Grouping Arrangements Teaching Grades Separately

What is clear from Veenman’s (1995) meta-analysis and from other research is that one of the more common organisational arrangements within multigrade settings is for teachers to teach each grade within the classroom separately (Galton and Patrick, 1990; Kaloaja and Pertainen, 2009; Mason and Good, 1996; Pratt, 1986; Veenman, Vote, and Elm, 1987). In this approach, sometimes termed ‘quasi monograde’, (Little, 2005; Pridmore, 2007), the teacher directly teaches each group, treating them as if they were a single grade class for that period. While one group is receiving instruction, the other undertakes individual ‘seatwork’). ‘Seatwork’ is the term used in the research literature which is that part of the lesson where pupils work on tasks or activities independently or with a small group away from the attention of the teacher (Mulryan-Kyne, 2005b). This strategy is most often used in two grade multigrade classes and more usually for mathematics and reading (Mason and Good, 1996). According to Veenman (1995), this approach leads to a situation where the multigrade setting is little different to the single grade setting except children have to share their teacher with one or more other grades. Mason and Burns (1996) argue that

if teachers maintain grade distinctions in their multigrade classes, they present two separate curricula, organise two sets of curricular materials and activities and must monitor two groups. Consequently, there is a decrease in direct instruction levels with children having to wait long periods to gain the attention of their teacher (Galton and Patrick, 1990).

Teachers face a number of challenges in facilitating independent work for their pupils. The issue of time-on task is explored and there is some difference of opinion in the findings of researchers. Everston (1989) for example, indicates that student’s time on task levels are lower during independent seatwork than during teacher directed instruction. Findings from observational studies in mixed age classes indicate that time-on-task in mixed age classes is on average 6% lower than in single grade classes (Veenman et al., 1987). From the perspective of Irish teachers there was not sufficient time to spend with each grade level in each subject and they believed that children with lower levels of achievement in particular lost out (Mulryan-Kyne, 2004). However, Pratt and Treacy, (1986) found no differences in time-on-task between multigrade and single grade classes while Mason and Good, (1996) found time-on-tasks measures during independent work more favourable in multigrade rather than single grade classes.

A regular challenge for multigrade teachers is the provision of appropriate independent learning activities (INTO, 2003). Teachers consider many factors when choosing material for independent seatwork. The importance of matching independent learning tasks to the needs of pupils is essential. Mason and Good, (1996) suggest that teachers, in an effort to reduce interruption have favoured simple reinforcement activities which ensure success for children without having to collaborate with others. This has particular implications for teachers in early years as children may not have developed sufficient skill in literacy to access independent learning materials.

Another factor which emerges from the research is the use of concrete materials during seatwork. In a study which compared mathematics instruction in combination classes with that in single grade classes, Mason and Good, (1996) focussed their research on the use of materials in the mathematics class. Pupils in multigrade classes were found to have less opportunity to use concrete materials during mathematics than their peers in single grade classes. It appears that sometimes independent work in multigrade classes is aimed at keeping children busy, but in as quiet and ordered a fashion as possible. Meanwhile, teachers were involved with

providing direct instruction with the other group. Content of independent work analysed in this research featured mainly written computation activities (Mason and Good, 1996). However, the researchers admit that the study was exploratory with a limited sample of 24 and therefore its findings may not reflect practice in some multigrade schools. Despite the small sample size of this research, the study provides informative findings.

Critics of the separate grade instruction approach observe that over reliance on separate grade instruction does not encourage teachers to explore other strategies which may be effective in meeting the needs of individual children within the multigrade setting. These practices which include cross-grade grouping or cross-age tutoring, where children are grouped across grade lines, are believed to have the potential to improve the quality of teaching and learning in multigrade settings (Gutierrez and Slavin, 1992; Veenman, 1995).

Teaching Across Grades

Veenman (1995) argues that the multigrade class has unique potential for cross-grade grouping. Cross-grade grouping allows the teacher to reduce the number of working groups in the class and to accommodate more precisely the needs of individuals within the class. In addition the teacher can address the needs of several levels of ability within one lesson. (Gutierrez and Slavin, 1992) Children engage in reduced amount of independent seatwork because they are spending a greater proportion of time being instructed directly by the teacher.

Pridmore, (2007) outlines two varied approaches to curriculum planning. Teachers use these approaches in multigrade settings to address problems of curricular coverage when implementing cross grade teaching strategies. These are

1. Differentiation of curriculum.

2. Multiple-year cycles developed for certain curricular area

The ‘differentiated curriculum’ is an example of one such approach where learning is facilitated across age and grade boundaries. In this strategy, the same general topic in the same subject is used with all learners at the beginning and end of the lesson. The teacher uses questions of varying degrees of difficulty to extend and support learning. Each grade group also completes a task at their own level of learning (Little, 2005;

Pridmore, 2007). In the second model, pupils in consecutive grades work through common topics and activities together but complete curriculum cycles at different times. For example in the area of Science, a child in a Senior Infant class may follow a curriculum for Junior Infants if he had completed a Senior Infant curriculum the previous year. These two approaches are often combined for subjects areas other than reading work in language and number work in mathematics which need to be learned more incrementally and where each grade is generally taught separately (Pridmore, 2007).

In contrast to the views expressed already, Mason and Burns (1996) point out some constraints in relation to the management of cross-age grouping and maintain that its usefulness has yet to be proven in research studies. Cross grade grouping may lead to problems in relation to curriculum if pupils from upper grades are taught a lower grade curriculum. To clarify this issue further let us consider a hypothetical example. If a teacher implements a cross grade grouping strategy, a pupil in Second Class for example, is taught mainly the curriculum for First Class while she is in a multigrade class of first and second classes. The following year the pupil moves to third class and is taught the third class curriculum. It is possible that such children may miss out on some elements of a grade level of curriculum or will develop different single/multiple grade histories.

Cross Age Tutoring

Post-Vygotskian notions of teaching and learning as assisted performance (Tharp and Gallimore, 1998) or as a process of guided participation (Rogoff, 1990) suggest that learning emerges both as a result of deliberate guidance of the learner by a more capable other as well as incidentally through participation in collective activities with members of the learning community. Tutoring, both peer and cross- age, is an example of a strategy which purposefully enables children to support each others learning and is recognised as a key strategy in improving learning in multigrade classes (Miller, 1991; Russell et al., 1998; Thomas and Shaw, 1992). In particular, the findings of a study which investigated principal and teacher perceptions of various aspects of learning and teaching in multigrade classes in Victoria, Australia, (Russell et al., 1998), strongly endorsed tutoring as an appropriate and useful strategy to use in the multigrade classroom. Tutoring was seen to be of benefit to the tutor in particular with most of the benefits being social ones. However, Thomas and Shaw (1992) argue

that tutoring appears to be most effective when it is implemented within a structured programme and for a limited amount of time.

Veenman (1995) has argued that little cross-grade grouping takes place within the multigrade setting. However, a study in Ireland found that across grade grouping was used by a significant but relatively small number of teachers in a range of different subjects (Mulryan-Kyne, 2005). In the Irish context, Mulryan-Kyne (2005) notes that rather than applying the organizational methods used in single grade classes, the teachers in her study used a variety of grouping arrangements. Cross grade grouping strategies included teachers working with all grades together and two grades together usually for aspects of Gaeilge (Irish language), English and Mathematics, although a much smaller proportion of junior level teachers employed this strategy in comparison to their colleagues teaching the senior classes.

The key findings in relation to research literature on teaching and grouping strategies in multigrade classes is that grade composition alone is unlikely to have any significant effects on the cognitive outcomes for pupils while the pattern of findings on non-cognitive outcomes is also mixed. While teaching in a multigrade class suggests the need for a pedagogy more suited to the mixed-age characteristic of the class and practices where children are grouped across grade lines are believed to have potential to improve the quality of teaching and learning in multigrade classes, it is evident in the research that grouping practices in many multigrade do not differ significantly from those employed in single grade classes. The necessities for initial teacher education and access to ongoing professional development in curricular areas which are specific to their mixed age context are also highlighted.