Tag: K-12

Posted on

Pass or Fail: The Final Word

pass or fail

In this multi-part series, I provide a dissection of the phenomenon of retention and social promotion. Also, I describe the many different methods that would improve student instruction in classrooms and eliminate the need for retention and social promotion if combined effectively.

While reading this series, periodically ask yourself this question: Why are educators, parents and the American public complicit in a practice that does demonstrable harm to children and the competitive future of the country?

It is the contention of this blog series that ending retention, and social promotion are justified by both practical and theoretical considerations. Doing so does, however, also entail ending graded education and standardization. Collectively, these changes require a substantial overhaul of the entire system of public education in the United States as well as the re-education of the vast majority of its stakeholders.

The 6-pronged approach described above provides insight into the most promising plan for replacing retention, social promotion, graded classrooms and standardized tests with a fundamentally more effective educational system. If the stakeholders in the public education system are to be brought on board in support of this plan, the campaign to re-educate them must begin as soon as possible. This plan must emphasize how we have got to the point we are now at in our education system, so that it will be clearer where we might go if we make the changes the plan suggests.

It is time for the public education system to take an honest look at itself. The benefits of our current strategies are negligible. The United States is losing the knowledge and innovation battle and will ultimately lose the war unless reform begins soon. The tragedy of handicapping our children with a clearly second-rate education is all the worse because it is so unnecessary. As a nation, we have the information that justifies the changes outlined in this blog series. As citizens and parents, we also have the duty to provide our children the high-quality education envisaged by our Founding Fathers, and education that stimulates creativity and a love of learning.

Returning to the issues of retention and social promotion, the evidence is overwhelming that both of these strategies damage the children they are supposed to help. They are damaging not only to individual students but also society as a whole. The large-scale, long-term effects of retention are that individuals lose educational opportunities, job opportunities, and opportunities to make cultural and economic contributions to their communities.

Retention and social promotion also represent a tremendous burden on the state. The likelihood of an individual requiring welfare or being unemployed is greatly increased when they are affected by retention or social promotion. And as grave as these consequences are for an individual, they are dwarfed by the crippling effect of a personality stunted by a pernicious educational environment. Because a child who has been held back or socially retained is likely to be inhibited and stunted intellectually and creatively, the public school system really should be considered a clear and present danger to the nation’s future.

Only by acknowledging the harm done by grade retention, graded classrooms, and standardized tests can the American public education system can rise to the challenge of the modern world and provide a world-class education that is free, effective, and fair to all segments of society. Even if the American public education system is not completely transformed, there should at least be a shift in the approach to assessment. American schools should at least put an end to the use of restrictive, standardized testing and the use of retention and social promotion policies.

Posted on

Pass or Fail: Mixing Ages in a Single Classroom to Accommodate Developmental Differences

pass or fail

In this multi-part series, I provide a dissection of the phenomenon of retention and social promotion. Also, I describe the many different methods that would improve student instruction in classrooms and eliminate the need for retention and social promotion if combined effectively.

While reading this series, periodically ask yourself this question: Why are educators, parents and the American public complicit in a practice that does demonstrable harm to children and the competitive future of the country?

When it comes to getting rid of our current pass-fail system, I have developed six strategies (click to see them all). One change that I think will make substantial improvements is a shift to multi-age classroom arrangements.

All of the strategies for ending retention and social promotion presuppose a substantial and systemic change to the American educational system. Indeed, the strategies discussed in this series are not exclusively or even primarily focused on retention and social promotion, which are seen merely as symptoms of a greater disease. The true focus is upon putting an end to the graded education model and the related problems of standardized assessments and a graded curriculum. These are the factors that undermine our educational system most insidiously, often leaving the most vulnerable and the most talented of our students without a place in the educational system.

Multi-age classrooms can promote developmentally appropriate, innovative, and engaging educational opportunities. The multi-age classroom has tremendous potential as an educational approach if supported by skilled, qualified, and dedicated professionals in various capacities. However, it bears repeating that many different elements must be successfully integrated if a multi-age classroom is to attain its full potential.

Human development entails an interrelated sequence of changes in socialization, behavior, communication, and physical development. Students need the opportunity to work on these other areas of development as much as they need the opportunity to develop intellectually and academically. Students need to be able to interact appropriately with their peers and with adults. Behavioral considerations are related to both emotional and social development. In light of the evidence that multi-age classrooms provide benefits in these specific areas, graduates from multi-age programs can be expected show social and emotional maturity as well as academic achievement. Behavioral problems can be more effectively addressed in a multi-age classroom because of the regular exposure of younger students to their more mature peers.

Rather than basing the minimum acceptable grade on a child’s age, mixed age classrooms would take developmental differences into account. Mixed age classrooms would group children in developmentally equivalent groups spanning two or more years to optimize the learning potential of each child.

Posted on

Pass or Fail: Rethinking School Design for Better Learning Outcomes

pass or fail

In this multi-part series, I provide a dissection of the phenomenon of retention and social promotion. Also, I describe the many different methods that would improve student instruction in classrooms and eliminate the need for retention and social promotion if combined effectively.

While reading this series, periodically ask yourself this question: Why are educators, parents and the American public complicit in a practice that does demonstrable harm to children and the competitive future of the country?

When it comes to getting rid of our current pass-fail system, I have developed six strategies (click to see them all). A rehaul of design in our K-12 schools is a big component in making this shift a reality.

Redesigning America’s schools involves many levels of change and would take a considerable amount of time. Nonetheless, there is immense potential in the effort, including the opportunity to identify and learn from those aspects of the American education system that have been successful in the past, as well as those that continue to be successful today. There is also the opportunity to learn from systems used in other parts of the world, and to look at alternative assessment models, such as those found in various European countries. The multi-age classroom approach has a great deal to offer as a model that would reduce some of the most negative elements in the current system, especially the anxiety many students experience in the school setting and their lack of excitement regarding the experience of learning.

The ultimate goal of a redesigned system is the revival of the passion for learning within this nation. One of the qualities the founding fathers had was curiosity and a love for intellectual development and study. The talent that existed among those who founded this nation is something that could, even today, help rekindle a national passion for learning, innovation, and creativity. The need for such a rekindling is becoming ever more crucial because of the importance of knowledge and innovation in a global economy.

Inspiring students to be creative, analytical, and resourceful in their thinking will likely have many other effects. The cost of retention and social promotion policies includes high unemployment rates, reliance on public benefits, high dropout rates, and many social and emotional issues that manifest as problems of self-esteem. Creating a passion and a capacity for learning would help to teach American students to take care of themselves, boosting their self-esteem.

A characteristic of our times is that new ideas and new technologies are rapidly making old systems obsolete. Depending on the quality of his or her education, this can either be depressing or an inspirational challenge to the American worker. An individual who has enjoyed a high-quality and inspiring education that fosters critical thinking and an appreciation of knowledge will be able to overcome the challenges of a global marketplace instead of being left behind by change.

An interesting application of this notion is offered in a report on the knowledge economy itself. Powell and Snellman suggest that the modern automobile is becoming less of a dumb collection of nuts and bolts and more of a smart machine that applies computer technology to improve safety, economy, and environmental friendliness at the same time as it provides more entertainment and better automotive performance. Although the technology that supported the initial development of the car, the innovations of Henry Ford and the pioneers of the assembly line, are now almost entirely obsolete, innovations are rapidly transforming a relatively limited piece of technology into a sophisticated product with multiple functions.

The innovators of the future will be those who can take existing products and transform them into something so new as to be almost unrecognizable. This is abundantly clear with the car and numerous other products, like cell phones or computers. Ultimately, the American education system should be focused on preparing Americans to be capable of this order of innovation.  Even within the education system itself, we should be striving to do more with the resources that are already available, becoming more efficient and aiming for a higher purpose.

Posted on

Pass or Fail: Multiple Assessments to Determine True Learning

pass or fail

In this multi-part series, I provide a dissection of the phenomenon of retention and social promotion. Also, I describe the many different methods that would improve student instruction in classrooms and eliminate the need for retention and social promotion if combined effectively.

While reading this series, periodically ask yourself this question: Why are educators, parents and the American public complicit in a practice that does demonstrable harm to children and the competitive future of the country?

When it comes to getting rid of our current pass-fail system, I have developed six strategies (click to see them all). Developing a system with varied assessments is one of those points.

Many educators view standardized testing as a necessary evil, and some see it as a completely useless process that never reflects what students know. Proponents of K-12 assessments, on the other hand, contend that there is no adequate way to enforce educator accountability without them.

The majority of states and school districts rely on large-scale assessments when it comes to student grade progression, but this should only be a small piece of a larger analysis of individual students. Multiple sources of information about a student should be used in determining his or her readiness for the next grade, and teachers should make use of them.

Compared to the first two stages of change, the idea of creating multiple assessment measures is very easy. To some extent, public schools already make use of multiple assessment measures. For instance, multiple assessment measures are standard for students with IEPs, and IEPs are not usually changed without making reference to multiple assessment measures. The real key to implementing this stage is not so much the employment of multiple measures as it is the actual selection of those measures and the way they should be administered and interpreted.

The use of multiple assessments including some that do not entail tests makes allowance for that considerable proportion of the student body that does not perform well on tests. Multiple assessments also allow for the possibility that a student simply had a bad day on the day of the test. Finally, the inclusion of some assessment elements that do not consist of a rigid, multiple-choice tests reduces the likelihood of students “overthinking” higher-level questions, and inadvertently providing the right answer to the wrong question.

A combination of assessments is best both for simple assessment of learning and for making decisions about retention. The decision to hold a student back, if made at all, should be made on the basis of multiple measures of performance, and never strictly by a standardized test.

Posted on

Pass or Fail: Rewriting Standards to Eradicate Pass-Fail Strategies

pass or fail

In this multi-part series, I provide a dissection of the phenomenon of retention and social promotion. Also, I describe the many different methods that would improve student instruction in classrooms and eliminate the need for retention and social promotion if combined effectively.

While reading this series, periodically ask yourself this question: Why are educators, parents and the American public complicit in a practice that does demonstrable harm to children and the competitive future of the country?

When it comes to getting rid of our current pass-fail system, I have developed six strategies (click to see them all). The first is new standards that pull away from pass-fail initiatives to a better outcome for students.

Clear standards must guide the actions of all stakeholders in the education process. Administrators need clear standards to support policy decisions, just as teachers require a clear description of what they must teach, how they must teach it, and how they must assess their students’ learning. Students also need to know what they must learn and do to demonstrate their learning in an assessment process that does not entail the rigid standardization so characteristic of today’s tests. At some point in their K-12 career, students need to learn how to support themselves or seek out additional support from the school system when they encounter difficulties.

An emphasis on standards in the comprehensive sense advocated here can help to solve many of the existing problems in the K-12 system. As part of a broader strategy, an emphasis on standards can also help to ensure that all key players are on the same page. The ultimate vision is to provide a quality education that prepares students for college and high-level careers. Over the short term, the goal is to ensure students have ample opportunity to achieve success throughout their K-12 school career and to demonstrate their learning by making use of an assessment procedure that suits their temperament and accurately reflects their accomplishments. Clear and comprehensive standards provide a clear pathway to success as well as access to learning resources of proven efficacy.

These standards are needed before any shift away from the pass-fail mentality is possible and the time to start writing them is now.

Posted on

Pass or Fail: A New Plan for K-12 Success

pass or fail

In this multi-part series, I provide a dissection of the phenomenon of retention and social promotion. Also, I describe the many different methods that would improve student instruction in classrooms and eliminate the need for retention and social promotion if combined effectively.

While reading this series, periodically ask yourself this question: Why are educators, parents and the American public complicit in a practice that does demonstrable harm to children and the competitive future of the country?

The practice of passing students to the next grade or holding them back is nothing new. In the often cut-and-dry world of K-12 academics, the fate of a student is based on a shockingly unsophisticated system. The K-12 system seems to be oblivious or indifferent to the impact this pass/fail system has on the lives of the children it affects. Even though all available indices show they are the worse for it, students continue to be promoted by age with no concern for subject mastery or held back regardless of age when metrics are not met. Such irrationality demands an explanation. Why are educators, parents and the American public complicit in a practice that does demonstrable harm to children and the competitive future of the country?

Although this series is about the evolution of pass-fail systems in our schools, it does more than summarize the evolution of retention and social promotion in the American public education system. It’s more important message is a description of the benefits of individualized learning and an explanation of why so many Americans are oblivious to them.  The sad truth is that neither retention nor social promotion have been thought out. They were both simply allowed to happen, paths of least resistance on the journey from the one-room schoolhouse of the historical past to the high pressure, the age-grade system of today.

After critiquing the current pass-fail system, this series goes on to describe the many different methods that would improve student instruction in classrooms and eliminate the need for retention and social promotion if combined effectively. Modified standards, better teacher training, multiple approaches to assessment and a whole new outlook on K-12 classroom design are just a few of the points emphasized and encouraged in the latter half of the series. Replacing the pass-fail system with something equally rigid and simplistic will not improve the public education system in any meaningful way. What is needed is an entirely new approach that is thoughtfully assembled, piece by piece, from the ground up.

The American education system started with the iconic one-room schoolhouse, where students of all ages learned together in a common room. While quaint by today’s sophisticated standards, those rooms did, in fact, represent great educational equalizers. In this light, it is once again important to remind ourselves why they were replaced by a more rigorous, age-based system.

The statistics show a steeply rising trend in both social promotion and retention over time. Clearly, these facts show that the underlying causes of poor academic performance have simply been papered over with reflexive pass-fail standards. Pass-fail systems have been in place for decades without ever being subjected to serious review. What would the K-12 system look like if these policies were eliminated? If retention and social promotion are truly designed to help the individual student, why are students doing so poorly?

This series attempts to answer these questions by examining the actual impact of pass-fail strategies and the harm they do to individual students, their communities, and the U.S. workforce. Unemployment and public assistance is especially prevalent among high school dropouts, who are disproportionately comprised of students who were socially promoted or held back.

This series starts with the admission of failure for the existing K-12 system and moves on to describe and promote concrete alternatives to retention and social promotion. Many of these alternatives consist of various types of targeted intervention for struggling students. Special attention has been given to realistic, cost-effective interventions that can be implemented in public schools with minimal disruption to other students.

To transform the U.S. K-12 system from its current reliance on a pass-fail system will require the integrated implementation of all of the strategies I advocate in this blog series. The solution must be as multi-faceted as the problem.

In light of the multiple problems affecting the K-12 system, I encourage the reader to consider a six-point strategy for eliminating the pass-fail system and for qualitatively improving the efficacy of the U.S. public education system. Click here to see those points.

Posted on

Pass or Fail: Multi-Age Classrooms — The Verdict

pass or fail

In this multi-part series, I provide a dissection of the phenomenon of retention and social promotion. Also, I describe the many different methods that would improve student instruction in classrooms and eliminate the need for retention and social promotion if combined effectively.

While reading this series, periodically ask yourself this question: Why are educators, parents and the American public complicit in a practice that does demonstrable harm to children and the competitive future of the country?

As outlined in all of the strategies for ending grade retention and social promotion considered so far, there is a need for substantial and systemic change, not just an end to the specific policies regulating retention and social promotion. Indeed, the strategies discussed in this series are not exclusively or even primarily concentrated on the ending of grade retention and social promotion; these problems are merely symptoms of a greater disease. The true focus should be upon putting an end to the graded education model and the related problems of standardized assessments and graded curriculum; problems that hamper student learning, often leaving the most vulnerable and the most talented of our students without a place in the educational system.

It is clear that multi-age classrooms can be an opportunity for developmentally appropriate, innovative, creative, and engaging educational opportunities. The multi-age classroom also has tremendous potential as an educational approach if supported by skilled, qualified, and dedicated professionals in various capacities.

It bears repeating, though, that an added layer of engagement, challenge, and innovative thinking is needed before a multi-age classroom can be implemented that is both effective at achieving specified educational goals for all students and maximizing learning for individuals.

Many aspects of development relate to socialization, behavior, communication, and physical development. Students in schools need the opportunity to work on these other areas of development as much as they need the opportunity to develop intellectually and academically. Students need to be able to interact appropriately with their peers and with adults. Behavioral considerations come into play both with emotional and social developments.

Given that there is evidence of the benefits of multi-age classrooms with specific reference to these areas, it seems one of the added benefits of the educational model must be that graduating students are not only better prepared academically; they are also better equipped with opportunities to mature socially and emotionally. Behavioral problems may be more effectively addressed in the multi-age classroom setting, affording students better opportunities for engagement that come with exposure to more mature students.

What will it take for multi-age classrooms to become a reasonable norm, though? It starts with parent and teacher support of the idea and also calls for research on best practices. From there, multi-age classrooms with strong potential can be formed as a positive way to avoid retention or social promotion – and all the baggage those practices carry.

 

Posted on

Pass or Fail: Preparing Teachers, Parents and Administrators for Multi-Age Classrooms

pass or fail

In this multi-part series, I provide a dissection of the phenomenon of retention and social promotion. Also, I describe the many different methods that would improve student instruction in classrooms and eliminate the need for retention and social promotion if combined effectively.

While reading this series, periodically ask yourself this question: Why are educators, parents and the American public complicit in a practice that does demonstrable harm to children and the competitive future of the country?

Any large change in K-12 education in America will need backing from teachers and parents.

Both of these stakeholders tend to lack full understanding of the multi-age education, though. Parents often express resistance when faced with the possibility of switching to a multi-age classroom. Teachers also tend to indicate that they have not received adequate training to be confident teaching multi-age groups. The two problems tend to go hand in hand, and parents also worry about the multi-age environment because of the potential issues with instruction quality.

Parent education and teacher education are thus two crucial components of a successful multi-age classroom system, especially one on the scale envisaged here; one that will replace the graded approach and, among other things, remove grade retention and social promotion from the American public-education system.

The processes for parent and teacher education are different, and the focus of the education must likewise be different. Parent educa­tion and teacher preparation are essential but must, to be effective, target the respective groups independently. Parents must be educated about the multi-age classroom and its benefits and challenges from an educational perspective. They must receive information and support to help them understand not only what the benefits and challenges are, but also what the process will be for the implementation of a multi-age classroom.

It is necessary to make sure that parents have the opportunity to be involved in the process of reviewing implementation plans for establishing multi-age classrooms as the standard for education in America’s public schools. Furthermore, the elements of curriculum and teacher training and support should be understood by parents. Parents must be reassured that teachers will be able to meet the needs of all students.

It has been stated that age-balanced classrooms containing students of a similar level cannot be achieved easily if parents do not fully understand and support the philosophy it depends on upon, and this should also be a consideration in the implementation of a multi-age strategy.

Teachers, for their part, must be educated and prepared to manage multi-age classrooms and given intensive support to maintain an appropriate level of professional development over time. It is not enough to promise that there will be support available. The support must be in place and made use of effectively. Honesty and accountability are key factors.

As in any other educational environment, students may not enjoy optimal benefits from multi-age classrooms if teachers cannot implement best practices. In this instance, students may not enjoy the benefits of the educational model if teachers don’t have the ability to put differentiated instruc­tional strategies, environments, and assess­ments in place. Offering professional-development workshops on multi-age edu­cation and supporting differentiated instruction for teachers, as well as providing detailed information for parents, can help students implement multi-age programs successfully.

Learning from both current and past issues, alignment of the multi-age program with curriculum must be emphasized at all points of contact. Multi-age classrooms are often not aligned with graded and curriculum-centered educational agendas in the United States, and this contributes to the challenges of making the necessary shift.  One of the greatest difficulties for administrators looking to implement the multi-age pro­gram in traditionally organized schools is that they have to operate two different programs in one school or have to operate a program that is incompatible with the legal state and federal requirements of accountability.

Administrators, like parents and teachers, must be supported to make the shift and go beyond what has been acceptable in the past, in a bid to “make room” for multi-age classrooms. Whereas school administrators have gone about creating space for multi-age classrooms in the past, trying to force them into what already exists, administrators must instead be supported in creating multi-age classrooms that exist outside the graded system. Based on research, some of which is mentioned above, there is little argument that multi-age classrooms cannot fit within the traditional graded school system. To make multi-age classrooms benefi­cial to all students, administrators should envision the classrooms as a “school within a school.”

School administrators must do more than apply multi-age education as a quick-fix solution for the underserved or for those who are not succeeding in the traditional classroom. Multi-age classrooms should not be used as a dumping ground but should be considered, as part of an established multi-age program, to be something more substantial. Indeed, administrators must essentially revise their thinking to ensure that multi-age classrooms are seen as the best option for providing students with an excellent education.

Finally, there is the problem of federal and state accountabif5lity and how the existing systems of accountability depend on standards, assessments, and school performance accountability. Creating a K-12 education system that emphasizes the achievement of all students and the academic, social, and emotional development of students is crucial, but also something that cannot be rushed. The accountability issues currently manifest as supports for a system that emphasizes the achievement of the “bubble kids,” or stu­dents just below the passing rates or cut scores on standardized testing.

Of course, there should be an emphasis on students who are on the outside of the distribution of abilities, whereas the current emphasis is at the expense of students in these bounds. The lowest achievers and high-ability students don’t have a place with the current model, and creativity and innovation, of course, are lost in the drive to have students demonstrate a level of minimum competency.

Shifting to multi-age classrooms should also concentrate on this notion of providing individual students with access to challenging but developmentally appropriate instruction. More than this, though, there should be a clear effort to embrace the potential for creative and innovative learning. The opportunities for this learning and the obvious need for it should be emphasized as one of the principal reasons for the shift to multi-age classrooms.

The need to embrace the true principles of education is central to all the benefits, challenges, and subsequent recommendations for multi-age classroom development and management.

 

Posted on

Pass or Fail: Obstacles in Multi-age Classroom Development

pass or fail

In this multi-part series, I provide a dissection of the phenomenon of retention and social promotion. Also, I describe the many different methods that would improve student instruction in classrooms and eliminate the need for retention and social promotion if combined effectively.

While reading this series, periodically ask yourself this question: Why are educators, parents and the American public complicit in a practice that does demonstrable harm to children and the competitive future of the country?

In a lot of ways, multi-age classroom options in our schools make a lot of sense, and research backs that up. Like any part of the educational puzzle, however, there are some complications.

Having single-age and multi-age classes in a single school can result in some inequality, according to research. Better teachers, more advantaged students, and other factors that go into a better education can lead to the sense that students in multi-age classrooms are superior to those in single-age classrooms.

On the other hand, some schools tend to use multi-age classrooms as a sort of graveyard for students who are deemed to be falling too far behind. Such students are the same as those who would be impacted by retention or social promotion policies, but using multi-age classrooms for this purpose is not at all consistent with the guiding philosophy. It is hardly surprising, then, that the application of the model in this way can create low self-esteem in affected students.

Because of the above-mentioned factors, the ideal model of multi-age classrooms is not easily implemented and is not aligned with current regulations and policies. This should hardly be surprising. However, even with these various limitations, there are countless reports of the successful application of multi-age classrooms. Schools that operate multi-age classrooms effectively do so by planning ahead, taking the time to properly introduce the program to parents, and ensuring that teachers are educated and have plenty of ongoing professional development.

Although the multi-age classroom is not perfectly aligned with the current policies, many schools have implemented multi-age classrooms. They have also shown rapid progress by doing so in the correct way, ensuring that the multi-age philoso­phy and child-centered approach are central considerations.

Current grade-based academic standards and high-stakes testing are designed to correlate to curriculum-centered instruction, but it is hopeless to apply the same curricula or even to use the same grade-based academic standards and tests to teach or assess a diverse group of students. It is already clear that this grade-based approach and the use of high-stakes testing neglect the needs of many students, including high and low achievers. An alternative curriculum and assessment model is needed. Alternative academic standards are needed, together with a focus on multi-age classrooms. Indeed, the application of multi-age philosophies to classrooms and implementing differentiated teaching strategies allows teachers to meet the needs of all students.

According to the research, certain student demographics reap the greatest benefits from multi-age classrooms. The demographic that benefits most is one that has both disadvantaged students and high-ability students. In other words, the multi-ability element is important in the multi-age classroom, too. Of course, this creates a further problem. There are specific challenges to establishing and managing multi-age programs in high-poverty schools. It is difficult to organize classes to include a sufficiently diverse group of students in terms of ability. Careful planning can lead to success, however.

In particular, a clear benefit of multi-age classrooms is that struggling students can benefit from the resultant learning environment; an environment that is typically caring and supportive of diverse learning. High-ability students also benefit, however, because of the resultant variety and because opportunities are not limited to students who struggle academically. While the various programs for high achievers exist in a vari­ety of forms – and some of the examples mentioned in the research include after-school activities, summer camps, and honor classes – being involved in a diverse population of vari­ous ages is also important. Multi-age classrooms require the considered development of differentiated curric­ula and instructions. They require the development of a curriculum that is specifically designed to meet the needs of all students.

Precisely because of the relatively minimal current research on the outcomes and benefits of education, it is crucial that multi-age classrooms maintain consistency in its objectives and focus on the guiding philosophy of student-centered and project-based learning. Setting aside the mixed research from the mid-1990s, the importance of this is apparent, especially because of the wide range of ways in which multi-age education has been implemented historically.

It has been difficult for researchers to generalize about the academic impact of multi-age education because of the diversity of implementation strategies, and because of the natural shift away from what should be the basic focus and philosophy of the system. When implemented with an awareness of the best practices for management of multi-age classrooms, positive outcomes emerge and students have the opportunity to do well.

Outlining recommendations and requirements for multi-age classrooms, however, it is important to note as well that positive outcomes are not guaranteed. Certainly they are not guaranteed in the absence of appropriate administrative and instructional support, which must be implemented alongside a considered multi-age curriculum and classroom model.

High-quality research must to be done to assess not only the effects of multi-age education in a modern context, essentially updating the research that has already been done, but also to validate, through research and randomized control trial and quasi-experimentation, exactly what are the optimal procedures and policies for multi-age education. Research is needed, in other words, to determine precisely what the best practices for multi-age education ought to be. Research is also needed to determine exactly what type of curriculum would best serve the multi-age classroom environment, and how accountability in terms of academic standards and curriculum might be defined and implemented.

Researchers will also need to look at patterns for teaching language development, reading, and mathematics in multi-age classrooms, outlining what the expectations ought to be and how they ought to be defined. Assessment of the average accelerated gains of students in these areas within the multi-age classroom will also be a requirement. Armed with this information, though, multi-age classrooms have the potential to change outcomes for students in K-12 classrooms for the better.

 

Posted on

Pass or Fail: Hiring Qualified Teachers to Reduce the Need for Pass-Fail Systems

pass or fail

In this multi-part series, I provide a dissection of the phenomenon of retention and social promotion. Also, I describe the many different methods that would improve student instruction in classrooms and eliminate the need for retention and social promotion if combined effectively.

While reading this series, periodically ask yourself this question: Why are educators, parents and the American public complicit in a practice that does demonstrable harm to children and the competitive future of the country?

When it comes to getting rid of our current pass-fail system, I have developed six strategies (click to see them all). Hiring qualified teachers who know how to reduce the retention and social promotion rates through pedagogy is one of those points.

Research continues to show that good teachers are the single most effective factor in student success. Unfortunately, not all teachers are adequately prepared to address the rising standards of education in the modern world. The problem lies not so much with the teachers themselves as it does with their lack of training and their lack of access to teaching resources. To avoid both retention and social promotion, teachers must be better prepared. Moreover, they must expect to continue to prepare themselves throughout their careers.

Because the hiring of quality teachers is the second step outlined in our program for change, it is particularly important that the time frame for educational transition be a prominent element of the reform process. On the surface, the hiring of “qualified” and “competent” teachers seems easy enough and should be something that schools are already doing. The problem is that the hiring – and retention – of teachers reflects the standards of a dysfunctional system. While it is probably too harsh to say that schools have no-one to blame but themselves for the teachers they now have, it is certainly true that the effectiveness of teachers in the U.S. public school system is unlikely to improve until hiring standards are revised to reflect the requirements of multiage classrooms, individual interventions, alternative assessment procedures, and other elements of individual-based education. Moreover, schools must be prepared to implement retraining programs for teachers who were selected on the basis of existing pass-fail, age-graded standards. It is not enough, or even fair, simply round up anyone suspected of incompetence.

It stands to reason that if students are changing, teachers need to change too. More specifically, the education that teachers receive needs to be modified to meet the needs of modern K–12 classrooms. There are policy and practice changes taking place all over the world – many driven by teachers – that address the cultural shifts in the classroom. Some of the more promising recent developments in the educational world include the following items:

Subject-specific recruiting by colleges and universities. The book Teaching 2030, written by 13 experts in K-12 classroom pedagogy, calls for education schools to stop admitting anyone so long as they have some education major. Instead, the experts suggest that colleges become more selective to meet the actual needs of today’s students. Young people who want to teach in high-demand subject areas like mathematics, bilingual education, the physical sciences and special education should be given a higher priority by admissions boards of teaching colleges. Such a needs-based philosophy addresses actual voids in the industry and produces teachers who are better equipped to meet students’ needs.

Virtual learning options. Although online college courses have been around for years, K-12 education has also begun to provide distance learning options for students in some areas. During the 2010-2011 school year, 1.8 million students in grades K-12 were enrolled in some distance learning program. That is up from just 50,000 in the 2000-2001 school year, according to the International Association for K-12 Online Learning. This is a trend that teachers-to-be simply cannot ignore. Virtual learning is not reserved only for those who can afford it; 40 U.S. states have state-run online programs, and 30 of those states provide statewide, full-time K-12 schools online. The University of Central Florida is one of the only schools to offer a virtual-school emphasis for education majors that lets students apprentice with Florida Virtual School instructors.

Public education in America needs teachers who are better trained to meet the needs of specific student populations, who understand the necessary role of distance learning, and who are willing to speak up for making real change in the classroom. Without such teachers, it is unlikely that social promotion and retention can be replaced by individual-based learning.