How do multigrade teachers manage monograde resources?
(a UK study)
Adapted and partially re-written with permission from Jude Stringer,
Nottingham Trent University, School of Education, UK. (Master’s degree dissertation, 2005)
by
Anita Pincas
Senior Lecturer, Lifelong Education and International Development [LEID]
Institute of Education, University of London
<http://www.ioe.ac.uk/english/Apincas.htm>
<http://www.ioe.ac.uk/english/OET.htm>
SUMMARY
In this interview study, multigrade teachers were asked how they manage to effectively teach
their classes using monograde resources. The classes involved teaching at least two year groups
for the entire day. Results noted refer only to the 13 teachers interviewed, who between them
had 48 classes, and are not necessarily representative of all UK multigrade teachers. The study
includes reference to the literature on the subject from a range of sources.
Overview
The teachers described a variety of methods mostly including
- adapting government strategies into their own long and medium term plans,
- teaching year groups concurrently or consecutively
- combining similar subject units.
Most teachers organise their students by ability, and then try to foster independent learning.
This study found that monograde resources are of limited use in the multigrade setting.
Frequently, several teachers work in cramped multi-purpose rooms, one school has no playing
field, the very small schools do not have separate halls or dining rooms and many of the
respondents work without the added assistance of adult classroom support. The results show that
multigrade teachers require assistance from advisors and the government who have nothing to
offer to this increasingly common educational setting of mixed ages and levels within the same
class. It is very important to note that the teachers were noted to have a number of special
qualities necessary for effective teaching of multigrade classes in the given circumstances.
UK conditions
Multigrade teaching is found most commonly in “small” schools where, from economic
necessity, there are fewer teachers to enable single-grade, or monograde, class formation.
(Veenman 1995) Very little research about multigrade teaching in England exists, and nothing
seems to be known of multigrade teacher qualities or skills. What research there is focuses on
pupil attainment in multigrade classes compared to pupils in monograde classes for example
Gaustad (1992), Katz (1992), Veenman (1995) and Cotton (2002), who all came to the
conclusion that achievement in multigrade classes appears to be no different from achievement
in monograde classes. British research also investigates small schools’ competence in meeting
National Curriculum standards and delivery (Galton and Patrick 1990, Vulliamy and Webb 1995,
Hargreaves, Comber and Galton 1996, Hayes 1999).
More recent research in 2004 by Dr. Chris Berry of the Institute of Education in London,
Learning and teaching in Multigrade setting, found that opportunities and problems within his
target group were the same as found by previous researchers – Galton and Patrick (1990),
Hargreaves et al (1996) and Hayes (1999). Berry (2004) reported that 38% of the schools in a
“typical” London authority who responded to his questionnaire, operated some mixed-age
classes - a slightly larger percentage than the 32% found by Bennett et al in1983 – and this
i
means approximately 1200 children in any one authority are likely to be in mixed-age classes.
In other words, many teachers are working in multigrade settings.
Literature focusing on multigrade teaching and learning is not extensive. In industrialised
countries such as the U.S.A., Canada, The Netherlands and England most students enter school
at the official school entry age and progress through grades. The vast majority will progress in
monograde classes, the ideal which dominates the basis of school organisation in the twentieth
century, but increasingly children are being taught in multigrade classes formed by falling roles
rather than by choice. In the United Kingdom in 1997/98, 6.3% of schools enrolled less than 50
children thus giving rise to multigrade teaching. In rural areas with scattered populations the
incidence of small schools with multigrade classes in England in 1999 was 3.5%. Multigrade
classes are a reality in most countries. (Ibid)
There exists a variety of terms for classes where children of mixed ages are taught together.
Veenman (1995) distinguishes between multigrade classes where children form two or more
grades are taught by one teacher in one room at the same time whilst retaining their respective
grade levels, and multiage classes where children are deliberately mixed for educational reasons.
Most research on multigrade teaching focuses on its effectiveness and its impact on student
learning compared to those pupils in monograde classes. (Gaustad 1992, Katz 1992 and 1995,
Kinsey 2001, Cotton 2002) .
Planning for multigrade classes requires much more time and effort than for single grade
teaching. (Veenman 1995, Mason & Burns 1995, Vulliamy & Webb 1995, Hayes 1999)
Veenman (1995) expands on specific problems encountered by multigrade teachers: lack of time
for adequate teaching of certain subjects, lack of time for the preparation of classroom materials,
keeping up with the marking, the need to attend to one grade whilst instruction is given to the
other(s), the greater workload, lack of time for individual remediation and lack of time to deal
with parental concerns. Mason and Burns (1995) quote teachers who spoke about “twice the
work and planning,” “stressful,” “problematic” dealing with more than one curriculum and
“You’re very busy every minute.” (p41) Vulliamy and Webb (1995) highlight the problems of
instigating a rolling four year long term plan for Key Stage 2 (KS2) classes in order to avoid
repetition.
Hayes (1999) comments that multigrade classes provide a specific challenge for teachers’ ability
to plan, organise, manage and monitor children’s work but later in his report notes that the
complex decisions and demands placed on these teachers, although heavy, are not
“unmanageable for an experienced teacher.” (p106) He does not, however, define
“experienced.” Hay and McBer found that experience does not necessarily make an effective
teacher. My research will try to discover if the multigrade teacher does or does not need more
experience to be effective.
One of the issues raised by several researchers of multigrade teaching is the lack of training for
teaching these classes. Veenman (1995) found that more than 80% of the respondents in his
research had not had any training whatsoever in multigrade classroom teaching. Little (1995)
states that for children to learn effectively in multigrade environments the teachers need to be
well-trained, well-resourced and hold positive views towards multigrade teaching. She found
that many of the multigrade teachers are either untrained or trained in monograde pedagogy,
have few, if any, teaching/learning resources and consider multigrade teaching as the poor cousin
of the better resourced monograde classroom.
Berry (2001) confirms that multigrade schools are common in many parts of the world
particularly in sparsely populated areas but that multigrade teaching is often neglected in texts on
curriculum and in teacher training programmes because it is seen as peripheral to the education
ii
process. He also concurs that multigrade schools face a range of challenges to their
effectiveness, including resourcing and teacher quality.
Little (2001) refers to the inattentiveness of education officers to the needs of multigrade schools
as the “invisibility” of multigrade teaching. She writes that the knowledge required to work
effectively within the multigrade setting appears not to be transmitted via textbooks on
curriculum and teaching methods, via syllabi, teacher’s guides, nor via the content and pedagogy
of teacher training at colleges and universities. These absences lead her to state that the
knowledge, orientation and attitude required for effective multigrade teaching are “invisible.”
This invisibility can lead to neglect. Curricula are not designed for use by teachers in multigrade
schools, few countries have specific teacher training for multigrade and there is a lack of basic
facilities in these schools as multigrade teaching in England occurs predominantly in small
schools who have lower budgets but who are still expected to deliver the full National
Curriculum.
Most of the research regarding the effectiveness of small school is American. Large-scale
quantitative studies in the 1980s and early 1980s firmly established small schools as more
productive and effective than small ones. Lee and Smith (1995) confirmed that students learn
more and better in small schools and that disadvantaged students perform far differently in small
schools and appear more dependent on them than more fortunate students. Stockard and
Mayberry (1992) found that students behave better in smaller schools. Howley (1994) noted that
size has a unique influence on students’ academic accomplishment: the larger the school, the
lower the students’ achievement levels.
Ofsted (2000) reported that in terms of overall quality of education, pupils in small schools are
not disadvantaged when compared with those in larger schools and that small schools are equally
capable of providing an effective education and many are the most effective in the country. If
this is the case then I would propose that teachers in small schools teaching multigrade classes
are somehow different from their colleagues in monograde schools.
This study
In accordance with recommendations by Dr Berry (2004 – above), the aims and objectives of the
present study were to interview multigrade teachers to:
 Determine how multigrade teachers manage monograde resources
 To what extent are teaching materials adapted for use in the multigrade classroom and by
whom.
 Do multigrade teachers need special kills over and above those identified as effective
teaching skills for monograde classes?
This report used small schools following the Ofsted (1999) definition of up to 100 pupils, and
very small schools have less than 50. These schools all operate multigrade teaching out of
economic necessity. (Veenman 1995). The research results provide insight into multigrade
teaching in England and shed light on a practice that operates almost invisibly within a
monograde system.
First, multigrade teachers manage monograde resources in a variety of ways. The National
Literacy and Numeracy Strategies are adapted by the teachers themselves, and the national
league tables but Ofsted (2000) confirm that small schools are producing results as good as, and
often better, than monograde schools.
Second, existing monograde schemes of work are of necessity adapted to fit the ages of the
children to be taught. Materials are also produced by the teachers themselves. All of the
interviewees indicated that their job would be much easier and their workload lighter if they
iii
could have pre-made multigrade schemes of work. Many schools are compelled to work with
minimal resources restricted by low budgets.
Finally, multigrade teachers have many special skills and qualities. A special section is devoted
to this below.
Recommendations arising from this research are that:
 Training for multigrade teaching should be included in all teachers courses;
 In-service training and advice for multigrade teachers is urgently needed;
 Multigrade courses for supporting advisors is urgently needed
 Education authorities should review education budgets for small schools;
 Multigrade curricula and resources ought to be provided by government.
The most common formation found in multigrade schools is three classes mixed in terms of age,
one combining years 1 and 2, another combining years 3 and 4 and a final one combining years 5
and 6. Foundation classes, previously known as reception and pre-reception, and involving 3
and 4 year olds, in the small schools were accommodated in their own designated area or
classroom and staffed with both a nursery teacher and a nursery nurse.
Aware of the ever-increasing workload for teachers, the Department for Education and Skills
(DfES) (2003a) introduced Workforce Remodelling in January 2003 to relieve teachers of basic
administration jobs in the classroom and release them to teach but only one of the schools visited
was able to provide such time for the teaching staff. The demands on teachers in these small
schools have therefore not diminished and they continue to work an average of more than sixty
hours a week. Storey and Sisson (1993) comment that even small schools may incorporate
multilayered, interconnecting roles and responsibilities. All of the teachers I interviewed carry
out a multitude of other tasks as well as teaching. Mason and Burns (1995) quote a multigrade
teacher as saying, “You’re very busy every minute.” Multigrade teachers have more demands on
their time than monograde colleagues.
In numeracy lessons children are grouped according to ability and each school had a maths
scheme that can be used for children to work at their own pace and level. Some interviewees
aimed the work at one single year group on alternate days, others included numeracy for all year
groups every day. One respondent said, “I make the children fit.”
Literacy is delivered in a similar way to numeracy – all aspects of the National Literacy Strategy
are met. Sentence and word level objectives are delivered to small groups or individuals. Those
teachers with four year groups in their class indicated that literacy schemes are inadequate
because they do not appeal to a wide age and ability range. Some decided to each one year group
objectives one year and the other year group objectives the next. These teachers spend
considerable time searching for relevant and appropriate material, as the monograde literacy
resources do not provide for the multigrade setting. One respondent commented: “Most of the
schemes are boring anyway.”
Subjects other than literacy and numeracy are delivered in several ways depending on school
policy or in some cases class teacher preference. All the interviewees told me that science is
taught over a two year plan; those with two year groups concentrated on one year group
objectives one year and completed the other year group objectives the following year. Those
with four year groups combined similar themes to be taught concurrently over two years, the
input for the younger children acting as revision for the older children.
iv
For other subjects most teachers use a two year rolling programme and all but one is working to
construct a four year rolling programme in order to incorporate subjects being introduced in the
near future – citizenship and a modern foreign language – and to avoid repetition.
Only the larger schools have dedicated multigrade classrooms, and often a hall used as a dining
room as well as playgrounds and a field for Foundation children. But very small schools are not
so fortunate, as classrooms have to serve many purposes – worship, dining, the meeting, concerts
and so on. One said “The children become expert furniture movers.”
With the introduction of the Primary Strategy (DfES 2003a) all lessons must include an element
of I.C.T. All children in the very small schools receive the full I.C.T. entitlement using the
classroom sited computers. All the schools involved in this research were well equipped with
computer software and all have at least one interactive whiteboard. Without exception, all
respondents thought that laptop computers available to every child in the classroom would
greatly help with I.C.T. curriculum delivery.
Not one of the respondents received any training for multigrade teaching during their initial
teacher training or later. At one training event, the course leaders announced at the beginning
that ”most of this will not apply to those of you in multigrade classes.” Visiting advisors were
unable to provide any help or hints, and one teacher said they “really don’t know anything about
multigrade teaching”.
Katz (1990) suggests that teachers of multigrade classes need: more preparation, more training,
more resources and more support and understanding. Gaustad (1992) and Katz (1992) accept
that teaching in multigrade classes makes greater demands on teachers’ time and organisational
skills than teaching in single grade classes. A Netherlands team (Veenman et al 1987, Roelofs et
al 1994, Veenman & Raemaekers 1995) concluded that staff development on the theory and
practice of multigrade classes increased teachers’ instructional and management skills, their use
of materials and space, how to deal with disturbances and improved pupil behaviour particularly
their time on task. Despite these positive findings the researchers note that there were no
significant achievement differences between trained and untrained teachers.
Ofsted (2000) comment that the quality of education in small schools and hence multigrade
schools is often the most effective in the country. One of the schools in this study was
consistently the top primary school in the county’s league table.
Skills and Qualities for Effective Multigrade Teaching
Specific qualities and skills required of multigrade teachers like patience, adaptability, super
organised, flexibility, enthusiasm, good managerial skills and a variety of ways of approaching
problems, have been identified by researchers as qualities found in all effective teachers.
[Getzels & Jackson (1963), Flanders (1970), Rosenshine (1971) Berliner and Tickenhoff (1976),
Borich (1988), Mortimore (1988), Kyriacou (1991), (Galton (1995) Hay and McBer (2000) and
Muijs and Reynolds (2001)]
However, this study found several that seem to be multigrade specific. These are the ability to:
 teach all ages and levels and to know where the children are going i.e. to be fully
conversant with the whole primary curriculum;
 adjust one’s language to suit the target group;
 maintain focus at all times;
 be prepared for, and cope with, constant interruptions;
 maintain high levels of stamina;
 manage thorough planning and organisation;
v





keep a sense of proportion;
be realistic about what can be achieved;
multi-task;
differentiate extensively;
maintain concentration and never “switch off”.
Resources that would improve the multigrade teacher’s job were, in some cases, related to the
building and space available, since multigrade teaching self-evidently needs more space to
operate effectively because of paired and group work. It almost goes without saying that they
need books, practical equipment designed to be used in multigrade schemes of work and
containing suggestions for wide differentiation. All respondents waned more help in the
classroom, e.g. full-time, classroom support.
Multigrade Classroom Organisation
Fifty percent of respondents group pupils according to ability but others work in age groups with
paired work within those. One teacher keeps the class mixed at all times, believing that it boosts
confidence and enables peer assistance. One teacher uses a small whiteboard for each year group
so that the children have their own reference. Another teacher commented that the children have
to become independent learners very early. Monograde teaching is viewed as an easier option as
there are fewer objectives to concentrate on at the same time. Nevertheless, research by
Veenman (1995) Katz (1995) and Kinsey (2001) all point to the advantages gained by children in
multigrade setting.
The growing complexity of educational institutions means that even relatively small primary
schools may incorporate multilayered, interconnecting roles and responsibilities. All this means
that effective staff planning and development are essential prerequisites for achieving and
maximising goals, especially in multigrade classrooms. (Storey & Sisson 1993)
Many teachers, however, have concerns about threats to professionalism, unclear targets,
uncertain rewards, evaluation difficulties and lack of time. Such concerns can be overcome with
effective long-term management support for staff and setting and achieving specific targets.
Macaulay and Cook (1994) recommend that headteachers must have a good understanding of
what motivates their staff, provide regular feedback and decide on appropriate rewards and
incentives. Management is about achieving long-term goals and yet the overwhelming pressure
on most people is to handle the day-to-day tasks efficiently. Goals without deadlines are often of
no real use, targets negotiated with recommended guidelines are possible.
The classroom environment has great effects upon student learning (Smith 1996, 1998) Ample
workspace, comfortable furniture, windows, temperature, lighting and decoration are some of the
aspects identified by Godefroy and Clark (1989) as conducive to more productive performance.
vi
References
Adair J. (1988) Effective Time Management, London: Pan Books Ltd.
Audit Commission (1985) Audit Commission Handbook: A Guide to Economy, Efficiency and
Effectiveness, London: Audit Commission
BeardwellI. & Holden L (2001) (3rd edn) Human resource Management: A Contemporary
Approach, Essex: Pearson Education Ltd.
Bell J. (1999) (3rd edn.) Doing Your Research Project, Buckingham: Open University Press
Bell L. (2000) The Management of Staff: Some Issues of Efficiency and Cost-Effectiveness, in
Coleman M & Anderson L. (eds) (2000) Managing Finance and Resources in Education,
London: Paul Chapman Publishing Ltd.
Bennett N. O’Hare E. & Lee J. (1983) Mixed age Classes in Primary Schools: a survey of
practice, British Educational Research Journal, 9(1) 41-56
Berliner D.C. & Tickenhoff W.J. (1976) The California Beginning Teacher Evaluation Study:
overview of the Ethnographic Study, Journal of Teacher Education 27, 24-30
Berry C. (2001) Achievement effects of multigrade and monograde primary schools in the Turks
and Caicos Islands, International Journal of Educational Development 21 (6) 537-552
Berry C. (2004) Mixed Age Classes in Urban Primary Schools: Perceptions of Headteachers,
available at www.ioe.ac.uk/multigrade/fulltext10beryymixedage/htm [Accessed 12 January
2005]
Borich G.D. (1988) Effective Teaching Models, Columbus OH: Merrill
Borich G.D. (1996) Effective Teaching Methods, 3rd edn, New York: Macmillan
Bouri J & Barker-Lunn J. (1969) Too Small to Stream, London: NFER in England and Wales
vii
Brophy J. & Good T.L. (1986) Teacher Behaviour and Student Achievement in Wittrock M. (ed)
Handbook of Research Teaching 3rd edn. New York: Macmillan
Carr W. & Kemmis S. (1986) Becoming Critical: Education, Knowledge and Action Research,
London: The Falmer Press
Cohen L., Manion L. & Morrison K. (2004) Research Methods in Education, 5th edn., London:
RoutledgeFalmer
Cole G.A. (1997) (4th edn) Personnel Management, London: Continuum
Coleman M & Anderson L (eds) (2000) Managing Finance and Resources in Education,
London: Paul Chapman Publishing Ltd.
Cotton K. (2002) Non-Graded Primary Education, Close-up No 14. Available at
www.nwrel.org/scpd/sirs/7/cu14.html [Accessed 20th August 2004]
Covey S.R. (1992) The Seven Habits of Highly Effective People, London: Simon & Schuster Ltd.
Croll P. & Hastings N. (eds) (1996) Effective Primary Teaching, research-based classroom
strategies, London: David Fulton
Cross P & Moses D. (1988) Teaching methods and Time on Task in Junior Classrooms,
Educational Research 30(2) 90-97
DfEE (2000) Performance Management: Guidance for Governors, London: Department for
Education and Employment
DfES (January 2003a) Excellence and Enjoyment: A strategy for primary schools, London:
Department for Education and Skills
DfES (June 2003b) Raising Standards and Tackling Workload: Implementing the National
Agreement, London: Department for Education and Skills
Fidler B., Russell S. & Simkins T. (1997) Choices for Self-Managing Schools: Autonomy and
Accountability, London: Paul Chapman Publishing Ltd.
Fitzpatrick K.A. (1982) The effect of a secondary classroom management training programme on
teacher and student behaviour, Paper presented at the AERA Annual Meeting, New York
Flanders N. (1970) Analysing Teacher Behaviour, Reading: Addison-Wesley
Forward B. (1988) Teaching in the Smaller School, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
Galton M. & Croll P. (1980) Pupil progress in basic skills in Galton & Simon (eds) Progress and
Performance in the Primary Classroom, London: Routledge & Kegan Paul
Galton M & Patrick H (eds) (1990) Curriculum Provision in the Small Primary School, London:
Routledge
Galton M. & Simon B, (1980) Progress and Performance in the Primary Classroom, London:
Routledge and Kegan Paul
viii
Galton M. (1995) Crisis in the Primary Classroom, London: David Fulton
Gage M.L. (1963) Handbook of Research on Teaching, Chicago: Rand
Gaustad J. (1992) Nongraded Primary Education. Eric Digest, Number 74, ID ED347637
Available at www.ericfacility.net/ericdigests [Accessed 20th August 2004]
Gertzels J.W. & Jackson P.W. (1963) The Teacher’s Personality and Characteristics in Gage
M.L. (ed) Handbook of Research on Teaching, Chicago: Rand McNally
Godefroy C. & Clark (1989) The Complete Time Management System, London: Guild
Good T.L. & Grouws D. (1979) The Missouri Mathematics Effectiveness Project: an
experimental study in fourth grade classrooms, Journal of Educational Psychology 71(3) 355362
Gorard S. (2001) Quantitative Methods in Educational Research: the role of numbers made easy,
London: Continuum
Goss D. (1994) Principles of Human Resource Management, London: Routledge
Hargreaves L., Comber C. & Galton M. (1996) The National Curriculum: can small schools
deliver? British Educational Research Journal 22(1) 89-99
Hayes D (1999) Organising for Learning in Mixed Age Classes: a case study about a multi-task
lesson, Curriculum 20(2) 100-109
Hay/McBer (2000) A Model of Teacher Effectiveness, report to the Department for Education
and Employment, London: DfEE
HMI (1990) Standards in Education 1988-89, London: DES
Hopkins D. (2002) A Teacher’s Guide to Classroom Research, (3rd edn.) Berkshire: Open
University Press
Hopkins D., Ainscow M. & West M (1994) School Improvement in an Era of Change, London:
Cassell
Howley C. (1994) The academic effectiveness of small-scale schooling (an update) Eric Digest
No ED 372897
Hughes D. (1973) An experimental investigation of the effects of pupil responding and teacher
reacting on pupil achievement, American Educational Research Journal 10(1) 21-37
Hughes M., Ribbins P. & Thomas H. (1985) Managing Education: The System and the
Institution, London: Holt, Rinehart & Winston
James C. & Colebourne D (2004) Managing the performance of staff in LEAs in Wales,
Educational Management, Administration & Leadership, Vol 32 (1)
James C & Philips P. (1997) Markets and Marketing, in Fidler et al (1997) (eds) Choices for
Self-Managing Schools: Autonomy and Accountability, London: Paul Chapman Publishing Ltd.
ix
Joseph, Sir K (1985) North of England Education Conference, 4th January, Chester
Joyce B & Weil M (1996) Models of Teaching, 4th edn. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: PrenticeHall
Joyce B., Calhoun E. & Hopkins D. (1997) Models of Teaching Tools for Learning, London:
Open University Press
Katz L.G. (1992) Nongraded and Mixed-Age Grouping in Early Childhood Programs, Eric
Digest, ID ED351148. Available at www.ericfacility.net/ericdigests [Accessed 20th August
2004]
Katz L.G. (1995) The benefits of Mixed-age Grouping, Eric Digest ID ED382411. Available at
www.ericfacility.net/ericdigests [Accessed 20th August 2004]
Kinsey S.J. (2001) Multiage Grouping and Academic Achievement. Eric Digest ID ED448935.
Available at www.ericfacility.net/ericdigests [Accessed 20th August 2004]
Kirkham G. (2004) The Role of the Subject Leader, London: Optimus
Kounin J. (1970) Discipline and Groups Management in the Classroom, New York: Holt,
Rinehart & Winston
Kyriacou C (1991) Essential Teaching Skills, Oxford: Basil Blackwell
Law S. & Glover D. (2000) Educational Leadership and Learning, Practice, Policy and
Research, Buckingham: Open University Press
Lee V. & Smith J. (1995) Effects of high school restructuring and size on early gains in
achievement and engagement, Sociology of Education, 68(4), 241-270
Levacic R. (1997) Managing resources in educational institutions: and open systems approach,
in Preedy, Glatter & Levacic (1997) Educational Management, Strategy, Quality and Resources,
Buckingham: Open University Press
Levacic. R (2000) Linking Resources to Learning Outcomes, in Coleman & Anderson (2000)
Managing Finance and Resources in Education, London: Paul Chapman publishing Ltd.
Little A. (1995) Multigrade Teaching: a review of practice and research, Serial No 12. Overseas
Development Administration, London. Available at
www.ioe.ac.uk/multigrade/fulltext1littlerevofrandp.htm [accessed 10th March 2004]
Little A. (2001) Multigrade teaching: towards an international research and policy agenda,
International Journal of Educational Development, 21(6) 481-497
Lock D & Farrow N (1988) The Gower Handbook of Management, Aldershot: Gower
Macaulay S. & Cook S. (1994) How to Improve Your Customer Service, London: Kogan Page
Mason D. & Burns R. (1995) Teachers’ Views of Combination Classes, The Journal of
Educational Research, 89 (1) 36-45
x
McCallum B (1999) Literacy in Four Effective Schools, School Leadership and Management
19(1) 7-24
McClelland A. (1991) Small Primary Schools: Aspects of Education No. 44, Hull: University of
Hull
Mertens D.M. (1998) Research Methods in Education and Psychology: Integrating diversity with
quantitative and qualitative approaches, London: Sage
Miles M.B. & Huberman A.M. (1994) (2nd edn) Qualitative Data Analysis, London: Sage
Molander C & Winterton J (1994) Managing Human Resources, London: Routledge
Mortimore P, Sammons P, Stoll L. Lewis D. & Ecob R. (1988) School Matters, Wells, Somerset:
Open Books
Mortimore P. (1994) School effectiveness and the management of effective learning and
teaching, School Effectiveness and School Improvement 4(4) 290-310
Muijs D. & Reynolds D. (1999) School effectiveness and teacher effectiveness: some
preliminary findings from the evaluation of the Mathematics Enhancement programme. School
Effectiveness and School Improvement, 11(3)
Muijs D. & Reynolds D. (2001) Effective Teaching: Evidence and Practice, London: Sage
Muijs D. (2004) Doing Quantitative Research in Education with S.P.S.S. London: Sage
Nonaka I. (1991) The Knowledge Creating Company, Harvard Business Review Nov-Dec Vol.
69
Nuthall G & Church J (1973) Experimental studies of teacher behaviour, in Channan G. (ed)
Towards a Science of Teaching , London: NFER
Ofsted (1993) Achieving Good Behaviour in Schools, London: Ofsted
Ofsted (1995) The Ofsted Handbook: Guidance on the Inspection of Secondary Schools, London:
Ofsted
Ofsted (1999) A Review of Primary Schools in England, 1994-1998, London: Office for
Standards in Education
Ofsted (2000) Small Schools: How Well Are They Doing? London: Office for Standards in
Education
Oppenheim A.N. (2003) (New Edition) Questionnaire Design, Interviewing and Attitude
Measurement, London: Continuum
Perrott E. (1982) Effective Teaching, Essex: Longman Group Limited
Peterson P. & Walberg H (1979) (eds) Research on Teaching, New York: Macmillan
Pollard A. Broadfoot P. Croll P., Osborne M. & Abbott D. (1994) Changing English Primary
Schools? London: Cassell
xi
Polyani M (1967) The Tacit Dimension, London: Routledge
Powney J. & Watts M (1987) Interviewing in Educational Research, London: Routledge
Preedy M. Glatter R & Levacic R. (1997) Educational Management, Strategy, Quality and
Resources, Buckingham: Open University Press
Pressley M., Goodchild F., Fleet J. & Zajchowski R. (1989) The challenges of classroom strategy
instruction, Elementary School Journal 58(3) 266-278
Reason P. & Rowan J. (1981) (eds) Human Enquiry: A Sourcebook in Paradigm Research,
Chichester: Wiley
Reynolds D. & Muijs R.D. (1999a) The effective teaching of mathematics: a review of research,
School Leadership and Management 19(3) 273-288
Reynolds D. & Muijs R.D. (1999b) Numeracy Matters; contemporary policy issues in the
teaching of mathematics. In Thompson (ed) Issues in Teaching Numeracy in Primary Schools,
Buckingham: Open University Press.
Richards C (1988) Curriculum and Pedagogy in Key Stage 2: a survey of policy and practice in
small rural primary schools, The Curriculum Journal 9(3) 319-331
Roelofs E. Veenman S. & Raemaekers J. (1994) Improving instruction and classroom
management behaviour in mixed-age classrooms: Results of two Improvement studies,
Educational Studies, 20(1) 106-126
Rosenshine B. (1971) Teaching Behaviours and Student Achievement, IEA Studies, No. 1,
Slough: NFER
Rosenshine B. (1979) Content, time and direct instruction In Peterson P & Walberg H. (eds)
Research on Teaching, New York: Macmillan
Rubin I. (1985) Artistry and Teaching, New York: Random House.
Ryan D. (1960) Characteristics of Teachers, American Council on Education, Washington D.C.
Simkins T. & Lancaster D. (eds) (1988) Managing Schools, Managing School Resources, Milton
Keynes: Open University Press
Simkins T (1997) Managing Resources in Fidler, Russell & Simkins (eds) (1997) Choices for
Self-Managing Schools: Autonomy and Accountability, London: Paul Chapman Publishing Ltd.
Smedley D. (1995) Marketing secondary Schools to Parents – some lessons on the research on
parental choice, Educational Management and Administration, 23(2) 96- 103
Smith A. (1996) Accelerated Learning in the Classroom, Stafford: Network Educational Press
Ltd.
Smith A. (1998) Accelerated Learning in Practice, Stafford: Network Educational Press Ltd.
Smith C.J. & Laslett R. (1993) Effective Classroom Management, 2nd edn. London: Routledge
xii
Stockard J. & Mayberry M. (1992) Effective educational environments, Eric Digest No. ED
350674
Storey J & Sisson K. (1993) Managing Human Resources and Industrial Relations,
Buckingham: Open University Press
Strauss A. & Corbin J. (1998) Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for
Developing Grounded Theory, London: Sage
Stronge J. H. (2002) Qualities of Effective Teachers, Alexandria VA: Association for
Supervision and Curriculum Development
Teachernet (2004) Mixing It, available at www.teachernet.go.uk/teachingandlearning [Accessed
21st August 2004]
The Independent (24 June 2004) (Online Edition) No Room to be Small, available at
http://education.co.uk/schools/story.jsp?=534492 [accessed 8th January 2005]
Tesch R. (1990) Qualitative Research: Analysis Types and Software Tools, London: Falmer
Press
Veenman S. (1985) Active Learning Time in Mixed Age Classes, Educational Studies 11(3)
171-180
Veenman S. Lem P. & Voeten M. (1987) Time-on-task in mixed-age classes, Journal of
Classroom Interaction, 23(2) 14-21
Veenman S (1995) Cognitive and Noncognitive Effects of Multigrade and Multi-age Classes: A
Best Evidence Synthesis, Review of Educational Research 65 (4) 319-381
Veenman S & Raemaekers J (1995) Long term effects of a staff development programme on
effective instruction and classroom management for teachers in multi-grade classes, Educational
Studies 21(2) 167-185
Veenman S. (1996) Effects of Multigrade and Multi-age Classes Reconsidered, Review of
Educational Research 66(3) 323-340
Vulliamy G & Webb R. (1995) The Implementation of the National Curriculum in Small
Primary Schools, Educational Review, 47(1) 25-41
Walls R.T. (1999) Psychological Foundations of Learning, Morgantown WV: WVU
International Centre for Disability Information
Watkins R. & Derrick D (1980) Educational Disadvantage in Rural Areas, Manchester: Centre
for Information and Advice on Educational Disadvantage
Waugh D. (1991) Implementing Change in the Small Primary School, in McClelland A (ed)
Small Primary Schools: Aspects of education, Hull: University of Hull
Wellington J. (2000) Educational Research: Contemporary Issues and Practical Approaches,
London: Continuum
xiii
Winstanley D & Stuart-Smith K. (1996) Policing performance: the ethics of performance
management, Personnel Review 25(6) 66-84
Wittrock M. (1986) Handbook of Research Teaching, 3rd edn. New York: Macmillan
Wood I.D. (1988) Your Time Management in Teaching, London: New Education Press Ltd.
Wragg E.C. (1984) (ed) Classroom Teaching Skills, London: Croon Helm
Wray D., Medwell J., Fox R & Poulson L. (2000) The Teaching Practices of Effective Teachers
of Literacy, Educational Review 52(1) 75-84
xiv