DeWayne A. Mason

“Simply No Worse and Simply No Better” May Simply Be Wrong: A Critique of Veenman’s Conclusion About Multigrade Classes

Although Simon Veenman’s (1995) synthesis of research on multigrade and multi-age classes contributes important definitions and findings to the literature, his assessment of the effects of multigrade classes—the more common of these classroom structures—ignores two key factors: (a) selection bias and (b) lower-quality instruction. The omission of these two key factors and Veenman’s implicit advocacy of multi-age classes and cross-grade grouping render his no-difference conclusion problematic. In this article, we critique Veenman’s conclusion and explanations, and argue that selection bias and lower-quality instruction should be included as part of the explanation for his no-difference finding. We conclude that multigrade classes have at least a small negative effect on achievement as well as potentially negative effects on teacher motivation. We suggest that researchers examine more carefully the conditions under which student achievement and affect may be fostered in this classroom structure.

Class Composition and Student Achievement in Elementary Schools

Principals and teachers sometimes intentionally use class formation procedures to create class compositions. This study examined the class distributional properties of 200 elementary school classes in two school districts. Fifty-six classes were combination classes—classes with students from two grade levels. The two districts differed in their policies toward gifted and talented classes and in principals’ preferences for heterogeneous student assignment. Students completed pretest measures of ability and independence and posttest measures of achievement. Hierarchical linear modeling procedures were used to estimate composition effects. The major findings were that (a) principals and teachers assigned higher ability and more independent students to combination classes; (b) these purposeful assignment procedures affected the class distributional properties and how achievement variation was allocated within and between classes; and (c) composition effects were observed for both ability and independence in the district with a commitment to gifted and talented classes, and these composition effects were strongest in combination classes. It is argued that evidence on both student assignment rules and substantive mechanisms for compositional effects are needed to properly interpret regression coefficients relating outcome to pretest in classroom studies.

Reassessing the Effects of Combination Classes.

ABSTRACT This article reviews the research on combination classes–an often debated grouping structure in which students from two or more grades are placed with one teacher for most or all of the school day. Because researchers and disseminators of research have generally overlooked key distinctions between combination classes and their most common counterparts–single‐grade and multiage/nongraded classes–we begin by distinguishing combination classes, formed as a result of imbalanced or inadequate enrollments, from single‐grade classes, formed as a part of traditional schooling, and multiage/nongraded classes, formed as a result of pedagogical or philosophical interests. We show that conclusions about the effects of combination classes are confounded by (a) the merging of combination class studies with those that included several multiage/nongraded components, and (b) the slighting of a unique and important feature of combination classes–the assignment of certain types of students and teachers to these cla...

Class Formation and Composition in Elementary Schools

This study examined the class formation procedures used in 22 elementary schools from two districts, as well as the influence these procedures had on the class composition of 200 classes, 56 of which were combination classes (classes with students from two grade levels). Principals were interviewed about their procedures for assigning students to classes, and students completed pretest measures. The major finding was that principals, in an effort to ease the burden that combination classes placed on teachers, assigned higher ability and more independent students to these classes, a strategy that raised the ability level of combination classes but lowered it in adjacent single-grade classes. This study suggests that it may be profitable to conceptualize both elementary and secondary school student assignment procedures as the same mechanism, a mechanism that creates particular K–12 curricular paths for students.

Effects of Two-Group and Whole-Class Teaching on Regrouped Elementary Students’ Mathematics Achievement:

The effects of two models of active teaching and active learning on the mathematics achievement of 1,736fourth-, fifth-, and sixth-grade students in 81 classrooms in which teachers used within-grade regrouping were compared: a whole-class model that provided for student diversity through ad hoc remediation and enrichment on a daily basis with small groups (referred to as whole-class ad hoc teaching) and a two-group model that accommodated diversity through fixed within-class ability groups. Nine schools from a midwestern district were matched and randomly assigned to treatment conditions. Treatment teachers received three 90-minute workshops on an active teaching and active learning model consisting of 16 key instructional behaviors. Dependent variables consisted of computation, concepts, problem-solving, and mental mathematics measures. Results showed that students in whole-class ad hoc classes scored significantly higher in mathematics computation than control-group students taught using within-class ability grouping. Observational data explaining these differential effects are presented and discussed.

An Observational Study of Small-Group Mathematics Instruction in Elementary Schools

This article reports a naturalistic study of small-group instruction in elementary school mathematics classes. Three school districts from three cities (a small suburban city, a large urban city, and a middle-sized city) in three midwestern states were studied. Observations (N = 206) of entire mathematics periods were made in the classrooms of 33 teachers (primarily fourth-, fifth-, and sixth-grade) in 21 schools. This article describes the types of small-group formats observed, the variation in teachers’ use of time in 12 teaching functions, and the extent to which group structure and use of teaching functions affected the task climate in which students learned mathematics. Six types of small-group formats were found: whole-class ad hoc, two groups, three groups, four groups or more (mixed-size groups), heterogeneous work groups (cooperative learning), and individualized grouping.

Toward a Theory of Combination Classes.

ABSTRACT This rejoinder replies to Veenmans (1997) critique of our (Mason & Burns, 1997a) literature review conclusion that combination classes lead to at least small negative effects. Veenman argues that his reviews (1995, 1996) lead to a conclusion that combination classes are “simply no worse and simply no better” than single‐grade classes. In our response, we identify and discuss the major disagreements we have with Veenmans findings, assumptions, and explanations. Veenmans conclusion, we explain, is hampered by a narrow reading and interpretation of the literature that appears to focus (a) too heavily on faulting teachers for failing to capitalize on the “potential positive effects” of combination classes, and (b) too lightly on interview research, observational studies, and a theory that would explain how the no‐difference achievement effects occurred.

Grouping Students for Elementary School Mathematics: A Survey of Principals in 12 States

ABSTRACT In this study I explored how elementary school students are initially assigned to homeroom classrooms (criteria used and heterogeneous vs. homogeneous grouping), subsequently assigned to mathematics classes (e.g., self‐contained, regrouped, departmentalized), and grouped for mathematics instruction within classes (e.g., whole‐class, two groups, individualized). This three‐dimensional typology of school and classroom organization was used to survey 571 elementary school principals from 12 states. Results showed that students were generally assigned to heterogeneous self‐contained homeroom classes, that they remained in these same classes for mathematics, and that mathematics was usually taught to entire classes (whole class). Within‐class ability grouping, within‐grade regrouping, and departmentalized plans were used increasingly for mathematics at the intermediate grades, but across‐grade or Joplin Plan programs were infrequent.