Peter E. Pflaum - Golden Globe -

The Synergy Network

Wiredbrain Pflaump@wiredbrain.com

CHAPTER 2

SMALL SCHOOLS, EFFECTIVE SCHOOLS

Teachers in one-room schoolhouses almost never lectured.

These teachers knew that there wasn't much they could say

simultaneously to a roomful of kids of different ages and stages of learning. So teachers moved from one group of two or three students to another. Because they couldn't spend much time with any group, they usually assigned some work to each, making sure that the group had a pretty good idea of how to proceed.

Periodically the teacher would return to each group to make sure the work was being done correctly and to offer more help where it was needed. And teachers frequently asked students who'd mastered a particular task to help those who were still

struggling to learn it. What one-room teachers did out of necessity -- avoid teacher talk and get kids to learn on their own or in small groups -- is actually a superior way of getting them to learn (Shanker in Fiske, 1991, p. 90).

While evidence supports both sides of the large versus small school issue, there is reason to believe it is easier for small schools to be effective.

There are few small Florida public schools. This researcher, therefore, studied small Florida nonpublic schools.

The American nonpublic school universe consists of 26,712 schools. Most of these schools enroll less than 150 students (National Center for Education Statistics [NCES], 1992). In Florida there are about 1300 nonpublic

schools. Approximately 450 of these are elementary schools enrolling 50 or fewer students; or are combined elementary and high schools (K-12) enrolling 150 or fewer students (Florida Department of Education [FDOE], 1991).

There are not enough small nonpublic high schools in Florida to study. Chapter 3 describes this researcher's survey of 138 of these 450 small nonpublic Florida schools.

To evaluate effectiveness of the 138 schools, information from Hot Topics: Usable Research, Comprehensive School

Improvement (FDOE, 1990) was used.

The FDOE selected twelve characteristics to frame Comprehensive School Improvement: 1. Clear Goals

2. School-Focused Improvement

3. Strong Leadership

4. High Expectations

5. Focused Program of Instruction

6. Collaborative Decision-Making

7. Individual & Organizational Development

8. Order & Discipline

9. Maximized Learning Time

10. Parent/Community Involvement

11. Incentives/Rewards for Academic Success

12. Careful and Continuous Evaluation (FDOE, 1990, p. v). School improvement is often associated with the effective schools movement. Restructuring refers to fundamental and lasting changes. Information provided by the FDOE seeks to provide useable research to insightful educators so curriculum and instruction design can address the needs of Florida's diverse student population and thus enhance the education of all students (FDOE, 1990).

There are limitations to this research of 138 small nonpublic Florida schools. Personal visits to these schools would yield more accurate information and a more comprehensive picture. A longer questionnaire surveying a bigger sample would give fuller representation.

Small schools employ effective teaching practices, not necessarily because of special training or theoretical

orientation, but simply because of physical make-up of the organization.

The twelve characteristics identified by FDOE are inherent in small school structure. For example, in a class of ten students of multiple ages and stages of progress (a frequent educational situation in small schools), it is hard to lean on one's shovel and not be noticed. Conversely, in a traditional graded lecture- oriented classroom of 30 students, as long as one does not cause overt problems, unobserved shovel-leaning is more feasible (conversations with S. McKee, 1992). "It is not

impossible to have a good large school; it simply is more

difficult" (Goodlad, 1984, p. 309).

Multiage Perspective Foundations

Before the founding of public school systems, much formal American education took place in settings such as Dame schools, one room-schools, and homes with family hired tutors. Multiage grouping was inherent to these types of educational organization. Society, neighborhood, and family make-up typical of the times naturally involved children in multiage groups. Average American nineteenth century families were much larger than those of today. Infant mortality frequently caused wide differences in ages of siblings. Extended families often lived in the same

neighborhoods or homes. Commonly, children on the farm worked cooperatively with adults and siblings (Pratt, 1983, p. 8). In the eighteenth century, foreshadowing of graded schools can be seen through establishment in Boston of separate reading and writing schools. Both boys and girls attended these schools but were segregated by gender (Goodlad & Anderson, 1987).

Another step toward modern educational organization can be seen through the monitorial system where a teacher taught older students who then tutored younger groups. Student "monitors" also were responsible for discipline, record keeping,

examinations, and even promotion (Goodlad & Anderson, 1987; Ornstein & Hunkins, 1988).

After visiting Prussia in 1843 Horace Mann observed:

The first element of superiority in a Prussian school . . . consists in the proper classification of the scholars. In all places where the numbers are sufficiently large to allow it [emphasis mine] the children are divided according to ages and attainments, and a single teacher has the charge only of a single class . . . .

There is no obstacle whatever . . . to the introduction at once of this mode of dividing and classifying scholars in all our large towns (Mann, 1843, p. 84 in Pratt, 1983, p. 9). It is interesting to note, as emphasized above, the historical link between largeness and gradedness.

In 1848, five years after Mann's report of the Prussian method of educational age grouping, Quincy Grammar School was

established in Boston (Goodlad & Anderson, 1987; Pratt, 1983). This institution is widely considered the first graded school in the United States. Support for gradedness grew, becoming the "accepted wisdom" (Pratt, 1983, p. 9).

During the nineteenth century, belief of education for all increased.

There was pressure in the 1830's and 40's to enroll and socialize a giant influx of immigrant children (Radner, 1991). Establishment of normal schools helped unify educational ideas and practices. Growth in school attendance rates, teacher training, and popularity of new textbooks enhanced favor of gradedness. Enthusiasm for

The McGuffy Eclectic Readers (graded and illustrated) impacted on production of these texts as well as on production of numerous others. Motivated book salesmen seized opportunities to sell these materials to teachers who were often unskilled in determining book quality (Goodlad & Anderson, 1987).

The Lowell School Committee Report of 1852 compared logic of age grouping to logic of division of labor in industry:

The principle of the division of labor holds good in schools, as in mechanical industry. One might as justly demand . . . all operations of carding, spinning and weaving be carried out in the same room, and by the same hands, as insist that children of different ages and attainments should go to the same school and be instructed by the same teacher (Lowell School Committee Report of 1852 in Pratt, 1983, p. 9). Here lies the logic for our factory model of schooling.

In 1837 Horace Mann became secretary of the state board of Massachusetts; in 1843 Henry Barnard was assigned a similar position in Connecticut. John Dewey sees these two events as marking the beginning of our American system of public schools. Between 1837 and 1850 grew up all the most characteristic

features of the American public- school system: from this time date state normal schools, city training schools, county and state institutes, teachers' associations, teachers' journals, the institution of city superintendencies, supervisory officers, and the development of state universities as the crown of the

public-school system of the commonwealth (Dewey, 1903, p. 228). Here one sees foundations of our bureaucratic system of

schooling. Our modern classification system of elementary, secondary, and post-secondary divisions of educational levels was fairly well established by 1890. Age of entry to school was standardized through laws requiring school attendance (Pratt, 1983). Natural Grouping

David Pratt (1983) presents a case for nongraded multiage instruction by examining implications from anthropology, history, and education. In simple societies, Pratt found interaction between ages common. Heterogeneous groupings for a variety of purposes appear to be the norm. Such interaction often seems essential for natural development of the young.

Problems in implementing curriculum reform are increased by certain structural characteristics of schools including

homogeneous age grouping. A further obstacle is ability

classification, a practice intensified after the introduction of standardized testing around 1920.

An early attempt (1925) at instituting self-paced

individualized instructional programs is credited to Carleton Washburne, Superintendent of Schools, Winnetka, Illinois. Washburne saw variation in time as a necessary ingredient for success in learning. To master the same material, some students require more time than others. In adapting Washburne's system, however, many school boards resorted to "dividing the students in each grade into sections of slow, average, and rapid learners on the basis of group intelligence tests" (Cremin, 1961 in Pratt, 1983, p. 15).

After World War II educational research began to address the question of age grading. In 1948 the first empirical examination of age grading was completed by Arthur Foshay for a doctoral thesis at Teachers College. Classes combining three years were compared with those using the conventional one-year approach. Nonrandomly selected children of lower IQ made up the

experimental group. Findings showed less progress than projected for these children in reading and arithmetic achievement. Age-graded children chose friends from within the same age group 81% of the time. Children in the multiage group chose friends from within the same age group just 46% of the time (Foshay, 1948 in Pratt, 1983; in Goodlad & Anderson, 1987).

In 1949 for a doctoral study at the University of Minnesota, Dreier compared graduates from graded and nongraded elementary schools in rural Minnesota. No important differences were found between the two groups (Dreier, 1949 in Pratt, 1983).

In contrast to the two studies mentioned above, a 1956 study conducted by Rehwoldt and Hamilton in Torrance, California, showed significant advances both socially and academically by pupils in multigrade classes (Goodlad & Anderson, 1987).

Pratt located 27 experimental studies on age grading

conducted between 1948 and 1981. Ten of the 27 were doctoral dissertations. Design is lacking in many of the studies. Problems include difficulty in differentiating between effects of age heterogeneity and effects of individualization and intraclass grouping.

Regarding academic achievement, 3 studies favored

conventional grouping, 10 favored multiage grouping, 12 were inconclusive. In the doctoral studies 1 favored conventional grouping, 2 favored multiage grouping, 5 were inconclusive. Regarding social/emotional development none of the 27 studies favored conventional grouping, 9 favored multiage grouping, 6 were inconclusive. No doctoral studies favored conventional grouping, 3 favored multiage grouping, 4 were inconclusive (Pratt, 1983).

In surveying research studies conducted between 1968 and 1976 comparing graded and nongraded schools, Tamsen Banks Webb notes: * favor of nongradedness over gradedness using measurements of standardized tests;

* students in a nongraded structure may have improved chances for good mental health and positive attitudes about school; * longitudinal studies suggest the longer students are in nongraded programs, the more likely they are to have higher academic achievement and positive attitudes about school;

* mental health benefits for Blacks, boys, underachievers, and students of lower SES appears to be enhanced by nongradedness (Pavan, 1977 in Webb 1992).

Recent work by James P. Comer (Fiske, 1991) emphasizes need for a community atmosphere in schools serving disadvantaged youth. Miller (1990 in CRESS ERIC DIGEST, May 1991) reviewed 13 studies comparing academic achievement in single-grade and multigrade classes. Studies showed no significant differences between the two types of groups. Regarding student affect, however, multigrade groupings appeared much stronger than

single-grade groupings. Important Generalizations

Major writing in the area of nongraded multiage grouping became available in 1959 when John Goodlad and Robert Anderson published

The Nongraded Elementary School. This book was revised in 1963 and reissued in 1987. Goodlad and Anderson criticized Procrustean attempts to shape children to fit the system. Greek mythology tells us of the cruel robber, Procrustes (the

stretcher). When travelers sought his house for shelter, they were tied onto an iron bedstead. If the traveler was shorter than the bed, Procrustes stretched him out until he was the same length as the bed. If he was longer, his limbs were chopped off to make him fit. Procrustes shaped both short and tall until they were equally long and equally dead.

Certain time-honored practices of pupil classification, while perhaps not lethal, trap school-age travelers in much the same fashion as Procrustes' bed trapped the unwary.

These practices are concomitants of our graded system of school

organization (Goodlad & Anderson, 1987, p. 1).

In support of nongraded organizations, Goodlad and Anderson point to important generalizations such as:

* children entering first grade range from three to four years in readiness to benefit from a "graded minimum essentials" approach to schooling;

* this ability range increases through the years and is almost double by the time a child finishes elementary school; * the achievement range of students reflects learning

readiness soon after first grade students receive normal school instruction;

* for the same children achievement varies depending on area of learning (Goodlad & Anderson, 1987).

A Place Called School: Prospects for the Future (Goodlad, 1984) offers an in-depth examination of 38 elementary, junior high, and high schools. Goodlad and his associates determined that these schools were representative of contemporary American education.

The author details findings and offers restructuring plans. A major aspect of these plans is the multiage nongraded approach.

Many administrative and organizational problems exist in implementing a nongraded educational structure. Often these problems stem from our history of gradedness. With standardized tests, textbooks, and other materials relying on the graded educational structure, break with tradition becomes more

difficult. In addition, educators and parents are familiar with gradedness, most having been schooled that way themselves. Connel doubts customary age segregation in schools.

"Segregating children by sex, race, ethnic, or socioeconomic differences is against the law. Is it right to segregate by age?" (Connel, 1987 in Webb, 1992, p. 90). Self-Esteem

Research strongly indicates retention impacts negatively on children's self-esteem and further achievement (Shepard & Smith, 1990 & Katz, 1988 in Webb, 1992; Goodlad & Anderson, 1987). Elimination of nonpromotion is indicated through much literature. Along this vein, Goodlad and Anderson suggest need to also eliminate promotion (Goodlad & Anderson, 1987). Questions of whether to promote or not to promote individual students can be removed through an idea of continuous progress. Each student proceeds through material which is often the same; the difference is time. Nongradedness lends itself to this concept.

Lack of readiness in kindergarten follows the child through later school years. Frustration because of lack of readiness to master expectations of adults results in low self-esteem. Fetzer and Ponder see the system of designating a child's class

according to birth date alone as "antiquated" (Fetzer & Ponder, 1988, p. 192).

A recent report published by the National Association of Elementary School Principals identified 163 indicators of school quality. Suggestions include: maximum class size of 20, or fewer in the primary grades; grouping by needs, not by age and grade only. School effectiveness is enhanced by the idea that all students can learn (Raze, 1985).

The idea also enhances student self-esteem. Grouping

Debate over grouping according to ability and achievement measures has continued since 1920. Sputnik (1957) heightened interest in identifying and encouraging children of high aptitude to enter scientific fields. Ability grouping often results in tracking where both students and teachers in low classes easily can become discouraged. Hall and Findley (1971) suggest one defect of this system is the small percentage of teachers who prefer to teach the low achieving groups.

Goodlad (1984) views tracking as a repulsive practice that often begins in primary school. Evidence shows "higher-achieving students do not do better when together, and lower-achieving students do much worse when together. Tracking clearly

discriminates and clearly perpetuates inequities among students . . ." (Glickman, 1991, p. 5). Recommended alternatives are groups of various sizes formed for special purposes and dissolved when the specified purpose has been accomplished. Goodlad reminds us of how much we learn by teaching others. Cooperative learning, peer tutoring, and student leadership are just some advantages of students helping each other. Leadership can change and rotate according to need.

These practices are inherent to the structure of one-room and other small schools.

Anton S. Makarenko devised such a plan in the Gorky Colony, a multiage school for wayward youth established in the Ukraine in the 1920's. After much trial and error, Makarenko successfully arranged a system of mixed detachments where all colonists except "the most glaringly unsuitable" (Makarenko, 1973, p. 356) served as leaders. Depending on the project, mixed detachments were scheduled and organized according to the job at hand. Upon completion of a task, the group was dissolved. Mixed detachment leaders were responsible for organization and quality control. A leader in one group served as a follower in others. Each

colonist also belonged to a permanent detachment with a permanent commander. Permanent detachments formed a "nucleus for the colony" (Makarenko, 1973, p. 355). Standardized Testing Today In an opinion paper on reorganizing American education, Leona Tyler sees inadequate attention to individual differences; an excess of compulsion. Age grouping "is perhaps the worst

possible strategy for maximizing the learning of individuals" (Tyler, 1985, p. 1). "A Proposal for Reorganizing American Public Education" cautions against focusing on averages of standardized test scores rather than on the spread of scores. This author criticizes reporters for lack of realization of a naturally occurring situation.

They continue to be shocked at the finding that half of any group tested is below the average of the group. Human beings differ inherently in how much they learn and how rapidly they learn it. Yet we go on categorizing them by age and treating them all alike. What sense does it make to assign the same tasks to all members of an age group and expect them all to succeed equally well? (Tyler, 1985, p. 2).

Implications for Change

Literature on nongraded multiage instruction is plentiful. Although empirical research is lacking in many specific areas, review of writings on nongraded multiage grouping shows much support by many well-respected educators. Findings on academic achievement of graded and nongraded classes are inconclusive.

There does, however, seem to be evidence of positive social and self-esteem advantages in a nongraded approach.

Another thread running through much of the literature concerns belief that all children can learn -- the varying factor is time. Some students require a longer period to master the same tasks. Multiage nongraded groupings can vary in size depending on purposes. Advantages of teaching as a method of enhancing one's own learning is a device well known to educators. Implications exist here for peer tutoring, cooperative learning, and valuable leadership and followship experiences.

Teacher cycling, a common practice in small schools, is

mentioned in the literature. Advantages of teaching the same students for several years include greater opportunity to know those students well; possibilities for determining and designing effective individual learning programs can be increased. Critics of teacher cycling sometimes cite lack of exposure of students to teachers of different talents. Here supporters often suggest team teaching where educators can draw on the strengths of each other.

Discussion Total Quality

In 1950 W. Edwards Deming, an industrial engineer, introduced to Japan a method of statistical quality control. Over the last several decades Deming's approach has become well-known as quality control circles. An analysis of Deming shows there is a basic misunderstanding of evaluation in manufacturing. Similar confusion is shown by belief that objective testing is likely to improve educational quality. A central point in this discussion is the difference between standards and quality. Multiage grouping in schools can achieve quality when people of various ages work together to achieve results of distinction.

"

The Total Quality Classroom" (Bonstingl, 1992) applies to education Deming's 14 principles for Total Quality Management (TQM). John Jay Bonstingl sees relevant similarities of business organizations and schools. Alan M. Blankstein (1992) explains how five of Deming's principles translate into school terms. Principals and superintendents are management or leadership; teachers are employees, leaders, and managers; students are employees; student knowledge is the product; parents and society are customers; legislators are the board of directors. Lewis A. Rhodes explores TQM concepts concerning values. He points to importance of the totality of educational organizations. Work processes encompass a unified system. Synergy

"In a school, everything important touches everything else of importance," notes

Theodore Sizer recognizing "the synergistic character of a school" (Sizer, 1991, p. 32). "No Pain, No Gain" suggests restructuring often involves painful break with

tradition. Effective change demands attention to all parts of a school.

"

The Quality School" (Glasser, 1990) is an adaptation of the book by the same name where psychiatrist William Glasser, M.D., examines educational application of TQM. In analysis of control theory, motivation theory, and non- coercive management employed by "lead-managers," Glasser recognizes naturally resulting high-quality educational outcomes. Our system must encourage lead-management in teachers and principals. It must discourage "boss- management," a scientific management approach employing fear, coercion, and intimidation. Because of district office bureaucratic power struggles, Glasser feels lead- management usually must be initiated at the building level. He sees

teachers and principals as leaders who can make a real difference in producing high quality American schools. Quality Versus Standards

Can quality be defined, or is it more accurate to view quality as a recognizable characteristic? Quality isn't something you lay on top of subjects and objects like tinsel on a Christmas tree. Real Quality must be the source of the subjects and objects, the cone from which the tree must start. To arrive at this Quality requires a somewhat different procedure from . . . . "Step 1, Step 2, Step 3" instructions . . . (Pirsig, 1974, p. 262).

"Quality can be defined only in terms of the agent. Who is the judge of quality?" (Deming, 1986, p. 168). Deming sees determination of quality as involving three agents, including workers and managers as well as customers.

Multiage nongraded grouping in American education offers a framework where quality can be found through development of uniquely appropriate strategies. Quality is realizing the potential within an environment. Choice in District 4

Quality was the concern in Community School District 4, East Harlem, New York. Choice developed as a way to improve education of inner-city students. Almost all students are members of minority groups.

There is a high poverty level. Test scores of District 4 in the early 1970's were lowest or almost the lowest of all 32 school districts of New York City. Superintendent Anthony Alvarado gave teachers and administrators opportunities and authority to improve education in their classes by devising their own programs.

They then received resources to "turn their ideas into little schools" (Fiske, 1991, p. 181). Students and parents who shared their vision could choose to attend a

particular school.

In 1974 Deborah Meier with 100 children opened Central Park East Elementary School.

The school served grades K-2 only. Children who attended came because their parents chose the school. Central Park East uses child-centered approaches to learning and stresses content, thinking, experimenting,

discussion, research, and writing. Dramatic success of the school gave rise to two others, Central Park East II and River East. Central Park East Secondary School, part of Ted Sizer's Coalition of Essential Schools, opened in 1985.

The 50 District 4 schools include alternative, bilingual, and theme schools. All began as small schools. Rather than grow larger, popular schools were copied in new locations. "Less is Better" is the district belief. "Fewer students per school and classroom, less

bureaucracy, and less top-down management make up their reform formula. [Says Mrs. Meier,] `Small schools are not the answer, but without them none of the proposed answers stands a chance'" (Fiske, 1991, p. 184).

Holweide Comprehensive School

Located in Cologne, West Germany, Holweide Comprehensive School is a contemporary example of quality education.

The school began as an experiment in the mid- 1970's and serves the equivalent of American grades 5 through 11. Culturally diverse students include children of foreign guest workers and children from single-parent or poor German families. Almost all pupils are considered non- college bound.

Teams of teachers remain with the same students for the entire six years of Holweide schooling. School administration is composed of only one teaching principal and two assistants who also teach. Students are not tracked according to assessed ability. Teacher teams determine how to group students and how to organize the school day. Readjustments are made as needed.

Because of this structure, authentic accountability is

possible. Since teachers have the same students for six years, former instructors cannot be blamed for pupil deficiencies. Teachers cannot pass problem students along to others. Teacher teamwork increases chances of defining appropriate ways to improve schooling of individual pupils. "Holweide's approach thus turns the usual bureaucratic, assembly-line processing of children into a teaching and learning enterprise, a moral

community" (Shanker, 1990, p. 351).

The School and Society In reading early twentieth century Dewey and in reading Goodlad's recent book (Goodlad, 1984), one is struck by recurrent themes and by apparent inability of the American educational system to adapt to changing circumstances. Schools are part of a complex web of life.

The social change of which Dewey was an early prophet continues to evolve.

The philosopher's concern with the exigency of learning to learn permeates his 1920

thinking. Dewey notes rapid progress of his times. Advances in industrialization, transportation, and communication dictated need to adapt to a continuously and quickly changing environment. Experience and thinking involve connection of relationships. This connection is essential for reasoning to occur. While all thinking results in knowledge, ultimately the value of knowledge is subordinate to its use in thinking. For we live not in a settled and finished world, but in one which is going on, and where our main task is prospective, and where retrospect -- and all knowledge as distinct from thought is retrospect -- is of value in the solidity, security and fertility it affords our dealings with the future (Dewey, 1920, pp. 177-178).

Implications of such thought exist today in our post- industrial information age.

The core of Dewey's educational theory was encouragement of flexibility, creativity, and practicality in individual thinking. His argument suggests these qualities are required of a broadly democratic society as he defined it. Public schools were

originally designed for students who would settle well into industrial discipline. Waves of immigrants arriving in the mid-nineteenth century were socialized to American ways through the public schools.

As a segment of society, early public schooling saw as part of its role this preparation of factory workers. Assembly lines were largely staffed by immigrants from foreign countries and rural America. Factory-like compartmentalization was reflected in physical traits of schools (rows of nailed down desks) as well as in curriculum with its segmented structure. Subjects were and often are separated from other subjects and from life itself.

Dewey is a prophet of contemporary critics of our educational system.

The American school system is not working. Goodlad (1984) sees necessity for change even in our best schools.

The system designed to produce factory workers is no longer relevant. Rather than factory mentality, we need reason -- reason derived from thinking and knowledge. As technology rushes forward, it is imperative for citizens to have learned how to learn. Dewey saw schools as small communities where students grasp larger concepts through smaller concepts relevant to their own worlds. Individual discovery of findings established

centuries earlier, are new in the sense of unique interpretation. As a child uncovers wonders of nature, the individual's

revelation is as fresh as an initial discovery. Goodlad (1984) sees the role of schools as communities for changing society, not as mere reflections. Sadly, what we often see inside of our schools is a mirror image of what is wrong outside.

Dewey the philosopher and social theorist based much of his thought on the social sciences and psychology. He spoke of organizations as the organic whole. As industry changes from production lines to cooperative work groups, X

Theory becomes

Theory Z.

Traditional schools espouse X

Theory (individuals are

inherently unmotivated, needing coercion to work or learn). Dewey's school is based on

Theory Z (learning occurs naturally through relevance). Organizational structure of small schools lends itself to Type-Z application.

The nongraded multiage approach is an attempt to break out of the industrial mold and teach the child as an individual being, rather than as a product to be processed. Age segregation is as unnatural as subject matter segregation. Retention shatters self-esteem into small bits. Goodlad proposes teacher cycling, schools within schools, and multiage nongraded grouping in an effort to bring continuity to schooling.

Summary

Factors impacting on nineteenth century enthusiasm for gradedness include teacher training through normal schools, growing popularity of textbooks, population movement from rural to urban areas, industrialization, and consolidation. According to Dewey, most features of our American educational system were instituted between 1837 and 1850. Gradedness is part of this American tradition.

Proponents of multiage grouping see it as a natural order of society. Studies of simple societies and early American history reflect such grouping. Small colonial schools featured

variations of multiage groupings.

These practices are seen today in many small schools. Demand for community and calm focus in schools is particularly essential today because of deteriorating family conditions.

Many respected educators of the twentieth century vigorously uphold concepts of multiage nongraded educational organization; many suggest problems with implementation. Benefits of multiage grouping advanced by advocates include individualized self-paced instruction, opportunity for increased self-esteem, leadership and followship experiences, peer tutoring, and cooperative learning. Multiage nongraded schooling, an inherent aspect of small school structure, lends itself to a child-centered learning approach where creativity and individuality are respected and enhanced.

Organizational features of one-room and small schools make multiage nongraded grouping natural.

The FDOE defines twelve characteristics to be considered in improving schools. General areas for attention include goals, focus, leadership,

expectations, instruction, collaboration, development, order, time, involvement, incentives, and evaluation (FDOE, 1990). Chapter 3 describes these areas as perceived by small nonpublic schools in Florida.