EFFECTS OF SCHOOL SIZE UPON SOME ASPECTS OF PERSONALITY
| Date | 01 February 1981 |
| Published date | 01 February 1981 |
| Pages | 201-231 |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/eb009848 |
| Author | W.J. CAMPBELL,J.L. COTTERELL,N.M. ROBINSON,D.R. SADLER |
| Subject Matter | Education |
THE JOURNAL OF EDUCATIONAL ADMINISTRATION
VOLUME XIX, NUMBER 2 SUMMER 1981
EFFECTS OF SCHOOL SIZE UPON SOME ASPECTS OF
PERSONALITY1
W.J. CAMPBELL, J.L. COTTERELL,
N.M. ROBINSON AND D.R. SADLER
Are the effects of school size transmitted in measurable quantities to the
personalities of pupils? Having argued that the learning environments of small and
large schools could differ in predictable ways, the authors examined the effects of
these differences on the personality development of pupils. Multiple regression
analysis revealed the effects of school size to be reflected in only two of eight
personality outcomes
—
sense of cohesion and concern for persons. Two variables —
attitude towards school and fear of failure — are regarded as "not proven" and four
variables —functional identity, sense of internal control over events, breadth of role
constructs, and cognitive complexity showed no evidence of the effects of school size.
INTRODUCTION
This is a study of the effects of school size upon some aspects of personality
in primary-school pupils. It is confessed at the outset that the size of a
school which a child attends is unlikely to be a major influence on his
development; numerous studies have established that the home
environment is of paramount importance, and, within the school, teacher-
pupil relationships, the curriculum, and specific teaching strategies are
more promising variables for study. Nevertheless, there is a persistent
belief among many people that aspects of school structure, such as size, do
affect the development of pupils, and educational policy makers
sometimes act on the basis of this
belief.
Accordingly, however modest the
expectations, there is a need for studies which examine whether or not
these effects exist, and, if so, to what extent.
The identification of minor effects is difficult enough; in addition, a
study such as this is bedevilled by conceptual and methodological
problems inherent in the establishment of plausible links between
phenomena which differ in kind. Although many of our everyday actions
are based on the assumption that manipulation of the non-psychological
(or ecological) environment will succeed in eliciting certain behaviours and
developments in persons, readers may recall that eminent psychologists
such as Lewin,2 Barker,3 and Brunswik4 have concluded that, in our
present state of knowledge, it is impossible to present a convincing
demonstration of a causal connection between such disparate variables.
Lewin's solution was to retreat into purely psychological phenomena by
including the ecological variables only in their perceived form; Barker, on
the other hand, has devoted a life-time to exploring the structure,
202 Campbell
organisation and control of the ecological environment without proceeding
far towards establishing relationships with the psychological phenomena
that are being regulated — in his own words, he has "detoured" the
sublime but millennial goal of developing a single conceptual system which
would incorporate both ecological and psychological variables; finally,
Brunswik advocates retention of the two classes of phenomena, but warns
that we will have to settle for "probabilistic" statements regarding the
connections between them. This study is a combination of the Barker and
Brunswikian approaches: the nature and immediate effects of the
ecological environments in schools of different sizes are examined, and, in
addition, an attempt is made to explore the relationship of these to some
psychological outcomes in pupils. It is at this latter stage that we enter the
"probabilistic" domain to which Brunswik refers.
Conceptual Framework
We believe that school size is best regarded as a "marker" variable which
does not influence development directly but, rather, exerts an effect
through experiences which it facilitates or inhibits. The basic assumption of
the study is that human development is an interactive process of existing
personalities and environmental stimuli, and, although we ascribe greater
significance to the former of these two variables, any evidence to show that
school size affects the number, level, and quality of interactions of pupils
with their environments is likely to be important.
In diagrammatic form, the broad conceptualization of the study is as
follows:
Figure 1 suggests that the initial effect of school size is variation in the
"richness" of schools. The richness concept is similar to Barker's
"manning" one, but it goes beyond the latter by including, within a single
index, not only the number of school activities and the number of pupils,
but measures of the variety and complexity of activities as well.5 According
to the "model", variations in school richness will affect both the
psychological climates of schools and the participation of pupils in school
activities. Finally, it is claimed that variations in the participation of pupils,
within school climates that also vary, will lead to differences in certain
aspects of psychological development in the pupils.
This conceptualization generated several propositions which guided the
study, and these are presented below.
To continue reading
Request your trial