Teaching for Impact: Less is More

Impact of Teaching: Big or Small

As we aim to make an impact in our world, we often equate more with better. In the world of teaching, this translates to reaching more students with the knowledge we hope to impart. But, is more really better? Can we still have an impact without mass exposure? While it may seem that teaching a larger group would naturally result in a greater impact, teaching fewer students is not the disadvantage some might assume.

Efficiency in Teaching

Teaching large groups of students is undoubtedly an efficient method for distributing information. A teacher gives a lecture to many students, and information is received by numerous eyes and ears. This is a common scene in the large lecture halls of our educational institutions, where we instruct our youth and set them on the path to their careers and vocations. However, the efficiency gained in spreading information may be offset by the depersonalization of the learning experience.

In contrast, teaching smaller groups allows for a more customized approach. Smaller class sizes can lead to improved information retention, stronger interest in subject matters, increased critical thinking skills, and other benefits. For example, a study found that the use of small group work was positively correlated with student exam performance across all units of analysis. These benefits suggest that teaching fewer students at a time is definitely not inferior to the large group setting if one hopes to have a significant impact.

Investing in Non-Efficiency

So, why would some teachers opt to spread information with large groups rather than smaller groups of students? Efficiency is the key. Fewer engagements to spread the same amount of information equates with less time investment and effort. This is not a derogatory statement or inferring a teacher as being selfish or lazy. It is just a reflection of one valuing their time and effort. If the desire is to make the same quantitative impact with fewer groups of students, it would simply take more time and effort. This equates to more investment on behalf of the instructor. By the measure of some, teaching smaller groups of students may not be considered the best use of one’s time.

However, investing more in fewer students is not the disadvantage it might seem if one hopes to impart knowledge and have an impact. The impact won’t be measured by the number of students reached but by how deeply students are transformed and inspired. As a teacher impacts one, that impact can be spread to others through the students they inspire. Education can be contagious. An engaged and inspired student may have a farther-reaching impact than the commonly coveted mass exposure. In the end, the greatest legacy may be found not in the masses we teach, but in the lasting impact we leave on the hearts and minds of a few, affirming that dedicating time to fewer students is always time well spent.

Have you experienced both large and small class settings in your education? Which one do you feel had a more significant impact on your learning, and why?