ERIC ED504569: The Advantages and Disadvantages of Multiage Classrooms in the Era of NCLB Accountability. Education Policy Brief. Volume 7, Number 1, Winter 2009

2009·0.3 MB·English

by  ERIC

Education Policy Brief
The Advantages and Disadvantages of Multiage Classrooms
in the Era of NCLB Accountability
Ruiting Song, Terry E. Spradlin, and Jonathan A. Plucker
VOLUME 7, NUMBER 1, WINTER 2009
some extent by research, multiage pro-
CONTENTS INTRODUCTION grams face difficulties when being imple-
mented into schools and classrooms. With
Introduction....................................... 1
For a great portion of the history of the regard to the benefits and obstacles of mul-
Benefits and Advantages .................. 2 American education system, multiage edu- tiage education, it is important for practitio-
cation was the norm in one-room school- ners to consider the evidence to implement
Obstacles and Problems................... 2 houses throughout the nation. Prior to the and operate multiage classrooms in a way
common school reforms of the 1830s and reflective of research and best practice.
Kentucky Model of Multiage
1840s, the term “multiage class” was
Programs ............................................ 3 The multiage education philosophies have
defined broadly; it represented a single
been supported by much of the historical
Michigan Model of Multiage class in which students of different ages
research and adopted by many schools all
Programs ............................................ 3 studied as separate grade/subject groups or
over the world. More recently, however,
as a whole group, usually for administrative
Policy Perspectives Mason and Burns (1996) argued that
or economic reasons. The current graded,
Joe McGowan ................................. 4 instruction in multiage classes was less
curriculum-centered approach in the U.S.
Sandra Stone................................... 5 effective, since the multiage classes usu-
appeared during the mid-nineteenth century
ally had higher achievers and more experi-
International Model of Multiage with the rapid economic development and
enced teachers and the negative effects
Programs ............................................ 6 massive immigration into the country. Con-
were masked by this selection bias (Mason
currently, some innovators tried to develop
Conclusions and child-centered education, which focused on & Burns, 1996). Veeman’s research (1995)
Recommendations............................. 6 applying a developmentally appropriate contends that there is not a significant dif-
ference in the quality of instruction
practice in a more social and natural learn-
Authors............................................... 6 between models (multiage and single-
ing environment. These efforts led to the
grade classes) if the class size is controlled
Acknowledgements ........................... 6 current scheme of multiage education,
and teachers are trained to teach through
teaching students in a cross-grade group as
References.......................................... 7 a whole class and emphasizing individual appropriate methods.
List of 2008 Education Policy progress through a developmentally appro- The current point of contention is whether
Briefs................................................... 8
priate curriculum (Lloyd, 1999). multiage groupings help increase chil-
dren’s academic skills, and so far, the
The multiage program movement in the
results of the few available studies are
U.S. peaked in 1990, a year in which the
inconsistent. Slaton (1997) suggests that
philosophy was embraced by the Kentucky
UPCOMING POLICY BRIEFS AND the forced assignments for both teachers
Education Reform Act (Pardini, 2005).
SPECIAL REPORTS . . and students in multiage classrooms might
However, in recent years, some schools
contribute to negative academic outcomes
9 The Effectiveness and Efficiency of have discontinued their multiage programs
in some situations (Slaton et al., 1997),
Charter Schools in Indiana due to the grade-level standards and testing
while Veeman (1995) attributes the pre-
requirements imposed by the No Child Left
9 The Excellence Gap Examined vailing confusion about multiage educa-
Behind Act and most states’ accountability
tion to the inconsistent definition of
9 Public Law 221: Is Indiana’s Account- laws. Although the number of these class-
ability Law Working or is it Another multiage education. According to Lloyd
rooms has declined recently, many educa-
Passing Education Reform Fad? (1999), the wide range of ways multiage
tors still embrace the multiage philosophy.
groupings are implemented makes it diffi-
9 Open Enrollment Policies of the States Some schools use multiage classrooms as
cult for researchers to generalize the aca-
an alternative learning environment for stu-
demic impact of multiage education
dents, while others choose to use multiage
(Lloyd, 1999).
classrooms school wide. Although the mul-
tiage education philosophy is supported to
The benefits (perceived and real) of the students to serve as role models or mentors teaching strategies to meet all students’
idealized model of the multiage program to help their younger peers. needs, educators might have increased
are many, including: helping to develop motivation to focus on the progress of indi-
Since teachers are usually required to teach
students’ social, emotional, and verbal vidual students rather than their own
the same class for approximately two to
skills and self-esteem; enabling students to progress in moving through the adopted
three years in multiage settings, they
learn at their own pace; building a caring textbooks and sticking with rigid course
become more familiar with students and
child-centered and project-based learning calendars. In addition, a student-centered
their families, potentially resulting in a
environment; and improving student atti- and project-based learning environment is
strong sense of continuity. Such an envi-
tudes toward school and school work, more likely to be established in such set-
ronment might help to build a connection
which results in increased attendance, etc. tings because students of different levels
between families and schools as well,
Despite these outcomes, the obstacles and can pay more attention to individual
which could lead to better teacher-parent
problems of program management and dif- projects, which are carefully designed to
relationships and increased parent involve-
ferentiated instruction may be the reasons challenge their own knowledge and abili-
ment (Miller, 1994). Research has also
for a deliberative and cautious approach to ties, in contrast to a common curriculum,
shown that on the first day of school, both
the selective use of multiage classrooms. In which does not focus on individual abili-
students and teachers who were in multiage
this Education Policy Brief, the advantages ties (Aina, 2001). It has also been shown
classrooms in an elementary school felt
and disadvantages of multiage education that such a caring, individual-emphasized,
more relaxed, calm, and comfortable than
are examined and some state programs are project-based community can improve stu-
those in single-age classrooms (Fu et al.,
highlighted to deepen our understanding dent attitudes toward school and school
1999).
about multiage education programs and work, decrease discipline referrals,
how to implement them more effectively. increase attendance, and improve peer
relations among students (Veeman, 1995).
The student demographic to reap the great-
est benefits from multiage classrooms var-
BENEFITS AND ADVANTAGES
The current grade-based ies from disadvantaged students to high-
academic standards and ability students. Although there are chal-
Educators may be attracted by the benefits
lenges to establishing and managing multi-
that an idealized model of multiage class- high-stakes testing might
age programs in high-poverty schools,
rooms can bring to schools. An idealized have solid correlations to
such schools have reported success with
model creates diverse yet balanced group-
curriculum-centered the programs after careful planning
ings of students of mixed ages with differ-
instruction, but by using (Carter, 2005; Melliger, 2005). A caring
ent abilities, including special needs and
learning community might be even more
gifted students. The enhanced social and the same curricula to
helpful to students who encounter more
natural settings in multiage classrooms can teach diverse groups of
troubles outside of school. Regarding high-
help raise students’ social and emotional students, they might
ability students, a multiage class can be a
skills. Research on early childhood multi-
neglect some students’ desirable option for them as well. Although
age grouping (Logue, 2006) found that stu-
needs, especially those of programs for high-achievers exist in a vari-
dent disobedience was considerably less
ety of forms, such as after-school activities,
prevalent in multiage groupings than in sin- high- and low-achievers.
summer camps, honor classes, etc., they
gle-age classrooms; and because of higher
often include a diverse population of vari-
rates of language exchange among mixed-
ous ages. In this case, differentiated curric-
age children, those in multiage groupings
ula and instructions are necessary to meet
had higher language development as well
all of their needs (Lloyd, 1994).
(Logue, 2006). More dated research also
supports the finding that students in multi-
The most attractive advantage of the ideal-
age classrooms show significant gains in
ized multiage classroom to educators may
reading and language skills (Skapski,
. be that it is aligned with the belief that stu-
1960). Although current research is lacking OBSTACLES AND PROBLEMS
dents should learn at an individual pace to
to substantiate that there are significant
reach their full potential. The current
academic achievement gains in multiage Although many educators agree with the
grade-based academic standards and high-
classrooms, some evidence does suggest philosophies of the multiage classrooms,
stakes testing might have solid correlations
that children in multiage classrooms some are skeptical of multiage programs
to curriculum-centered instruction, but by
achieved a higher cognitive developmental because of the difficulties of implementing
using the same curricula to teach diverse
level at a faster rate than those in class- and operating the programs. The first bar-
groups of students, graded education might
rooms of same-age peers (Frosco et al., rier is usually dissatisfaction and rejection
neglect some students’ needs, especially
2004). Furthermore, including students of by parents. Mixing their children with chil-
those of high- and low-achievers. By
different ages in one classroom creates a dren of other ages raises concerns about the
applying multiage philosophies to class-
caring environment, as it encourages older quality of instruction. Parents of older stu-
rooms and implementing differentiated
dents tend to think that their children will
THE ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES OF MULTIAGE CLASSROOMS IN THE ERA OF NCLB ACCOUNTABILITY —— 2
learn less, while those of younger ones neatly into the traditional organization for personal communication, November 12,
worry that their children might be chal- schools (Kolstad et al., 1998). 2008).
lenged too intensely and lose confidence in
Some contend that because of parents, According to the Kentucky Demographic
their learning abilities. Often the parents
teachers, and policy constraints, multiage Survey of the Primary Program used to
involved more in school life are the ones
classes usually have better teachers, more evaluate the primary program between
who promote and prefer to have their chil-
advantaged students, and other perquisites, 2001-2007, over time the program was
dren in multiage classrooms. Thus, this sit-
which lead to feelings of superiority among found to improve students’ academic
uation might produce multiage classrooms
students. Yet, some schools choose to achievement, increase teacher’s prepara-
full of privileged and affluent students and
implement multiage classrooms as a tion time before classes and use of various
could cause them to become homogeneous
“dumping ground” for students who “need types of assessments, and improve parents’
groups, not aligned with the philosophy of
more time” which results in low self- involvement in their child’s education.
multiage education programs.
esteem for students. As discussed above, an Nevertheless, the use of multiage class-
Teacher buy-in and preparedness are idealized model of multiage classrooms is rooms in Kentucky has been decreasing
important considerations, too. Many teach- not easy to achieve, and to some extent, it is since 2001, and predominantly single-
ers report having almost no preparation for not aligned with current regulations and grade classrooms have been increasing
teaching students of different ages, and policies. (Demographic Survey, 2007) (see the Pol-
about 8 in 10 teachers oppose differenti- icy Perspective letter by Joe McCowan on
Despite these limitations, there are a num-
ated instruction, which is to adapt the cur- page 4 for more information about the Ken-
ber of successes reported as well. Schools
riculum to meet all students’ needs. They tucky experience with multiage education).
which effectively operate the multiage pro-
doubt their abilities to assign the groups,
grams often plan ahead, introducing the
carry out the materials, and efficiently cre-
programs to parents, educating teachers,
ate group work among students of different
and offering teachers extensive, ongoing
abilities and ages (Farkas & Duffett, 2008).
MICHIGAN MODEL OF MULTIAGE
professional development. Although the
The increased workload is also a point of
PROGRAMS
multiage classroom is not perfectly aligned
dispute. Even if teachers accept the argu-
with the current policies, many schools
ments in favor of multiage grouping and
have implemented it and shown rapid The Michigan State Board of Education
start teaching in multiage classrooms,
progress by doing so in the correct way, announced a new grant initiative in 1994
some have misunderstandings about the
which conforms to the multiage philoso- for the establishment of non-graded contin-
program and do not implement it correctly.
phy of a child-centered approach. uous progress programs for students in
In addition, relations between staff mem-
multiage classrooms. For a time, multiage
bers may be strained. Since teachers who
programs flourished in Michigan. In 1995,
have had more extensive training and pro-
the Michigan Department of Education
fessional development usually have more
estimated that one in five districts imple-
opportunities to teach multiage classes, an KENTUCKY MODEL OF MULTIAGE
mented the multiage settings; three years
experience gap between those who teach PROGRAMS
later, more than half of the districts began
single-graded classes and those who teach
or expanded upon their multiage models
multiage classes may result, leading to The 1990 Kentucky Education Reform Act
(Fox, 1998). However, state funding for
feelings of superiority in multiage groups. established a statewide ungraded primary
multiage programs ceased in 1999, and a
Also, teachers who are opposed to change program with emphasis on the delivery of
year later, the Michigan Department of
can undermine well-meaning multiage multiage and multi-ability learning experi-
Education stopped the initiative and the
classroom teachers. ences for all primary students. The pro-
encouragement of multiage grouping.
gram started in 1990 and was modified in
Administrators may also experience diffi- 1996 to give schools more authority to Although the multiage classrooms were
culties with multiage classrooms. Because structure the program. Legislation passed perceived to be quite effective in helping
of the federal and state accountability laws, in Kentucky in 1992 specified seven main students make progress, a reason cited for
such as Indiana Public Law 221-1999, stu- attributes to be included in every primary their discontinuation in Michigan was the
dents are required to take standardized tests program: developmentally appropriate argument that they are not compatible with
by grade level. Multiage classrooms, educational practices, multiage and multi- grade-level content and annual testing (L.
which blur the grade level standards, make ability classrooms, continuous progress, Hansknecht, personal communication, July
this difficult. Furthermore, many principals authentic assessment, qualitative reporting 1, 2008).
reported that it was difficult to operate two methods, professional teamwork, and pos-
types of structures in one school. Multiage itive parent involvement. Regional service
groups often need special field trips, school centers were established in 1992 and
schedules, equipment, etc., and have to be included a primary program consultant to
separated from the events which are provide professional development for
designed for specific grades. School bud- school district personnel; however, the ser-
gets encounter problems as well, in that it vices were discontinued in 2003 because of
is difficult to fit the multiage programs lack of funding and support (J. McCowan, (continued on page 6)
THE ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES OF MULTIAGE CLASSROOMS IN THE ERA OF NCLB ACCOUNTABILITY —— 3
Policy Perspective

PRIMARILY SPEAKING IN KENTUCKY

Joe McCowan
Along with the newly established legislation, that was responsible for various regions across
the primary program was originally supported the state who worked in conjunction with other
with many models and resources for educators similar statewide networks, like education co-
who were grounded in research methods tai- ops. In 1998, the focus of the regional service
lored to the ungraded structure of learning for centers became more content driven and in
young children. There was a sense of coher- alignment with funding for education acade-
ence among primary programs, and regional mies that provide content specific professional
support was available to strengthen networks development. Five years later, the regional ser-
of teachers through this new type of learning vice centers were legislatively removed by a
structure. This learning structure was sup- lack of funding and support.
ported by educators who were using a very pro-
Data has been collected by the Kentucky
active approach to teaching and learning that
Department of Education through the Demo-
Education reform continues to influence many was collaborative in nature. Consistent com-
graphic Survey of the Primary Program. Survey
educators across our nation and the history of munication was crucial to success that included
results indicated an increase of predominantly
these efforts can be looked at closely as we consistent delivery of necessary information
single-age groupings over a five-year span.
make future decisions in education. In 1990 the for all stakeholders. As a result, students’
Another area of concern from the survey
kindergarten through third grade primary pro- achievement outcomes improved.
reflects a higher number of primary students
gram in Kentucky was influenced by positive
The ungraded primary program I have just being offered an additional year of primary and
decision making from educators truly search-
briefly described continued on a similar path where this additional year is being offered is
ing for a new and innovative way to provide a
from 1990 until 1996. In 1996, further legisla- very inconsistent statewide.
structure of learning best suitable for young
tion was added to the primary program as a
children as part of the Kentucky Education
The most important factor to truly evaluate pri-
response to many concerns from educators that
Reform Act. As a result of this reform, new
mary programs in Kentucky will always be the
more flexibility was needed. As a result, the
legislation was adopted into law that created
overall impact on student learning in relation to
Kentucky General Assembly passed a bill that
the ungraded primary program for all schools
the implementation of the critical attributes.
states each school council, or, if none exists,
in Kentucky as a prerequisite to entering the
Teaching and learning in the primary program
the school shall determine the organization of
fourth grade. Within this new primary program
across the state is happening in a variety of
its ungraded primary program including the
structure, a strong emphasis was placed on pro-
ways and structures. However, the support that
extent to which multiage groups are necessary
viding multiage and multi-ability learning
is currently being provided to schools is more
to implement the seven critical attributes and
experiences for all children in Kentucky.
content driven with further support for inter-
meet the needs of individual student needs.
vention services appropriate for students who
In 1992, new legislation established the critical Upon the passage of this legislation, each
are struggling. As schools continue to make
attributes to be included in every primary pro- school would now be given more authority to
local decisions about the structure of the pri-
gram, commonly referred to as the “seven criti- determine the primary program structure to be
mary program in Kentucky, the quality of the
cal attributes.” The seven critical attributes implemented.
services provided to support the instructional
include: developmentally appropriate educa-
As the accountability has shifted among the core of students, teachers, and content through
tional practices, multiage and multi-ability
primary program requirements, so has the the critical attributes must be apparent.
classrooms, continuous progress, authentic
amount of support that has been offered state-
assessment, qualitative reporting methods, pro-
wide. In 1992, regional service centers were Kentucky’s Primary Program:
fessional teamwork, and positive parental
created that primarily focused on professional http://www.education.ky.gov/KDE/Instruc-
involvement. This legislation is still in place
development for school districts. These service tional+Resources/Elementary+School/Pri-
and truly outlines what must be included
centers provided a primary program consultant mary+Program/
throughout the implementation of the primary
program. The established seven critical
attributes are the most important part of the pri-
mary program legislation as they define what
shall be accessible for all primary students in
Kentucky. Joe McCowan is the manager of the Mathematics and
Science Branch at the Kentucky Department of Education.
THE ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES OF MULTIAGE CLASSROOMS IN THE ERA OF NCLB ACCOUNTABILITY —— 4
Policy Perspective

MULTIAGE IN THE ERA OF NCLB

Sandra J. Stone
Ideally, because of opposing aims, multiage 6. Understanding child development so chil-
should exist outside the graded system or be dren are not set up for failure.
protected as a “school within a school.” To try to 7. Learning through meaningful and relevant
fit multiage philosophy within a graded system experiences.
creates frustration for teachers, parents, and 8. Learning as a process and not a product.
children. Some teachers have likened the expe- 9. Learning through play.
riences to trying to “fit a square peg into a round 10. Learning as an individual
hole.” It just does not fit. The advantages for multiage education from
social learning theory for children include:
If the fit is forced, the edges of the square are
chiseled off, so it does not resemble a square 1. Learning from children who are both nov-
anymore. If multiage education is forced into the ices and experts.
system, oftentimes the focus then becomes cur- 2. Encouraging the use of more sophisticated
In the age of NCLB, educators continue to sup- riculum-centered rather than child-centered. skills in order to engage experts.
port the rigidity of the graded system, which is Learning is limited to the curriculum for the 3. Mastering skills through modeling for
based on a manufacturing model spurred by the grade levels rather than designing learning for diverse learners.
Industrial Revolution. When Horace Mann each child. Grades are given for curricular work 4. Internalizing new understandings through
introduced the graded system from Prussia in instead of using portfolios to plan for individual “cognitive conflict” experiences with mixed
1843, he launched a system in the United States progress. The focus is on teaching to tests, rather ages.
which benefited children by providing an educa- than facilitating learning for the child. Competi- 5. Developing intellectual and communication
tion for all and sought to ground democracy and tion reduces cooperation. Standards are used as skills because of broader differences in the
equality in our nation. However, with this sys- benchmarks rather than goals in the natural learning community.
tem also came a curriculum-centered approach, course of learning. In this setting, multiage class- 6. Acquiring social skills in meaningful con-
which remains with us today, and is com- rooms become merely combination classes texts with mixed ages.
pounded by the regulations of NCLB. Children rather than vibrant, social learning environments 7. Providing a natural environment for pro-
are organized into grade levels, curriculum is with many of the benefits of a true multiage pro- social behaviors to thrive such as helping,
sequenced by grade, children must pass the gram lost. sharing, and taking turns.
grade level tests or be retained, and endure the 8. Encouraging cooperative learning in the
However, multiage programs continue to
pressure of high-stake tests, which may limit absence of competition.
beckon educators who circumvent the graded
their educational opportunities. 9. Providing contexts for the development of
system in order to pursue multiage philosophy
leadership skills for all ages.
Multiage education is a child-centered in its truest form — and multiage classrooms 10. Seeing greater benefits for all children in
approach, which is founded in an understanding become places where children of different ages three age groupings than for two age group-
of child development and research on how chil- flourish in safe and challenging learning envi- ings.
dren learn, and considers the uniqueness of ronments. The advantages of multiage educa-
In the world of NCLB, learning is often dimin-
each learner in terms of learning rate, back- tion from a constructivist perspective for
ished for children. Some children win and some
ground, learning styles, multiple intelligences, children include:
children lose. Multiage education, however,
and interests. Multiage education does not com-
1. Learning as a whole person. opens up learning for every child, providing an
pare children. The philosophy sees each child
2. Learning is social. enriched learning environment within a family
on his own continuum of learning within a
3. Freedom to take risks, follow interests, and of mixed age learners. The opportunities are
whole child context: social, emotional, cogni-
make choices. greater for learning, but more importantly, chil-
tive, and physical. Multiage does not try to fit
4. Facilitation of personal construction of dren are treated with respect for their individu-
the child to the pre-determined curriculum, but
knowledge. ality. Children are not seen as products coming
rather chooses a broad-based curriculum to fit
5. Honoring and valuing each person as off the conveyor belt, stamped with a test score,
the needs of the child. Multiage is grounded in
unique. but children are human beings with emotions
constructivist and social learning theory.
who are cared for and nurtured through a system
Elkind (1989) envisioned two approaches to that understands what learning is all about.
education with opposing aims: 1) to facilitate
the development and personal construction of
Sandra J. Stone is Director of the National Multiage Institute and
each child’s knowledge (multiage), and 2) to
Chairman of the College of Education at Northern Arizona University.
produce children who score high on tests of
achievement (graded).
Please see page 7 for a list of references for this Policy Perspective letter.
THE ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES OF MULTIAGE CLASSROOMS IN THE ERA OF NCLB ACCOUNTABILITY —— 5
(continued from page 3) strength of multiage education is its empha- operate two different programs in one
sis on the learning styles and progress of school.
each student. When implemented with
Recommendations
INTERNATIONAL MODEL OF fidelity and reflective of best practice, mul-
tiage classrooms can provide a learning It is necessary for administrators to create
MULTIAGE PROGRAMS
environment where students flourish — but “space” for multiage classrooms within the
positive outcomes are not guaranteed in the school and to let multiage classrooms exist
Multiage classrooms are popular in many
absence of appropriate administrative and outside the graded system. Few dispute
countries. In 1995, more than half of the
instructional support. that multiage classrooms do not easily fit in
classrooms in the Netherlands, Finland,
the traditionally-organized school, and by
Portugal, and Western Australia had multi- Recommendations
forcing them into the system, usually the
age groupings, and one in seven Canadian
High-quality research on the effects of classrooms cannot maintain their child-
classrooms were multiage (Veenman,
multiage education is needed via a random- centered approach (Stone, 2008). In order
1995). In 2004, the Netherlands Antilles
ized control trial or a quasi-experimental for multiage classrooms to be most benefi-
federal government required their schools
study to validate the existing body of cial to all students, administrators should
to change from a traditionally graded sys-
research that generally point to accelerated create the classrooms as a “school within a
tem to a child-centered and mixed-aged
gains by students in language develop- school” (Stone, 2008).
approach (Stone, 2004).
ment, reading, and mathematics.
The Australian Association of Multiage
Education, established in 1994, helps and Conclusion
leads multiage schools by providing Conclusion
Federal and state accountability systems,
numerous professional development activ-
Teachers and parents often lack a full based on standards, assessment, and school
ities, including newsletters, journals, work-
understanding of multiage education, performance accountability, have created a
shops, and a biannual conference. In
which results in difficulties of implement- K-12 education system that emphasizes the
Canada, multiage groupings are common
ing multiage classrooms. Many teachers achievement of the “bubble kids,” or stu-
in childcare centers and preschools, and
indicate that they are not adequately trained dents just below the passing rates or cut
many rules regarding the implementation
to teach multiage groups of children, and scores on standardized testing. This
and management of these programs have
parents tend to worry about the environ- emphasis has come at the expense of stu-
been introduced to help other centers and
ment and the quality of instruction. dents at the tail ends of the ability distribu-
schools (Bernhard et al., 2000).
tion, both the lowest achievers and high
Recommendations
ability students. The learning and develop-
Multiage education may be flourishing all
In order to implement multiage classrooms mental needs of all students must be ade-
over the world, but it is critical to keep in
efficiently and effectively, parent educa- quately considered and addressed.
mind that this method is not deliberately
tion and teacher preparation are essential. Creativity and innovation cannot be lost in
used for educational purposes in all
Students may not enjoy the optimal bene- the drive to have all students demonstrate a
instances. In order to achieve the full bene-
fits from multiage classrooms if teachers level of minimum competency.
fits of multiage education, a careful exam-
cannot implement differentiated instruc-
ination of best practices and the research Recommendations
tional strategies, environments, and assess-
base, professional development, and per-
ments; and age-balanced heterogeneous School administrators should consider
haps some regulations are needed to help
classrooms cannot be easily achieved if multiage education as a viable “alterna-
schools implement the program correctly.
parents do not fully understand and support tive” program that should be available to
the philosophies. By offering professional any student who is underserved or not suc-
development workshops on multiage edu- ceeding in the traditional classroom.
cation and differentiated instruction for Administrators should consider multiage
CONCLUSIONS AND
teachers, as well as providing detailed classrooms as a smaller learning commu-
RECOMMENDATIONS
information to parents, schools will be nity or a school within a school and provide
more likely to implement the program suc- these programs adequate support and lead-
cessfully. ership.
Conclusion
Little research exists on the outcomes and
benefits of multiage education. Much of the Conclusion
research is quite dated, and additional
Currently, the non-graded multiage pro-
research from the mid-90s provides mixed
grams are not perfectly aligned with the
results. The wide range of ways multiage
graded and curriculum-centered education
education is implemented makes it difficult
system in the U.S. It is difficult for admin-
for researchers to generalize the academic
istrators to implement the multiage pro-
impact of multiage education. Thus, with-
gram in traditionally organized schools and
out overstating the benefits and effects, the
THE ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES OF MULTIAGE CLASSROOMS IN THE ERA OF NCLB ACCOUNTABILITY —— 6
Primary+Program/Assessment+and+Account- Melliger, S. R. (March, 2005). Our long, winding
AUTHORS ability+for+Primary/Primary+Program+Demo- road to multiage classrooms. School Administra-
graphic+Survey.htm tor, 62(3), 24-25. Retrieved June 3, 2008, from
Farkas, S., & Duffett, A. (2008, June). Results from http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/
Ruiting Song
a National Teacher Survey. In High-achieving detail?vid=56&hid=12&sid=c7116578-fae4-
([email protected]) is an Undergraduate
students in the era of NCLB (pp. 49-82). Wash- 4f47-829f-
Research Assistant at the Center for Evaluation
ington D.C.: Thomas B. Fordham Institute. 1568925aca3a%40sessionmgr2&bdata=JnNpd
& Education Policy. Fox, C. L. (1998, April). The Michigan Multiage GU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ%3d%3d#db=eric&AN
Terry E. Spradlin Continuous Progress Model, Michigan Depart- =EJ711035
([email protected]) is Associate Director for ment of Education. Retrieved June 3, 2008, from Miller, B.A. (1994). Children at the center. Port-
Education Policy at the Center for Evaluation & http://eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/custom/port- land, OR: Northwest Regional Educational Lab-
lets/recordDetails/detailm- oratory.
Education Policy.
ini.jsp?_nfpb=true&_&ERICExtSearch_Search Pardini, P. (March, 2005). The slowdown of the
Jonathan A. Plucker Value_0=ED425524&ERICExtSearch_SearchT multiage classroom. School Administrator,
([email protected]) is Director of the Cen- ype_0=no&accno=ED425524 62(3), 22-30. Retrieved June 3, 2008, from http:/
ter for Evaluation & Education Policy and Pro- Frosco, A. M., Schleser, R., & Andal, J. (2004). /web.ebscohost.com/ehost/
fessor of Educational Psychology and Cognitive Multiage Programming Effects on Cognitive detail?vid=56&hid=12& sid=c7116578-fae4-
Science at Indiana University. Developmental Level and Reading Achievement 4f47-829f-
in Early Elementary School Children. Reading 1568925aca3a%40sessionmgr2&bdata=JnNpd
Psychology, 25, 1-17, Retrieved June 3, 2008, GU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ%3d%3d#db=eric&AN
from http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/ =EJ711034
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
detail?vid=39&hid=12&sid=c7116578-fae4- Skapski, M.K. (1960). Ungraded primary reading
4f47-829f- program: An objective evaluation. Elementary
The authors would like to thank Joe McCowan, 1568925aca3a%40sessionmgr2&bdata=JnNpd School Journal, 61, 41-45
Kentucky Department of Education, and Sandra GU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ%3d%3d#db=aph&AN Slaton, D. B., Atwood, V. A., Shake, M. C., &
Stone, National Multiage Institute, for the submis- =12377194 Hales, R. M. (1997). Experienced teachers’ reac-
sion of their Policy Perspective letters. We also Fu, D. et al. (1999). A comfortable start for every- tions to mandated reform and nongraded primary
extend our gratitude to the following staff at CEEP one: The first week of school in three multi-age school programs. Journal of Research in Child-
for their review and contributions on this report: (K-2) classrooms. Early Childhood Education hood Education, 3(3), 111-116. EJ 352 966.
Dr. Nathan Burroughs, Meg McGillivray, and Journal, 27(2), 73-80. Retrieved June 3, 2008, Stone, S. (2004). Creating the multiage classroom.
Michael Holstead. from http://eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/custom/ Glenview, IL: Good Year Book.
portlets/recordDetails/detailm- Veeman, S. (1995). Cognitive and noncognitive
ini.jsp?_nfpb=true&_&ERICExtSearch_Search effects of multigrade and multi age classes: A
Value_0=EJ602108&ERICExtSearch_SearchTy best-evidence synthesis. Review of Educational
pe_0=no&accno=EJ602108 Research, 65(4), 319-381.
REFERENCES Kolstad, R., & McFadden, A. (March, 1998). Mul-
tiage classrooms: An age-old educational strat-
egy revisited. Journal of Instructional References for the Policy Perspective letter,
(K-2) Classrooms. Early Childhood Education
Psychology, 25(1), 14-19. Retrieved June 3, Multiage in the Era of NCLB, by Sandra
Journal, 27(2), 73-80. Retrieved June 3, 2008,
2008, from http://eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/ Stone
from Academic Search Premier database.
custom/portlets/recordDetails/detailm-
Aina, O. E. (2001). Maximizing learning in early Bandura. A. (1977). Social learning theory. Engel-
ini.jsp?_nfpb=true&_&ERICExtSearch_Search
childhood multiage classrooms: Child, teacher, wood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Value_0=EJ565426&ERICExtSearch_SearchTy
and parent perceptions. Early Childhood Educa- Brooks, J.G., & Brooks, M.G. (1999). In search of
pe_0=no&accno=EJ565426
tion Journal, 28(4), 219-225. Retrieved June 3, understanding: The case for constructivist
Lloyd, L. (Summer, 1999). Multi-age classes and
2008, from http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/ classrooms. Charlottesville, VA: Association for
high ability students. Review of Educational
detail?vid=17&hid=12&sid=c7116578-fae4- Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Research, 69(2), 187-212. Retrieved July 1,
4f47- Copple, S., & Bredekamp, S. (1997). Develop-
2008, from http://eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/
829f1568925aca3a%40sessionmgr2&bdata=Jn mentally appropriate practice in early child-
custom/portlets/recordDetails/detailm-
NpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ%3d%3d#db=aph hood programs serving children from birth
ini.jsp?_nfpb=true&_&ERICExtSearch_Search
&AN=11305183 through age 8. Washington, DC: National Asso-
Value_0=EJ600456&ERICExtSearch_SearchTy
Bernhard, J., et al. (2000). Infants and toddlers in ciation for the Education of Young Children.
pe_0=no&accno=EJ600456
Canadian multi-age, childcare settings: Age, Elkind, D. (1989). Developmentally appropriate
Logue, M. E. (May, 2006). Teachers observe to
ability and linguistic inclusion. Retrieved June 3, practice: Philosophical and practical implica-
learn: Differences in social behavior of toddlers
2008, from http://www.ryerson.ca/~bernhard/ tions. Phi Delta Kappan, 71(2), 113-117.
and preschoolers in same-age and multiage
articles.html Piaget, J., & Inhelder, B. (1969). The psychology
groupings. Young Children, 61(3), 70-76.
Carter, P. (September, 2005). The modern multi- of the child. New York: Basic Books.
Retrieved June 3, 2008, from http://eric.ed.gov/
age classroom. Educational Leadership, 54-58. Shepard, L. & Smith, M. (1990). Synthesis of
ERICWebPortal/custom/portlets/recordDetails/
Retrieved June 3, 2008, http://www.eric.ed.gov/ research on grade retention. Educational Lead-
detailm-
ERICWebPortal/custom/portlets/recordDetails/ ership, 47 (8), 84-86.
ini.jsp?_nfpb=true&_&ERICExtSearch_Search
detailm- Stone, S.J. (1997). The multiage classroom: What
Value_0=EJ768997&ERICExtSearch_SearchTy
ini.jsp?_nfpb=true&_&ERICExtSearch_Search research tells the practitioner. Alexandria, VA:
pe_0=no&accno=EJ768997
Value_0=EJ725901&ERICExtSearch_SearchTy Association for Supervision and Curriculum
Mason, D. A., & Burns, R. B. (1996). “Simply no
pe_0=no&accno=EJ725901 Development (ASCD).
worse, and simply no better” may simply be
Demographic Survey of the Primary Program Stone, S.J. (2004). Creating the multiage class-
wrong: A critique of Veenman’s conclusion
2001-2007 Statewide Summary Data/Compari- room (2nd ed.). Tucson, AZ: GoodYear Books.
about multigrade classes. Review of Educational
son Data [Data file]. (2007). Retrieved June, Vygotsky, L.S. (1978). Mind in society: The devel-
Research, 66, 307-322.
2007, from http://www.kde.state.ky.us/KDE/ opment of psychological processes. Cambridge,
Instructional+Resources/Elementary+School/ MA: Harvard University Press.
THE ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES OF MULTIAGE CLASSROOMS IN THE ERA OF NCLB ACCOUNTABILITY —— 7
2008 EDUCATION POLICY BRIEFS IN REVIEW
Single-Sex Education in the 21st Century
Arguments and Evidence: The Debate over Collective Bargaining's Role in Public Education
Improving High School Graduation Rates
Promises and Pitfalls of Virtual Education in the United States and Indiana
Calculating High School Graduation Rates
The Status of Male Teachers in Public Education Today
Using Data to Address Equity Issues in Special Education
Latino Students and Disproportionality in Special Education
Models of State K-12 Educational Governance: Where Does Indiana Stand?
All of the above Education Policy Briefs and other CEEP publications can be found at:
http://www.ceep.indiana.edu/pub.shtml#ed
Education Policy Briefs are executive edited by Jonathan A. Plucker, Ph.D. and published by the
Center for Evaluation & Education Policy
Indiana University

1900 East Tenth Street

Bloomington, IN 47406-7512

812-855-4438

More about the Center for Evaluation & Education Policy

and our publications can be found at our Web site:

http://ceep.indiana.edu

010809_946
THE ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES OF MULTIAGE CLASSROOMS IN THE ERA OF NCLB ACCOUNTABILITY —— 8