Report of the Palisades
Multiage Study Committee
April 8, 2015
Committee Members
Marie Collie
Leslie Mueller
Scott Davis
Danny O’Donnell
Chris Garr
Tamara Rambo
Janet Link
Dawn Smigo
GeriAnn McLaughlin
Rich Spering
Ad Hoc Members
Donna Holmes and Kate Kieres
In the 2014/15 school year, the Superintendent directed that a committee be formed to review
multiage education in the Palisades School District. A committee, composed of three elementary
principals, three parents (one from each elementary school), and three teachers with multiage
experience (one from each elementary school) was formed. The Director of Curriculum and
Instruction was assigned as a resource to the committee, as was the middle school assistant
principal, who was to serve in the role of statistician for the committee. The committee was
charged with the following tasks:








Review what the literature says about best practices in multiage education
Identify non-traditional class configurations used in Palisades over the past 5 years
Identify the academic impact of multiage classrooms in Palisades School District
Identify the social impact of multiage classrooms in Palisades School District
Elicit perceptions of Palisades multiage experiences/programs
Identify the financial impact of multiage configurations in Palisades School District
Discuss how standards-based systems impact multiage classrooms
Identify considerations for the future of multiage or other non-traditional class
configurations in Palisades
The full committee met monthly from October 2014 through March 2015 to accomplish its
mission. A subcommittee system which met outside of the regularly scheduled monthly meetings
was also incorporated. The committee operated through a consensus process, with the
elementary principals rotating as facilitators and recorders of the committee’s work. This report
is a summary of the completed work of the committee.
A Brief History of Multiage and Other Nontraditional Classrooms in
Palisades
Multiage classrooms have been a part of Palisades Elementary Schools for the past 15 years.
They were implemented when the district was involved in a state initiative focused on
developmentally appropriate practices (DAP). Their implementation came about after extensive
study, visits to other districts, and work with DAP consultants. They were primarily focused on
primary students, as developmentally appropriate practices were emphasized for students from
birth to age 8. Other variants of providing children with a multi-year experience with the same
teacher were also implemented during that time, including combo classes and looping
teachers/classes. While these non-traditional grouping patterns were most typically used in
grades 1-3, there was a 3/4 and 4/5 multiage program in effect at DN for two years.
1
Non-Traditional Classroom Grouping Patterns Used in Palisades Over the
Past 5 Years
Over the past 5 years, several forms of primary non-traditional classroom grouping patterns,
which were dubbed as “multiage”, were used across the district. These classes incorporated two
grades of children, and typically included daily delivery of two years of curriculum. In many
instances, students spent two years (and 2 grades of school) in these classrooms with the same
teacher. These classes were as follows:
2009/10 – (2) 1-2 Multiage Classes at DN
(2) 1-2 Multiage Classes at T
2010/11 – (2) 1-2 Multiage Classes at DN
(1) 1-2 Multiage Class at T
(1) 1-2 Multiage Class at S
2011/12 – (1) 1-2 Multiage Class at DN
(1) 2-3 Multiage Class at S
2012/13 - (1) 1-2 Multiage Class at DN
(1) 1-2 Multiage Class at T
2013/14 – (1) 1-2 Multiage Class at DN
(1) 1-2 Multiage Class at T
178 Palisades students were identified as having participated in one of these classrooms over the
past 5 years, with 85 of these students participating in a “multiage classroom” for two years, and
the remaining 93 students participating in a “multiage classroom” for one year.
Today’s Multiage Classroom
Teachers of the current grade1-2 multiage classroom at DN and Tinicum were asked to describe
their current instructional/curricular practices. They were described as follows.
Reading-We teach both the first and second grade full curriculums complete with flexible guided
reading groups, based on the Storytown series. We use work centers for skill reinforcement.
Technology is also used to target instructional needs and provide reinforcement.
2
Math- We teach both the first and second grade full curriculums, based on the Everyday Math
series. We use work centers for skill reinforcement. Technology is used to target instructional
needs and provide reinforcement.
Writing- We teach writing from the second grade curriculum, sometimes using separate
checklists and rubrics for first and second graders. We give first and second grade district-wide
assessment prompts, respectively.
Science and Social Studies – We teach the first grade curriculum one year, and switch to the
second grade curriculum the following year.
Specials- Our first and second graders take gym and music together. They separate for Art,
Spanish, and Library.
Field Trips – The primary classes within the building go on field trips together.
Supports:



3 paid curriculum days for multiage teachers to meet and develop curriculum/practices
during summer of 2014
As available, additional reading support to conduct guided reading groups in the
multiage classroom
As needed, a monthly day of curriculum, planning, and assessment release time from
classroom
Study of Current Research in Multiage Classrooms
A search was conducted to find the most recent research on multiage classrooms/practices. While
much of the research is over 10 years old, the committee did locate and discuss a few more
recent articles. These included:



“The Advantages and Disadvantages of Multiage Classrooms in the Era of NCLB
Accountability”, Song, Spradlin, and Plucker, 2009, Indiana University, Center for
Evaluation and Education Policy, Education Policy Brief, Volume 7, Number 1.
“The Slowdown of the Multiage Classroom: What Was Once a Popular Approach Has
Fallen Victim to NCLB Demands for Grade Level Testing”, Pardini, 2005, School
Administrator, Volume 26, Number 3.
“Multiage Programming Effects on Cognitive Developmental Level and Reading
Achievement in Early Elementary School Children”, Fosco, Schleser, and Andal, 2004,
Illinois, Reading Psychology 25:1-17.
3
Student Achievement
Palisades Multiage Statistical Study 2014-2015:
The Numbers:
5 years reviewed (2009 through 2014)
Entire population near 700 student scores reviewed
Multiage sample 178 students, 85 students participated for two years
23 data points compiled and analyzed:
7 data points from Grade 1—fall/spring math and reading MAP, District Reading Assessment (DRAlevel/accuracy/rate)
7 data points from Grade 2—fall/spring math and reading MAP, DRA
9 data points from Grade 3—fall/spring math and reading MAP, DRA, and PSSA—math and reading
46 statistical tests were run at the 0.05 level of significance:
14 hypothesis tests were run on 7 data points for mathematics—3 tests revealed significance
32 hypothesis tests were run on 16 data points for reading—11 tests revealed significance
Statistical Significance simply means that the differences in the sample mean and population mean are
unlikely to have occurred by chance. Significance offers no sense of correlation or causality.
Statistical Significance is based on z-scores which are found using a mathematical formula utilizing the
sample mean, population mean, standard deviation and sample size. The z-score is a measurement of
the relationship between the sample mean and the population mean indicating whether it is above or
below such mean and by how many standard deviations.
14 tests yielded significance:
Grade 1 fall math MAP—multiage scored significantly better than non-multiage:
RIT MEANS:
Multiage
Non-multiage
Entire population
Grade 1 fall math MAP
165.7
163.6
164.2
4
Grade 3 spring math MAP—multiage scored significantly worse than both non-multiage and the entire
population:
RIT MEANS:
Multiage
Non-multiage
Entire population
Grade 3 spring math
MAP
204.2
208.3
207.8
Grade 1 spring reading MAP—multiage scored significantly better than both non-multiage and the
entire population:
RIT MEANS:
Multiage
Non-multiage
Entire population
Grade 1 spring reading
MAP
181.2
177.3
178.3
Grade 3 spring reading MAP—multiage scored significantly worse than the non-multiage: (increase in
variance)
RIT MEANS:
Multiage
Non-multiage
Entire population
Grade 3 spring reading
MAP
201.4
204.4
204
Grades 1, 2, and 3 spring DRA levels—multiage scored significantly better than both non-multiage and
the entire population:
DRA MEANS:
Multiage
Non-multiage
Entire population
Grade 1 DRA level (20)
19.9
17.8
18.3
Grade 2 DRA level (30)
32.2
28.9
29.8
Grade 3 DRA level (40)
39.7
38.4
38.7
5
Grade 1 spring DRA rate—multiage scored significantly better than both the entire population and
non-multiage:
DRA MEANS:
Multiage
Non-multiage
Entire population
Grade 1 DRA rate
(WPM)
75.4
67.9
70.1
32 tests yielded no significance:
Including 3rd grade PSSA reading and math tests:
MEANS:
Multiage
Non-multiage
Entire population
Grade 3 PSSA reading
1415 (high proficient)
1407 (high proficient)
1409 (high proficient)
Grade 3 PSSA math
1407 (advanced)
1400 (advanced)
1401 (advanced)
6
Perceptions of Multiage Programming in Palisades
Parent Perceptions
An online survey was sent to parents in the Palisades School District to gather perceptions of the
multiage program and perceptions of student achievement in multiage and traditional
classes. The survey was sent to 624 families who had children attending Tinicum, Springfield or
Durham Nockamixon elementary schools between 2009 and 2014, a time in which multiage was
offered at each school.
There were 69 respondents (11% response rate) and the following is a breakdown of that total:



28 parents experienced 2 years in multiage
12 parents experienced 1 year of multiage
29 parents experienced a traditional style classroom
A combination of multiple choice and open-ended questions were posed and responses were
analyzed to find common themes regarding both multiage and traditional style classrooms. The
following themes were prevalent throughout the survey:

Parents amongst the three schools were somewhat split in their overall experience of the
multiage program. 22/40 (55%) felt that reported a positive experience, 2/40 (5%)
reported a neutral experience, and 16/40 (40%) reported a negative experience.

Parents expressed the importance of being given the opportunity to choose between
traditional or multiage style classrooms. There were numerous negative comments
regarding multiage from parents who were not given the option of making a decision as
to which type of classroom their child entered. Of the 13 respondents who did not
choose the program but had children placed in the program, 10 shared negative
perceptions of the program.

Parents were concerned about the lack of communication regarding the multiage
program; not enough information is provided about how the classroom operates. More
details about what is being offered in a multiage environment needs to be presented was a
common request. Many negative comments voiced in the survey regarding multiage
stemmed from those parents who felt they were given little or no details regarding the
multiage program.
- 32/69 (46%) of respondents felt that they did not receive enough information
about the program
- 26/69 (38%) of respondents felt that they received adequate information about
the program
7
- 11/69 (16%) of respondents were neutral about the amount of information they
received about the program

There was an overwhelming response regarding the teacher’s role in the multiage
experience. Many parents chose multiage due to the teacher assigned to the classroom
and felt that their child succeeded in multiage because of the teacher’s ability to
successfully handle a multiage format. There were also positive comments regarding
their child’s ability to transition successfully from their first year in multiage to the
next. Having the same teacher two years in a row provides stability and is a positive
aspect of multiage for many parents. The majority of traditional parents who said the
teacher had “no influence on their decision” felt that way because they were against
multiage; in their opinion they would not have chosen a combo class no matter who was
teaching it. 17/21 (81%) of parents who chose the 2 year multiage stated that they did so
because of the teacher, while only 7/27 (28%) of parents who chose traditional stated
that they did so based on the teacher.

Of the 40 respondents whose children had participated in a multiage classroom, 28/40
(70%) reported that the teacher was able to meet the child’s learning needs in the
multiage setting, 4/40 (10%) indicated neutrality in this statement, and 8/40 (20%)
reported that the teacher was unable to meet their child’s learning needs in the multiage
setting.

Parents whose child participated in multiage felt that their child experienced positive
social bonds and friendships that thrived due to the varying ages of students found in a
multiage setting. Parents also reported a strong student-teacher relationship as well as
parent-teacher relationship in a multiage setting. Academically, parents recognized an
increase in student achievement, leadership skills and in the ability of their child to work
independently. Reported positives of multiage were as follows:
-Strong Positive Student/Teacher Relationship – 24/40 (60%)
-Positive Attitude Towards School – 17/40 (43%)
-Strong Positive Parent/Teacher Relationship – 16/40 (40%)
-Increased Student Achievement-16/40 (40%)
-Increased Self Esteem – 13/40 (33%)
-Being Part of a School Family- 10/40 (25%)
A few others added comments indicating increased leadership skills (n=2), social growth
(n=4), and being with a teacher for two years (n=3) as additional positives about the
program. Two people noted that they did not check any benefits because they didn’t feel
8
any of these options were specific to multiage and could easily apply to a traditional
classroom.

Several parents (n=13)voiced concerns regarding the course work offered in the second
year of multiage; they felt there was repetition between the first and second year
curriculum and therefore second grade in multiage is a review. They feel their child is
limited academically because they are in a multiage class; many parents felt the work was
too easy in the second year and that their child spent too much time helping the younger
kids. There were also parent concerns that children who participated in multiage were
playing “catch-up” in third grade. Socially there is also a transitional concern amongst
parents: When second year multiage students rejoin their third grade peers, they are a
smaller group and therefore become the minority upon reentry. Reported negatives of
multiage were as follows:
-Work too easy the second year – 13/40(33%)
-Too much time helping younger kids – 12/40 (30%)
-Too much independent work – 9/40 (23%)
-Pressure to compete – 3/40 (8%)
-Work was too challenging – 1/40 (3%)
A few others added comments indicating a first grade advantage (n=5), lack of structure
in the classroom (n=3), not getting the full attention of the teacher (n=5), teacher change
(n=4), difficulty transitioning to third grade (n=4), 2 years of the same curriculum (n=7),
socially negative (n=2), and curriculum too diverse (n=2) as disadvantages of the
program.

20/28 (75%) of parents reported that their child preferred being the oldest in the 2 year
multiage program. This coincides with data that the second year was too easy
academically and more social.

Our survey questioned parents of students who only participated in one year of multiage
to see if there was any effect of having the program only one year. 9/12 (75%) of parents
reported that their child was unaffected by having only the one year. However, parents of
students who experienced two years of the program tended to identify an average of 3
program benefits, while parents of children who spent only one year in the program
tended to identify only 2 program benefits. We also know from the survey that having an
increased teacher/student relationship, most likely due to having the same teacher two
years in a row, was the number one benefit. People also hand wrote that having the same
teacher 2 years in a row is a positive benefit, and that switching teachers is a negative and
distressing change. Children noted that being the oldest was the preferable option which
9
one year multiage students may not have experienced. Therefore, parents may be
unaware that their child was affected.
In Conclusion to the Parents Perceptions:
After receiving the results of the survey, we were surprised by how integral the teachers were in
the parents’ multiage perspective. In the future, we feel it would be beneficial to readdress the
parents and ask them questions about the program itself without the teacher being part of the
equation. Because we could not alter our survey at this point, we went through the handwritten
comments to see if some information was conveyed specifically about the program. 11/40 people
wrote that the program itself did not work, but the teachers that made the class work. 11/40
people ( with 5 people overlapping from the previous 11/40) stated that they would like to see
multiage discontinued in the district.
Teacher Perceptions
Six Palisades teachers who have taught multiage over the past five years were included in the
survey. The survey was open-ended in nature. Five teachers typed their answers to the survey
questions and one preferred to be interviewed, with the committee member recording her
responses.
Teacher Selection

3/6 teachers stated they were recruited by their principals to teach multiage, but they also
felt obligated to take the assignment. 2/6 teachers were directed they were going to teach
multiage even though they did not want the assignment. They had no choice. 1/6 teacher
stated she was recruited by her principal and agreed to it.
Experience and Certification of Multiage Teachers


Half had fewer than 10 years of experience and the other half had 10 or more years of
experience. 5/6 teachers had a master’s degree and some had credits beyond master’s.
After reviewing the varied experiences and education level of the multiage age teachers,
there was no relationship between the education/experience of a teacher and her opinions
about multiage.
Professional Development Related to Multiage Instruction

2/6 teachers attended a two day workshop over 15 years ago regarding multiage practices.
5/6 teachers received one day or less of observing an in-house multiage classroom, a
book dating back to the 1990’s, and a half day every month to collaborate.
Teaching Philosophy Related to Multiage Experience
10

2/6 teachers describe their philosophy of education in a more teacher-directed fashion.
4/6 teachers described their philosophy of education in a more student-centered fashion.
Assignment of Students to the Multiage Classroom




Teachers reported that the parents were surveyed without a guarantee about their child’s
placement (traditional or multiage) and their preferences were honored for the most
part. There were a handful of students who were placed in multiage without informing
parents or giving parents a choice. This created some tension and concerns for everyone
involved.
In 2/3 schools some parents would ask their child’s kindergarten teacher for a
recommendation, but in the end it was the parent’s choice. In one of the schools some
parents would discuss multiage with their child’s teacher; however, if the teacher felt the
child was not a good match for multiage, then the child was not placed there.
There was nothing consistent regarding learning profiles across the three
schools. Considerations were made based on:
- academic performance
- ability to handle multiple groups
- ability to focus
- ability to be independent.
One teacher indicated that at risk students who would benefit from the consistency of a
two year program were offered placement in the multiage classroom. All students were
considered for multiage and participated in multiage.
Sizes of Multiage Classes

Multiage class size ranged from 18 to 29. At one of the schools there was initially a cap
on the numbers of students in multiage; however, the cap was abandoned. Some classes
were more or less half first graders and half second graders. Some classes were lopsided
(approximate ⅓ of a grade with ⅔ of the other). Ratios were based on overall gradelevel.
Instructional Materials Used

This varied between buildings. All teachers, however, stated that today it is very difficult
to have flexible groups between grade levels due to the curriculum, assessment schedule,
and standards based report cards.
Teaching of Other Subjects


Science and Social studies are taught to the whole group. One year the class experiences
the 1st grade curriculum, and the next year they experience the 2nd grade
curriculum. The curriculum is modified to meet student needs.
One school reports that students were to receive grade appropriate Science/SS
curriculum. The first graders were to go to the first grade for both subjects. The second
11


grade students were to receive instruction in SS/Science at the second grade level. In the
end, however, it was decided that all students would receive the second grade curriculum
due to schedule constraints and changing Science curriculum.
2/3 schools report that music and gym were taught as multiage classes. Spanish, Art, and
Library were done by grade level.
One school reported all students went to Specials together. Creative planning was
implemented by Specialist teachers to accommodate for students that essentially skipped
the first grade year of instruction so as not to repeat for the second grade students.
Provision and Use of Instructional Assistants

Each multiage class had a 5 ½ hour instructional assistant. 6/6 teachers reported that their
teaching assistants complete clerical work, remediate small groups of students, work oneon-one with struggling students, and teach formal lessons provided by the
teacher. Teachers expressed that it would be nearly impossible to implement a multiage
without a teaching assistant. (Traditional classrooms do not have a 5 ½ hour per day
instructional assistant assigned to them.)
Collaborating with Grade Level Partners

There were attempts to collaborate; however, it was difficult to manage due to time
constraints. At two schools, the multiage class would attend field trips with students in
the traditional first and second grade classes. In another school, multiage was included
with a specific grade level. (I.e. multiage 1/2 attended field trips with grade 2).
Planning and Preparation Procedures

Due to time constraints, most planning of the day’s activities were done by the classroom
teacher beyond the school day. During in-school prep time which occurred during
specials and/or lunch, most teachers communicated with the IA bringing them up to
speed with the lesson of the day and student behavior.
Successes





“Family” atmosphere
Ability for the older students to take on a leadership role
Benefit knowing students for more than one school year
Teachers were able to develop a strong family connection.
Made them grow as a teacher because they were willing to go deeper.
Challenges
Teachers feel multiage is overwhelming for these following reasons:


Little playing/working/learning together between the younger and older students.
Not enough direct instructional time with each grade level
12







Too much independent time working on their own or at centers
Time constraints
Creating meaningful center work to address two grade levels for a large portion of the
student day.
There is great difficulty managing two testing schedules
Excessive noise/distractions make it difficult to keep the children focused
Planning time is extensive
Too wide a range of student needs
To summarize, time constraints made it difficult to touch-base with all students daily and not
give “busy work” to students that were working independently (considering they were only 1st
and 2nd grade, doing meaningful AND independent work could be tricky). Also, following the
pacing of the specific curricular programs in place (EDM, ST, etc.) made it difficult to have a
true multiage class-where students learn at their own pace.
Accommodations/Modifications

Teachers revamped their centers to accommodate the varied abilities of all students. This
also served as a classroom management system. Teachers work(ed) very hard to create
meaningful and differentiated work for each student.
Acceptance of the Program by the Community

3/6 teachers felt the program was well accepted while the other 3/6 teachers did not feel it
was accepted at their school. Parents are aware that multiage is a way for the district to
accommodate ever-changing class size fluctuations in lieu of hiring more staff. The
feeling of acceptance at each school varied. It was agreed that there were areas that
proved difficult to accommodate multiage. For example, it is difficult for specialist
teachers to arrange their schedules to accommodate due to time constraints. One teacher
cited how she felt less valued by colleagues and administrators and therefore felt more
guarded.
Teacher Comparisons of Multiage and Traditional Teaching Experiences


3/6 teachers who were surveyed accepted their multiage teaching assignments and
recognize varying degrees of success.
ALL teachers agree it is easier to fulfill the required, grade-level curriculum in a
traditional classroom.
Student Perceptions
We reached out to the parents of 40 systematically-randomly selected former multiage students,
requesting their permission to conduct a brief face-to-face interview with their children.
13
Permission was granted for 33 (82% response rate) students to take part in the interview.
Seventeen of these students had taken part in a multiage classroom for grades 1 and 2, three had
taken part in a multiage classroom for grades 2 and 3, four had been part of a multiage classroom
for grade 1 only, six had been part of a multiage classroom for grade 2 only, and one had been
part of a multiage classroom for grade 3 only. Interviews were conducted by the elementary
principals. Interview trends are as follows.
Perceived Benefits of Multiage Classrooms (from presented list of commonly identified benefits)







2 students identified no benefits from the multiage classroom
22 students reported that a benefit of the multiage classroom was knowing their teacher
well, and their teacher knowing them well
13 students reported liking school more when they were in a multiage setting
11 students reported that being part of a classroom family was of benefit to them
9 students reported more individualized learning as a benefit of the multiage experience
5 students reported enhanced self esteem
5 students reported doing better in school
Perceived Drawbacks of Multiage Classrooms (from presented list of commonly identified drawbacks)





19 students identified no drawbacks from the multiage classroom
7 students reported that work was too hard the first year, and too easy the second year
2 students reported that there was too much independent work in the multiage classroom
2 students reported too much time spent helping younger students in the multiage
classroom
1 student reported comparing him/herself to/competing with older students
Best Memories of Multiage
Students were asked to share their best memory of the multi age experience. There were three
major themes to the memories: positive memories of the teacher, positive memories about
specific classroom experiences, and positive memories of having friends/partnering with students
who were older or younger than themselves, including getting help from and giving help to other
students.
Recommendations for Younger Siblings
Students were asked, based on their experiences, whether or not they would recommend a
multiage classroom to a younger sibling. 30 students responded” yes”, 1 student responded “yes
but for first grade only”, 1 student responded” no”, and 1 student responded “maybe.” Reasons
14
for “yes” responses included having the opportunity to learn from other students, more
individualized learning, getting advice from older kids, social connections, and giving and
getting help.
Financial Considerations
In studying multiage classrooms in Palisades over the past 5 years, it is notable that, while at
a majority of the time (8/11 times) the use of multiage saved money, multiage classrooms were
also implemented when it would have been more cost effective to run traditional classrooms
(3/11 times), and not hire instructional assistants to provide support. If primary class size was
desired to be 25 or fewer in grades 1 and 2, multiage classrooms realized a cost –savings for the
district in many years, as three teachers served the grade 1 and 2 students in each school, as
opposed to providing 4 teachers for 2 sections of first grade and 2 sections of second grade.
These cost savings were realized in the following locations and years:

2010-11: Springfield and Tinicum

2011-12: Durham Nockamixon and Springfield

2012-13: Durham Nockamixon and Tinicum

2013-14: Durham Nockamixon and Tinicum
The net savings in each case was the cost differential between a full-time elementary teacher and
a 6 hour per day instructional assistant. Additional savings were also realized by housing these
students in three classrooms as opposed to four classrooms, in terms of energy savings,
maintenance savings, etc.
It was only during two years that the multiage program cost more than traditional
programming, because two multiage sections were implemented along with one section
each of traditional 1st and 2nd grade classrooms. These years and locations were as follows:

2009-10: Durham Nockamixon and Tinicum

2010-11: Durham Nockamixon
Since each of these multiage classrooms also included a 6 hour per day instructional assistant, it
would have been more cost-effective to run traditional classrooms (two 1st grade classrooms, two
2nd grade classrooms) without instructional assistants.
15
IMPACT OF COMMON CORE STANDARDS ON MULTIAGE
CLASSROOMS
This issue was addressed in two of the three research articles read by the committee. In
summary, both articles indicated a belief that the standards movement has contributed to the
decline in the number of multiage classrooms across the United States for the following reasons:





True multiage classroom are philosophically rooted in developmentally appropriate
pedagogy, which is at odds with the standards movement
Having specific single grade level standards makes it much more difficult to be flexible
in curriculum and delivery models, and does not support a continuous progress model
that is integral to the multiage classroom
In a standards-based setting, individual grade level standards become goals, and classes
tend to function more as combination classes, with specific goals and curriculum for each
grade, rather than true multiage classes, which are focused on designing learning for each
child
Implementation of a standards-based system more easily aligns to a curriculum-focused,
rather than student-focused approach
For all reasons listed above, multiage teaching has become more difficult and more workintensive for the teacher
Still, both articles included the perspective that multiage classrooms can successfully operate in
today’s schools if they can be created as a “school within a school".
Committee Recommendations
Our study has revealed the benefits and drawbacks of current multiage classrooms in the
Palisades School District. We are concerned about continuing the program in its current format.
If the district wishes to continue with multiage programming, we recommend the following
changes:
Program
-Focus on grade 1-2 multiage programming for the present, as it is best supported in research and fits with
current standards
-Re-imagine the multiage program, focusing on the “school within a school” concept, developmentally
appropriate practices, and a learning continuum. Develop a clear vision for the program, and involve
teachers in the development of the program
16
-Do not create temporary multiage classrooms for financial reasons
-Provide relief from some of the standards-based mandates and protocols in order to allow the multiage
classroom to function as a more developmentally appropriate setting
-Ensure that enrichment opportunities /appropriate instructional time is devoted to children in the second
year of the multiage program
-Examine and support the transition of the students from the multiage classroom to the traditional
classroom
Teachers
-Consider teaching philosophy and grade level experience in multiage teacher assignments and focus on
placing child-centered teachers in these positions
-Provide training opportunities for teachers selected for multiage assignments, perhaps through partnering
with the multiage center at the University of Arizona
-Provide multiple teachers with training in multiage practices in order to allow teachers to rotate between
multiage and traditional classrooms
Communication
-Provide parents with the opportunity to indicate their preference/lack of preference for this environment,
so that they can be comfortable with their child’s placement. Once parents are asked their preference,
their opinions need to be seriously considered in the decision process.
-Increase information provided about the multiage program through websites, on-site programs,
curriculum sharing, a day in the life of a multiage student, etc.
17
APPENDIX A
Multiage Survey
We would like to thank you for taking the time to complete this survey. This survey
will help shape the future of multiage here at Palisades. It is your chance to make
the largest impact. We ask that you please answer each question as honestly and
openly as possible. This is an anonymous survey.
———————————————————————————————————————
Section 1:
General Student Background Information: Please circle the best answer
1. Gender: Boy Girl
2. Birth Order: Only Child
Oldest Child Middle Child Youngest Child Other
3. Month child was born:
4. Who helps child with homework? Mother
Father
Mother and Father Self-
sufficient
5.
Is there any other unique information you wish to share about your child.
18
———————————————————————————————————————
Section 2:
Multiage: Why or Why Not? : Please rate or answer the following questions (extra
space provided below if you care to elaborate):
6.** Did you feel that you knew enough about the multi-age program and what was
being offered prior to your child entering either a multi-age or traditional
classroom? ( 1 being you felt like you knew nothing and 5 being very confident in
your overall understanding.)
1
2
3
4
5
COMMENT BOX: optional
7.** How much did the reputation of the multi-age teacher influence your decision to
choose or not choose multi-age? (1 being no effect, 5 being you chose the class
primarily for the teacher)
1
2
3
4
5
COMMENT BOX: optional
19
8. What decision did you make for your child?
A. Chose Multiage
B. Didn’t choose Multiage (and wish you had)
C. Didn’t choose multiage (and was happy with the decision)
D. Chose multi-age and did not get in due to specific restrictions
If you chose option A please proceed to section 3; if you chose “didn’t chose
multiage” please go to question 9.
9. Please tell us why you chose either of the previous responses. (Didn’t choose but
wish you had/ was happy with decision)?
______________________________________________________________________
10. Why did you think your child would not have been a good fit for Multiage?
______________________________________________________________________
11. Is there anything else you would like to add, or think we should know concerning
the multiage classroom?
______________________________________________________________________
20
Thank you for your time and input! If your child did not take part in multiage then
you've completed this survey.
———————————————————————————————————————
Section 3:
The Multiage Experience: Please rate or answer the following questions (extra space
provided below if you care to elaborate):
12. Check the following drawbacks or benefits that you think applied to your
child’s experience with multi-age.
Benefits:
Enhanced student achievement
Higher self-esteem
Positive attitude toward school
Part of a school family
Strong positive teacher/student relationship
Strong positive teacher/parent relationship
Drawbacks:
Work was too challenging
21
Work was too easy the second year
Too much time was spent helping younger children the second year
Too much independent work required
Felt pressure to compete with younger or older children
If you would like to share additional benefits or drawbacks please use the comment
box.
COMMENT BOX: optional
13. How well do you think your teacher was able to meet your child’s learning needs
in a multiage setting? (1 being very poorly, 5 being exceeded expectations)
1
2
3
4
5
COMMENT BOX: optional
14. Did your child prefer being the youngest grade in multiage, the oldest grade in
multiage.
Youngest
Oldest
Only participated in multi-age for one year
15. Did your child get the full 2 year multi-age experience?
22
Yes
No
If you circled yes, please proceed to question 17.
If you circled no, please complete question 16.
16. Did you feel that your child was affected academically or socially by not
experiencing the entire 2 year program?
Yes
No
COMMENT BOX: optional
17. What was the best and worst part of your experience with multi-age?
COMMENT BOX: required
18.** If you could go back in time, would you still have chosen to put your child in
the multi-age class?
23
Yes
No
Why did you choose this answer?
COMMENT BOX: required
To help us in moving forward, please write anything else you think we should know
about multi-age based on your experience.
COMMENT BOX: optional
Thank you for your time and input! You have now completed the survey.
24
APPENDIX B
Teacher Survey -- Multiage
Use this survey to record your experiences with multiage classroom configurations over the
past five years. Please share your HONEST thoughts. We will use your feedback to help
determine the future of multiage in Palisades. THANK YOU!
1. How were you recruited or selected to teach multiage?
2. What teaching experiences did you have prior to multiage? What degrees &
certificates did you hold?
3. What professional development materials, experiences, and opportunities were
provided to you before you began the multiage assignment and during it?
4. How would you describe your teaching philosophy prior to your multiage
experience? How did it change as a result of it (if applicable)?
5. How were students assigned to your multiage? Please elaborate on the following
questions:
a. Was there a parent survey?
b. Was it based on teacher recommendation?
c. Were student learning profiles considered?
d. Were gifted and/or IEP students invited to participate?
6. How many students were enrolled in multiage and what grade levels were
included? Please include the ratio of each grade level. (e.g., Eight first graders and
twelve second graders were included for a total of twenty students. Class size was
capped at twenty students.).
7. Did all students work only on grade-designated material or did you vary materials
across grades based on student needs and abilities?
8. How were social studies and science handled? Specials?
9. Was a full time teaching assistant assigned to the multiage room? How did you use
your assistant?
10. Were you able to plan and coordinate materials with grade-level partners? If so,
what subjects/activities were collaborative?
11. When did your prep/planning time occur? Was there joint planning time with your
colleagues and/or teaching assistant (if you had one). If so, how was that time
used?
12. Based on your experiences, what were the greatest successes? Challenges?
13. What modifications had to be made (and to what extent) to accommodate all
students?
25
14. How well do you feel the program was received by families and staff? Do you feel
the program was an integral part of the school community? Please explain.
15. Overall, compare your multiage experience with your experience in traditional
classrooms.
26
APPENDIX C
Multiage Student Surveys
To be personally administered to 40 randomly selected students involved in the multiage program over
the past 5 years.
1.
How many years were you in the multiage class?
2.
What is your best memory of being in multiage?
3. Multiage programs have both benefits and drawbacks. Some of the possible benefits are doing
better in school, feeling good about yourself, more individualized learning, having a teacher who
knows you well (and knowing your teacher well), being part of a classroom family, and liking
school. Did you experience any of these benefits? Which ones?
4. Some of the possible problems of multi-age programs are work that is too hard the first year-too
easy the second year, too much time spent helping younger children the second year, too much
independent work, and comparing yourself older classmates. Did you experience any of these
drawbacks? Which ones?
5. We are studying the multiage program in Palisades, and the future of the program. Based on
your experience, if you had a younger brother or sister, would you recommend that they join a
multiage classroom? Why or why not?
27
28