Get documents about "SECTION 1 : INTRODUCTION
Shared by: HC120213063916
-
Stats
- views:
- 0
- posted:
- 2/12/2012
- language:
- pages:
- 85
Document Sample
CLASS SIZE REDUCTION PROGRAM
EVALUATION
2004 INTERIM REPORT
by
PROFESSOR BOB MEYENN
April 2005
2004 Class Size Reduction Program – Evaluation Report 1
DEAN, FACULTY OF EDUCATION AND HEAD OF CAMPUS
Heffron Building +61 2 6338 4477
Tel:
Panorama Avenue +61 2 6338 4182
Fax:
Bathurst NSW 2795 www.csu.edu.au
Australia ABN: 83 878 708 551
16 May 2005
To Whom It May Concern
It is with pleasure that I present this report for publication. This Interim Report follows
the Class Size Reduction Pilot Project Evaluation and is one of a series relating to
the Class Size Reduction Program Evaluation completed in cooperation with the
NSW Department of Education & Training.
The report describes the experiences reported by teachers, parents and principals
involved with the program. The vast majority of reported experiences highlight the
positive impact of the Class Size Reduction Program in NSW Primary Schools.
Yours sincerely
Professor Bob Meyenn
Dean, Faculty of Education and
Head of Campus
Charles Sturt University
2004 Class Size Reduction Program – Evaluation Report 2
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Class Size Reduction Program was introduced in NSW Government schools on
a state-wide basis in 2004. Under this program, by 2007, the average size of classes
with Kindergarten students will be 20 students, the average size of classes with Year
1 students will be 22 students and the average size of classes with Year 2 students
will be 24 students. The first phase of the program is now in place and in 2004
classes with Kindergarten students in priority funded schools were reduced to a
statewide average of 19.3. This report examines the impact of smaller Kindergarten
classes in 15 priority funded schools.
The longitudinal evaluation of the Class Size Reduction Program includes bi-annual
student attainment testing and a survey using both questionnaire and interview each
year from 2004 to 2008. This report builds upon the Class Size Reduction Pilot
Program Study report from 2003 and will be further informed by the annual Class
Size Audit report which provides information on the implementation of the program
across the state.
This Report presents the analysis of survey data collected in 2004. Questionnaires
were completed by 15 principals, 39 teachers and 73 parents of children in 15
schools in the Priority Schools Funding Program (PSFP). Of these 15 schools, 8 also
participated in in-depth study involving interview of principals, teachers, support
teachers and parents of children. The findings of the questionnaire and interviews
are presented together here and provide the perspective of the principals, the
teachers of the smaller classes and the parents of children in the smaller classes in
terms of:
the overall effect of the program;
the impact of the program on teaching practices;
the impact of the program on class organisation;
the impact of the program on perceptions of student outcomes;
The major findings of this Report are that the Class Size Reduction Program has
been very successful from the perspective of principals, teachers and parents. In
relation to the overall effect of the program, five areas were identified as being
significantly affected by the introduction of smaller classes: (1) teacher morale; (2)
improvements in learning outcomes; (3) the provision of individualised teaching; (4)
classroom management and (5) the teacher-student relationships.
In relation to teaching practices, the majority of both the principals and teachers
responded that many aspects of teaching were occurring more frequently. A large
majority of the parents reported that they were very satisfied or satisfied with
teaching practices relating to individual instruction, the use of technology, teacher
contact and feedback.
Changes in some teaching practices were reported. In particular, principals and
teachers identified more, smaller and more effective groups, more individual
2004 Class Size Reduction Program – Evaluation Report 3
attention and instruction, more effective assessment, use of improved behaviour
management strategies, more discussions, more hands on activities and more
innovation and experiment. The findings indicate that the teachers were tending to
use the same teaching practices they used in larger classes; however they were
using them more frequently, more effectively and on a more individual basis. The
professional development activities that were reported as most prominently
addressing the needs of teachers of smaller classes were: Quality Teaching, Early
Literacy Initiative, Count Me In Too and Reading Recovery.
In relation to the impact of the smaller classes on the structures of classes, student
outcomes and teaching practices, a large majority of participants were either very
satisfied or satisfied with the program. Principals reported that a large majority of the
parents had a positive attitude towards the 2004 class organisation. The impact of
the reduction in class numbers in the 15 study schools is clearly shown here, further
details of implementation across the state are available in the 2004 Class Size Audit
Report.
The survey study also enquired about principals’, teachers’ and parents’ views on
student attainment. Almost all of the principals and teachers believed that through
being in a smaller class, students had made substantially more progress in the
achievement of both literacy and numeracy outcomes. The vast majority of parents
supported this view in regard to their child’s progress in literacy and numeracy, with
90% of parents also stating that they were either very satisfied or satisfied with their
child’s level of work.
Non-academic outcomes were also investigated and a large majority of principals
and teachers reported:
that students were better behaved in class;
that students related better to each other;
that the transition to school was better; and
that students were more confident participating in the whole class situation.
The majority of parents were also very satisfied or satisfied with their child and the
other children’s behaviour in the class, their child’s relationship with other children
and their settling into school, and their child’s level of confidence in taking part in
class activities. The longitudinal analysis of children’s performance on literacy,
numeracy and social skills attainment tests will provide the opportunity to verify the
positive trends reported from this survey. The initial findings are overwhelmingly
positive, encouraging the evaluation in future years to focus on some of the findings
of this report in order to further analyse the issues surrounding Class Size
Reduction.
2004 Class Size Reduction Program – Evaluation Report 4
TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...................................................................................................... 3
SECTION 1: INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................. 6
A) BACKGROUND AND CONTEXT OF THE REPORT ........................................................................... 6
B) AIMS OF THE EVALUATION............................................................................................................ 6
C) OUTLINE OF THE REPORT ............................................................................................................. 7
D) PURPOSE OF THE EVALUATION .................................................................................................... 7
SECTION 2: TEACHING AND LEARNING ....................................................................... 8
A) EFFECT OF SMALLER CLASSES ON TEACHING PRACTICES........................................................... 8
B) TEACHER SATISFACTION AND MORALE ...................................................................................... 12
C) TEACHING PRACTICES THAT WERE CHANGED ........................................................................... 12
D) TEACHING PRACTICES MAINTAINED/UNCHANGED ................................................................... 15
SECTION 3: STUDENT OUTCOMES ............................................................................. 19
A) FACTORS AFFECTING STUDENT PERFORMANCE IN THE EARLY YEARS ................................... 19
B) EFFECT ON STUDENT LEARNING OUTCOMES............................................................................ 19
C) EFFECT ON STUDENT BEHAVIOUR AND SOCIAL SKILLS ........................................................... 22
SECTION 4: SIGNIFICANT BENEFITS OF THE PROGRAM ......................................... 25
A) MOST SIGNIFICANT BENEFITS FOR PRINCIPALS, TEACHERS AND PARENTS ............................ 25
SECTION 5: IMPACT ON SCHOOLl ORGANISATION .................................................... 27
A) CLASS SIZES IN THE 15 SCHOOLS ............................................................................................... 27
C) CLASS ORGANISATION IN THE 15 SCHOOLS............................................................................... 28
D) EFFECT OF ADDITIONAL STAFFING ON CLASS ORGANISATION ............................................... 28
E) ALLOCATION OF TEACHERS ........................................................................................................ 28
F) USE OF SUPPORT STAFF ............................................................................................................... 29
SECTION 6: ADVICE FROM PRINCIPALS AND TEACHERS ........................................ 30
A) ADVICE FROM PRINCIPALS ......................................................................................................... 30
B) ADVICE FROM TEACHERS ............................................................................................................ 30
C) PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT .................................................................................................. 32
SECTION 7: DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS .......................................................... 33
APPENDIX A: EVALUATION STUDY ............................................................................................. 36
THE SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE PARTICIPANTS...................................................................................... 38
THE SURVEY INTERVIEW PARTICIPANTS .............................................................................................. 39
APPENDIX B: SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE AND INTERVIEW QUESTIONS .................. 40
INTERVIEWS ......................................................................................................................................... 40
SURVEYS ............................................................................................................................................... 40
APPENDIX C: DETAILS OF THE SCHOOLS INVOLVED IN THE INTERVIEWS .............. 85
DETAILS RELATING TO THE SCHOOLS ............................................................................................... 85
DETAILS RELATING TO THE CLASSES ................................................................................................ 85
2004 Class Size Reduction Program – Evaluation Report 5
SECTION 1: INTRODUCTION
a) Background and Context of the Report
In 2002, the then Minister for Education and Training, the Hon. John Watkins,
announced that class sizes would be reduced in the earliest years (Kindergarten to
Year 3) at selected NSW government schools under a $5 million class size pilot to
be conducted in 2003.
As part of the pilot, 63 schools participated in an evaluation, the aim of which was to
assess the educational benefits of reduced class sizes in the early years of
schooling.
In 2003 the NSW Government announced its plan to reduce class sizes in the first
three years of primary schooling so that by 2007, all classes in the early years will be
reduced to a statewide average of 20 for Kindergarten students, 22 for Year 1
students, and 24 for Year 2 students.
In 2004, as part of the Government’s election commitment, the Class Size Reduction
Program was introduced in government schools on a state-wide basis, commencing
with Priority School Funding Program (PSFP) Kindergarten classes and including
those schools that participated in the pilot. The program is being progressively rolled
out each year, until all classes in state government schools have reached the
targets.
To facilitate the reduction of class sizes, 1500 additional teaching positions are being
provided and more than 600 additional classrooms delivered to schools as part of
the program.
The program will be evaluated each year, with the evaluation of the effects of the
smaller classes being considered an integral part of the Class Size Reduction
Program. The evaluation is not only aimed at providing feedback on the progress of
the program, but also addresses cost effectiveness, reflecting accountability.
The study focuses on Kindergarten classes in both PSFP and non-PSFP schools
each year and follows the transition from larger to smaller classes. Details of the
evaluation design are included in Appendix A.
The results of the Student Attainment tests in literacy, numeracy and social
outcomes which were conducted in March and November 2004 will be reported at a
later date, providing empirical evidence on the learning outcomes of the study.
b) Aims of the Evaluation
The aim of the overall Class Size Reduction Program evaluation is to assess the
educational benefits of class sizes and their impact on student outcomes, where the
average size of classes with Kindergarten students is 20, the average size of classes
with Year 1 students is 22 and the average size of classes with Year 2 students is
24.
2004 Class Size Reduction Program – Evaluation Report 6
This first report specifically looks at Kindergarten classes in 15 PSFP schools in
phase one of the program.
c) Outline of the Report
This report is the first in a series relating to the evaluation of the Class Size
Reduction Program. The Report presents the analysis of the data collected in the
survey conducted in 2004, which focussed on Kindergarten teachers, parents and
principals of 15 PSFP schools. The utilisation of both quantitative and qualitative
methodology provides scope and depth of understanding in evaluating the effects of
the project from the three different perspectives of the principals, teachers and
parents.
d) Purpose of the Evaluation
The survey questionnaire and interviews reported in this paper are used to evaluate
the Class Size Reduction Program in terms of:
the overall effect of the program;
the impact of the program on teaching practices;
the impact of the program on class organisation; and
the impact of the program on perceptions of student outcomes.
2004 Class Size Reduction Program – Evaluation Report 7
SECTION 2: TEACHING AND LEARNING
This section discusses the effect of smaller classes on various aspects of teaching
practices.
a) Effect of Smaller Classes on Teaching Practices
In the survey, principals and teachers were asked whether smaller classes had
altered their methods of teaching.1 Principals reported that all but two of the fourteen
aspects of teaching that they identified were occurring more often in the smaller
classes. The exceptions were whole class instruction and whole class discussion,
with the majority of principals indicating there was no change in these elements.
Teachers also reported that all the aspects of teaching were occurring more often,
with the exception of whole class instruction. All of the principals and the teachers
nominated teacher support for students who need assistance and the provision of
individualised instruction as occurring most often as a result of reduced class sizes.
Table 1 summarises the rank order of responses by each group.
1
Aspects of teaching commented on by principals and teachers were categorised into the following:
inclusion of students in a group; support to students who need assistance; individualised instruction
for all students; provision of feedback to students on their work; students’ involvement in numeracy
activities; students’ involvement in literacy activities; use of group work; learning activities in
curriculum; students use of ICT; use of higher order questions; interaction with parents; management
of problems with student behaviour; use of whole class discussion; use of whole class instruction.
2004 Class Size Reduction Program – Evaluation Report 8
Table 1: Rank Order of Aspects of Teaching Rated ‘More Often’ by the Majority
of Principals and Teachers
Rank Principals Teachers
1 Individual Instruction Individual Instruction
Support of Students Support of Students
Student Feedback
2 Fewer Students in Groups Student Feedback
Fewer Students in Groups
3 Use of Group Work Use of Group Work
Students Use of ICT
4 Use of Higher Order Questions Students Numeracy Activities
5 Students Literacy Activities Students Literacy Activities
Students Numeracy Activities
6 Students’ Other Curriculum Areas Use of Higher Order Questions
Student Behaviour Management Students Other Curriculum Areas
Teacher Interaction with Parents
7 Students Use of ICT
Student Behaviour Management
8 Teacher Interaction with Parents
9 Whole Class Discussion
Parents were also asked for their opinions of the impact of smaller classes on
various teaching practices. The large majority of the parents were very satisfied or
satisfied with:
the feedback their child received from the teacher;
the teacher-child contact;
their child’s use of technology, and
the individual help and instruction their child received.
2004 Class Size Reduction Program – Evaluation Report 9
Notably, the greatest level of satisfaction was with teacher-child contact (67.6% of
parents very satisfied) and the feedback that their child received (62% of parents
very satisfied).
Figure 1: Parents’ Reported Level of Satisfaction with Teaching Practices
Parents Perceptions
70.0%
Feedback Child
Receives
Teacher-Child Contact
Child's Use of
60.0%
Technology
Individual Help Child
Receives
Individual Instruction
50.0% Child Receives
Percent
40.0%
30.0%
20.0%
10.0%
0.0%
Dissatisfied Mixed feelings Satisfied Very satisfied
Parents Level of Satisfaction
n.b. the category of “Very dissatisfied” had zero response and has not been
included.
2004 Class Size Reduction Program – Evaluation Report 10
In interview the parent helpers were also specifically asked about their observations
of teaching practices in the classroom. The parent helpers stated that they observed:
the teacher spending more time with individual students;
the students working at their own pace and at various levels;
the teacher spending more time on reading and writing;
the teacher providing more assistance for children who were having difficulties;
the teacher having more control over the class, and there being fewer students
with behavioural challenges;
the teacher having a better understanding of each child’s personality;
extra activities being organised; and
the children being more at ease.
Individualisation
In regard to individualisation of instruction, principals and teachers commented that
smaller classes and the increased time for each student enabled teachers to:
provide more individualised and personalised attention;
make effective use of group work and group rotation;
become more easily aware of non-participating students;
direct questions to various levels and abilities of students;
enhance individual assessment and immediate feedback; and
retain better control of the class.
Assessment
Principals and teachers reported that students’ results in assessment were able to
be more closely aligned with teaching to the individual, with quicker and more
frequent feedback and explicit instruction based on effective assessment of student
needs. Others commented that smaller classes allowed more time for detailed
marking of the work in the presence of the student and providing students with
immediate feedback on their progress.
Classroom Management
Smaller classes facilitated classroom management, enabling teachers to closely
observe individual behaviour and group dynamics, and quickly control any disruptive
behaviour. It was also reported that, since the majority of students did not condone
poor behaviour, having fewer students in the class reduced the likelihood of the
disruptive individual receiving positive reinforcement. Subsequently, the reduction in
distractions led to students being more attentive and spending more time on tasks,
resulting in additional learning.
Teacher/Student Relationship
Smaller classes were seen to benefit the teacher-student relationship, enabling
teachers to get to know their students better and on a more personal basis. This
resulted in students trying harder to please the teacher through their work. More
2004 Class Size Reduction Program – Evaluation Report 11
personalised learning approaches were possible. Similarly, other relationships
relevant to the class, such as student-student and teacher-parent were also
improved, resulting in a happier and more comfortable classroom.
b) Teacher Satisfaction and Morale
Principals and teachers reported that smaller classes have had a substantial effect
on teacher satisfaction. Morale was greatly improved, partly due to the teachers’
feelings of accomplishment regarding their students’ achievements and because
they were able to provide more time and assistance to students. Many teachers
indicated that smaller classes allowed them to implement the teaching strategies
which they had learned in teacher training. It was also noted that the increase in
morale was not limited to the teachers of the smaller classes, but tended to spread
throughout the school, thereby benefiting other teachers.
In the questionnaires, both the principals and teachers were asked to rate the effect
that smaller classes had on teachers’ level of satisfaction with teaching. A majority of
principals (11 of 15) and teachers (29 of 39) considered teachers were much more
satisfied. The remainder of the principals and all of the remaining teachers, except
one, reported being “more satisfied”.
Some comments from teachers include:
“It has been the most rewarding and satisfying year of my entire career”,
“I’m a lot happier and the students are a lot happier and you don’t have the
distractions and as many behavioural problems” and
“My morale has never been higher. The kids are really attached to the teacher.
Lessons are really happy. The kids are having a good time”.
In the in-depth interviews, the principals were encouraged to provide more detail
about the effect on teacher morale. The principals indicated that the reduced class
sizes had:
increased job satisfaction;
improved morale;
led to increased teamwork; and
reduced absenteeism.
c) Teaching Practices that were Changed
Principals and teachers were asked to identify the main ways in which teachers in
smaller classes had, or had not, changed their teaching practices. Though the
teaching practices cited by the principals and the teachers were in some cases the
same, their descriptions of the teaching practices differed.
Table 2 illustrates the changes in teaching practices cited most frequently by
principals. Table 3 details the teachers’ descriptions of the changed teaching
practices.
2004 Class Size Reduction Program – Evaluation Report 12
Table 2: Principals’ Descriptions of Changes in Teaching Practices
Aspect of Teaching Descriptions of the way Teaching Practices have
Changed
Group Work In the smaller classes there was more emphasis on group work,
the groups were smaller and used more effectively. In particular,
the groups were utilised to focus attention on the needs and
progress of the individuals within the group, so in effect through
group work the teacher provided individual tuition to students.
More Individual Smaller classes meant that there was more time to provide
attention individual attention/instruction to students, in particular those
students who needed assistance.
Assessment In the smaller classes, assessment was more effective because
in the group situation the teacher was able to individually
assess student’s progress, providing greater consistency and
accuracy in assessment. Further, there was an increase in
assessment which was informing future teaching.
Behaviour Management In the smaller classes, behaviour management was easier
because of less interruptions and incidents of poor behaviour.
Improved behaviour management meant that there was more
time to devote to teaching and learning.
Innovation and An effect of smaller classes was that teachers were using more
Experiment experimental and innovative teaching and learning activities.
This including providing a greater variety of activities, more
team teaching opportunities and catering for different learning
styles by providing a variety of teaching strategies.
2004 Class Size Reduction Program – Evaluation Report 13
Table 3: Teachers’ Descriptions of Changes in Teaching Practices
Teaching Practice Descriptions of the way Teaching Practices have
Changed
Group Work The smaller classes not only permitted more and smaller
groups, especially in areas such as reading and maths, but
also permitted the formation of mixed ability groups or
remedial groups. This assisted in targeting the specific
needs of students and the rotation of groups.
Individual Instruction Smaller classes allowed teachers to provide more individual
instruction, such as reading more often with individual
students and individualised teaching to students with social,
language or learning difficulties.
Assessment In smaller classes, assessment was easier, more frequent,
detailed and thorough. The class size facilitated providing
immediate feedback to students by marking their work with
them present, encouraging peer tutoring and self evaluation
and ongoing assessment such as Count Me In Too in
maths.
Discussions Smaller groups facilitated more and better class discussion
by allowing more discussion time for each child, the teacher
being able to draw out student’s responses more and
providing the teacher with the opportunity to ask questions
focused on different abilities and to target a larger amount of
students. The class size also meant that there was more
discussion in small groups.
Hands On or Concrete In smaller classes there was more opportunity for ‘hands on’
Activities activities or concrete learning and games based teaching
and learning.
Table 4 shows the changes in teaching practices cited most frequently by principals
and teachers. It is clear that both groups perceive an impact of smaller classes that
increases group work, personalised attention and use of assessment.
2004 Class Size Reduction Program – Evaluation Report 14
Table 4: Principals’ and Teachers’ Perceptions of Changes in Teaching
Practices
Principals Teachers
More, smaller and more effective groups More group work
More individual attention More individual instruction
More effective assessment More informative assessment
Improved behaviour management More discussions
Innovation and experiment More hands on or concrete activities
d) Teaching Practices Maintained/Unchanged
Principals and teachers were asked to identify the teaching practices that teachers
have maintained regardless of the smaller classes. In some instances the teaching
practices mentioned by the principals and the teachers were the same, however the
descriptions of these practices differed. Table 5 provides details of the principals’
perceptions of maintained teaching practices and Table 6 outlines the teachers’
perceptions of maintained teaching practices.
2004 Class Size Reduction Program – Evaluation Report 15
Table 5: Principals’ Perceptions of Maintained/Unchanged Teaching Practices
Teaching Practice Description of Teaching Practice
Catering The practice of catering for the individual instruction of students
for individuals included offering varying types of lessons to cater for learning styles
and individualised programs for students, with the use of
assessment information in the planning of new learning. Further,
smaller classes permitted both the provision of extension work and
support of students when necessary.
Whole class The teaching practice of whole class instruction was retained,
instruction being used for modelled writing and reading and whole class
demonstrations which led into group work.
Group work Groups were still used for instruction, the practicing of skills and
modelled guided and independent practice. Also the groups were
rotated and the discussions in the group were used as “lesson
topic generators”. However, the reduced class size meant that
these groups were smaller and this led to greater learning and
time efficiency.
Whole class The use of whole class discussions was retained, with the whole
discussion class being used to begin instruction.
2004 Class Size Reduction Program – Evaluation Report 16
Table 6: Teachers’ Perceptions of Maintained/Unchanged Teaching Practices
Teaching Practice Description of Teaching Practice
Group work The teachers retained the use of group work in guided reading, writing
and maths, to practice skills and the use of group discussion. They also
maintained the rotation of groups. However, with smaller classes, group
work was used more often, with a smaller number of children in the
groups and it was possible to form small ability groups and more easily
cater for them.
Whole class The teachers maintained the use of whole class instructions,
instruction, demonstrations and discussions to provide explicit demonstration
demonstrations and of skills, whole year activities and demonstrations with each grade.
discussions Also, the whole class was used in shared reading and modelled
writing and instruction in maths, as well as whole class lessons and
discussions in some Key Learning Areas (KLAs) and news and
presentations.
Modelled and guided The use of modelled and guided instruction was predominantly in
instruction the areas of reading and writing. It included modelled reading with
big-book conventions of print and modelled story writing.
Behaviour In smaller classes, the teachers maintained their use of behaviour
Management management, which included behaviour and social skills programs
strategies and steady, clear and consistent behaviour management
strategies to increase intrinsic motivation.
While teachers reported fewer behavioural issues, they continued to use the same
behaviour management strategies in the classroom. Table 7 summarises and
compares the principals and teachers views of which teaching practices were
maintained and remained relatively unchanged.
2004 Class Size Reduction Program – Evaluation Report 17
Table 7: Principals’ and Teachers’ Perceptions of Maintained Teaching
Practices
Principals Teachers
Group work Group work
Whole class instruction Whole class instruction, demonstrations and
Discussions
Catering for individuals Modelled and guided instruction
Whole class discussion Behaviour management
Conclusion
Reduced class sizes have led to principals and teachers reporting increased use of
positive teaching practices although there was some variation across the schools as
to which teaching practices were increased, decreased or maintained. The key
outcome measure of student attainment on achievement tests will support the
validity of teachers and principals perceptions and the positive teaching practices
that they report result in learning benefits.
2004 Class Size Reduction Program – Evaluation Report 18
SECTION 3: STUDENT OUTCOMES
This section of the report provides information on the effect of smaller classes on
perceived student outcomes, such as student performance in the early years,
learning outcomes, behaviour (in both classroom and playground) and social skills.
This section will be complemented by future reports that will provide findings of the
analysis of measured student literacy, numeracy and social skills attainment data.
While the analysis of student attainment testing will provide the empirical evidence
on student learning outcomes, this study investigated the views of principals,
teachers and parents regarding student learning outcomes and the influences upon
them. It is important to note therefore that what is reported here is not measured or
assessed student attainment, but rather principal, teacher and parent judgements of
a) Factors Affecting Student Performance in the Early Years of Schooling
To explore the views of principals and teachers about the relationship between
smaller classes and student outcomes, respondents were asked to identify three key
factors that affected student performance at their schools and indicate whether small
classes had an impact on these factors.
The factors mentioned most frequently identified by principals and teachers were:
attributes of the family, such as the socio-economic background, the parental
attitude towards learning and their relationship with the school, the value placed
on education and the assistance provided by parents with learning activities such
as reading;
language competencies, associated with coming from a non-English speaking
background where English is the second language;
prior life experiences, including attendance at preschool or other activities that
provide group and social interaction which assist in building vocabulary and life
skills;
behaviour/learning competencies, including challenging student behaviour
requiring substantial teacher attention; and
teaching related factors, such as time spent addressing the specific needs of
individual students, teaching materials available and the involvement of support
teachers.
b) Effect on Student Learning Outcomes
A large proportion of the principals’ responses (37 of 45) were in the affirmative,
suggesting that smaller classes had impacted upon those factors they had identified.
This was attributed to the teacher providing more personalised instruction and
increased communication with parents.
A narrow majority (61 of 117) of teachers’ responses also indicated that smaller
classes had made an impact on the factors that they identified as affecting student
2004 Class Size Reduction Program – Evaluation Report 19
performance. However a higher proportion of the factors identified by teachers
related to influences beyond the classroom.
Literacy Outcomes
In terms of literacy outcomes, 14 out of 15 principals and 36 out of 39 teachers either
agreed or strongly agreed that, as a result of being in a small class, students had
made substantially more progress in their achievement of literacy outcomes. A
comparison of principals and teachers responses is shown in Figure 2.
The parents supported this view, with 65 of 73 parents being either very satisfied or
satisfied with their child’s literacy skills.
Figure 2: Principals and Teachers Level of Agreement that Students have
made substantially more Progress in their Achievement of Literacy Outcomes
Respondent
70.0%
Principals
Teachers
60.0%
50.0%
Percent
40.0%
30.0%
20.0%
10.0%
0.0%
N either agree nor disagree Agree Strongly agree
Level of Satisfaction with Students Literacy Outcomes
n.b. The categories “Disagree” and “Strongly disagree” received zero response and
have not been included.
In the interviews, the parents were asked whether smaller classes had helped
improve their children’s literacy skills. All of the parents interviewed believed that the
smaller classes had assisted with literacy skills.
2004 Class Size Reduction Program – Evaluation Report 20
Numeracy Outcomes
There were similar results with numeracy, with 14 of 15 principals and 36 of 39
teachers responding that they either agreed or strongly agreed that as a result of
being in a smaller class, students had made substantial progress in their
achievement of numeracy outcomes. A comparison of principals’ and teachers’
responses is demonstrated in Figure 3.
The parents supported this view, with 67 of 73 being either satisfied or very satisfied
with their child’s numeracy skills. In the case study interviews, all parents interviewed
believed that the smaller classes had helped improve their child’s numeracy skills.
Figure 3. Principals and Teachers Level of Agreement that students have made
substantially more Progress in their Achievement of Numeracy Outcomes
Respondent
60.0%
Principals
Teachers
50.0%
40.0%
Percent
30.0%
20.0%
10.0%
0.0%
Neither agree nor disagree Agree Strongly agree
Level of Satisfaction with Students Numeracy
Outcomes
n.b. The categories “Disagree” and “Strongly disagree” received zero response and
have not been included.
In the interviews, principals and teachers were asked a broader question about the
effect of smaller classes on student learning outcomes. Principals indicated that the
smaller classes had made a difference, with a significant improvement in learning
outcomes in comparison to previous years, as well as students progressing at a
faster rate through the curriculum.
2004 Class Size Reduction Program – Evaluation Report 21
Teachers who participated in the case study interviews also reported that the
students were achieving learning outcomes quicker and at a higher level than
cohorts from previous years.
These findings are consistent with the responses of the parents in the survey, with
64 parents stating that they were either very satisfied or satisfied with their child’s
level of work.
c) Effect on Student Behaviour and Social Skills
The survey collected data on the perceptions of students’ behaviour in class and in
the playground, and their development of social skills. This included the time
students spent on tasks and the level of student attention. The majority of principals
(14 out of 15) and teachers (33 out of 39) indicated that they either agreed or
strongly agreed that students were better behaved in class.
Most parents (65 out of 73) also indicated that they were satisfied or very satisfied
with their child’s behaviour at school and 60 parents stated that they were either
satisfied or very satisfied with the behaviour of other students in the class.
When asked whether, as a result of smaller classes, students were spending more
time on tasks in the classroom, almost all the principals (14) and teachers (36) stated
that they agreed or strongly agreed. There was a similar finding in regard to students
being more attentive in class with 14 principals and 34 teachers indicating either they
agreed or strongly agreed with this statement.
In interviews principals were also asked whether smaller classes had an effect on
student behaviour in the classroom and playground. Most of the principals felt that
both classroom and playground behaviour had improved as a result of the smaller
classes. Similarly, all of the teachers interviewed indicated that students were more
attentive in the smaller classes.
Principals and the teachers also reported in interview that they felt that smaller
classes had a positive effect on behaviour in the playground. Response to this
question in the questionnaire was more equivocal, with the majority of principals (10)
and teachers (19) neither agreeing or disagreeing that students were better behaved
in the playground as a result of smaller classes.
In interview the teachers spoke about the students in the smaller class:
having a close bond with one another and this being transferred to the
playground so they easily made friends;
knowing the rules and the expectations of behaviour in the playground; and
talking, in their class group, about what happens in the playground.
A majority of parents (48) also indicated that they were either very satisfied or
satisfied with other students’ behaviour in the playground.
In the questionnaire survey data were collected in three areas relating to students’
social skills:
2004 Class Size Reduction Program – Evaluation Report 22
student confidence;
student relationships; and
the transition from home to school.
The majority of principals (14) and teachers (36) indicated that they agreed or
strongly agreed that, as a result of being in a small class, students were more
confident in participating in the whole class situation. This was consistent with the
response of parents, with 65 parents satisfied or very satisfied with their child’s
confidence in taking part in class activities.
In response to the statement that children related better to each other as a result of
being in a smaller class, 13 principals and 35 teachers either agreed or strongly
agreed. This finding was supported by the parents, with 65 stating that they were
satisfied or very satisfied with how their child related to other children. Figure 4
compares the principals’ and teachers’ perceptions of students’ social skills in terms
of students’ confidence in participating in the classroom and their ability to relate to
one another.
Figure 4: Principals and Teachers Perceptions of Student Social Skills
80.0%
Categories
Principals Views on
Student Confidence
Principals Views on
Student Relationships
Teachers Views on
Student Confidence
Teachers Views on
60.0% Students Relationships
Percent
40.0%
20.0%
0.0%
Neither agree nor disagree Agree Strongly agree
Level of Agreement on Students’ Social Skills
n.b. The categories “Disagree” and “Strongly disagree” received zero response and
have not been included.
2004 Class Size Reduction Program – Evaluation Report 23
All of the principals and 34 of 29 teachers reported that as a result of smaller
classes, Kindergarten students were better able to make the transition to school and
68 (of 73) parents stated that they were satisfied or very satisfied with their child
settling into the school.
In interviews, the principals and teachers were also asked whether smaller classes
improved Kindergarten students settling into the school. All of the principals and the
teachers believed that the students had settled into school better due to the smaller
classes. The teachers attributed the successful transition from home to school to:
the students recognising familiar faces sooner in smaller classes;
if, having attended prior to school settings, moving to classes targeted at similar
numbers, instead of classes with possibly 26 or more students; and
orientation to school and peer buddy programs.
2004 Class Size Reduction Program – Evaluation Report 24
SECTION 4: SIGNIFICANT BENEFITS OF THE PROGRAM
This section provides information on the most significant benefits perceived by
participants as having resulted from the implementation of the Class Size Reduction
Program in their schools. Findings are mostly drawn from the questionnaire
responses, but are supported by the more detailed data from the interviews.
a) Most Significant Benefits for Principals, Teachers and Parents
The participants were asked to identify the most significant benefit for them of the
smaller classes in 2004. Responses were categorised and Table 8 summarises the
five most frequently mentioned benefits from the perspective of the principals,
teachers and parents.
Table 8: The Most Significant Benefit of Smaller Classes from the Perspective
of Principals, Teachers and Parents
Principals Teachers Parents
Improved teacher morale More individual attention and More one-to-one time and
knowledge of children individual attention
Improved student outcomes Improved and increased Improved teacher-student
assessment practices Relationships
Children more settled Improvement in children’s More assistance for students
progress if required
Parents happier Improved classroom Improved settling into and
management transition to school
Improved behaviour Increased job satisfaction Improvements in learning
management
There were similar findings in the analysis of the interviews. The principals in the
interviews identified the most significant benefits of the program as being:
improved teacher morale, with teachers being described as happier, enthusiastic
and more optimistic; and
improved learning outcomes, with improvements in learning compared to
previous years and comments that students from low socio-economic status
areas were, due to their rapid rate of learning through more personal attention, no
longer being disadvantaged.
2004 Class Size Reduction Program – Evaluation Report 25
The significant benefits cited by the teachers in the interviews were similar to those
reported in the questionnaire. In addition teachers talked of how they had made
improvements in their ability to meet the individual needs of students and reported
being able to develop close relationships with the students.
For the parents in the interviews, the significant benefits were:
happier and more confident children;
children receiving more attention;
improvements in children’s progress;
the ability of the teacher to identify problems; and
improved student behaviour.
It is interesting to note that the following benefits were identified by principals,
teachers and parents in both the survey and interviews:
improved teacher morale and student learning outcomes identified by principals;
improved ability to meet the needs of individual students thereby contributing to
their overall progress and increased job satisfaction identified by teachers; and
children being happier and receiving more attention identified by parents.
2004 Class Size Reduction Program – Evaluation Report 26
SECTION 5: IMPACT ON SCHOOL ORGANISATION
a) Class Sizes in the 15 Schools
In 2004, a new state-wide staffing formula was introduced for these schools which
are part of the Priority Schools Funding Program (PSFP) to achieve a state-wide
average Kindergarten class size of 20 students.
In 2005, the program will be expanded to enable PSFP Year 1 classes to achieve a
state-wide average of 22 students and in the following year (2006), the program will
enable PSFP Year 2 classes to achieve a state-wide average of 24 students.
Findings presented here refer to Kindergarten classes in the sample of 15 PSFP
schools. A fuller account of the impact of the Class Size Reduction Program is
available in the 2004 Class Size Audit Report which provides information about class
size and class organisation in all NSW public schools.
Table 9 provides comparative information about classes with Kindergarten students
in the 15 PSFP schools in 2003 and 2004. It is evident from the data, that the
average size of classes with Kindergarten students has been reduced in all the
schools in 2004, in some cases by as much as 10 students.
Table 9: Comparison of the Size of Classes with Kindergarten Students in 2003
and 2004 in the 15 PSFP Schools
PSFP 2003 2003 2004 2004
Schools No of Classes School No of Classes School
with Kindergarten Average with Kindergarten Average
students students
School 1 5 classes 26 5 classes 19
School 2 2 classes 27 3 classes 21
School 3 5 classes 26 5 classes 21
School 4 3 classes 27 5 classes 19
School 5 2 classes 28 3 classes 20
School 6 3 classes 30 4 classes 22
School 7 1 class 28 2 classes 23
School 8 2 classes 26 2 classes 21
School 9 1 class 28 2 classes 20
School 10 3 classes 27 4 classes 21
School 11 2 classes 29 3 classes 19
School 12 2 classes 27 3 classes 18
School 13 3 classes 28 4 classes 20
School 14 3 classes 26 2 classes 18
School 15 2 classes 26 2 classes 19
2003 2003 2004 2004
Number of Average Number of Average
classes classes
39 27 49 20
2004 Class Size Reduction Program – Evaluation Report 27
b) Class Organisation in the 15 Schools
In 2004 the fifteen schools in the sample had a total of 39 regular Kindergarten
classes and 10 multiage K-1 classes2 . The average class size for this group of
schools was 27 in 2003 and was reduced to 20 in 2004.
An examination of the total numbers of Kindergarten classes in the PSFP schools for
2003 and 2004 reveals the following details:
five schools had more single age Kindergarten classes in 2004 than in 2003;
six schools had one multi age class in 2004 but none in 2003;
two schools had multi age classes in 2003 but none in 2004; and
three schools had the same numbers of single and multi age classes in 2003
and 2004.
Overall, there were more single and more multiage Kindergarten classes formed in
2004 as compared to 2003. It is important to note that in the PSFP schools studied
the total number of Kindergarten classes increased from 39 in 2003 to 49 in 2004.
c) Effect of Additional Staffing on Class Organisation
No clear trends emerged from this evaluation regarding effect of additional staffing
on class organisation, with principals’ views on this issue being highly variable.
Further research is required to examine and confirm these observations as the
present study is unable to generalise as to the relationship between class size and
staffing procedures.
d) Allocation of Teachers
In the survey, principals were asked about the basis for allocating teachers to the
smaller classes and were allowed to indicate more than one reason.
The most frequently cited factor related to teacher experience, including:
experience in teaching Kindergarten and, if applicable, Year 1.
training in early childhood education; and
overall years of teaching experience.
The next two factors pertained to self nomination by the teacher and supervisor
nomination. Percentage responses can be seen in Table 10.
2
Multi age Kindergarten classes – 6 in 2003 and 10 in 2004; refer to 2004 Class Size Audit Report for
total numbers in multi age classes.
2004 Class Size Reduction Program – Evaluation Report 28
Table 10 : Basis of Teacher Allocation to Smaller Classes
Reasons Percentage
Teacher experience: 37%
most experienced in teaching applicable year level of class
most experienced teacher
trained in early childhood education
Self nominated 27%
Supervisor nominated 27%
New teacher appointed specifically for the Class Size Reduction Program 5%
Other 5%
e) Use of Support Staff
Principals and teachers were asked whether smaller classes had an impact on the
work of support staff in the school. The majority of principals (8) and teachers (25)
responded in the affirmative, namely, that smaller classes had affected the way
support staff work in the school.
The majority of responses by principals suggested that support staff were more
focussed on supporting teachers in the classroom (7), followed by support staff were
more focussed on Kindergarten to Year 3 (6) and support staff were more focussed
on Year 4 to Year 6 (4).
The teachers were also asked to identify the ways in which the work of support staff
had been affected. The most common reports were that there was more interaction
with students and more one-to-one teaching and small group work.
2004 Class Size Reduction Program – Evaluation Report 29
SECTION 6: ADVICE FROM PRINCIPALS AND TEACHERS
This section of the Report discusses advice given by Principals and Teachers from
the 15 PSFP schools to their colleagues regarding implementation of smaller
classes.
a) Advice from Principals
Principals were asked to provide advice to their colleagues about implementing
smaller classes. Their advice encompassed a wide range of aspects, the most
frequently mentioned include:
keep parents informed;
resource the smaller classes adequately;
focus on achievement; and
provide training and development.
Keep parents informed: Principals emphasised the importance of keeping parents
informed about every step in the process, which included publicising the school’s
involvement in the Class Size Reduction Program, engaging in consultations with
parents to ensure shared understanding and expectations of smaller classes and
informing parents about the results being achieved in Kindergarten.
Provide adequate resources: Principals believed that the smaller classes required
adequate resources, with classrooms needing to be well resourced for practical
activities.
Focus on achievement: Principals expressed the view that the focus should be on
student achievement and raised expectations of what could be achieved. This
included having high expectations of student learning outcomes and developing
more individualised strategies and learning programs.
Provide training and development: Principals suggested maximising the benefit of
reduced class sizes by co-ordinating a strong teaching and learning focus which
included training and development for teachers. This involved providing teachers
with training and development to support literacy, numeracy and computer supported
learning, as well as teaching on a more individual basis and in groups. Principals
also suggested starting a professional dialogue amongst teachers about teaching
practices.
b) Advice from Teachers
In the survey, teachers were asked to provide advice to their colleagues who would
be teaching smaller classes in the following year. Their advice encompassed a wide
range of aspects with the most frequently mentioned being:
enjoy your teaching;
do more group work;
accelerate the pace of learning;
2004 Class Size Reduction Program – Evaluation Report 30
get to know the children better;
spend more time with individuals; and
take opportunities in regard to class management.
Enjoying teaching: Teachers reported that smaller classes provided the opportunity
to enjoy teaching. Enjoyment was gained through interacting with children in a more
relaxed environment and seeing more students reach literacy and mathematics
outcomes. Aligned with this was the satisfaction of providing individual instruction to
more children over a wide range of abilities, the professional satisfaction of greater
achievement and increased personal satisfaction.
More group work: Teachers suggested incorporating more group work in each
curriculum area, as the groups would be easier to manage and cater more for
students’ individual needs. It was also advisable to introduce hands-on group work
early in the year, have clear expectations and keep the groups small.
Accelerating the pace of learning: Teachers believed that smaller classes
facilitated an accelerated pace of teaching and learning and there was scope to
undertake activities that were too difficult for larger classes. However, it was
important for the teacher to be prepared to extend students’ learning because of the
rapid progress.
Getting to know the children better: Teachers emphasised the fact that through
having more time, it was possible to get to know students better and quicker in a
smaller class and this facilitated the development of a comfortable atmosphere in the
classroom.
Spending more time with individuals: Teachers reported that with smaller classes
there was more time to spend with individual students. They suggested spending
more time meeting students’ individual needs, personalising learning and assisting
more children with their diverse range of abilities.
Managing challenging activities: Teachers advised that smaller class size made
classes more manageable in terms of group work and hands-on activities. They
advised other teachers to take the opportunity to try more of these activities which
they might have previously seen as more challenging in terms of behaviour
management.
Other advice offered by teachers was that smaller classes facilitated moving high
achievers onto the next level, whilst meeting the needs of the students requiring
additional assistance, as well as permitting more regular assessments. Teachers
also commented on the reduction in stress, the need to be flexible and innovative
and to reflect on teaching practice whilst exercising caution in trying new methods of
instruction and teaching.
In summary, the advice from principals and teachers was that in order to obtain the
maximum benefit from this program, it was essential to ensure that the smaller
classes have teachers who have the relevant training and resources and thus are
able to maximise the benefit from smaller classes. Teachers also needed to be
2004 Class Size Reduction Program – Evaluation Report 31
encouraged to take advantage of the opportunity to get to know their students and
provide instruction tailored to their students’ individual needs.
c) Professional Development
In the questionnaire the principals and teachers were asked to identify any
professional development that had assisted in the teaching of smaller classes. The
professional development activities mentioned most often by the principals and
teachers are shown in Table 11.
Table 11: Professional Development Identified by Principals and Teachers as
Assisting in Teaching Smaller Classes
Principals Teachers
Reading Recovery Reading Recovery
Count Me In Too Count Me In Too
Early Literacy Initiative Early Literacy Initiative
Mat Training Student Engagement in Maths
Quality Teaching Quality Teaching
SEA Consultancy Support Get Them Started Early
In interview many teachers reported that smaller classes made it easier for them to
implement what they had learned through these professional development activities.
These findings are in line with advice given by principals regarding the importance of
providing suitable training and development opportunities to teachers as a means of
deriving maximum benefits from the program.
2004 Class Size Reduction Program – Evaluation Report 32
SECTION 7: DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS
The major findings of this report are that the Class Size Reduction Program has
been exceptionally successful from the perspective of principals, teachers and
parents who all reported high levels of satisfaction with the impact of the program on
class organisation, teaching practices, and student learning outcomes, behaviour
and social skills.
According to principals, teachers and parents the program has resulted in: a
perceived improvement in learning outcomes in literacy, numeracy and social skills;
in the provision of more personalised attention and teaching; an increase in teacher
morale; a reduction in classroom management problems and better teacher-student
relationships.
Some ways to maximise the benefits of the Program include:
smaller classes being ‘managed’ and promoted by principals in a way that
further enhances the benefits of the program;
the selection of experienced teachers to support quality teaching;
publicising smaller classes and the advantages of these classes as a means of
attracting new students;
conducting meetings with parents and regularly informing them of the steps
and processes involved, so as to ensure that they feel part of the process and
become involved with the school;
publicising and celebrating students’ achievements and the teachers’ efforts
in producing the success;
providing the necessary resources and training. This may include re-directing
priorities to ensure that there are enough practical activities and material
resources to equip an extra classroom; facilitating sharing, team teaching and co-
operation amongst the teaching staff and offering professional development to
support teachers not only in literacy, numeracy and the use of computers in
learning, but in individual and group teaching practices.
To strengthen the positive impact of this program future evaluation will focus on the
teaching and learning practices that this report has confirmed as central to
maximising the benefits of reduced class sizes. Both teachers and principals have
illustrated their awareness that adjustment of teaching practice to the new, smaller
class, environment is important. Parents too have reported that the smaller classes
provide opportunities for improved teaching practices and more personalised
learning for their child. There is potential to pursue these issues more deeply in
interviews in 2005.
2004 Class Size Reduction Program – Evaluation Report 33
APPENDIX A: EVALUATION DESIGN
a) Longitudinal Study
The evaluation of the Class Size Reduction Program involves Student Attainment
testing in a longitudinal study from 2003 to 2008 which tracks four groups of students
from Kindergarten to Year 3. The four groups are:
1. Students in large classes in 15 PSFP schools who commenced their
schooling in Kindergarten 2003.
2. Students in reduced classes in the same PSFP schools who commenced their
schooling in Kindergarten 2004.
3. Students in large classes in 15 non-PSFP schools who commenced their
schooling in Kindergarten 2004.
4. Students in reduced classes in the same non-PSFP schools who commenced
their schooling in Kindergarten 2005.
A sample of approximately 3000 students is involved in this study, the participants
being drawn equally from PSFP schools and non-PSFP schools.
The Student Attainment testing involves measuring aspects of literacy, numeracy
and social outcomes of Kindergarten students, with testing taking place in March and
November each year. The testing commenced with Kindergarten students in large
classes in PSFP schools in November 2003 and continued in 2004 for students in
smaller classes. Students in large classes in non-PSFP schools were tested in
March and November 2004.
The results of the Student Attainment testing in large classes will be compared with
that of students in smaller classes.
The results of the Basic Skills Test (BST) for students in large classes will also be
compared with students in smaller classes. This will involve comparing the 2007
PSFP students’ BST results with earlier years, and the 2008 non-PSFP students’
BST results with earlier years. A student identifier will be used to track the
performance of students in small and larger classes through the Basic Skills Tests in
Year 3 and Year 5.
2004 Class Size Reduction Program – Evaluation Report 34
Table 1: Classes involved in the PSFP and non-PSFP Schools Evaluation and
how they will be compared.
15 PSFP Schools
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
Cohort
Kindergarten Year 1 Year 2 Year 3
Larger students in students in students in students in
classes PSFP PSFP PSFP PSFP
schools schools schools schools
Need not Need not Need not Need not
exceed 26 exceed 28 exceed 29 exceed 30
Kindergarten Year 1 Year 2 Year 3
Reduced students in students in students in students in
classes PSFP PSFP PSFP PSFP
schools schools schools schools
Average 20 Average 22 Average 24
15 Non PSFP Schools
Cohort 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
Kindergarten Year 1 Year 2 Year 3
Larger students in students in students in students in
classes non PSFP non PSFP non PSFP non PSFP
schools schools schools schools
Need not Need not Need not Need not
exceed 26 exceed 28 exceed 29 exceed 30
Year 3
Kindergarten Year 1 Year 2
students
Reduced students in students in students in
in non
classes non PSFP non PSFP non PSFP
PSFP
schools schools schools
schools
Average 20 Average 22 Average 24
In this evaluation design, data collection in 2004, which is reported here, focuses on
15 PSFP schools only.
b) The Sample
The sample for the survey was drawn from 15 schools who were involved in the
Priority Schools Funding Program. The 15 PSFP schools were identified through the
August 2003 Class Size Audit from schools which have large classes in
Kindergarten. In these schools, principals were expected to reduce the classes in
2004 to close to the state average of 20 to meet the requirements of the evaluation
model.
The sample comprised of 15 principals, 39 teachers and 73 parents. The principals
were chosen on the basis that they were in charge of the PSFP School. The
teachers selected were those who were teaching a reduced size class. The parents
chosen had a child in a smaller class and were the parents of the eighth and
sixteenth student on the class roll. If there were fewer than sixteen students in a
class, the questionnaire went to the parent of the last student on the class roll.
2004 Class Size Reduction Program – Evaluation Report 35
The sample for the interviews consisted of eight of the 15 PSFP schools. The
principal, the teachers of smaller classes, the support teachers and the parents of
children in smaller classes for each school were interviewed.
c) Data collection instruments and procedures
Surveys
A survey of the 15 PSFP schools was conducted in 2004 to evaluate the small class
size project from the perspective of the principal, the teachers and the parents. The
instruments of measurement in the survey were three questionnaires designed for
the three target groups, i.e. principals, teachers and parents. Though different
questionnaires were developed for each of the target groups, the questionnaires
covered similar areas.
For principals, a 20-item questionnaire collected data on:
background information on the respondent;
the organisation of classes;
teaching and learning practices and
student outcomes.
For teachers, a 20-item questionnaire collected data on:
background information on the respondent;
teaching and learning practices and
student outcomes.
For parents, a 13-item questionnaire collected data on:
background information on the child and family and
the effects of smaller classes.
The questionnaires are included in Appendix A.
Principals of the participating schools were sent an information pack which included
a covering letter explaining the purpose of this evaluation, separate questionnaires
for the principal, teachers and parents and a reply paid envelope.
The initial mail out resulted in a total of 117 questionnaires being returned. A further
10 questionnaires were returned after a telephone call was made to the principals of
the remaining schools one week prior to the return date.
Interviews were used to determine the range of educational benefits in the context of
different schools and to gain a deeper level of understanding of the effect of smaller
classes on the schools involved in the Class Size Reduction Program. Data was
collected through semi-structured interviews with principals, teachers, support
teachers and parents from eight PSFP schools.
Principals and parents were asked questions covering the areas of background and
general information, class organisation and learning support and student learning.
The questions for the teachers and support teachers included the additional area of
teaching.
2004 Class Size Reduction Program – Evaluation Report 36
There was considerable flexibility in the order and way in which the questions were
asked and all respondents were assured that their views would remain confidential
and that the information would be reported in such a way that no individual student,
parent, class or school could be identified. The list of interview questions is included
in Appendix B.
Principals of the participating schools were contacted to arrange a suitable date and
time and each of the eight schools was visited for one day in the first part of Term 3.
The interviews were approximately one hour in duration. The parents were
interviewed in groups and the interviews were conducted as focus groups. Hand
written notes were taken during the interviews and tape recordings made for later
transcription.
d) Description of the schools participating in interviews
Eight schools were selected to participate in interviews. They were selected based
on their involvement in the Class Size Reduction Program, and represented a range
of school types drawn from the Sydney Metropolitan Area and regional and rural
areas.
The schools consisted of:
a P1 school in the metropolitan area (enrolments greater than 700)
a P2 school in a metropolitan area (enrolments between 451 -700)
a P3 school in the metropolitan area (enrolments between 301-450)
two P2 schools in rural areas
a P4 school in a rural area (enrolments between 160-300)
a P3 school in the outer metropolitan area
a small P5 school (enrolments between 26 and 159)
The sample comprised of 8 principals, 15 teachers, 8 support teachers and 33
parents.
Appendix C provides details of the schools involved in the interviews.
e) Method of Data Analysis
The questionnaire data was coded and collated. To ensure consistency all coding
was undertaken by the researcher. The data was then analysed using the SPSS
computer package. In accordance with the purpose of the survey, the analysis
focused on descriptive, rather than inferential statistical analysis.
The analysis of the data gathered from the interviews used content analysis and
analytic induction. The data from the interviews was transcribed and then entered
into the computer software program NVIVO, which is a code-and-retrieve program
that can be used to analyse qualitative data, such as open-ended questions,
transcriptions of interviews and focus groups. The data was then collated and each
question was analysed using the technique of content analysis to identify categories
and obtain an overview of participants’ views on smaller classes.
2004 Class Size Reduction Program – Evaluation Report 37
The process of analytic induction was used as a “method for building up causal
explanations of phenomena from a close examination of cases” (Ryan & Bernard,
2000, pp. 786-787). It involved a cyclic, iterative process of formulating descriptions
of the categories, examining each interview case to establish whether the description
fitted the case, then either reformulating the description or examining further cases
until universal descriptions were established (Bryman & Burgess, 1994; Flick, 1998;
Potter, 1996; Ryan & Bernard, 2000).
Subsequently, the quantitative data collected in the survey provided the basis of this
report and the qualitative data collected in the interviews was used to supplement
and deepen the level of understanding of participants’ views.
f) Background of Participants
The Survey Questionnaire Participants
Principals
The 15 principals who participated in the survey had held their current position at the
school for an average of 3.5 years, with two principals holding the position for 3
months and one principal holding the position for 12 years. Of the principals, 9 were
female and 6 were male.
Teachers
The majority of the teachers (32 out of 39) who responded to the survey taught
Kindergarten, with the remainder 6 teaching the multi-age class Kindergarten-Year
1(K-1). These teachers were experienced in their professional role, with an average
teaching experience of 13 years. This experience tended to be concentrated in
teaching the early years of schooling, with the average number of years teaching
Kindergarten to Year 3 (K-3) being 9.1 years, and the average number of years
teaching their current level of class being 4.7 years. Nearly all the teachers (37) were
female.
The largest number of teachers (17) held a Bachelor of Education, which was
followed by a Bachelor of Teaching (7) and other qualifications not listed in the
questionnaire (6) including the Teachers Certificate and Diploma of Teaching. A
number of teachers (8) were also trained in Early Childhood Education.
Parents
All of the parents who responded to the survey had a child in Kindergarten. The large
majority of these children (61 out of 73) were in regular classes with the remaining
12 in multi-age classes. Slightly more than half (39) or were female, 33 or were male
and there was one set of twins, a female and a male.
More than three quarters of the parents (56) surveyed spoke English at home, with
the remaining 17 speaking a language other than English. Only 3 of the families
were of Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander background.
2004 Class Size Reduction Program – Evaluation Report 38
The majority (58) of the parents indicated that their child had attended pre-school in
the year prior to starting school. Slightly more than half of the parents (37) or had an
older child in a large class. Of the parents surveyed, approximately one third (25) or
worked as a parent helper in their child’s class.
The Survey Interview Participants
Principals
The principals who participated in the interviews had held their current position for an
average of 6 years, with one principal holding the position for 1 term and another
holding the position for 30 years. Similarly, the period of time the principals had been
working at the school ranged from 1 term to 35 years, the average length of time
being 7.25 years.
Teachers
The majority (11 out of 15) of the teachers involved in the interviews taught
Kindergarten, with the remainder teaching K-1. They had been teaching their current
level of class for an average of 2.2 years. These teachers were experienced in their
professional role, with the average number of years teaching being 7 years and an
average of 3.6 years teaching K-3. Only 2 teachers were trained in Early Childhood
Education.
Support Teachers
The number of years the support teachers involved in the interviews had worked at
the school ranged from 1 to 17 years, with the average being 6 years at the school.
Similarly, the number of years they had worked in the support position ranged from 1
to 17 years, with the average being 5.5 years in the position.
Parents
Of the 33 parents who participated in the interviews, 32 had a child in Kindergarten,
with only one parent’s child being in Year 1. For a large proportion of this group (24),
their child was in a regular class, with only 9 of the parents having children in a multi-
age class. More than half the children (19) were male and 14 were female. A
substantial number of the children (28) had attended pre-school.
2004 Class Size Reduction Program – Evaluation Report 39
APPENDIX B: SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE AND INTERVIEW
QUESTIONS
Mx xxxxxxxxx
Principal
xxxxxxxxxxxx Public School
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Dear xxxxxxxxxxxx
CLASS SIZE REDUCTION PROGRAM EVALUATION – INTERVIEWS
AND SURVEYS
As a participant in the class size reduction program, your involvement in the
evaluation of this initiative would be greatly appreciated. Responses from principals,
teachers and parents will be used to monitor the effectiveness of the program and to
evaluate the educational benefits of reduced class sizes.
The evaluation process will involve surveys and a limited number of interviews.
Thank you for agreeing to participate in both the surveys and interviews, which I
understand you discussed with a member of the evaluation team recently.
Interviews
Interviews will involve the principal, teachers and selected parents in structured
interviews designed to provide more detailed feedback on the implementation of the
class size reduction program.
It is envisaged that these interviews will take place over one day, and will be
arranged with you to minimise inconvenience to you and your staff. The evaluation
team will be in contact with you again soon to confirm a time suitable to your school’s
requirements.
Surveys
Please find enclosed in this package, copies of the separate questionnaires for the
principal, the teachers of the reduced size classes and parents of students in those
classes. Envelopes have also been provided for the completed responses.
Principals are asked to arrange for the distribution of the questionnaires with their
envelopes to the relevant teachers. Teachers are to return the completed
questionnaires in the sealed envelopes to the principal.
Principals are also asked to arrange for the distribution of the parent questionnaire to
the family of the eighth and sixteenth student on the class roll of each reduced size
2004 Class Size Reduction Program – Evaluation Report 40
class. If there are fewer than sixteen students in a class please provide a
questionnaire to the family of the last student on the class roll. Parents are also to
return their completed questionnaires in the sealed envelopes to the principal.
Please place your completed questionnaire and those of the teachers and parents in
the large envelope provided and forward to the Planning and Innovation Directorate
by the end of Term 3.
All respondents to the questionnaire are assured that their views will remain
confidential. The information will be reported so that no individual student, parent,
class or school can be identified.
If you have any enquiries about the surveys or the interviews, please contact Jenny
Donovan on 9561-8260.
Yours sincerely
Martin Graham
Acting General Manager
Planning and Innovation
July 2004
2004 Class Size Reduction Program – Evaluation Report 41
CLASS SIZE REDUCTION PROGRAM QUESTIONNAIRE:
PRINCIPAL
This questionnaire is designed for the principals of schools in the class size
reduction program.
Your responses are important for evaluating the educational benefits of smaller
classes and informing the class size reduction program.
Please complete by filling in spaces, ticking the box or by writing comments as
requested.
PART A – PARTICIPANT INFORMATION
1. Number of years as a principal at this school
2. Please indicate your gender: Female Male
3. Name of present school
PART B – CLASS ORGANISATION
4. Please indicate the current size of reduced size classes:
(a) Regular (single year) classes:
.
Class Year No. in Class Year No. in class
name class name
(b) Multi-age (composite) classes:
Class No. in No. in Year No. in Year No. in Year Total No. in
name Kinder 1 2 3 class
2004 Class Size Reduction Program – Evaluation Report 42
5. (a) What was the effect of the additional staffing on how classes were
structured in 2004 compared with 2003?
more regular (single year) classes
more multi-age (composite) classes
no effect
(b) Why were multi-age (composite) classes formed in 2004?
for stage-based learning
for reasons other than stage-based learning
no multi-age (composite) classes formed
6. In general what has been the attitude of your parent community to:
(a) Regular (single year) classes:
(b) Multi-age (composite) classes:
(c) This year’s class organisation:
7. (a) Has the small class size in the target class(es) had an effect on how
support staff work in the school?
Yes No
(b) If yes, is the work of support staff :
(You may tick more than one box) Yes No
more focussed on Kindergarten to Year 3
more focussed on Year 4 to Year 6
more focussed on students withdrawn from the class
more focussed on supporting teachers in the classroom
2004 Class Size Reduction Program – Evaluation Report 43
8. What part did the following play in allocating the teacher(s) to the reduced size
classes?
Please tick for each target class. You may tick more than one box for each class.
Target Target Target Target Target Target
The teacher on the target class was:
class 1 class 2 class 3 class 4 class 5 class 6
The most experienced teacher
The most experienced in
teaching in the year level of the
class
Trained in early childhood
education
The teacher appointed
specifically for the reduced size
class
Self nominated
Supervisor nominated
Other (please specify):
9. List any professional development that has assisted the teaching of smaller
classes:
PART C – TEACHING AND LEARNING
In answering the questions on teaching and learning in this section it could be useful
to discuss with the teachers of the reduced size classes in order to help your general
overview.
10. List the main ways teachers in the reduced size class(es) have changed their
teaching practices because of the smaller classes. Please list up to three ways.
2004 Class Size Reduction Program – Evaluation Report 44
11. What effect has the smaller number of students this year had on the
following aspects of teaching in the reduced size class(es)?
(Mark one response only for each aspect)
More No Less
Aspects of teaching
often change often
5 4 3 2 1
Use of whole class instruction
Use of whole class discussion
Use of group work
Inclusion of fewer students in a group
Provision of individualised instruction
for all students
Provision of support to students who
need assistance
Use of higher order questions
Students’ involvement in literacy
activities
Students’ involvement in numeracy
activities
Students’ involvement in learning
activities in curriculum areas other than
literacy and numeracy
Student use of ICT
Provision of feedback to students on
their work
Management of problems with student
behaviour
Teacher interaction with parents
12. List the main teaching practices that teachers have maintained regardless of
the smaller class size. Please list up to three ways.
2004 Class Size Reduction Program – Evaluation Report 45
13. For those teachers of reduced size classes, what effect has a smaller class
this year had on their satisfaction with teaching?
Much more satisfied
More satisfied
No effect
More dissatisfied
Much more dissatisfied
Unsure
PART D – STUDENT OUTCOMES
14. What are the key factors affecting student performance in the early years at
this school?
Please list up to three factors.
(a)
(b)
(c)
15. Have smaller class sizes had an impact on each of these factors?
Factor If yes, then how? If no, then why not?
a) Yes No
b) Yes No
c) Yes No
2004 Class Size Reduction Program – Evaluation Report 46
16. Effect of smaller class sizes on student outcomes.
Please indicate the degree to which you agree or disagree with each
statement below by ticking the appropriate box to the right of each
statement.
(Mark one response only for each statement)
Neither
As a result of being in a small class I Strongly Strongly
Agree agree nor Disagree
feel the students: agree disagree
disagree
5 4 3 2 1
Spend more time on task in the
classroom
Are better behaved in class
Are more attentive in class
Relate better to each other
Are more confident in
participating in the whole class
situation
Are better behaved in the
playground
Are better able to make the
transition to school (Kindergarten
students only)
Have made substantially more
progress in their achievement of
literacy outcomes
Have made substantially more
progress in their achievement of
numeracy outcomes
2004 Class Size Reduction Program – Evaluation Report 47
17. What evidence do you have of the effect of smaller class sizes on the literacy and
numeracy outcomes of students in the target classes? You could attach any summary
information.
PART E – CONCLUDING COMMENTS
18.(a) What has been the most significant benefit for you as a principal in having
a smaller class(es) this year?
(b) Please explain why a smaller class(es) has resulted in this benefit.
2004 Class Size Reduction Program – Evaluation Report 48
19. What advice would you have for principals about
implementing smaller classes?
20. Any further comment on the effect of smaller classes or the design of this
survey.
THIS ENDS THE QUESTIONNAIRE. THANK YOU FOR YOUR HELP.
Please place your response in the envelope provided with the questionnaire.
Please place your survey with those of the teachers and parents in the large
envelope addressed to the Planning and Innovation Directorate and forward by
the end of Term 3.
2004 Class Size Reduction Program – Evaluation Report 49
CLASS SIZE REDUCTION PROGRAM QUESTIONNAIRE:
CLASSROOM TEACHER
This questionnaire is designed for teachers of classes in the class size reduction
program.
Your responses are important for evaluating the educational benefits of smaller
classes and informing the class size reduction program.
Please complete by ticking the box, filling in spaces or by writing comments as
requested.
PART A – PARTICIPANT INFORMATION
1. Year level of your class:
Kindergarten
Year 1
Year 2
Year 3
Multi-age (specify years)
2. Number of students in your class
If multi-age please specify number of students in each year:
Year Number of students
Year Number of students
Year Number of students
3. Your years of teaching experience
4. Your years of teaching experience in:
a) the year level of this year’s class
b) Kindergarten to Year 3
5. Please indicate your gender: Female Male
2004 Class Size Reduction Program – Evaluation Report 50
6. What teacher education course did you most recently complete?
B Teach. Grad. Dip Ed. B Ed.
Degree + Dip Ed
Grad B. Ed Double Degree M Teach.
Other (Please specify)
7. Are you trained in Early Childhood? Yes No
8. Name of present
school
9. List any recent professional development that has assisted your teaching of a
smaller class:
PART B – TEACHING AND LEARNING
10. List the main ways you have you changed your teaching practices because
of the smaller classes. Please list up to three ways.
2004 Class Size Reduction Program – Evaluation Report 51
11. What effect has the smaller number of students had on the following aspects
of your teaching this year?
(Mark one response only for each aspect)
More No Less
Aspects of teaching
often change often
5 4 3 2 1
Use of whole class instruction
Use of whole class discussion
Use of group work
Inclusion of fewer students in a group
Provision of individualised instruction
for all students
Provision of support to students who
need assistance
Use of higher order questions
Students’ involvement in literacy
activities
Students’ involvement in numeracy
activities
Students’ involvement in learning
activities in curriculum areas other than
literacy and numeracy
Student use of ICT
Provision of feedback to students on
their work
Management of problems with student
behaviour
Your interaction with parents
12. List the main teaching practices you have maintained regardless of the
smaller class size. Please list up to three practices.
2004 Class Size Reduction Program – Evaluation Report 52
13. Has the smaller class had an effect on how support staff work with the
students in your class?
Yes No Unsure
(b) If yes, in what ways?
14. What effect has teaching a smaller class this year had on your satisfaction
with teaching?
Much more satisfied
More satisfied
No effect
More dissatisfied
Much more dissatisfied
PART C – STUDENT OUTCOMES
15. What are the key factors affecting student performance in the early years at
this school?
Please list up to three factors.
(a)
(b)
(c)
16. Have smaller class sizes had an impact on each of these factors?
Factor If yes, then how? If no, then why not?
a) Yes No
b) Yes No
c) Yes No
2004 Class Size Reduction Program – Evaluation Report 53
17. Effect of smaller classes on student outcomes.
Please indicate the degree to which you agree or disagree with each
statement below by ticking the appropriate box to the right of each statement.
(Mark one response only for each statement).
Neither
As a result of being in a small class I feel Strongly Strongly
Agree agree nor Disagree
the students: agree disagree
disagree
5 4 3 2 1
Spend more time on task in the
classroom
Are better behaved in class
Are more attentive in class
Relate better to each other
Are more confident in
participating in the whole class situation
Are better behaved in the
playground
Are better able to make the
transition to school (Kindergarten
a
students only)
Have made substantially more
progress in their achievement of literacy
outcomes
Have made substantially more
progress in their achievement of
numeracy outcomes
a respond to this statement only if teaching Kindergarten students
PART D – CONCLUDING COMMENTS
18.(a) What has been the most significant benefit for you as a classroom teacher
in having a smaller class this year?
2004 Class Size Reduction Program – Evaluation Report 54
(b) Please explain why a smaller class has resulted in this benefit.
19.What advice would you have for teachers who will be teaching smaller classes
next year?
20. Any further comment on the effect of smaller classes or the design of this
survey?
THIS ENDS THE QUESTIONNAIRE. THANK YOU FOR YOUR HELP.
Please complete by 17 September and place your response in the envelope
provided. Please give to your principal who will forward all surveys to the
Planning and Innovation Directorate.
2004 Class Size Reduction Program – Evaluation Report 55
CLASS SIZE REDUCTION PROGRAM
PARENT QUESTIONNAIRE
Dear Parent
During 2004 an additional teacher or teachers has been provided to your school as
part of the Class Size Reduction Program. This has allowed your school to reduce
class sizes in some classes in the early years of schooling.
This program for all of NSW began in 2004 and will continue to 2007. By 2007 the
average size of Kindergarten classes in government schools will be 20, Year 1
classes 22 and Year 2 classes 24.
This questionnaire is designed for parents who have a child in one of the reduced
size classes at the school. You are one of the parents who has been randomly
selected to complete the questionnaire. The aim of the questionnaire is to find out
what the effects of reducing class sizes have been on your family.
Your views are important to assist in the evaluation of the educational benefits of
smaller classes and to assist in the Department’s future work in reducing class sizes.
The questionnaire will only take a few minutes to complete.
The results of this survey will be entirely confidential. The survey report will
not identify individual students, parents, classes or schools.
If you require any assistance in completing this questionnaire please contact
the school or Jenny Donovan on 9561-8260.
Thank you for your assistance in completing the questionnaire. Please return
the completed questionnaire to the school by 17 September 2004 in the
envelope provided.
Yours sincerely
Martin Graham
Acting General Manager
Planning and Innovation
30 July 2004
CLASS SIZE REDUCTION PROGRAM QUESTIONNAIRE:
PARENT
2004 Class Size Reduction Program – Evaluation Report 56
This questionnaire is designed for the parents of students in the class size reduction
program.
Your responses are important for evaluating the educational benefits of smaller classes and
informing the class size reduction program.
Please complete by ticking the box, filling in spaces or by writing comments as requested.
If you have more than one child in one of the smaller classes, please select the youngest of
your children and fill in their details.
PART A – PARTICIPANT INFORMATION
10. N
ame of your child’s
school:
11. Which year is your child in?
Kindergarten Year 1 Year 2 Year 3
12. Is your child in a regular (single year) class or a multi-age (more than
one year) class?
Regular Multi-age
13. Is your child a boy or a girl?
Boy Girl
14. Does your family speak a language other than English at home?
Yes No
15. Is your family of Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander background?
Yes No
16. Did your child attend a pre-school in the year before starting school?
2004 Class Size Reduction Program – Evaluation Report 57
Yes No
PART B – EFFECTS OF SMALLER CLASS SIZES
17. What has been the most important benefit for your child of being in a smaller
class?
18. (a) Do you have an older child (children) who has been in a larger class?
Yes No
(b) If yes, how does their experience compare?
19. (a) Do you consider there are disadvantages to small class sizes?
Yes No
(b) If yes, could you please describe them.
20. (a) Do you work as a parent helper in one of the reduced size classes?
Yes No
2004 Class Size Reduction Program – Evaluation Report 58
(b) If yes, what have you observed has been the effect of a smaller number of
students?
21. For each of the following aspects of school how satisfied are you with your
child’s experience this year. Please mark one response for each aspect.
Very Mixed Very
How satisfied are you this year with: Satisfied Dissatisfied
satisfied feelings dissatisfied
5 4 3 2 1
your child’s literacy skills
your child’s numeracy skills
how your child has settled
into school
the level of work your child is
doing
the chance your child has to
use technology
the feedback your child gets
from the teacher about
his/her work
contact with the teacher
about your child
the individual instruction
provided in class for your
child
the individual help provided
in class for your child if
struggling with the work
the behaviour of your child at
school
the behaviour of other
students in the class
the behaviour of other
students in the playground
how your child gets on with
the other students
the confidence your child
has in taking part in class
activities
2004 Class Size Reduction Program – Evaluation Report 59
22. Any further comment on the effect of smaller classes or the design of this
survey.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR HELP.
Please place your response in the envelope provided and return to the school by
17 September, 2004.
2004 Class Size Reduction Program – Evaluation Report 60
INTERVIEWS
Class Size Reduction Program: 2004
Principal Interview School Name:
The purpose of this evaluation is to investigate how and to what extent the
class size reduction program has impacted on class organization, the use of support
staff and strategies and activities that enhance learning in classes. The schools
chosen to participate in this study were selected based on their involvement in the
class size reduction program, and represented a range of school types.
It is your views that are of interest to us: there are no right or wrong answers.
Your participation in this study is voluntary: you do not need to answer any questions
that you do not want to and you can withdraw your participation at any time. The
information gathered will be treated as strictly confidential with no school, principal,
teacher, student or parent identified in any reports.
Background Information (Use this as
part of an introductory conversation):
1. How long have you been at the
school?
2. How long have you been a
principal?
Please note if the principal is relieving.
General:
1. (a) What are the key factors affecting
student performance in the early years?
(b) What are the key factors affecting
student performance in the early years at
this school?
2. Have smaller class sizes had an impact
on these? In what ways?
2004 Class Size Reduction Program – Evaluation Report 61
3. What helps to enhance the benefits of
smaller classes?
Class Organisation and Learning Support:
4. (a) What were class structures and
instructional groupings (other than roll
classes) in 2003?
(b) How were they determined?
5. (a) What are the class structures and
instructional (other than roll classes)
groups in 2004?
(b) How were they determined?
(c) What was the impact of the additional
resource?
(d) Did it help teaching and learning?
6. (a) What are parents’ views of the 2004
class organization in this school in relation
to multi–age and regular classes?
(b) What are parents’ views of the
2004 stage-based learning?
7. (a) Has the additional staffing resource
had an impact on the use of support staff
within the school?
(b) In what ways?
2004 Class Size Reduction Program – Evaluation Report 62
Student Learning:
8. What effect do you believe that smaller
classes have had on:
(a) student learning outcomes including
the progress student’s make?
(b) student behaviour in the classroom
and in the playground?
(c) students’ social skills e.g. peer
relations, sense of community?
(d) how Kindergarten students have
settled in to school?
(e) assessment practices?
(f) teacher/parent interaction?
9. What effect do you believe that smaller
classes have had on:
(a) teaching/learning methods used e.g.
whole class, group or individual activities?
(b) what teachers do with the students
(e.g. how much teacher-directed; the
higher order nature of the work; the pacing
of the work)?
(c) time spent on literacy and numeracy
activities and other areas of the
curriculum?
(d) student use of ICT?
2004 Class Size Reduction Program – Evaluation Report 63
(f) support for students who need
assistance?
(g) feedback to students?
(h) teaching programs?
(i) teachers’ expectations of what
students can achieve?
(j) the classroom environment, including
atmosphere, use of space?
(k) teacher morale?
10. (a) What training and development has
helped in teaching smaller classes?
(b) What training and development you
think teachers (and principals) need now?
11. (a) What have you learned from the
experience?
(b) What would you do differently?
(c) What advice would you have for
principals?
(d) What advice would you have for
teachers?
2004 Class Size Reduction Program – Evaluation Report 64
(e) Where would you go from here?
12. (a) What has been the most
significant benefit for you as a principal in
having smaller classes this year?
(b) Why?
2004 Class Size Reduction Program – Evaluation Report 65
Class Size Reduction Program: 2004
Teacher Interview School Name:
The purpose of this evaluation is to investigate how and to what extent the
class size reduction program has impacted on class organization, the use of support
staff and strategies and activities that enhance learning in classes. The schools
chosen to participate in this study were selected based on their involvement in the
class size reduction program, and represented a range of school types.
It is your views that are of interest to us: there are no right or wrong answers.
Your participation in this study is voluntary: you do not need to answer any questions
that you do not want to and you can withdraw your participation at any time. The
information gathered will be treated as strictly confidential with no school, principal,
teacher, student or parent identified in any reports.
Background Information:
(Use this as part of an introductory conversation):
1. What class do you currently teach?
2. What is the number of students in your class?
3. How many years have you been teaching?
4. How many years of teaching experience have
you had in:
the same year as this year’s class?
Kindergarten to year 3?
5. Are you Early Childhood Teacher trained?
General
1. (a) What are the key factors affecting student
performance in the early years?
(b) What are the key factors affecting student
performance at this school?
2004 Class Size Reduction Program – Evaluation Report 66
2. (a) Have smaller class sizes had an impact on
these?
(b) If so, in what ways?
3. What helps to enhance the benefits of smaller
classes?
Class Organisation and Learning
Support:
4. (a) What were class structures and
instructional groups in 2003?
(b) How were they determined?
5. (a) What are the class structures and
instructional groups in 2004?
(b) How were they determined?
(c) What was the impact of the additional
resource?
(d) Did it help teaching and learning? How?
6. (a) What are parents’ views of the 2004
class organization in this school in relation
to multi–age and regular classes?
2004 Class Size Reduction Program – Evaluation Report 67
(b) What are parents’ views of the 2004
class organization in this school in relation
to stage-based learning?
7. (a) Has the additional staffing resource
had an impact on the use of support staff
within the school?
(b) Has the additional staffing resource had
an impact on the students in your class?
(c) Has the additional staffing resource had
an impact in other ways?
Student learning
8. What effect has smaller classes had on:
(a) the learning outcomes of your students,
including the progress they make?
(b) classroom management?
(c) the behaviour of students in the
playground?
2004 Class Size Reduction Program – Evaluation Report 68
(d) the social skills of your students e.g.
peer relations, sense of community?
(e) if you are teaching Kindergarten, how
the students have settled into school?
(f) student attentiveness in class?
(g) the assessment practices you use?
(h) your interaction with parents?
(i) your interaction with students?
Teaching
9. What effect have smaller classes had
on:
(a) your teaching?
(b) how learning activities are structured
within your classroom e.g. whole class,
group and individual activities?
(c) what you do with the students (e.g. how
much teacher-directed; the higher order
nature of the work; the pacing of the work)?
(d) time spent on literacy and numeracy
activities and other areas of the
curriculum?
(e) student use of ICT?
(f) support for students who need
assistance?
2004 Class Size Reduction Program – Evaluation Report 69
(g) your feedback to students?
(h) your teaching programs?
(i) your expectations of what students can
achieve?
(j) the classroom environment, including
atmosphere, use of space?
(k) your morale?
2004 Class Size Reduction Program – Evaluation Report 70
10. (a) What training and development have
you done in the past that helped you in
teaching smaller classes?
(b) What training and development do you
think that you would need now?
Conclusion:
11. (a) What have you learned from the
experience?
(b) What would you do differently?
(c) What advice would you have for teachers?
(d) Where would you go from here?
12. (a) What has been the most significant
benefit for you as a classroom teacher in
having a smaller class this year?
(b) Why?
2004 Class Size Reduction Program – Evaluation Report 71
Class Size Reduction Program: 2004
Support Personnel Interview School Name:
The purpose of this evaluation is to investigate how and to what extent the
class size reduction program has impacted on class organization, the use of support
staff and strategies and activities that enhance learning in classes. The schools
chosen to participate in this study were selected based on their involvement in the
class size reduction program, and they represent a range of school types.
It is your views that are of interest to us: there are no right or wrong answers.
Your participation in this study is voluntary: you do not need to answer any questions
that you do not want to and you can withdraw your participation at any time. The
information gathered will be treated as strictly confidential with no school, principal,
teacher, student or parent identified in any reports.
Background Information:
(Use this as part of an introductory
conversation):
1. How many years have you been at
this school?
2. How many years have you been a
support person?
General:
1. (a) What are the key factors affecting
student performance in the early years?
(b) What are the key factors affecting
student performance at this school?
2. Have smaller classes impacted on
these?
If so, in what ways?
3. What helps to enhance the benefits of
smaller classes?
2004 Class Size Reduction Program – Evaluation Report 72
Class Organisation and Learning
Support:
4. (a) In what ways have you traditionally
worked within the school?
(b) What are their priorities for your
support?
(c) What are the main areas that you
support?
(d) What is the nature of that support e.g.
in class, withdrawal from the classroom?
5. In what ways have the smaller classes
had an impact on your work within the
school?
Student Learning:
6. As a result of the smaller classes, what
have you noticed about:
(a) student learning outcomes and
progress your students make?
2004 Class Size Reduction Program – Evaluation Report 73
(b) students’ social skills?
(c) your interaction with parents?
(d) your interaction with students?
(e) the way you work with students?
Teaching:
7. What effect have the smaller classes
had on:
(a) how you work with classroom
teachers?
2004 Class Size Reduction Program – Evaluation Report 74
(b) your morale?
Conclusion:
8. (a) What have you learned from the
experience?
(b) What would you do differently?
(c) What advice would you have?
(d) Where would you go from here?
9. What has been the most significant
benefit for you in having smaller classes in
the school this year?
2004 Class Size Reduction Program – Evaluation Report 75
Why?
2004 Class Size Reduction Program – Evaluation Report 76
Class Size Reduction Program: 2004
Parent Interview School Name:
The purpose of this evaluation is to investigate how and to what extent the
class size reduction program has impacted on class organization, the use of support
staff and strategies and activities that enhance learning in classes. The schools
chosen to participate in this study were selected based on their involvement in the
class size reduction program, and represented a range of school types.
It is your views that are of interest to us: there are no right or wrong answers.
Your participation in this study is voluntary: you do not need to answer any questions
that you do not want to and you can withdraw your participation at any time. The
information gathered will be treated as strictly confidential with no school, principal,
teacher, student or parent identified in any reports.
Background Information:
1. Which year is your child in?
2. Is your child in a regular class or
multi-age class?
3. Is your child a boy or a girl?
4. Did your child attend a pre-school
in the year before starting school?
General:
1. What is important for you, as a
parent, for your child to get from the
first years of schooling?
2004 Class Size Reduction Program – Evaluation Report 77
2. (a) Is class organisation and class
size important for your child to
achieve this?
(b) Why?
Class Organisation and Learning
Support:
3. (a) How does this school organize its
classes from Kindergarten to Year 2?
(b) Is this different from previous years?
4. (a) What are your views on how classes
are organised in relation to multi-age and
regular classes?
(b) What are your views on how classes
are organised in relation to stage-based
classes?
2004 Class Size Reduction Program – Evaluation Report 78
5. (a)Do support staff work in your
child’s classroom?
(b) How does this support assist your
child’s learning at school?
Student Learning:
6. (a) Do you think that being in a
smaller class has helped your child to
learn?
(b) Do you think that being in a smaller
class has helped your child with their
literacy skills?
2004 Class Size Reduction Program – Evaluation Report 79
(c) Do you think that being in a smaller
class has helped your child with their
numeracy skills?
2004 Class Size Reduction Program – Evaluation Report 80
7. (a) If your child is in Kindergarten,
how has your child settled into school?
(b) If you have an older child, how did
this compare?
(c) Did smaller classes help this? How?
8. (a) Are you happy with how your
2004 Class Size Reduction Program – Evaluation Report 81
child is going socially?
(b) Are you happy with how your child
is relating to other students?
(c) Are you happy with your child’s
confidence in class?
9. What effect do you think that smaller
classes have had on:
(a) the teaching your child has had?
2004 Class Size Reduction Program – Evaluation Report 82
(b) the individual help your child has
received?
(c) your child’s level of work?
(d) your child’s use of technology?
(e) the feedback your child has received?
(f) your chance to communicate with the
teacher?
Conclusion:
10. (a) What has been the most significant
benefit for you in having your child in a
smaller class this year?
2004 Class Size Reduction Program – Evaluation Report 83
(b) If you have an older child, are there
any differences in these experiences that
might be connected to class size?
2004 Class Size Reduction Program – Evaluation Report 84
APPENDIX C: DETAILS OF THE SCHOOLS INVOLVED IN THE INTERVIEWS
Details Relating to the Schools
Interview Classification Location Enrolment at School Number of Number of Multi-age
School Regular Classes Classes
1 P1 SMA 692 25 1
2 P2 Country 504 7 12
3 P2 Country 535 13 7
4 P4 Country 254 1 9
5 P5 Central Coast 141 1 5
6 P3 SMA 389 12 3
7 P2 SMA 566 7 14
8 P3 Wollongong 305 12 1
Details Relating to the Classes
Interview Number of Number of Number Number of Number of Number of Number Number of Number of Number of
School Regular Regular of Regular Regular Other K-1 of Year Year 2-3 Year Other Multi-
Kindergart Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Regular Classes 1-2 Classes 3-4 age
en Classes Classes Classes Classes Classes Classes Classes
Classes
1 5 4 4 3 9 0 0 0 1 0
2 4 3 1 4 1 3 3
3 4 2 2 2 3 0 2 0 1 4
4 1 1 2 3 3
5 1 1 1 1 2
6 2 1 2 2 5 1 1 1
7 3 1 3 1 5 1 2 5
8 2 2 2 2 4 1
2004 Class Size Reduction Program – Evaluation Report 85
