The cost of smaller class sizes

Post-devolution Scotland has produced governments which also agree smaller class sizes are a good thing. The previous Scottish Executive's target was for maths and English classes in the first two years of secondary school to have no more than 20 pupils, while primary one classes should have a maximum of 25, while the new Scottish Government wants to go even further by reducing class sizes to 18 in P1-3 by 2011.

However, grim warnings have come from Scotland's two largest local authorities, Glasgow and Edinburgh, that implementing the policy will cost them nearly £90m.

Stephen Purcell, Labour leader of Glasgow City Council, said: "We would have to build extensions to schools that don't have the capacity for that, so there could be an impact on other facilities, such as the gym. There is no way, without a huge injection of capital, that we can deliver this within the four-year term."

The EIS is undaunted, however, and next week will call on MSPs to put pressure on the government to implement its own policy of a maximum of 20 pupils in every classroom in the country.

An EIS petition with 80,000 signatures was delivered to Hugh Henry, the previous Education Minister, in March. It will be considered by the petitions committee next Tuesday.

Union president Kirsty Devaney said the demands were reasonable and would benefit every Scottish pupil. She added: "The way that youngsters learn now is very different from years gone by. There's much more individualised learning and smaller class sizes are essential for that.

"We support the placing of pupils with special needs in mainstream schools, but it can only be done properly in smaller classes. It would also be easier to tackle classroom indiscipline if there were fewer pupils in a class, so we think the benefits are obvious."

But while Ms Devaney welcomed the commitment to reducing class sizes, she said it should not be limited to the first three years of primary school. "We want to see classes of 20 across the board, and if they want to cut them to 18 then so much the better," she said.

"But it will need to be carried right through the school. There's no point having 18 in a class up until the end of primary three, then 30 in primary four."

Parents and opposition politicians, however, are sceptical about the benefits of reducing class sizes. Judith Gillespie, of the Scottish Parent Teacher Council, said there was no firm evidence that it automatically lead to better results.

She said: "Parents choose the quality of school over class sizes. In Glasgow for instance, there are schools with small class sizes but that's because parents have opted to send their children to other schools.

"The complications associated with implementing this policy should not be underestimated either. A lot of schools simply don't have the space for the required number of classes, so the practical problems are not trivial.

"And if you really want to improve attainment, there are other ways of doing it. There's a huge risk we could be spending a huge amount of money and not getting much in return."

Rhona Brankin, the shadow education secretary, said Labour had recognised the importance of reducing class sizes while in power, but was concerned that the SNP was placing too much importance on the policy.

"Smaller class sizes can be easier for a teacher, but there are many other things that can be done to improve a child's education," she said. "We've got to be careful of throwing millions of pounds at something which research shows may not make the difference we're looking for."

Liz Smith, education spokeswoman for the Conservatives, said headteachers should have the final say on the size of their school's classes. She said: "The Scottish Government has made a huge mistake in going for a universal reduction in class sizes and I don't think councils can finance it."

A spokeswoman for the Scottish Government said it was already making funds available. "This is the key action amongst a range of things we are driving forward to improve education in Scotland," she said.

"We are completely committed to reducing class sizes, starting in the earliest years where it can make the biggest difference.

"We have already taken action by appointing 300 extra teachers for this school year and an extra 250 teachers in training too.

"We have also provided capital funding of £40m for school buildings to enable councils to plan investment."

Opinion split

Academic opinion on whether cutting class sizes can deliver an improved education for all pupils is split.

In 1994, a report from the London University Institute of Education said: "Probably all of us would take the view that, other things being equal, children are more likely to receive a better quality of education in small classes." However, it said that much of the evidence on which the findings were based was inconclusive and, at times, contradictory.

Most published research has been carried out in America, with Tennessee's Student Teacher Achievement Ratio (Star) study often held up as the definitive work.

It charted the progress of 7000 pupils throughout school and found small classes of around 15 pupils can lead to enhanced performance in reading and mathematics tests in the early years of schooling, especially for disadvantaged pupils.

But a study published last year by academics at Glasgow University said there was no evidence to support the theory.

The Scottish Centre for Research in Education report evaluated recent international research on class sizes. It found a "significant" cut in numbers was likely to improve pupil performance, especially in the early years of schooling, but that the cost of doing so was "prohibitively expensive" and alternative methods would be more cost-effective.