2.1 A narrative review of literature regarding class size in online  (Page 6/11)

Other university programs online: decisions on class size and scale

Other universities have been reported to have much higher numbers in online classes. For example, in a Task Force report (IPFW, 2008) from Indiana University-Purdue University Fort Wayne, Indiana, it was stated that departments have serious concerns regarding classes online of above 40. However, this statement was related to economic issues of payments ($75 per student) made to faculty for each student above 30. Ultimately the Task Force report indicated that the decision for class size should be up to the departments. Specifically, the Task Force provided its collective opinion as follows:

"The size of an online class should support the instructional objectives and teaching strategies selected by the department for this course, with input from the instructor or faculty member teaching the course. The size of the online class should not cause alterations to course design and delivery that would significantly impair teaching and/or learning. Although there are certainly others, below are some factors related to the decision about class size:"

• Course goals (e.g., general education with a need for developing communication and quantitative skills as well as critical thinking)
• The type of content (e.g., facts, principles, theories, or requiring critical thinking, problem-solving, or experiential learning)
• The teaching and assessment strategies (e.g., the need for extensive feedback on writing assignments)
• Whether the course is a culminating or capstone experience
• Whether the course is required of majors, or a foundation for a subsequent course or sequence of courses
• The level of support or assistance for the instructor with course design, technical issues, responding to basic student queries, and grading
• The experience of the faculty member in the online environment, with the particular subject matter or course, and the faculty member’s technological expertise
• The faculty member’s other workload
• The technological competence and maturity level of the students. (p. 9)

Furthermore, the Task Force warned that:

"In spite of the pedagogical arguments in their favor in some instances, offering smaller online classes has consequences. If qualified faculty are unable to be found to teach another section of the course, some of the student demand for classes in the online environment will not be met (although the students may enroll in a face-to-face class instead). Even if faculty are available to teach online, there is an increased cost to two smaller classes as compared to one larger one. Therefore, departments are encouraged to consider a balance between a demonstrated need for relatively smaller classes in the online environment both for the sake of faculty workload and effective instruction, and the need to meet student demand in a fiscally responsible manner." (p. 10)

Though 40 students were of concern in online classes as was reported by the faculty at Indiana University-Purdue University Fort Wayne, there are other universities with higher numbers in online classes. According to Stripling (2009), Lamar University in partnership with the private company, Higher Education Holdings or Academic Partnerships, noted a 2000-student class size in graduate classes. Coaches assist the professor of the course with approximately 100 to 125 students per coach. An average load for a coach was at 118, but with no fewer than 25 per coach. In this type program with Academic Partnerships (AP) which is also at Ohio University, Arkansas State University, Stephen F. Austin State University, University of Texas at Arlington, Texas A&M University Commerce, and Arizona State University, the goal is scale. According to Lederman (2011), the AP company president indicated that for-profit colleges have been the primary beneficiaries of online education, but that public universities (AP works to scale programs online with public universities) should not cede that terrain. Many professors have voiced concerns over the volume of students in the programs, noting that the universities may be forfeiting quality for quantity (Hacker, 2011).