Chapter 1 - Multi-grade teaching: Concept and status

Multi-grade teaching refers to the teaching of students of different ages, grades and abilities in the same
group. It is referred to variously in the literature as 'multilevel', 'multiple class', 'composite class',
'vertical group', 'family class', and, in the case of one-teacher schools, 'unitary schools'. It is to be
distinguished from 'mono-grade' teaching in which students within the same grade are assumed to be
more similar in terms of age and ability. Substantial variation in ability within a mono-grade class often
leads to "mixed-ability" teaching. Multi-grade teaching should also be distinguished from "multi-age-
within-grade" teaching which occurs when there are wide variations in age within the same grade. This
is common in developing countries, where the age of entry to school varies and where grade repetition
is common. However, in North America, where age and grade are more congruent, the terms "multi-
age" and "multi-grade" are often used synonymously.

Several writers have pointed out that the first state-supported elementary schools in North America and
Europe were un-graded. The school often consisted of a single room in which one teacher taught basic
literacy and numeracy to children from six to fifteen years of age. In the US the "death knell of the one
room school was sounded" after a visit to Prussia by Horace Mann, the Secretary of the Massachusetts
Board of Education, in 1843.

the first element of superiority in a Prussian school...consists in the proper classification of scholars. In
all places where the numbers are sufficiently large to allow it, the children are divided according to ages
and attainments, and a single teacher has the charge of only a single class... There is no obstacle
whatever... to the introduction at once of this mode of dividing and classifying scholars in all our large
towns (Mann quoted in Pratt 1986)

Urban education administrators in the US were soon to recommend that schools be divided on the lines
of age and grade, a development which was consistent with the division of labour in industry. The
"principle of the division of labour holds good in schools, as in mechanical industry" (Bruck quoted in
Pratt 1986). The mono-grade model was to become a universal ideal in the late nineteenth and
twentieth centuries and came to dominate the basis of school, class and curriculum organisation used
by central authorities.

The persistence of the multi-grade reality towards the close of the twentieth century

Yet despite the ideal, the multi-grade reality has characterised hundreds of thousands of schools
throughout the twentieth century and will continue to do so well into the twenty first. Although
information about the extent of multi-grade teaching tends not to be collected on a regular basis, 1959
data were collected by UNESCO's International Bureau of Education (Table 1). Table 1 indicates the large
number and proportion of teachers who were teaching in one-teacher schools in the late 1950s - some
2040% in countries of South and Central America, 16% in India, 25% in Turkey and 15% in the USSR. The
percentage of teachers teaching in one-teacher schools in some of the European countries was also
extremely high - 47% in Spain, 23% in Luxembourg, 20% in France, 10% in Switzerland. Figures in the US
and UK were lower - 2.9% in the USA, 3.6% in Scotland, 2.3% in Northern Ireland and 0.7% in England
and Wales (UNESCO/IBE 1961).

Comparable data for the late 1980s early 1990s are not available. Data on multi-grade teachers and
schools do not appear to be collected systematically by national and international agencies. Table 2
synthesises available information from a wide variety of sources on the current status of multi-grade
teaching. It expresses the incidence of multi-grade teaching at the primary school level in different
countries in the years for which the most recent data are available. The several columns in Table 2
reflect the non-standard nature of available data. In some countries data on the number and percentage
of one and two teacher schools are available. In others only the number and or the percentage of
schools which have multi-grade classes are available; or the number of classes within a system which are
multi-grade; or the number of teachers per school; or the percentage of teachers who teach multi-
grade; or the percentage of students who study in multi-grade classes.

Table 2 suggests that in 1986 India had over 300,000 one or two teacher schools, representing more
than 60% of all schools. In Sri Lanka the percentage is lower. However the seven hundred schools in Sri
Lanka which have either one or two teachers are located in the most difficult environments in a country
which has achieved near universal enrolment in primary school. In Malaysia too the multi-grade schools
are located in those areas which are disadvantaged in several ways Malay and Chinese schools in small
villages and settlements and in the remote, secluded areas of Sabah; Tamil schools in rubber estates and
the aboriginal schools in the interior and remote areas of Peninsular Malaysia.

RIC Identifier: ED335178

Publication Date: 1991-05-00
Author: Miller, Bruce
Source: ERIC Clearinghouse on Rural Education and Small Schools Charleston WV.

Teaching and Learning in the Multigrade Classroom: Student

Performance and Instructional Routines. ERIC Digest.
The multigrade classroom is an organizational pattern widely used in schools in the United States. Typically a
feature of small-scale schooling, multigrade classrooms are today getting a closer look. This Digest, written for
practitioners, parents, and policymakers, brings together recent information on the topic. It considers the history
the multigrade classroom, its effects on achievement and attitude, and the requirements of teaching and learning
multigrade classrooms.

HISTORY AND BACKGROUND

In 1918, there were 196,037 one-room schools, representing 70.8 percent of all public schools in the United Sta
By 1980, less than 1,000 of these schools remained (Muse, Smith, & Barker, 1987). But the multigrade classroo
persists. For example, in a study consisting of multigrade classrooms of only two grades, Rule (1983) used a
sample from a suburban district outside Phoenix, Arizona. Of the 21,000 elementary students in the district,
approximately 17 percent were in classrooms that combined grades. In rural, small elementary schools the
incidence of students served in multigrade classrooms may well be much higher.

Although rural, small schools may combine grades to save money, in the guise of the "ungraded classroom,"
multigrade organization has also been a feature of urban and suburban districts. In the 1960s and 1970s, "open
education" and individualized instruction became influential curriculum and instructional models. Such models
were commonly implemented with multigrade classrooms. Energized by developmental theories of learning, a
large influx in federal money, and student-centered models of instruction, open education became a major
educational innovation. As a result, multigrade classrooms received new attention.

Numerous studies compared the effectiveness of "open" classrooms (multigrade organization with student-
centered ethos and methods) and "regular" classrooms (single-grade organization with traditional ethos and
methods). We have learned a great deal from these innovative efforts. Working in an open, multigrade school
requires serious, ongoing teacher training and a commitment to hard work.

Most teachers have been trained to work in single-grade classrooms. Their knowledge of teaching method is bas
on whole-class instruction and small-group instruction (with groups often formed on the basis of ability or
achievement level). When placed in a multigrade setting, teachers of the 60s and 70s discovered that the time
requirements and skills needed to be effective were simply not part of their prior training and experience. Althou
the premises of "open" and "regular" (traditional) education can differ sharply, this finding still applies to
multigrade classrooms in traditional schools.

THE NORM OF THE GRADED SCHOOL

The large-scale innovations of the 60s and 70s have virtually ended. But the multigrade classroom persists,
especially in small, rural schools. Yet, here, as elsewhere, most people view graded schools as the natural way to
organize education. This norm can be a handicap for anyone (whether out of necessity or by theoretical design)
who wants to--or who must--work with multigrade classrooms or schools. Teachers of multigraded classrooms
who face the biggest challenge may be those working in school systems in which single-grade classrooms are th
norm.

For many rural educators, multigrade instruction is not an experiment or a new educational trend, but a necessity
imposed, in part, by economic and geographic conditions. In an environment dominated by graded schools, the
decision to combine grades can be quite difficult--especially if constituents feel shortchanged by the decision.
Nonetheless, recent proposals for school restructuring reflect renewed interest in multigrade organization (Cohe
1989) and in small-scale organization generally. Such work may eventually contest the norm of the graded scho

EFFECTS ON STUDENT PERFORMANCE

Many teachers, administrators, and parents continue to wonder whether or not multigrade organization has
negative effects on student performance. Research evidence indicates that being a student in a multigrade
classroom does not negatively affect academic performance, social relationships, or attitudes.

Miller (1990) reviewed 13 experimental studies assessing academic achievement in single-grade and multigrade
classrooms and found there to be no significant differences between them. The data clearly support the multigra
classroom as a viable and equally effective organizational alternative to single-grade instruction. The limited
evidence suggests there may be significant differences depending on subject or grade level. Primarily, these stud
reflect the complex and variable nature of school life. Moreover, there are not enough such studies to make safe
generalizations about which subjects or grade levels are best for multigrade instruction.
When it comes to student affect, however, the case for multigrade organization appears much stronger. Of the 2
separate measures used to assess student affect in the studies reviewed, 81 percent favored the multigrade
classroom (Miller, 1990).

If this is the case, why then do we not have more schools organized into multigrade classrooms? One response i
that history and convention dictate the prevalence of graded classrooms. However, there is a related, but more
compelling, answer to be found in the classrooms themselves and in information drawn from classroom
practitioners.

INSTRUCTIONAL AND ORGANIZATIONAL ROUTINES

The multigrade classroom can be more of a challenge than the single-grade classroom. Skills and behavior
required of the teacher may be different, and coordinating activities can be more difficult. In fact, such a
realization is one reason graded schools came into being in the first place (Callahan, 1962).

At first look, the skills needed to teach well in the multigrade and the single-grade (multilevel) classroom appea
be quite similar. The differences between the two sorts of classrooms may be more a product of socialization an
expectation than of fact. Clearly, if a teacher in either sort of classroom fails to address differences among
students, the effectiveness of instruction suffers. Likewise, teachers are harmed when they have not been
adequately prepared to teach students with varying ages and abilities--no matter what sort of classroom they wo
in.

But what does the research tell us regarding the skills required of the multigrade teacher? When student diversit
increases, whether it be in a multigrade or single-grade classroom, greater demand is placed on teacher resource
both cognitive and emotional.

Six key instructional dimensions affecting successful multigrade teaching have been identified from multigrade
classroom research (Miller, 1991). Note that each of these points has some bearing on the related issues of
independence and interdependence. It is important to cultivate among students the habits of responsibility for th
own learning, but also their willingness to help one another learn.

1. Classroom organization: Instructional resources and the physical environment to facilitate learning.

2. Classroom management and discipline: Classroom schedules and routines that promote clear, predictable
instructional patterns, especially those that enhance student responsibility for their own learning.

3. Instructional organization and curriculum: Instructional strategies and routines for a maximum of cooperative
and self-directed student learning based on diagnosed student needs. Also includes the effective use of time.

4. Instructional delivery and grouping: Methods that improve the quality of instruction, including strategies for
organizing group learning activities across and within grade levels.

5. Self-directed learning: Students' skills and strategies for a high level of independence and efficiency in learnin
individually or in combination with other students.
6. Peer tutoring: Classroom routines and students' skills in serving as "teachers" to other students within and acr
differing grade levels.

In the multigrade classroom, more time must be spent in organizing and planning for instruction. Extra material
and strategies must be developed so that students will be meaningfully engaged. This additional coordination let
the teacher meet with small groups or individuals, while other work continues.

Since the teacher cannot be everywhere or with each student simultaneously, the teacher shares instructional
responsibilities with students. A context of clear rules and routines makes such shared responsibility productive
Students know what the teacher expects. They know what assignments to work on, when they are due, how to g
them graded, how to get extra help, and where to turn assignments in.

Students learn how to help one another and themselves. At an early age, students are expected to develop
independence. The effective multigrade teacher establishes a climate to promote and develop this independence
For example, when young students enter the classroom for the first time, they receive help and guidance not onl
from the teacher, but from older students. In this way, they also learn that the teacher is not the only source of
knowledge.

Instructional grouping practices also play an important role in a good multigrade classroom. The teacher
emphasizes the similarities among the different grades and teaches to them, thus conserving valuable teacher tim
For example, whole-class (cross-grade) instruction is often used since the teacher can have contact with more
students. However, whole-class instruction in the effective multigrade classroom differs from what one generall
finds in a single-grade class.

Multigrade teachers recognize that whole-class instruction must revolve around open task activities if all studen
are to be engaged. For example, a teacher can introduce a writing assignment through topic development where
students "brainstorm" ideas. In this context, students from all grades can discuss different perspectives. They ca
learn to consider and respect the opinions of others (Miller, 1989).

Cooperation is a necessary condition of life in the multigrade classroom. All ages become classmates, and this
closeness extends beyond the walls of the school to include the community.

REWARDS AND CHALLENGES

There are many rewards for teaching in the multigrade classroom, but there are challenges, too. Instruction,
classroom organization, and management are complex and demanding. A teacher cannot ignore developmental
differences in students nor be ill-prepared for a day's instruction. Demands on teacher time require well-develop
organizational skills.

The multigrade classroom is not for the timid, inexperienced, or untrained teacher. Clearly, the implications for
teacher educators, rural school board members, administrators, and parents are far-reaching.

REFERENCES

Callahan, R. (1962). Education and the Cult of Efficiency. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Cohen, D. (1989). First stirrings of a new trend: Multigrade classrooms gain favor. Education Week, 9(14), 1, 1
15.

Miller, B. (1991). A review of the qualitative research on multigrade instruction. Research in Rural Education,
7(2), 3-12.

Miller, B. (1990). A review of the quantitative research on multigrade instruction. Research in Rural Education,
7(1), 1-8.

Miller, B. (1989). The Multigrade Classroom: A Resource Handbook for Small, Rural Schools. Portland, OR:
Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 320 719)

Muse, I., Smith, R., & Barker, B. (1987). The One-Teacher School in the 1980s. Las Cruces, NM: ERIC
Clearinghouse on Rural Education and Small Schools. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 287 646

Rule, J. (1983). Effects of multigrade grouping on elementary student achievement in reading and mathematics.
Dissertation Abstracts International, 44(3), 662. (University Microfilms No. ADG83-15672)

Library Reference Search Web Directory

This site is (c) 2003-2005. All rights reserved.

Please note that this site is privately owned and is in no way related to any Federal agency or
ERIC unit. Further, this site is using a privately owned and located server. This is NOT a
government sponsored or government sanctioned site. ERIC is a Service Mark of the U.S.
Government. This site exists to provide the text of the public domain ERIC Documents
previously produced by ERIC. No new content will ever appear here that would in any way
challenge the ERIC Service Mark of the U.S. Government.