2013 | Edukacja. An interdisciplinary approach 1 | 41–58
Article title

Estimating the effect of class size on academic achievement by ex post facto experiment

Title variants
Languages of publication
The analyses of influence of class size on academic achievement used data from study conducted in 2006 by the Regional Examination Board in Cracow (Poland). The variables explaining the achievements of lower secondary school pupils were identified using regression analysis. The model explains 71% of variance of exam results. These variables were used to identify statistical twins. Their assignment to the experimental and control group was performed in three ways: by stratification using Mahalanobis distance, matching one-to-many and one-to-one using k-means method. The last method proved the most successful. The effect of class size on student outcomes proved statistically insignificant. However, pupils from classes with below 23 pupils achieved higher mean scores than their peers from larger classes by 0.039 standard deviation.
Physical description
  • Jagiellonian University
  • Angrist, J. D. and Lavy, V. (1999). Using Maimonides’ rule to estimate the effect of class size on scholastic achievement. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 114(2), 533–575.
  • Bacher, J. (2002). Cluster analysis. Lecture Notes. Nuremberg: University of Erlangen-Nuremberg.
  • Biddle, B. J. and Berliner, D. C. (2004). Small class size and its effects. Educational Leadership, 59(5), 12–23.
  • Byrne, B., Coventry, W. L., Olson, R. K., Wadsworth, S. J., Samuelsson, S., Petrill, S. A., Willcutt, E. G. and Corley, R. (2010). Teacher effects in early literacy development: evidence from a study of twins. Journal of Educational Psychology, 102(1), 32–42.
  • Chapin, F. S. (1946). An application of ex post facto experimental design. Sociometry, 9(2/3), 133.
  • Coleman, J. S., Campbell, E. Q., Hobson, C. J., McPartland, F., Mood, A. M. and Weinfeld, F. D. (1966). Equality of educational opportunity. Washington: U.S. Government Funding Office.
  • Dunning, T. (2008). Improving causal inference: strengths and limitations of natural experiments. Political Research Quarterly, 61(2), 282–293.
  • Educational Research Service. (1980). Class size research: a critique of recent meta-analyses. The Phi Delta Kappan, 62(4), 239–241.
  • Freedman, D., Pisani and R., Purves, R. (1997). Instructors’ Manual for Statistics (3rd ed.). Department of Statistics, University of California, Berkeley, New York: Norton.
  • Glass, G. V. and Smith, M. L. (1978). Meta-analysis of research on the relationship of class–size and achievement. The class size and instruction project. San Francisco: Far West Laboratory for Educational Research and Development.
  • Glass, G. V. and Smith, M. L. (1979). Meta-analysis of research on the relationship of class-size and achievement. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 1, 2–16.
  • Glass, G. V., Cahen, L. S., Smith, M. L. and Filby, N. N. (1982). School class size: research and policy. Sage Publications.
  • Graue, E., Oen, D., Hatch, K., Rao, K. and Fadali, E. (2005). Perspectives on class size reduction. [Presentation on 12 April 2005 at Early childhood policy in practice: the case of class size Symposium, as part of annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association]. Montreal, Canada.
  • Hanushek, E. A. (1992). The trade-off between child quantity and quality. Journal of Political Economy, 100(1), 84–117.
  • Hanushek, E. A. (1997). Assessing the effects of school resources on student performance: an update. Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 19(2), 141–164.
  • Hanushek, E. A. (1998). Conclusions and controversies about the effectiveness of school resources. FRBNY Economic Policy Review, 4(1), 11–27.
  • Hanushek, E. A. (1999). The evidence on class size. In S. E. Mayer and P. E. Peterson (eds.), Earning and learning: how schools matter (pp. 131–168), Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.
  • Hanushek, E A. (2002). Evidence, politics, and the class size debate. In L. Mishel and R. Rothstein (eds.), The class size debate (p. 37–66). Washington, DC: Economic Policy Institute.
  • Harris, J. R. (2000). Geny czy wychowanie? [Genes or upbringing?] Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Czarna Owca.
  • Hart, S., Petrill, S. and Kamp Dush, C. (2010). Genetic influences on language, reading and mathematics skills in a national sample: an analysis using the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 41(1), 118–128.
  • Heckman, J. J., Ichimura, H. and Todd, P. E. (1997). Matching as an econometric evaluation estimator: Evidence from evaluating a job training programme. Review of Economic Studies, 64(4), 605–654.
  • Hedges, L. V. and Stock, W. (1983). The effects of class size: an examination of rival hypotheses. American Educational Research Journal, 20(1), 63–65.
  • Herbst, M. and Herczyński, J. (2005). School choice and student achievement. Evidence from Poland. Warsaw: Warsaw University.
  • Jakubowski, M. and Sakowski, P. (2006). Quasi-experimental estimates of class size effect in primary schools in Poland. International Journal of Educational Research, 45(3), 202–215.
  • Molnar, A., Smith, P. and Zahori, J. (2000). The 1999–2000 evaluation results of the student achievement guarantee in education (SAGE) Program, CERAI. University of Wisconsin–Milwaukee.
  • Morgan, S. L. and Winship, C. (2007). Counterfactuals and causal inference: methods and principles for social research. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Nye, B., Hedges, L. V. and Konstantopoulos, S. (2000). The effects of small classes on achievement. The results of the Tennessee class size experiment. American Educational Research Journal, 37(1), 123–151.
  • Nye, B., Hedges, L. V. and Konstantopoulos, S. (2001). Are effects of small classes cumulative? Evidence from a Tennessee Experiment. Journal of Educational Research, 94(6), 336–345.
  • Odden, A. (1990). Class size and student achievement. Research-based policy alternatives. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 12(2), 213–227.
  • Pillmer, D. B. and Light, R. J. (1980). Synthesing outcomes: how to use research from many studies. Harvard Education Review, 50, 170–189.
  • Rice, J. M. (1902). Educational research: a test in arithmetic. The Forum, 34, 281–297.
  • Robinson, G. E. (1990). Synthesis of research on the effects of class size. Educational Leadership, 47(7), 80–90.
  • Robinson, G. E. and Wittebols, J. H. (1986). Class size research: a related cluster analysis for decision making. Arlington, Virginia: Educational Research Service.
  • Rosenbaum, P. R. and Rubin, D. B. (1983). The central role of the propensity score in observational studies for causal effects. Biometrika, 70(1), 41–55.
  • Rubin, D. B. (1973). Matching to remove bias in observational studies. Biometrics, 29, 159–183.
  • Slavin, R. E. (1986). Student team learning. An overview and practical guide. Washington, DC: Professional Library National Education Association.
  • Sleszyński, P. (2002). Ekonomiczne uwarunkowania wyników sprawdzianu szóstoklasistów i egzaminu gimnazjalnego przeprowadzonych wiosną 2002 roku [Economic determinants of results of six-graders’ test and lower secondary school exams conducted in spring 2002]. Expert opinion commissioned by the Ministry of Education.
  • Strawiński, P. (2008). Quasi-eksperymentalne metody ewaluacji [Quasi-experimental evaluation methods] In A. Haber (ed.), Środowisko i warsztat ewaluacji [Evaluation environment and methods] (pp. 193–220). Warszawa: Polska Agencja Rozwoju Przedsiębiorczości.
  • Strawiński, P. (2007). Przyczynowość, selekcja i endogeniczne oddziaływanie [Causality, selection, and endogeneic effect]. Przegląd Statystyczny, 4, 49–61.
Document Type
Publication order reference
YADDA identifier
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.