Cooperative Learning and Class Size: Impact on Student Achievement
This action research paper investigates whether cooperative learning has a significantly positive impact on smaller or larger classes. Set in a suburban middle school in Nassau County, New York, the study compares achievement outcomes in the researcher's largest and smallest social studies classes using a Jigsaw cooperative learning model. The paper reviews major class-size reduction research — including Tennessee's Project STAR, Wisconsin's SAGE program, and studies from Indiana, North Carolina, and multiple economics courses — alongside the core principles of cooperative learning: simultaneous interaction, equal participation, and positive interdependence. Results and discussion conclude that smaller class sizes, combined with structured cooperative learning, produce higher student achievement, better classroom management, and more individualized instruction.
- Introduction and Research Rationale: Context, background, and rationale for studying class size
- Review of Related Literature: STAR, SAGE, AFT, and class-size research synthesis
- Current Experimental Research on Class Size: Tennessee, Indiana, North Carolina, and Wisconsin studies
- Cooperative Learning Principles and Structure: Interaction, participation, interdependence, teams, and management
- Method and Classroom Implementation: Jigsaw model design and assessment in two social studies classes
- Results: Findings on achievement and classroom environment by class size
- Discussion and Conclusion: Cooperative learning benefits confirmed in smaller class settings
✍️ How to write this paper — guide, tools & examples ▾
What makes this paper effective
- Grounds a classroom-level action research question in an extensive review of nationally recognized studies (Project STAR, SAGE, Indiana Prime Time, Burke County), giving the local findings broader credibility.
- Clearly defines key terms — cooperative learning, small class, large class — before deploying them, preventing ambiguity in interpretation of results.
- Integrates both the theoretical framework for cooperative learning (simultaneous interaction, equal participation, positive interdependence) and the practical implementation plan (Jigsaw model, rotation schedule, Bloom's Taxonomy questioning), showing how theory drives classroom practice.
Key academic technique demonstrated
The paper demonstrates the action research cycle: a practitioner identifies a problem in their own classroom (rising class sizes, uneven participation), grounds the inquiry in peer-reviewed and government-sponsored literature, designs a structured intervention, collects data, and reflects on outcomes. This practitioner-as-researcher stance is characteristic of high-quality teacher action research and models how educators can contribute to the evidence base rather than merely consume it.
Structure breakdown
The paper opens with a rationale rooted in the author's school context, then provides an extensive literature review covering landmark class-size studies and their statistical methods. A dedicated section on cooperative learning principles bridges theory and practice. The method section specifies the intervention design (Jigsaw groups, on/off cycle, assessment types). Results and discussion sections synthesize findings and acknowledge limitations such as the absence of random assignment, before a brief conclusion affirms cooperative learning's positive effect in smaller classes.
Introduction and Research Rationale
As educators in middle school and high school classrooms, content specialty teachers often work with a variety of class sizes. Yet, with such an assortment of class sizes, there are also extraneous variables that each teacher must consider in order to foster individual achievement. Participation and achievement are variables of individual students that weigh heavily on class success and are affected by class size. Educational mandates, as well as individual school district policies and requirements, also influence class size and affect individual achievement. Middle school and high school content specialty teachers are frequently searching for new ways to prevent individual achievement and participation from declining when class sizes rise. The varying number of students that content specialty teachers encounter from class to class drives them to seek out alternative methods to meet the needs of their learners in order to maintain individual success and achievement while promoting participation. Therefore, smaller class sizes may be an effective way to encourage students to participate and promote individual achievement.
Owing to rapidly growing enrollment, as well as towering tuition becoming a major concern for learners, teachers, and administrators at many academic institutions in the American education system, the search to determine the most successful means of providing high-quality education at an affordable cost continues. The reduction in government funding affecting numerous public schools, colleges, and universities nationwide has, time and again, given rise to a reduction in the number of course sections offered and an increase in class sizes within existing programs (Weimer, 1990).
Concurrently, over the past two years, class sizes have gradually climbed within the school district in which this researcher is currently working. The school district primarily includes students from low socioeconomic backgrounds. Like many similar urban schools, this district suffers from poverty, a large minority population, low test scores, a high number of discipline referrals, and many students who are not learning to read. Union contracts often stipulated maximum class sizes; however, even before the expansion of collective bargaining took place, there was widespread agreement that having more than thirty students in a class is a heavy burden for a conscientious teacher — especially for a middle or high school teacher who has five or six classes. This is the first year that the district has no cap on the number of students permitted in a classroom each period. Because of this new guideline, this researcher sees as many as thirty-two students one period and as few as twenty-one another period. Such numbers present difficulty in maintaining classroom management, teaching style, assessment, classroom configuration, and materials. But by far the greatest concern with classes as large as thirty-two students is participation and individual achievement. The challenge is to hold the interest of and promote the achievement of thirty-two students in a classroom that is at times overcrowded and lacks sufficient seating.
There is a rising concern regarding the preparation of high school graduates upon entering college. Subsequent to the 1983 declaration that America was at risk because of poor educational achievement, billions of dollars were committed to the educational system (Weimer, 1990). Regardless of this effort, minimal results were produced, discouraging public confidence in the instructional capability of American teachers. It has been noted, however, that there are additional factors involved — one such factor currently under assessment in both the political and academic arenas being the influence of class size on student achievement in school and college education.
Taking into consideration the rapidly growing enrollment in many public schools across the United States, administrators are burdened by the concern of increasing class size and the possible reduction of academic standards. Researchers emphasize that the "quantitative product" — financial gains provided by increased enrollment — are overshadowing the "qualitative product" — skillfully educated and well-informed high school graduates. It is, consequently, of immense significance that research studies are carried out to present compelling evidence as to whether or not students, faculty, staff, and possibly the nation as a whole may be suffering negative consequences because of the increase in class size (Weimer, 1990).
It is essential that all students receive individualized attention in some form. Whether it is through participating and sharing ideas, positive reinforcement, a conference, or working one-on-one, none of these are easily accomplished within a large or oversized class. It is essential for successful learning to maintain small class sizes in order to achieve individual student participation.
Cooperative learning is a term representing a variety of interactive group arrangements working toward a common goal. Each student in a cooperative group is individually accountable for the entire group's success. Cooperative learning groups contain students of mixed abilities, different genders, and different cultural backgrounds. For research purposes within this study, a small class consists of fewer than 25 students and a large class consists of more than 30 students. Classes are heterogeneously mixed, containing students of mixed learning abilities, different genders, and varied cultural backgrounds.
This action research project investigates the influence of cooperative learning on class size. Specifically, this study examines how cooperative learning impacts smaller and larger class sizes.
References
Alex Molnar. (2000). Vouchers: Class Size Reduction & Student Achievement. Phi Delta Kappa International Publishers.
Charles M. Achilles. (1999). Let's Put Kids First, Finally: Getting Class Size Right. Corwin Press.
Cooper, J. L., Robinson, P. R., and McKinney, M. (1994). Cooperative learning in the classroom. In D. F. Halpern & Associates, Changing college classrooms: New teaching and learning strategies for an increasingly complex world. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Enerson, Diane M., R. Neill Johnson, Susannah Milner, and Kathryn M. Plank. (1997). Teaching with collaborative activities and small groups. The Penn State Teacher II: Learning to Teach, Teaching to Learn. University Park: CELT, 57–72.
James Hiebert and James W. Stigler. (1999). The Teaching Gap: Best Ideas from the World's Teachers for Improving Education in the Classroom. Free Press.
Bosworth, K., and Hamilton, S. J. (1994). Collaborative learning: Underlying processes and effective techniques. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, No. 59. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
McKeachie, Wilbert J. (1999). Peer learning, collaborative learning, cooperative learning. In Teaching Tips: Strategies, Research, and Theory for College and University Teachers, 10th ed., 158–166. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
U.S. Department of Education. (1999). Class size reduction: Great hopes, great challenges. WestEd, U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Research and Improvement, Educational Resources Information Center.
U.S. Department of Education. (1998). California's class size reduction: Implications for equity, practice, and implementation. Policy Analysis for California Education (PACE), WestEd, U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Research and Improvement, Educational Resources Information Center.
U.S. Department of Education. (2000). The Class-Size Reduction Program: Boosting student achievement in schools across the nation — a first-year report. U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Research and Improvement, Educational Resources Information Center.
U.S. Department of Education. (2000). Using what we know: A review of the research on implementing class-size reduction initiatives for state and local policymakers. North Central Regional Educational Laboratory, U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Research and Improvement, Educational Resources Information Center.
Weimer, M. (1990). Improving college teaching: Strategies for developing instructional effectiveness. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Create your account
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.