What the Research Says About School Size

Parents choosing a school often face the same question: wouldn't a bigger school offer my child more?

It is a fair question. Larger schools can offer more subjects, more clubs, more facilities. For twenty years we have answered it the same way — that what a child gains from being known outweighs what a larger campus can list in a brochure. But that has always been our conviction rather than our evidence.

So we were interested to read a recent reflection published by the National Association of Independent Schools, in which a mother describes choosing a small school for her three children and the research that helped her explain a decision she had already made by instinct.

The research is worth knowing about, whatever school you eventually choose for your child.

What counts as a small school

There is no universal definition, but education researchers have settled on rough thresholds. Craig Howley's review for the ERIC Clearinghouse on Rural Education and Small Schools puts it at roughly 400 students or fewer for a high school, and around 200 or fewer for a school covering the elementary years. (This is for schools in the United States.)

Eastbridge has always been sized on purpose: big enough for a full Nursery-to-Junior-High program, and small enough that every child is known by name. Our classes have a maximum of 30 students, and most are smaller. That is not an accident of circumstance — it is the size that works well for our students.

The trade-off, stated honestly

The case for large schools is a real one, and we should say so plainly. A bigger school can offer specialised subjects, larger athletic programmes, more clubs, and facilities a small campus cannot match. Families who choose that path are not making a mistake, and several of our own graduates have thrived in exactly those environments.

But the research suggests there is a cost on the other side of the ledger, and it is one that does not appear in any brochure.

The whitepaper cited in the NAIS article — Stuart Grauer's study on the benefits of small schools — argues that beyond a certain size, something changes. Teachers feel less connected to their students. Students report feeling less safe. Academic performance becomes less consistent. And opportunities begin to be distributed less equally, with the same children getting picked for the same things.

None of this is visible on a campus tour. It shows up in how a child experiences a Tuesday.

What the studies found

The evidence has been building for some time. A review of research published between 1990 and 2009 concluded that the weight of evidence favours smaller schools. A long-term study by the research group MDRC, following students in New York City's small high schools, found higher rates of college enrolment — and a lower cost per graduate. A separate study from MIT found higher graduation rates and better test scores.

Howley's review adds a finding worth pausing on: smaller schools appear to improve equity in achievement across all students, and may matter most for children who start at a disadvantage.

In other words, the benefit is not only that strong students do well. It is that fewer children fall through.

One mother's account

The NAIS reflection is written by a parent of three, including twins who finished high school this year. What makes it worth reading is that she is specific about what changed for each child.

Her eldest daughter was quiet — reluctant to make mistakes, uncertain of herself, and by her mother's account largely silent in class until well into the school year at her large middle school. At a school where speaking accounted for most of the grade and she saw the same faces every year, staying invisible was no longer an option. She is now in university, recognised by professors for her engagement.

Her son, who is collaborative rather than competitive, moved freely between groups — sports, theatre, and a weekly games club — rather than settling into a single track. His mother believes a larger school would have let him specialise early and miss the rest.

Her younger daughter, more outgoing, was certain she would have spent her energy on social standing at a school of four thousand. Instead she was a strong student, an athlete and a leader, and found less pressure to be any one thing.

The mother's own summary of her large high school is worth quoting exactly: she ended up in a track, "academically, socially, and extracurricular-ly." There was no room to try what she was not already good at.

What this means at Eastbridge

We recognise the pattern, because it is the school we have tried to build.

In a class of our size, a teacher notices the week a child begins to struggle rather than the quarter. A quiet child cannot stay quiet for long. A child who is strong in music or movement rather than numbers is recognised for it — which is why we give awards across all nine intelligences we recognize, not only for academic rank.

None of this depends on the size of a campus. It depends on knowing every child.

The original reflection, "Parent Reflection: Why We Chose a Small Independent School" by Krista Edlund Gallagher, is published by the National Association of Independent Schools at nais.org.