually differs. In a larger setting, it is typically necessary to have examinations at the conclusion of instruction in order for students to demonstrate competency and understanding of the material.  These exams must be efficient to administer and score.   In contrast, in a smaller class setting, evaluations can occur almost simultaneously as one teaches the material.

Class size should influence on how the educator approaches instructional design. The educator needs to tailor his or her instructional approach and create an effective environment for learning. Whether the class is large or small, the educator still has control of how students are educated. Student performance is influenced by multiple factors: background knowledge, interactions, participation, attitude, course material … and class size. Success is multi-factorial and cannot simply be solved by focusing on one aspect. While class size does have some influence, it is not the only variable that determines student performance and success. And in the end, well-planned instructional designs is perhaps important that class size and student:teacher ratio.   

References

1. Kezar, AJ. The impact of institutional size on student engagement. NASPA Journal. 2006;43(1):87-91.
2. Taft SH, Perkowski T, Martin LS. A framework for evaluating class size in online education. Quarterly Review of Distance Education. 2011;12(3):181-97.
3. Ice P, Gibson AM, Boston W et al. Exploration of differences between community of inquiry indicators in low and high disenrollment online courses. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks. 2011.15(2);44-69.
4. Slavin, R. Class size and student achievement: Is smaller better? Contemporary Education. 1990;62(1):6-12.
5. Rawat KJ, Thomas M, Quazi W. Factors that inhibit teachers from adapting a student – centered teaching approach. The European Journal of Social Sciences. 2012:28(3);383-90.
6. Radders, SK. Design for class size: A study for instructional designers of large courses [dissertation]. [Minnesota]. Capella University; 2012. 7-20 p.
7. Savage, A. Why going to a small college rocks [Internet]. 2014 May 24 [cited 2014 Oct 10].
8. Clark, D.R. Design Methodologies: instructional, thinking, agile, system, or x problem? [Internet]. 2012 [cited 2014 Oct 18].

Get Smart: Smartphones to Complement Classroom Learning

by Jessica Pyhtila, Pharm.D., PGY1 Pharmacy Practice Resident, VA Maryland Health Care System

"The advent of the smartphone ushers in a myriad of possibilities for its use in education to complement classroom learning," I narrate into the Siri app of my beloved iPhone 5. It’s the opening sentence to this blog essay regarding smartphone use in education for a graduate school class I’m taking.  It’s by no means the first time I’ve used my smartphone as a tool to facilitate my academic work.  It’s not even the first time I’ve used it in this class, a decentralized internet-based class that meets online via Blackboard Collaborate. I’d like to take decentralization one step further by using my iPhone to participate in this class (or any class) from any location of my choice.

I am far from the only person who sees the potential for smartphone use in education, which has become a hot topic among educators. Long lists of educational activities have been published over the past year, encouraging teachers and learners to use smartphones to complement classroom instruction.^1,2 Ideas on these lists include everything from “remembering notes” (e.g. allowing students to photograph the chalkboard/whiteboard) to “blogging” to attendance-taking using location-based apps.^1,2

Smartphones are also being used in health profession education, both inside and outside the classroom. One study found 55% of medical students and 75% of medical school faculty reported that smartphone use had a positive impact on medical education, and 41% reported they used smartphones every day for clinical self-education.³ Further, 75% of medical students reported using smartphones for medical calculators, and 70% of reported using smartphones to access online textbooks.³ Another study of undergraduate health professional students found that smartphone use for educational purposes was focused on accessing medical reference material, and that smartphones were used for this purpose inside the classroom, outside the classroom, and between patient visits.⁴ Yet another study showed that more than 50% of medical students use smartphones to assist with drug information, clinical guidelines, point-of-care information, calculations, and differential diagnoses.⁵

Smartphone prevalence is increasing as well. In the USA alone, 71% of the US population owns a smartphone, according to Nielsen—a percentage that increases to 85% for people age 18-24 and 86% for people age 25-34.⁶ Additionally, there is a negligible gender divide, with 70% of men owning smartphones vs. 72% of women, as of 2014.⁶ Use is believed to be prevalent even among young children, with one estimate that 20% of children age 5-7 use a smartphone, generally belonging to their parents.⁷ That number increases to 70% of children age 13-17.⁷ Furthermore, the top-selling iPhone education applications are generally apps which have been designed for children.⁷ As of this blog post, 9 of the top 20 selling paid education apps on iTunes were aimed at children under the age of 11. Children and teens can be heavy users of smartphones and are highly reliant on phone-based communication and networking.  A 2012 Pew study showed that the average teen sends 60 text messages a day.⁸

Corporations are taking note. Textbook companies such as Pearson are leaping on the trend, offering not only digital versions of graduate-level medical textbooks and textbook auxiliary material, but also flashcards and educational games aimed at young children. McGraw-Hill is also offering flashcard applications aimed at young children to enhance their academic skills. Smaller companies have invested in this trend too, with a wide array of products aimed at both teachers and learners of all levels. Products include everything from free polling apps for teachers to simulate multiple-choice questions on tests, to social-networking style apps for student collaboration that leverage the theory of social learning, which postulates that learning takes place within a social context and construct.

With the use of any new technology—particularly one with such a wide variety of applications available—comes the need to appropriately evaluate its value using it for educational purposes. Carly Shuler, a Cooney Fellow at the Joan Ganz Cooney Center, advocates a “3 Cs” approach to evaluating the appropriate use of smartphones to complement education.⁹ (This approach was initially developed by Lisa Guernsey to evaluate children’s media).⁹

• Content – what is the design of the application? Is it appropriate to the age group and education level of the learner? Is the data contained therein trustworthy?
• Context – how is the learner applying what they are learning from the app? Are they learning a skill which they can then translate into a different activity? Is there a discussion period after the app use has been completed?
• Child (or, more broadly, learner) – what types of apps work best for this particular learner? Is there a type of app that seems more efficacious and engaging? Is the learner able to engage with others when not using the app?

Taking this approach into consideration alongside the real-world studies that have incorporated smartphones in teaching and learning, we should pose a few questions teachers should ask as they evaluate whether smartphone use can complement their classroom instruction. First, educators should evaluate the educational needs that might be served by smartphone use—such as remote access. Second, they should evaluate if the need is present in the classroom itself, or outside the classroom. Third, they should evaluate what types of resources and applications might best complement these needs. Lastly, they should consider evaluating smartphone use in the classroom using the “3 Cs” approach.

References

1. 40 Simple Ways To Use A Smartphone In The Classroom [Internet]. Te@chthought. 2012 Oct 10 [cited 2014 Oct 5].
2. Heick T. 50 Reasons It’s Time For Smartphones In Every Classroom [Internet]. Te@chthought. 2014 Jan 27 [cited 2014 Oct 5].
3. Wallace S, Clark M, White J. ‘It’s on my iPhone’: attitudes to the use of mobile computing devices in medical education, a mixed-methods study [Internet]. BMJ Open 2012 [cited 2014 Oct 10];2: e001099.
4. Davies BS, Rafique J, Vincent TR, et al. Mobile Medical Education (MoMEd) - how mobile information resources contribute to learning for undergraduate clinical students - a mixed methods study [Internet]. BMC Med Educ. 2012; 12: 1
5. Boruff JT, Storie D. Mobile devices in medicine: a survey of how medical students, residents, and faculty use smartphones and other mobile devices to find information [Internet]. J Med Libr Assoc. 2014; 102: 22-30.
6. Ring the Bells: More Smartphones in Students’ Hands Ahead of Back-to-School Season [Internet]. Nielsen. 2013 Oct 29 [cited 2014 Oct 5].
7. Mobile Millennials: Over 85% of Generation Y Owns Smartphones [Internet]. Nielsen. 2014 Sep 05 [cited 2014 Oct 5].
8. Lenhart A. Teens, Smartphones & Texting [Internet]. Pew Research Center. 2012 Mar 19 [cited 2014 Oct 5].
9. Hoffman T. Can Smartphones Make Kids Smarter? [Internet]. Education.com. 2013 Aug 27 [cited 2014 Oct 5].

Handwriting Notes in an Era of Technology

by Miranda Law, Pharm.D., PGY1 Pharmacy Practice Resident, Howard County General Hospital

Imagine a university student walking into classroom, promptly sitting in a seat, pulling out his or her laptop to prepare for class, and loading up the lecture slides.  The student also opens a web browser to load Google chat, Facebook, and e-mail.  If you were a student in the past few years, this is likely a familiar scene.

The method for taking notes during lectures has changed over the past decade. The use of laptops in classroom settings has been steadily on the rise and is now estimated to be 65% of students or more.¹ Increasing laptop use has led to apprehension not only about whether students are really paying attention during lectures but also about the quality of learning that is produced from electronic note taking. One survey found that 81% of students admitted to checking their e-mail during class and high percentages reported using instant messaging (48%), surfing the net (43%), playing games (25%), and doing “other” activities (35%) on their mobile devices.¹ The evidence strongly suggests that laptops, if not managed well, are a distraction for students in class.² But distractions aside, let’s assume that in the well managed classroom where every student is on task, not distracted, and diligently taking notes, do students who take “laptop notes” do as well as those students who take “longhand notes”?

An evaluation of this question requires a brief discussion on how each of these methods relates to learning theory. According to cognitive learning theory, one would hypothesize that longhand note taking would require learners to encode information while laptop note taking would merely require the learner to appropriate place information into external storage.³ According to the encoding hypothesis, longhand note taking requires a student to transform information beyond verbatim text and reorganize the material into a context that is most meaningful to the learner.³ Through these processes, students who hand write notes may perform better on examinations, particularly if they are required to do so without prior study.³  Similar to rote memorization, external storage is the process of taking notes in their verbatim format, without deeper processing, and storing them for recall at a later time.³ Therefore, laptop note takers who do not review their notes prior to an examination would likely perform less well due to a lack of deeper processing of the information.³

These suppositions sound legitimate, but a hypothesis is merely a question waiting to be answered.  Does hand writing notes really result in improve performance in real life?  Research shows that laptops enable students to record greater amounts of information over shorter periods of time.⁴  Therefore, any advantage from hand writing notes brought about by “encoding” might be lost due to the greater quantity of information that can be recorded using laptops.

A recent study examines this very question.⁴ Does laptop note taking produce equivalent learning results when compared to longhand note taking? Students in the study watched four instructional videos in one sitting and were later tested on this material. Each group was handed either pencil and paper or provided a laptop to take notes. Both groups were instructed to take notes as they normally would in the classroom and informed that a test on the material would follow in one week.  Some students in each group were allowed 10 minutes to study their notes prior to the exam, and some took the test without having an opportunity to study their notes. The test consisted of both factual and conceptual questions. Results indicated that students who took long hand notes consistently performed better on factual and conceptual questions, regardless of whether time was given for studying (p=0.002).⁴  This study documents a very clear advantage for long hand note taking over laptop note taking.

So what does this all mean? Should the schools set regulations against laptop use? Do teachers need to ban laptops from the classroom? Is banning laptop use in an era when over 90% of the students¹ owns one really feasible?

More and more research now indicates the potential harms of laptop use (and other mobile devices) on the learning process.  Not only do they create the opportunity for distractions but they may harm the very processes necessary for learning. But completely banning laptops and mobile devices is probably not feasible.  Some teachers have established “laptop zones” where users either sit in the front row to ensure their attention or, alternatively, sit in the back row to keep other students from becoming distracted.⁵ These solutions, however, do not resolve the inherent harms that laptop note taking may cause to the learning process.

The evidence shows that handwriting notes enhances the processing and learning of information.  My recommendation is for teachers to create learning environments where hand written notes are not only encouraged, but perhaps mandated.  The focus should be on improving the learning process, rather than prohibiting technology. Students can have their laptops when needed, but hand written notes should be the primary method of recording information during classroom instruction. Pushing students to process and organize the information enhances understanding and learning.  That’s something all teachers should strive to achieve for their students!

References

1. Fried CB. In-class laptop use and its effects on student learning. Computers & Education 2008;50:906-914.
2. Kay RH, Lauricella S. Exploring the benefits and challenges of using laptopcomputers in higher education classrooms: A formative analysis. Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology. 2011;37:1-18.
3. Rickards JP, Friedman F. The Encoding versus the External Storage Hypothesis in NoteTaking. Contemporary Educational Psychology. 1978;3:136-143.
4. Mueller PA, Oppenheimer DM. The Pen Is Mightier Than the Keyboard: Advantages ofLonghand Over Laptop Note Taking. Psychol Sci. 2014;25:1159-1168.
5. Yamamota, K. Banning Laptops in theClassroom: Is it Worth the Hassles?Journal of Legal Education. 2007;75:1-46.

Peeragogy – The Evolution of Active Learning

by Hsiao-Ting Wang, PGY1 Pharmacy Practice Resident, University of Maryland Medical Center

In a world of information overload, what is the best way to keep updated?  Other than reading through textbooks, guidelines, and journal articles, where can I learn from the wisdom of other’s real-world experiences?  Prior to starting my residency, I discovered Dr. Bryan Hayes’ twitter feed, @PharmERToxGuy, and was stunned by the abundance of knowledge shared between practitioners across the country.  One can learn about the hottest debate or the latest scientific findings in emergency medicine simply by reading 140-character tweets (aka messages)!  These are real-time conversations among experts in the field.  This is also self-directed learning conducted through peer-to-peer interaction, but without a facilitator!  The concept of peer-to-peer learning was first described in 2011 and subsequently called “Peeragogy.”^1,4  Before going further into peeragogy, I think it is necessary to take a step back to review the evolution of peer-based learning.

Traditional peer-based learning refers to the “active learning” component of instructional design where students are encouraged to formulate their own answers, participate in discussions, and engage in group work.  Teachers play the role of facilitator by selecting appropriate topics for discussions and raising questions when necessary to prompt students to think critically and deeply about the subject matter.  According to Alice Christudason, there are four common peer-learning strategies to choose from¹: buzz group, affinity group, solutions and critic group, and teach-write-discuss.  Buzz group is when students are divided into smaller groups for discussion in class and, following the small group discussion, one member of each small group presents during the whole class debrief.  Affinity group is similar to buzz group but it requires each small group to find their own time outside of the class meetings to discuss.  Solutions and critic groups work by pairing up two small groups together – one is responsible for teaching the whole class on a selected topic and the other for evaluating the presentation.  Lastly, the teach-write-discuss method utilizes a whole classroom discussion at the end of the instruction to examine how much students have learned from a lecture.

In addition, students can acquire new knowledge through other peer-to-peer instructional techniques such as role-play, debates, case studies, and group projects.  The key to successful traditional peer-based learning relies not only on students’ enthusiasm about active learning but also the teacher’s role in selecting and orchestrating the learning exercise.  In our digital world today, learning opportunity extend beyond the physical boundaries of classrooms.  One of the first peer-learning communities, Peer 2 Peer University (P2PU) was created in 2009 to provide inexpensive (free) higher education with quality content to millions of learners on the Internet.  There are many other online peer-learning communities similar to P2PU.  The newest platform is the Massive Online Open Classes (MOOCs), most notably Coursera.  These online communities still employ an instructor to facilitate learning with open forums for discussion between learners around the world.

Joe Corneli and Charles Danoff coined the term “Paragogy” to describe the self-directed learning that occurs through connections among peers.²  Literally, “para” means along side and “gogy” means leading.  Paragogy applies Knowles’ principles of androgogy (adult learning) to peer-based teaching and learning³.  There are five working principles of paragogy.  These principles along with authors’ definition of each principle are:

• Decenteralized center: Understanding the concept of shared context is more important than understanding one’s self-concept.
• Meta-learning as a source of knowledge: There is a lot to learn about learning.
• Peers have different but equal perspectives: Learners must confront and make sense of the difference among them as part of the learning experience instead of seeking to confirm what one already knew.
• Learning is distributed, not linear: It is important to learn how to work around a given social field as side-tracking is allowed.
• Realize the dream (if you can), then move one: Learners should attempt to fulfill their personal motivations but shouldn’t dwell too long.

Essentially, these working principles serve as the guidance for learners to facilitate their own learning without having a facilitator to remind them of the rules.  

To make the concept of self-driven peer-to-peer learning easily understood, Howard Rheingold coined the term “Peeragogy” in his Regent’s Lecture at the University of California, Berkeley in 2012.⁴  While parallel to paragogy, Mr. Rheingold combined social media with paragogy to describe peeragogy as the “future of high-end online learning in which motivated self-learners collaborate via a variety of social media to create, deliver, and learn an agreed curriculum.”⁵  Each learner serves in the “instructor” role and creates the syllabus and strategy to promote critical thinking and thoughtful discussions.⁶  In other words, for a peeragogical design to work, the group needs to establish a group consensus for expectations, learning objectives, media technology, and the social contract of the course.  The group needs to formulate a process for communicating with one another, how to respond to questions, give feedback in a timely manner, and evaluate performance at the completion of the course.  Last but not least, there needs to be a process to translate changes to the learning environment to be implemented in the next cycle.

Reflecting back on Dr. Hayes’ twitter feed, it is obvious that this online forum has provided a platform for information exchange among peers with similar interest and expertise in a particular field.  This fulfills the definition of a learning community as described by Mr. Rheingold.  To carry out peeragogy, the next step would be to establish a learning contract among followers and put it into action!

Reference:

1. Christudason, A. (2003). Peer learning. Successful Learning, Center for Development of Teaching and Learning (CDTL), National University of Singapore. (accessed 1 October 2014)
2. Corneli, J. and Danoff, C. J. (2011). Paragogy: Synergizing individual and organizational learning. (accessed 1 October 2014)
3. Knowles, M. S. (1980). The modern practice of adult education: From pedagogy to andragogy. Chicago: Follett.
4. Rheingold, H. (2012). UC Berkeley Regents' Lecture: Social Media and Peer Learning: From Mediated Pedagogy to Peeragogy. Presented by Berkeley Center for New Media. (accessed 19 September 2014)
5. Rheingold, H. (2012). Toward Peeragogy. (accessed 19 September 2014)
6. Rheingold, H, Corneli, J, Danoff, C. J. et al. (2014). The Peeragogy Handbook v. 2.0 (accessed 1 October 2014)