\
v1

'6
,l.

12 .
.13?!
3...... .. IL 21.!
{p.391 .
o.
‘5...-
E v 4
ﬂ..w.na\o.nw!
.m: i 1!.
3 ‘

:1... st...

 

in?
‘1’ I

. .. s41. Luvslt.
\ . ‘Lhtlh 1... 3...: . 5‘ VA
: .1: 4.293131% Ha.

a.“ O. n E L. . , . , . 0
.73.}. {kt . . urnmrﬁmrni
.1 V O 1"."

 

r .
:uwcu)... MD.

a: nm 9.34%

'H

L

' ‘1'!”th- I

.93..“
. ‘ g 30.5,...» ’54...

r . . $E ‘ V . ‘ ‘ . . . C 58.53:.
. . . V , H , ‘ . ‘ . . , H V . . V 5.. x».

 

(“36.893

a
(WM

llllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll

3 1293 01421 7255

This is to certify that the

dissertation entitled

The Impact of Multigrade
Classes on Student Achievement
In Elementary Core French

presented by
Cheryl Jean Evans-Harvey

has been accepted towards fulﬁllment
of the requirements for

_JhJ_degree in _Adu_1_t_and_Continu1'ng
Education

Date April 5, 1996

MS U is an Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Institution 0-12771

 

LIBRARY
Mlchlgan State
University

 

 

 

 

 

- ~wV—ﬁ..— .— 74 4 4

PLACE Ill RETURN BOX to remove thle checkout from your record.
TO AVOID FINES return on or before dete due.

DATE DUE DATE DUE DATE DUE

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

MSU le An Nﬂrmettve Action/Ewe! Opportunity lnetltwon
Wane-m

THE IMPACT or MULTIGRADE
CLASSES 0N STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT
IN ELEMENTARY CORE FRENCH
By

Cheryl Jean Evans-Harvey

A DISSERTATION

Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulﬁllment of the requirements
for the degree of

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

Adult and Continuing Education

1995

ABSTRACT

THE IMPACT OF MULTIGRADE CLASSES
ON STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT
IN ELEMENTARY CORE FRENCH

By

Cheryl Jean Evans-Harvey

The organization of multigrade Core French classes poses instructional challenges
to second language teachers. Many teachers feel that the organization of classes has an
impact on student achievement, with students in single grade classes achieving more than
students in multigrade classes.

The-purpose of this study was to determine the impact of multigrade classes
on student achievement in elementary Core French.

The study was grounded in a review of pertinent literature in the areas of increases
in the number of multigrade classes, research on multigrade versus single grade
achievement and factors unique to the Core French program.

One hundred and forty-seven students in single and multigrade classes in grades

seven and eight completed a pretest and a posttest in the 1994-1995 school year. The test

used was The Grade Eight Core French Test Package which evaluates student
achievement in listening, speaking, reading and writing. A number of signiﬁcant elements
were derived ﬁ'om the data of this quantitative study.

In listening and reading there were no signiﬁcant differences in the achievement of
students in single and multigrade classes when classes were combined. However, there
was a statistically signiﬁcant diﬁ‘erence (p = .05) in oral communication skills and in
written communication skills (p = .001) favoring the students in the single grades. The
differences were associated with several elements identiﬁed in multigrade classes:
reduction in teacher and student interaction time; fewer oral activities, increased student
communication in English due to limited second language skills; and gaps in learning if
teachers chose a program for either the lower or the higher grade. Although not part of
the major question, analysis also revealed that females achieved greater gains than males in
all four skill areas, and in writing, at a statistically signiﬁcant level (p = .016).

As a result of the study, it was recommended that a reduction in the use of
multigrade class assignments could signiﬁcantly strengthen the achievement of oral and
written skill development of students in elementary Core French. A second
recommendation called for professional development for teachers of multigrade second

language classes, especially in the areas of oral and written communication.

©Copyright by

CHERYL JEAN EVAN S-HARVEY
1995

ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

DEDICATION

This dissertation is dedicated to teachers of French as a Second Language who
seek optimal learning conditions for students, and excellence in programming.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Embarking on this doctoral journey has been a signiﬁcant and rewarding
experience in my life. I found the challenge intellectually stimulating and exciting as I
pushed myself to new limits. I also found that one does not undertake the journey alone.
There are many people I would like to thank for their part in this achievement:

Dr. Roy Giroux from Humber College and Dr. Howard Hickey from Michigan
State University who shared the vision of a unique cooperative program that allowed
many people to fulﬁll their dreams of obtaining a doctoral degree. I feel exceptionally
lucky and privileged to have been part of the group.

Glenn Campbell who shared his ideas on multi—level classes in Core French,
helping me focus on research relevant to the ﬁeld.

The Ontario Modern Language Teachers’ Association which provided ﬁnancial
assistance.

Dr. James Snoddy who provided exceptional guidance and direction as chair of my
committee and dissertation advisor. I appreciate his advice and his ﬁiendship immensely.

Drs. Howard Hickey, Lou Hekhuis and Arden Moon, who, as members of my

committee, provided insight and encouragement that was greatly appreciated.

vi

The principals, teachers and students who participated in the study and who were
extremely ﬁiendly and cooperative, making the data collection a very positive experience.

My colleagues, my ﬁiends who journeyed with me, who provided insight,
motivation and encouragement. I would particularly like to thank Marina Heidman, who
shared with me her laughter, friendship, and many rides to and ﬁom East Lansing. Louise
Legault and Mike Degagne who made group work at a distance such a rewarding
experience. Drs. Katherine Mezei, John Wilson, Jane Knight and Winston Isaac who led
the way and shared so much.

I would also like to thank my family. My brother Jim offered his warm hospitality
in Toronto for three years. My children Tracy, Danielle, Scott and Lauren oﬂ‘ered their
support and understanding. I especially want to thank my husband Craig for believing in

me and helping me succeed with his love and enthusiastic support.

vii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

 

 

 

LIST OF TABLES - __ _ _ - xi
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION _ 1
BACKGROUND TO THE PROBLEM .............................................................. 2
PROBLEMS OF MULTIGRADE CLASSES
UNIQUE TO CORE FRENCH .............................................................. 4
PROBLEM STATEMENT ................................................................................ 7
NEED FOR THE STUDY ................................................................................. 7
PURPOSE OF THE STUDY ............................................................................. 9
RESEARCH QUESTIONS ................................................................................ 9
RESEARCH DESIGN ...................................................................................... 10
SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY .................................................................. 11
DEFINITION OF TERMS ................................................................................ 12
SUMMARY ..................................................................................................... 16
CHAPTER 2: REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE ................... l7
HISTORY OF GRADED CURRICULUM ....................................................... l7
INCREASE IN THE NUMBER OF MULTIGRADE CLASSES ...................... 18
RESEARCH ON MULTIGRADE VERSUS SINGLE
GRADE ACHIEVEMENT .................................................................... 21
Studies Finding No Signiﬁcant Differences ............................................. 21
Studies Finding Signiﬁcant Diﬁ‘erences .................................................. 25
Studies ﬁnding Mixed Results ................................................................ 26
RESEARCH ON MULTIGRADE VERSUS SINGLE
GRADE ACHIEVEMENT IN CORE FRENCH ................................... 27
FACTORS UNIQUE TO THE CORE FRENCH PROGRAM .......................... 28
Program ................................................................................................ 29
The Oral Component .................................................................. 29
Program Delivery ....................................................................... 30
Instructional Time .......................................................... 30
Classroom Space ............................................................ 32
Classroom Organization .................................................. 32

viii

CHAPTER 2: REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE (Continued)

 

 

Transportation of Materials ............................................ 32

Curriculum. ........................................................................................... 33
Teaching Methodology .............................................................. 33

Instructional Organization .......................................................... 34

Two Separate Programs ................................................. 34

Thematic Units ............................................................... 35

One Program .................................................................. 36

Two Programs on Alternate Days ................................... 36

Attitude ................................................................................................. 38
Administrators ........................................................................... 38

Teachers .................................................................................... 38

Parents ....................................................................................... 39

Students ..................................................................................... 39

SUMMARY ..................................................................................................... 40
CHAPTER 3: DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY ....................................... 41
DESIGN ........................................................................................................... 41
Pretest ................................................................................................... 42
Posttest ................................................................................................. 42
Research Question and Hypotheses ........................................................ 42
POPULATION AND SAMPLE ........................................................................ 43
TREATMENT .................................................................................................. 44
DATA COLLECTION ...................................................................................... 45
Instrument ............................................................................................. 45
Administration ....................................................................................... 48
Scoring .................................................................................................. 48
ANALYSIS OF DATA ..................................................................................... 48
CHAPTER 4: PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS OF DATA - _ 50
STATISTICAL ANALYSIS ............................................................................. 51
Pretest Results ....................................................................................... 51
Comparison by Teacher ......................................................................... 53

Gain Scores by Class Assignment ........................................................... 55
Comparison by Grade Level ................................................................... 57
Comparison by Gender .......................................................................... 59

ix

CHAPTER 4: PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS OF DATA (Continued)

 

RESULTS OF HYPOTHESES TESTED ......................................................... 60
SUMMARY ..................................................................................................... 61
CHAPTER 5: SUMMARY, IMPLICATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ..... 63
DISCUSSION .................................................................................................. 64
STUDY LIMITATIONS ................................................................................... 65
IMPLICATIONS .............................................................................................. 66
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR PRACTICE ...................................................... 68
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FURTHER STUDY ......................................... 70
CLOSING COMMENTS .................................................................................. 71
APPENDICES
APPENDIX A: Principal Consent Form ........................................................... 72
APPENDD( B: Teacher Consent Form ............................................................ 75
APPENDIX C: Student Consent Form ............................................................. 78
APPENDIX D: Questionnaire for Principals ..................................................... 81
APPENDDI E: Questionnaire for Teachers ...................................................... 83
APPENDD( F: Questionnaire for Students ....................................................... 86
BIBLIOGRAPHY _ _ - 88
GENERAL REFERENCES ‘ ....... _ - - 93

 

Table 1

Table 2

Table 3

Table 4

Table 5

Table 6

Table 7

Table 8

LIST OF TABLES

Mean Performance Scores by Grade in Pretest in Listening,

Reading and Writing .......................................................................... 52
Mean Performance Scores by Grade in Pretest in Oral Test ................ 53
Gain Scores by Teacher Across Grades and by Class Assignment ....... 54
Mean Gain Scores of Single and Multigrade Classes in Listening,

Reading and Writing .......................................................................... 55
Mean Gain Scores of Single and Multigrade Classes in, Oral Test ....... 56
Mean Gain Scores by Grade in Listening, Reading and Writing .......... 57
Mean Gain Scores by Grade in Oral Test ........................................... 58

Comparison by Gender, Across Grade Level and by Class
Assignment ........................................................................................ 60

xi

CHAPTERI

INTRODUCTION

The establishment of classes combining students from more than one designated
grade level has been a long standing practice in school organization. Such classes,
commonly called multigrade or split grade classes, were often found in small country
schools established to educate children in rural areas. Here, children of many ages
assembled in one-room schoolhouses to receive a basic education. The teacher hired by
the local school board had to serve the needs of students of varying ages and levels along
the graded curriculum of the day (Niagara South Board of Education, 1987). Larger
school populations allowed for the organization of classes of single grade groups in which
students were assumed to be at the same level of the graded curriculum. Such an
organization, known as a straight grade or single grade class, was generally believed to be
advantageous to students and teachers alike.

Today, partially due to school board policies on student and teacher ratios and to
geographical student population density, administrators establish multigrade classes in
order to make more cost eﬁ‘ective use of personnel. Also, situations exist in which

administrators organize multiage groupings, usually three grades in one classroom, based

on pedagogical philosophy. The result is that multigrade classes are very much a part of
elementary school organization in virtually all provinces in Canada (Gayfer, 1991).

The topic of multigrade classes and the educational issues surrounding it has been
widely discussed by educators for a long time. The debate about the problems or merits of
multigrade organization goes on annually among educators and between parents and
principals. Two major issues identiﬁed are the quality of education received by students in
a multigrade class as compared to that received by students in a single grade class and the
work loads of teachers in multigrade assignments as compared to the workloads of
teachers in straight grade assignments (Niagara South Board of Education, 1987).

Along with this debate, the number of multigrade classes is increasing. Gayfer
(1991) suggests that multigrade classes are on the increase throughout Canada. Her study
found that one out of every seven classes is multi-level and that one out of every ﬁve
students is enrolled in a multilevel classroom. She also reported that administrative
considerations, not pedagogical ones, are the major considerations in organizing

multigrade classrooms.

BACKGROUND TO THE PROBLEM

French as a Second Language was initially introduced to the Ontario curriculum at

the beginning of the century starting in grade nine. In the seventies, three types of French

as a Second Language programs developed: Core French, Extended French and
Immersion French.

The Core French program is designed to provide students with a basic
achievement level in oral and written communication. Students study French for twenty
or forty minutes a day. The Extended Program is designed to provide students with a
middle achievement level. In the Extended Program, the Core Program is extended
through the addition of one or more other subjects taught in French. The Immersion
program is designed to provide students with the highest achievement level. In this
program, French is not only the medium in which subjects are taught, but also the means
of communication in the classroom and, as much as possible, beyond the classroom. All
programs are taught, when possible, by competent and qualiﬁed French teachers (Ontario
Ministry of Education [OMB], 1977).

Prior to 1987, school boards could offer any or all of the three programs in the
elementary system, and local school boards were oﬂ‘ered monetary incentives by the
government for initiation and program maintenance. In 1987, the Core French as a
Second Language program became obligatory for students in grades four through nine,
but boards still had the option of starting the program at any lower level, provided they

assured a sequential program (OMB PPM #5 8).

PROBLEMS OF MULTIGRADE CLASSES UNIQUE TO CORE FRENCH

Initially, there was an eﬁ‘ort to minimize the number of multigrade classes in Core
French, and some boards created policies on this matter. However, as the number of
multigrade classes increased in the province of Ontario, Core French teachers were asked
to teach more and more multigrade language classes. Campbell's survey of split grades in
1991 showed that nearly 80% of the responding boards approach multigrade classes in
Core French as they would any other class. However, diﬁculties became apparent due to
the nature and organization of the second language programs.

Ministry guidelines specify that, in order to provide the best learning possible,
French teachers present the four basic skills of listening, speaking, reading and writing in
an identiﬁed progression. As a child enters the program, much more emphasis is given to
the listening and speaking skills. Gradually, the emphasis in reading and writing increases
until, in advanced study, the attention to the four skill areas is similar to study in a
maternal language (OMB, 1980). In kindergarten, grade one and grade two, 100% of the
program is oral. In grade three, 90% of the program is oral and 10% is written. In the
junior division which includes grades four, ﬁve and six, 70% of the program is oral and
30% is written. In the intermediate division which includes grades seven and eight, 60%
of the program is oral and 40% is written. Because Core French in the elementary system
is a sequential and predominantly oral program with a focus on communicative
competence, teachers in multigrade classes ﬁnd that assigning independent written

seatwork can be inappropriate since the majority of activities should be oral. Also,

assigning oral groupwork activities is unproductive if the students, with limited second
language skills, communicate in English.

A study in the Middlesex County Board of Education examined students in
multigrade classes in which some teachers taught the same material to the two grades and
others taught two separate programs. Results indicated that students who have a good
ability to concentrate and the desire to remain focused on their task do better than
students who do not have those abilities.

Students with initiative and independent learning skills can achieve success,

particularly when taught the same program. However, in classes where

two separate programs are taught, students experiencing diﬁculty identify

the distracting classroom environment, not understanding what they are

supposed to be doing, and lack of individual attention and help from the

teacher as reasons for their poor achievement. The students who suffer

most are those who have dimculty concentrating and working

independently. This situation is particularly acute in a split grade class in

which two separate programs are being taught and in the lower grade of a

split in which the same program is taught (Moscovitch, 1991, p.9).

Another problem unique to language teachers that impacts on their workload is the
teaching timetable. Core French teachers must be qualiﬁed French as a Second Language
teachers. Most teach only French, across two or three divisions; for example, ﬁom grade
one through grade eight. Generally, classes are taught in twenty or forty minute blocks.
Dealing with over one hundred students a day with seven to ten lessons to prepare,
including about one third of the classes as multigrade classes, poses problems to teaching

effectiveness. Due to time restrictions, the lack of French classrooms and appropriate

resources, many teachers teach one program, usually that of the higher grade. The result

is that some students in multigrade classes experience a gap in learning while others
experience a repetition of curriculum.

In response to the growing concern of French teachers, some boards have policies
that attempt to avoid multigrade classes and also to avoid combining initial grade classes
in which, for example, a grade three class of twenty minute duration would be combined
with a grade four class of forty minute duration. However, the number of multigrade
classes is still increasing. Daniel (1988) points out that the organizational ﬂexibility of
administrators has been drastically reduced by the need to provide teacher time for
preparation. Since this has happened, the rise in the number of multigrade classes in Core
French has been dramatic. In one metropolitan board, the number of these classes rose
eight-fold in the ﬁrst year of the new teacher contract.

One response to the perceived problem has been to conduct studies to investigate
the problem and suggest strategies for improvement. The Niagara South Board of
Education (1987), Carleton Board of Education (1990), The Modern Language Council
(1990), Wentworth County (1991), and Middlesex County (1991) carried out surveys of
the multigrade classrooms. Campbell (1991) also conducted a survey on split grades in
the elementary Core French program on behalf of The Ontario Modern Language
Teachers' Association. He discovered that:

1. Over 80% of the responding boards indicated their teachers were
opposed to the teaching of multigrade classes in Core French.

2. Over 70% of the responding boards indicated that multigrade
classes in Core French had a negative effect on programming.

3. The main disadvantage was felt to be a reduction in student-
teacher interaction time (p. 12).

PROBLEM STATEMENT

From references cited above, it is clear that the organization of multigrade classes
is increasing and that teachers of Core French are concerned about the eﬂ‘ect such
programming has on student learning and attitudes. To date, very little research has been
conducted on this topic, especially in the area of student achievement, rendering decision

making by administrators very diﬁ'rcult.

NEED FOR THE STUDY

Gayfer (1991, p. 7) reporting an extensive study of multigrade classes across
Canada, recommended that ”Research on the cognitive development of students in
multigrade classes be continued in order to add much needed data to that which already
exists". Although an early case study (Shapson, Kaufman & Durward, 1978) found that
multigrade classes had positive eﬂ‘ects on student achievement in French as a Second
Language in the lower of the two grades involved, subsequent studies have not
substantiated this ﬁnding. In fact, surveys indicate the opposite. Since no other study has
been published which measured and reported student achievement in French as a Second
Language, the need for research in this area is apparent. This is substantiated by the

Carleton Board of Education (1990). After summarizing the disadvantages of multigrade

classes expressed in the literature, surveyors found that the impact these concerns have on
student learning outcomes is largely unsupported by empirical evidence, especially in the
area of second language learning. Most studies focus on the perceptions of students,
teachers, parents and administrators. A survey conducted by Reed (1991) for the
Wentworth County Board of Education concluded that students in multigrade Core
French classes do not have equality of opportunity for learning compared to students in
single grade classes.

The survey by The Ontario Modern Language Teacher's Association reported by
Campbell (1991) indicates that the majority of boards in Ontario appear not to be taking
any action at all to reduce the number of multigrade classes nor to deﬁne strategies to
improve the situation. He also recommended that his work be used to ". . .help answer
some of the questions educators who are concerned with excellence in Core French
programming have regarding the eﬁ‘ects of multigrade classes" (p. 3). He concluded with
a call for further research in the area of student achievement and exemplary teaching
practices while emphasizing the need for increased teacher support in terms of
professional development and program materials. Lapkin, Harley and Taylor (1993) also
identiﬁed the need for research in administrative areas such as multigrade classes in Core
French. An action that further demonstrates the need for this research was the decision
taken in 1992 by The Ontario Modern Language Teachers' Association to ﬁrnd research

on this topic.

PURPOSE OF THE STUDY

In response to the paucity of knowledge concerning student achievement in
multigrade classes compared to single grade classes in Core French, this research is
designed to compare the second language learning outcomes of students in single grade
settings with students in multigrade settings.

The research consists of a comparison of the language learning outcomes of
students in single grade seven and eight classes with the second language learning
outcomes of students in multigrade seven and eight classes. Comparison of the test results

will provide information on student achievement in the two settings.

RESEARCH QUESTIONS

The research question in this study is as follows: What is the relationship between
multigrade class assignment and student achievement?

The null hypothesis is as follows: There is no statistically signiﬁcant difference in
the second language achievement of students in single grade classes compared to the
second language achievement of students in multigrade classes.

The hypothesis is as follows: The second language achievement of students in

single grade classes is greater than the achievement of students in multigrade classes.

10

RESEARCH DESIGN

The study assessed the student achievement of 147 grade seven and eight students.
Generally, all students had a similar background in French with approximately six to eight
hundred hours of instruction by grades seven and eight. Most students were anglophone,
in the same board of education, in similar schools and exposed to the same curriculum.
The treatment was the second language instruction the students received in the single or
multigrade classes in a school year. The students in each school had a French teacher who
taught a single grade seven, a combined grade seven and eight and a single grade eight
class.

The study included a pretest administered in November and a posttest administered
in June. The test was The Grade Eight Core French Test Package developed at The
Ontario Institute For Studies in Education. All students completed three components of
the test: he test de comprehension auditive, le test de lecture, and le test d’écrr'ture. A
random sample of eight students ﬁ'om each of the six classes completed le test oral. The
gain scores of students assigned to single grade classes in grade seven were compared to
the gain scores of students assigned to multigrade classes in grade seven. Similarly, the
gain scores of students assigned to single grade classes in grade eight were compared to
the gain scores of students assigned to multigrade classes in grade eight. An analysis of

variance was used to determine if signiﬁcant diﬂ‘erences existed.

11

SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY

The signiﬁcance of the study lies in the hope that administrators, teachers, teacher
educators, parents and students will beneﬁt ﬁom the results. The results may be important
to administrators in that they might become better informed of the eﬁ‘ects of multigrade
classes on student achievement in second language learning. This knowledge could help
them create new policies and make better informed decisions in the following areas: the
organization of single and multigrade classes, the delivery of curriculum of the French as a
Second Language program, placement of students in multigrade classes, and support for
teachers' professional development. Burns, Haché & Haynes (1988) support this from a
sociological viewpoint. They state, ”When second language policy is rhetorical, unclear or
nondirectional, it may have the unintended eﬂ‘ect of hindering effective implementation of
French as a Second Language (sic) in a system" (p. 6).

Teachers may beneﬁt ﬁ'om the results in that they might impact positively on
attitudes and lead to the identiﬁcation of the most eﬁ‘ective strategies for teaching
multigrade language classes. Teacher educators would be able to incorporate into their
courses, curriculum about multigrade classes and the most effective strategies for teaching
multigrade language classes. Knowledge about student achievement in multigrade classes
would help parents make better informed decisions about the placement of their children in
straight grade or multigrade classes. Students may beneﬁt ﬁom the study because the

effects of multigrade classes on student achievement might be better understood. Record

12

keeping of student assignments to multigrade classes might reduce repetition of
curriculum, and the placement of students in multigrade classes might be based on
pedagogical reasons rather than organizational needs.

Due to the assessment of student outcomes, this study would differ from earlier
surveys by providing information on student achievement in the communicative skills of
listening, speaking, reading and writing in Core French. Collegial decisions by
administrators and teachers regarding the placement of students in multigrade classes
might identify those students most likely to succeed in a multigrade class. The ﬁndings
from this study might be somewhat applicable to foreign language teaching in general, thus

addressing the issue on a much broader level.

DEFINITION OF TERMS

Core French
Core French is a program in which students may receive a minimum of 60 hours
and a maximum of 120 hours of French language instruction in every grade level. French
language arts are taught in a speciﬁc time frame, usually twenty to forty minutes each day.
Core French is obligatory in Ontario from grade four to grade nine. School boards have
the option to oﬁ‘er this program in the primary division, so some boards oﬁ‘er Core French
from prekindergarten to the end of secondary school (Ontario Academic Credits [OAC]),

while others may oﬂ‘er Core French from grade four to OAC. The program must lead to a

13

minimum total accumulation of 1080 hours by the end of the grade 12 or OAC. The Core

French program is designed to provide students with a basic achievement level.

Core French Teacher
Core French teachers are generally proﬁcient in French and are qualiﬁed to teach
the French as a Second Language programs. It is common for Core French teachers to

teach across divisions, for example, from grade one to grade eight or from grade four to

grade eight.

Divisions

The elementary and secondary school systems in Ontario are organized into the
following divisions:

Primary: prekindergarten, kindergarten, grade one, two, and three

Junior: grade four, ﬁve, and six

Intermediate: grade seven, eight, nine, and ten

Senior: grade eleven, twelve, and Ontario Academic Credits, formerly known as

grade 13.

Extended French
Extended French is a program in which students take 120 hours of instruction in
French language arts, plus at least one other subject taught completely in French.

Students receive a minimum of 180 hours per year in every elementary grade included in

14

the program. The program must lead to a minimum of 2100 hours by the end of the grade
12 or Ontario Academic Credit. The Extended French program is designed to provide

students with a middle achievement level.

French As A Second Language
French as a Second Language programs are designed for anglophone students to
develop communication skills in French. There are three French as a Second Language

programs in Ontario: Core French, Extended French and Immersion French.

Immersion French

Immersion French is a program in which students take at least 120 hours of
instruction in French language arts plus enough other subjects to provide for at least 50%
of daily instruction taught in French. The program must lead to a minimum of 5000 hours
of French instruction by the end of the grade 12 or the Ontario Academic Credit. The
immersion French program is designed to provide students with the highest achievement

level.

Itinerant Core French Teacher
A Core French teacher is considered to be itinerant if she or he teaches in other

teachers' classrooms or if he or she teaches in two or more schools.

15

Multiage Class
A multiage class allows for the organization of students at diﬁ'erent grade levels,
usually three, in one classroom. These family groupings occur throughout the whole

school and are based on pedagogical philosophy.

Multigrade Class

A multigrade class allows for the organization of students at different grade levels,
usually two, in one classroom. This organization occurs in some classrooms of a school
and are, in most cases, based on administrative need. Example: grade seven and eight.
For purposes of this study, the terms multigrade class, multi-level class, split grade class

and combination class are synonymous.

Regular Program
The regular program refers to the curriculum taught in English, avoiding confusion

with the French as a Second Language programs that are taught in French.

Single Grade Class
A single grade or straight grade class allows for the organization of students in
instructional classes in which the students are in the same level of the graded curriculum.

Example: grade seven.

16

Ontario Academic Credits (OAC)
Formerly grade 13, the Ontario Academic Credits are required for an Ontario

Secondary School Graduation Diploma and entrance into universities.

SUMMARY

The need for a study of the impact of multigrade classes on student achievement in
elementary Core French has been established and supported by the literature. This study
has been designed to collect relevant data, provide analysis and recommendations, and
suggest implications. The ﬁndings may add new knowledge in the area of student

achievement in Core French as well as in the area of second language learning in general.

CHAPTER2

REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE

This chapter contains a review of the literature and relevant research on multigrade
classes. The review has been organized into ﬁve sections to examine the following: 1) the
history of graded curriculum, 2) the increase in the number of multigrade classrooms,
3) research on multigrade versus single grade achievement, 4) research on multigrade

versus single grade achievement in Core French and, 5) factors unique to the Core French

program.

HISTORY OF GRADED CURRICULUM

The occurrence of ungraded classes dates back to medieval Europe when
instruction consisted of a single teacher teaching large groups of male students in the
village church. The ages of students ranged from ten year old boys to elderly men (Pratt,
1983).

This concept of ungraded curriculum carried over into colonial America in the

dame schools of the seventeenth century and the district schools of the eighteenth century.
1 7

18

Rural schools were also organized in .this manner. As populations increased and schools
were consolidated, there was support for the single grade concept in which students were
placed in single grades with grade speciﬁc curriculum based mainly on age. The
development of graded textbooks oﬂ‘ered widespread support for the graded concept.

This type of classroom organization was ﬁrmly rooted in North America by the latter part
of the nineteenth century (Goodlad & Anderson, 1987), and has continued throughout
most of the twentieth century. In recent years however, school boards have incorporated
multigrading into the graded system, usually by combining two grade levels with separate

curricula into one classroom.

INCREASE IN THE NUMBER OF MULTIGRADE CLASSES

The increase in the number of multigrade classes reﬂects the impact of social and
philosophical changes on the school system, involving changes such as economic
variations, uneven ﬂuctuations in population size, a decrease in birthrates and mobility of
students (Gayfer, 1991). “Within the educational system, teacher contracts deﬁning
teacher-pupil ratios and teacher preparation time have also increased the number of
multigrade classes. Philosophical changes such as shifts towards multiage or family
grouping reﬂect changing social conditions, adding to the growing number of multigrade
classes.

19

Research for the British Columbia Teachers' Federation conﬁrmed that there has
been an increase in multigrade classes since 1982, resulting in 28% of the total elementary
classrooms in British Columbia being organized as splits (Craig & McLellan 1987).
Gajadharsingh (1983) also noted the increase in multigrade classes in Saskatchewan,
drawing the conclusion that 33% of elementary teachers are teaching in multigrade
classrooms. In Alberta, 50% of the classrooms in elementary grades are split grades
(Alberta Teachers' Association, 1986).

The Canadian Education Association's study of multigrade classrooms across
Canada, reported by Gayfer (1991), again conﬁrmed that the number of multigrade classes
has been increasing, especially at the primary and junior divisions. Results indicated that
one out of every seven classes is a multigrade class and approximately one out of every
ﬁve students is enroled in a multigrade class. The study also pointed out that
administrative expediency rather than philosophical or pedagogical reasons determined the
assignment of students to most multigrade classes. As Craig & McLellan (1987) point
out, this represents a signiﬁcant educational concern.

Essentially, the split grade classroom places the expectation on teachers to

prepare students according to mandated curriculum speciﬁcations in two or

more grades simultaneously. This is a difﬁcult, if not impossible, task to
expect without forcing teachers to make compromises in the programs

(p.7).

The reasons cited as pedagogical advantages for multigrade grouping are to

institute a philosophy of family grouping. The advantages include grouping students

20

according to ability, meeting the individual needs of students, opportunity for independent
study, and separating problem children (Gayfer, 1991).

Researchers in French as a Second Language document recent increases in the
number of multigrade language classes. Levy (1982) noted the increase of multigrade
language classes and reported that they were organized for administrative reasons such as
enrolment, balancing class size, budget constraints, and use of available staﬁ'. Daniel
(1988) reported a dramatic increase in the number of split grades due to negotiated
preparation time in teachers' contracts in Ontario in 1987.

Moscovitch (1991) documented an increase in multigrade classes in the Middlesex
County Board of Education, and Reed (1991) noted that 86% of the Core French teachers
teach at least one split grade in the Wentworth Board of Education. Lapkin et al. (1993),
discussing research directions in Core French, also made reference to the ”inevitable and
dramatic increase in the use of multigraded or nongraded classes in elementary school
organization" (p. 482).

Concerned by the increase in the number of multigrade classrooms, administrators
in school boards in Ontario conducted surveys and reports to assess the impact of such
organization on teaching and learning (Lalonde et al. 1980; Niagara South Board of
Education, 1987; Reed, 1991). In French as a Second Language, organizations such as
Canadian Parents for French (1988), the Modern Languages Council (Melnyck & Daniel,
1990) and The Ontario Modern Language Teachers' Association (Campbell, 1991) also
expressed concern about the number of multigrade classes and the impact they have on the

Core French program.

21

RESEARCH ON MULTIGRADE VERSUS SINGLE GRADE ACHIEVENIENT

The major concern about multigrade classes focusses on the question, "Do children
really receive as good an education in a multigrade class as they do in a single grade
class?” (Gayfer, 1991, p.1) Most of the studies that have been conducted are based on
quantitative research methods comparing single grade classes to multigrade classes by
measuring student achievement and assessing students' attitudes toward school.

Findings are organized under three headings: 1) studies that report no signiﬁcant
differences in the achievement of students in multigrade classes compared to the
achievement of students in single grade classes, 2) studies that report signiﬁcant

differences in achievement and, 3) studies that report mixed results.

 

Sixteen studies in North America indicate that there is no signiﬁcant diﬁ‘erence in
the achievement of students in single grade classes compared to the achievement of
students in multigrade classes. The mq’ority of studies conducted examined student
achievement at the primary and junior levels.

Knight (193 8) conducted the ﬁrst study of multigrade classes. Using the Stanford

Achievement Test with students in a combined grade three and four, and with students in a

22

combined grade four and ﬁve, Knight found that the achievement of fourth grade students
in multigrade classes equalled or surpassed the achievement of fourth grade students in
single grade classes, but not at a statistically signiﬁcant level.

Drier (1948) studied the math, reading, language and spelling of grade six students
and concluded that there was no signiﬁcant diﬁ‘erence in the achievement of students in
single grade and multigrade classes .

Adams (1953) studied the reading, arithmetic and language of grade ﬁve students.

He found that there was no diﬂ‘erence in arithmetic and reading. The achievement of
students in language favored the multigrade class, but not signiﬁcantly so.

Chace (1961), using the Stanford Achievement Test, found that student
achievement, in multigrade classes containing ﬁom two to four diﬂ‘erent grade levels
taught by one teacher, was slightly higher than student achievement in the single grade
classes, though not signiﬁcantly so.

Two studies at the kindergarten level indicated no diﬂ‘erence in the achievement of
students in multigrade or single grade classes. Harvey (1974), studying students in
kindergarten and combined kindergarten and grade one classes, concluded that the types
of classroom organization, single or multigrade classes, have little or no effect on the self-
concept, readiness, social-emotional development or achievement of kindergarten
students. Adair (197 8) reported no signiﬁcant differences in achievement in listening,
word analysis, mathematics or reading skills when studying kindergarten and grade one

students.

23

Another study measured the reading achievennent of grade two students who had
been enroled in a single grade one arnd a multigrade one, two and three class the year
previously. MacDonald and Wurster (1974), using the Gates-MacGinitie Reading Test
concluded that there was no signiﬁcant diﬁ'erence in the reading skills of the two goups.

Lincoln (1981) analyzed the reading achievement of gade three students using the
Comprehensive Test of Basic Skills. One group of students had been in single gade one
and two classes, while the other goup had been in multigade one and two classes. The
conclusion was that there were no signiﬁcant differences between the reading test scores
of the two goups.

Milburn (1981) conducted a longitudinal comparison of student achievement in
multigade and single grade classes over ﬁve years. Using the Gates-MacGinitie Reading
Test and the California Achievement Test in Mathematical Computation, Milbum
concluded that there was little difference between the two goups in basic skills
achievement.

A study of the effects of multiage gouping on student achievement in gades one
through ﬁve was conducted by Way (1981). Using the Stanford Achievement Test, Way
concluded that there were no signiﬁcant diﬂ‘erences found between students in multi-age
and single-age classrooms on any of the achievement means.

Perras (1983) studied academic achievement and cognitive development of
students in combined and single gade classes in math and French ﬁrst language. The
conclusion was that when differences appeared, they favored the multigade classes, but

that there were no signiﬁcant differences between the goups.

24

Johnson, Johnson, Pierson & Lyons (1985) studied age homogeneous and age
heterogeneous cooperative learning goups in gades four, ﬁve and six. The conclusion
was that educators who wish to use multiage groupings may do so with the expectation
that it will increase students' achievement motivation without any negative eﬂ‘ects on
achievement or interpersonal relationships.

In New Brunswick, Brown and Martin (1989) found that students in gades one
through ﬁve, in single and multigade classes, did not diﬂ‘er signiﬁcantly in gade points or
total achievement scores.

Gayfer (1991), reporting Gajadharsingh's (1984) survey of multigade and single
gade classes, reported that more than 85% of the teachers and principals assessed
cognitive development of students in multigades as being comparable or superior to
students in single gades in language arts, math, science and social studies.

Sexton (1992), using the Stanford Achievement Test in public elementary schools
in Alabama, concluded that there was no signiﬁcant difference in the scores of students in
combination classes compared to the scores of students in the single gade classes.

In the most recent study, Berger (1993) conducted a qualitative study on the
irnplemerntation of multiage classes. Her ﬁndings support the conclusions of many
quantitative studies that academically, there are few differences in achievemernt between

multiage and straight gade classes.

25

5| l' E l' 5' ’ﬁ Illim

Although there are fewer studies reported that document signiﬁcant differences in
student achievement in single and multigade classes, all three favor the single gades.
Hoen (1972) conducted a study of multiage classes at the gade ﬁve level using the Gates-
MacGinitr'e Test. The conclusion was that the reading comprehension scores were
signiﬁcantly in favor of single gade classes after allowance was made for individual
diﬁ’erences in mental ability. Signiﬁcant diﬁ‘erences in achievement levels were also cited
for students in mathematics. Especially those students identiﬁed as ‘average’ scored
signiﬁcantly lower than their counterparts in single gade classes. Although students in the
lower gade of a multigade class performed better than those in the upper gade, it was
recommended that multigade classes in mathematics be used with only ‘average to high
achieving students’ and ‘high achieving students’.

Foshay (cited in Lincolnn, 1981) studied students in gades four, ﬁve and six. The
ﬁndings indicated that the students in the single gades made signiﬁcantly geater gains in
reading, arithmetic, spelling and language usage than the students in the multigades.

Stimson (1991) investigated the effects of multigade classes on student
achievement in multi-track, year-round schools. She concluded that students in single
gade classes scored signiﬁcantly higher in achievement in reading, mathematics and
language than their counterparts in multigade classes.

Craig and McLellan (1987) ageed with these ﬁndings. Referring to a study by the

Alberta Teachers' Association using statistics on multigade classes from 1975-1985, they

26

noted the problem that the organization of multigades due to adnninistrative needs does
not provide teachers and principals with a pedagogical basis for teaching multigade
classes. Many feel that they have to make compromises in the progams. Therefore, a
majority of teachers prefer to be in single gade classes. Fifty percent of principals feel it
is inadvisable to have multigade classes, with another thirty-three percent adding that

multigade classes were advisable only because no other alternative exists.
5| I. E I. M. 13 !|

Three studies reported mixed. results. Firnley and Thompson (1963) compared the
aclnievement of students in multigade and single gade classes in a rural school. In gade
three, in arithmetic, a signiﬁcarnt diﬂ‘erence was noted that favored the multigade classes.
However, in gade ﬁve, there was a statistically signiﬁcant diﬂ’erence in arithmetic
favoring the single gade males.

Bowman (1971), although ﬁnding no signiﬁcant diﬁ‘erence in student achievement
between graded and nongaded schools at the primary level, concluded that at the
intermediate level there is a signiﬁcant diﬁ‘erence in student achievement favoring the
students in the nongaded classes.

Rule (1983) concluded that placement in multigade classes did not negatively
affect reading achievernernt however, mathematics achievement was negatively affected.
As well, she reported that the lower gade in a multigade class was favored by the

organnization. She indicated that careful selection of students for multigade classes was

27

necessary and that speciﬁc instructional techniques for use in mathematics were identiﬁed

as esserntial for eﬁ‘ective instruction.

RESEARCH ON MULTIGRADE VERSUS SINGLE GRADE

ACHIEVEMENT IN CORE FRENCH

Only one study provides information on student achievement in Core French. In
1978, Shapson et al. reported that multigade classes had positive eﬁ'ects on student
achievement in the lower of two gades and that attitudes towards the learning of French
remained the same. However, the students in the higher gade were at a disadvantage in
achievement the following year because they did not receive the full two year curriculum.
The researchers also noted that student attitudes in the higher gade became more negative
in the second year, possibly due to the repetition of content.

A study that refers to Core French indirectly, indicating that student achievement
in multigade classes is comparable or superior to single gade classes, was reported by
Gayfer (1991). She notes that teachers, commenting on language arts, math, science and
social studies, added a category "other" which included biology, French, music and art.
More than eighty percent assessed cognitive development in that category as comparable
or superior to single gade students.

Surveys which have focussed on the perceptions of administrators, teachers,

parents and students indicate that multigade classes have a negative eﬁ‘ect on student

28

achievement. Many conclude that students in multigade classes in Core French do not
have equality of opportunity for learning compared to students in single gade classes
(Daniel, 1988; Veilands, 1988; Campbell, 1991; Moscovitch, 1991; Reed, 1991). Several
studies indicate that teachers do not present all the curriculum, hence creating gaps in
learning that impact negatively on student achievement (Strauber, 1985; Daniel, 1988;
Veilands, 1988; Moscovitcln, 1991; Reed, 1991). In one study, student perceptions of
their achievement indicated that multigade classes had a negative effect on their
achievement. Fewer than 60% of students in multigades thought they were achieving as
well as they had the previous year in a single gade, compared to 80-95% of students in
single gades who thought they were achieving as well as they had in the previous year in
a single gade (Moscovitch, 1991). It appears that more research on student achievement

in Core French would be helpful.

FACTORS UNIQUE TO THE CORE FRENCH PROGRAM

Campbell (1991) warns against generalizing from the research in multigade
classes in the regular, or English ﬁrst language progam, to the Core French as a second
language context:

Whereas a good deal of evidence has been collected which indicates
that students in the multigade regular classroom progams do not suﬁ‘er
and sometimes even beneﬁt from their experience, compared with like-
gade students in single gade classes, comparatively little evidence is
available as to whether this holds true for the 20 to 40 nninute Core French

29

classes. Whatresearchthereistendstoindicatethatthisisnotthecase
(p.1).

Multigade classes have been introduced to the French program without the beneﬁt
of research to support the pedagogical soundness of this type of progarnnning (V eilands,
1988; Campbell, 1991). Often, as noted by Moscovitch (1991), little time is provided for
the development of curriculum, resources or professional development for teachers.

There is widespread ageement that there are factors unique to Core French that
could have an impact on student achievement in multigade classes. Mentioned most often

are 1) the progam, 2) the curriculurrn, and 3) the attitudes of the stakeholders.

Enigma

Two factors unique to the Core French progam are the importance of the oral

component of language learning and progam delivery.

The C m nent

Core French is a sequential, predominantly oral progam in which the teacher is
often the only model. The skills of listening and speaking should comprise 100% of the
kindergarten, gade one and two progams; 80% of the gade three program; 70% of the
gade four, ﬁve and six progams; and 60% of the gade seven and eight progams (OMB,
1980, p.5). Several studies report that in multigade classes there are fewer oral activities

because teachers oﬂen assign seatwork to one gade while monitoring the oral activities of

30

the other gade (Campbell, 1991; Reed, 1991; Jenn, 1991 and Moscovitch, 1991). Due
to the diﬁ'nculty of orgarnizing and managing oral activities for multigade classes there is
an increase in reading and writing activities which can be inappropriate in a predominantly
oral progam (Daniel, 1988; Campbell, 1991; Reed, 1991; Melnyck and Darniel, 1990).

This is an important consideration given the ministry mandate (OMB, 1980, p.5) that
states that mastery of the oral skills of listerning and speaking should precede the written
skills of reading and writing. The students in multigade classes have less opportunity to
master the oral skills of the language which could have an impact on their learning of the

written skills.

PM
The delivery of the Core French program is affected by four factors: 1)
instructional time, 2) classroom space, 3) classroom organization, and 4) the

transportation of learning materials (Reed, 1991).

Ingram

Core French teachers usually teach 20 or 40 minute lessons, often travelling ﬁom
classroom to classroom and ﬁ‘om school to school, teaching approximately 100-150
students each day. Teachers, because of their tightly scheduled classes, must leave one
classroom immediately after the 20 or 40 nninute time allotment to teach in another

classroom. Generally, there is little ﬂexibility in scheduling. The physical movement ﬁom

31

class to class plus the organization of students and resources for the multigade classes
often results in a loss ofactual teaching time.

In conjunction with the loss of instructional time due to progam organization,
Campbell (1991) documents a concern that lack of individual attention in multigade
classes has a negative effect on achievement. Reed (1991) supports this by saying that
teachers are "... rarely readily available to assist the students, monitor their progess,
encourage communication in the target language or evaluate studernt progess" (p.20).
James (1991) also notes that in the Core French classes, as compared to Immersion French
classes, there are more students with exceptionalities who need more individual attention
from the teacher. Moscovitch (1991) would agee, noting that both ‘average’ and ‘at risk’
students achieve at a lower level due to the lack of individual attention.

When split gades are taught one program, either the progam of the lower gade
or the progam of the higher gade,there is also concern about the loss of instructional
time the students experience from year to year (Veilands, 1988; Reed, 1991; Campbell,
1991).

Due to the factors mentioned above, the issue of time is an important consideration
in the French as a Second Language progam. Holmes (1979) reported that math and
French are two subjects in which there is a strong relationship between time and
achievement. In these subjects, more instructional time signiﬁcantly increases
achievement. It is possible that less instructional time, as observed by teachers in

multigade classes, could have a signiﬁcant negative innpact on student achievement.

32

Classroom space

Because Core French teachers often teach in the regular classroom teachers'
classrooms, there may be inadequate space to store resources such as texts, charts,
dictionaries and games. Frequently, an inadequate amount of blackboard space and space
to post the visual aids which students desire and require is available. These aids include
vocabulary and verb reference charts, student work, homework and assignments. Also,
there is often inadequate desk space for teachers to put their own books, tape recorders
and visual aids (Moscovitch, 1991). This problem is increased in multigade classes that
require resources for two gade levels, especially if the teacher teaches two or three

multigade classes, one after the other.

Classroom organization

The active learning environment required by multigade classes is diﬂicult to
achieve in classrooms where the desks are not arranged for gouping. There is little
provision for permanent centers such as listening or reading centers. For itinerant teachers,
the reorgarnization of the classroom for a 20 or 40 nninute lesson would result in a

signiﬁcarnt loss of instructional time (Moscovitch, (1991).

Tmspgﬂatign of materigs

Due to the cost of learning materials, teachers often have one set of texts for each
gade level. Transporting these materials, as well as the tape recorder, charts, visual aids

and games ﬁom one end of a school to another becomes an orgarnizational challenge.

33

Many teachers rely on carts to move materials, but are often ﬁ'ustrated because they can't
move the carts up and down stairs. Multigade classes increase the resources needed for

instruction in each classroom (Reed, 1991).

There are two major factors affecting the French as a Second Language

curriculum: teaching methodology and instructional organization.

Miriam

The diﬂ‘erences in teaching methodology between maternal or ﬁrst languages and
second languages is based primarily on linguistic backgound and environment. The
linguistic backgound of students entering school provides them with a vocabulary of
approxirrnately 3000-5000 words in their ﬁrst language (OME 1975b, p.28). The linguistic
competency expected in French as a second language students at the end of secondary
school is also 3000-5000 words (OMB, 1986). Second language methodology is designed
to help students with limited second language skills learn the second language. Since
multigade classes require students to work independently (Gayfer, 1991; Moscovitch,
1991; Reed, 1991), students in language classes 'who have diﬁ'nculty working
indeperndently, and who have a limited language backgound, often communicate in

English (Daniel, 1988; Moscovitch, 1991; Reed, 1991). This practice is contrary to the

34

principal aim of the French progam which is to develop communication skills in French
(OMB, 1980). The situation is more acute at the primary and junior divisions in which the
second language is extremely linnited and students are just beginning to develop their
independent study skills.

An environmental factor to consider is that most students are not exposed to
French outside the classroom. The ability to develop language skills in the ﬁrst language
continues throughout the day in both the school and the home context. The ability to
develop second language skills outside the classroom is very limited (Daniel, 1988;

Veilands, 1988; Reed, 1991).

1 '19 ..on

In order to teach multigade language classes, nearly 80% of teachers report
signiﬁcant modiﬁcations to the progam (Reed, 1991). Surveys indicate that teachers
present the curriculum in the following four ways: 1) two separate programs, 2) one
thematic progam, 3) one program, either the lower or the higher gade (Campbell, 1991),

and 4) two progams, each one on alternate days (V eilands, 1988).

Tw t r S
In this approach, teachers present two separate proganns to the two separate
gade levels in the classroom (Moscovitch, 1991; Daniel, 1988). Reed (1991) noted that

at the irntermediate level, it was especially important to separate students into speciﬁc

35

gade levels to suit both parents and students. However, teaching two separate progams
often results in the inability of the teacher to present all of the curriculum (Strauber, 1985;
Veilands, 1988; Craig & McLellan, 1987). Because the progam is predominantly oral,
student confusion and the inability to concentrate often result. If all the students are
engaged in oral activities, the noise level can be so high that meaningful learning
diminishes (Reed, 1991). Moscovitch (1991) adds
Classroom management problems arise as it is diﬁcult to keep all

students on task and maintain the motivation and self-discipline of the

unattended gade. This problem is particularly acute in the classes where

the two programs are taught separately (p.5).
She also noted that fewer than 50% of the students expressed satisfaction with their

situation in a split gade.

Thm'c units

In this approach, the teachers draw out the common elements from the two
progams and create new units based on common themes. Moscovitch (1991) reported
that since this approach allowed for more whole goup instruction, positive student
comments increased. This seems to be the best way to promote learning in multigade
classes. However, appropriate resources are often lacking and creating new thematic units
requires an enormous amount of preparation time by teachers. The need to create a new
curriculum with new outcomes, resources and evaluation strategies has been documented
(Daniel, 1988; Moscovitch, 1991; Reed, 1991). This solution has already been suggested

by Leblanc (1990) in the synthesis of the National Core French Study which recommended

36

that to improve the content of the Core French progams in Canada, consideration be
given to creating a multidimensional curriculum based on irnteresting and appropriate

themes.

e ro am

In this approach to curriculum delivery, teachers teach the progam of either the
higher or the lower gade. Ifthe progam of the lower gade is taught, the students in the
higher grade would have a repetition of content creating gaps in their knowledge the
following year (Shapson et al. 1978). If the program of the higher gade is taught,
students in the lower gade would experience a gap in content that would lead to
frustration. Either situation would have a negative inﬂuence on student achievement and
attitude (V eilands, 1988). Also, teachers would not be following the ministry mandate
that curriculum be cumulative. Curriculum guidelines state

Any French progam should involve students in a planned sequence

of learning experiences that provides opporturnity for steady increments of

knowledge and skill. The review and reuse of structures and vocabulary

are essential and natural in language study, but there should be no gaps, no

unnecessary repetition and no restarting ﬁom the beginning in a well
articulated progam (OMB, 1980, p. 29).

Two programs on alternate days

In this approach, teachers teach one gade at a time on alternate days. Students

not working with the teacher read library books. Teachers choosing this approach were

37

...concerned about the fact that students were receiving only half of the
amount of French instruction required, but felt that at least this way
students were receiving quality instruction on the days they were taught
instead of 'the best they could do' type lessons with both classes at once
(Veilands, 1988, p.11).
This approach does not follow the ministry mandate that ”Students in this program should
advance through an organized sequence of learning experiences that pernnits a steady
gowth of knowledge and skills” (OMB, 1980, p.3).

Drawing on the Edmonton study of split gades in ﬁrst language classrooms, Craig
and McLellan (1987) noted that most principals did not require teachers to teach the
curriculum of both gades in all subject areas in split gade classes. This appears to be the
case in some situations in Core French.

Daniel (1988) and Reed (1991) express concern about the impact of multigade
classes on student achievement year after year. Gaps in learning and repetition of
curriculum could have a negative inﬂuence on student achievement and attitude caused by
ﬁ'ustration or boredom. The signiﬁcance of these concerns increases with the recent trend
towards accountability. The publication and distribution of The Common Curriculum and

The Ontario Provincial Standards documents in 1995 require teachers to compare student

outcomes with provincial standards.

38

Altitude

Research addressing attitudes towards teaching and learning Frernch relates to

attitudes of administrators, teachers, parents and students.

mm

Many administrators view multigade classes as a positive concept that facilitates
small goup instruction and individualized progarnrrning. They stress that the key to a
successful multigade class is the teacher's attitude (James, 1991). Many also feel that
multigade classes in Core French are no diﬂ‘erent than multigade classes in the English
ﬁrst language progam (Campbell, 1991). However, Craig & McLellan (1987) point out
that 50% of the principals in their study felt it inadvisable to have splits and 33% felt that
there were no alternatives. Principals in the Wentworth County Board reported that split
gade classes do not allow suﬁicient quality time for the development of oral skills; gaps in
learning may be compounded by students who spend multiple years in split gades; and all
students do not have access to a quality progam because of the learrning limitations

imposed by the split gade situation (Reed, 1991).

Teachers

The majority of French teachers are opposed to multigade classes and think that

students in single grade classes have a geater learning opportunity than students in

39

multigrade classes (Campbell, 1991; Veilands, 1988; Moscovitcln, 1991). The Ontario
Modern Language Teachers' Association expressed concern about split gade classes and
comnnissioned a review to investigate the situation. The resulting publication of a ‘Cope
Kit’ resembles many produced by French consultants to help teachers ‘survive’ the split

gade classes.

11am

Principals note that multigade classes continue to be of geat concern to parents.
Only 35% of parents surveyed in the Edmonton study indicated satisfaction with their
child's placement in a multigade class (Craig & McLellan, 1987). The Canadian Parents
For French organization formally opposes school board policies under which
predominantly oral Core French progams in elementary schools are taught to combined

gades, thereby signiﬁcantly diminishing the quality of these progams.

Students

Student perceptions of their achievement are that they achieve more in single gade
classes (Moscovitch, 1991). Also, student attitudes towards the learning of French
become more negative in the second year of being in multigade classes (Shapson et al.,

1978)

40

SUMMARY

In summary, the literature shows that the number of multigade classes is
increasing in both the English ﬁrst language classes and the French as a second language
classes. Generally, multigade organization is based on administrative decisions more
often than pedagogical or philosophical decisions. In the English ﬁrst language programs,
there are sixteen studies indicating that there is no signiﬁcant difference in the achievement
of students in single gade classes compared to the achievement of students in multigade
classes. However, three studies report that there are signiﬁcant diﬂ‘erences in achievement
favoring the single gades. Three studies reported mixed results, noting that differences
occur in the speciﬁc subject areas of English and math, and at the intermediate level, with
students in single gades achieving more.

In the French as a Second Language progam there is a paucity of research.
Research on student achievement in Core French is needed. Also, due to the nature and
the delivery of the progam, the curriculum, and the attitudes of the stakeholders, there is
concern that the mandates of the mirnistry are not being met. Core French teachers feel
that students in multigade classes do not have equality of opportunity to learn compared

to students in single gade classes.

CHAPTER3

DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY

The purpose of this chapter is to describe the design and methodology of the
study. The discussion has been organized under the following headings: 1) design, 2)

population and sample, 3) treatment, 4) data collection, and 5) analysis of data.

DESIGN

The study was designed to compare the second language achievement of students
in multigrade classes with the second language achievement of students in single gade
classes. The instrument, The Grade Eight Core French Test Package, is appropriate for
students who have taken between 600-800 hours of instruction in French. Thus, students
in grades seven and eight in speciﬁc boards of education have the appropriate number of
hours of instruction relative to the test package. Students ﬁom two schools, assigned to
six classrooms in total, participated in the study. In each school there was a single gade
seven, a combined seven and eight, and a single gade eight class. To deterrrnine if there is
a difference in student achievement, a pretest-posttest design was used to provide data at
the beginning of the year and at the end of the year. The design allowed comparison of

gains in achievement during the year.
4 1

42

Enter
The pretest was conducted in the ﬁrst week of November, 1994. All students

completed three components of the test: the listening, reading, and writing sections. The
French teachers in the two schools admirnistered the tests in their regularly scheduled
classes. A random sample of forty-eight students, eight per class, completed the oral
interview which was scheduled and administered by the researcher in cooperation with

school personnel.

2931129.!
The posttest was conducted in the second week of June, 1995. All students
completed the same test, administered in the same manner by the two French teachers and

the researcher.

R h ' n n H h
The research question in this study is as follows: What is the relationship between
multigade assignment and student achievement?
The hypothesis is as follows: The second language achievement of students in

single gade classes is geater than the second language achievement of students in

multigrade classes.

43

The null hypothesis is as follows: There is no statistically signiﬁcant difference in
the second language achievement of students in single gade classes compared to the

second language achievement of students in multigade classes.

POPULATION AND SAMPLE

An early step in the study was to identify a school board in Ontario in which
students in gades seven and eight had approximately 600-800 hours of instruction in
French. Next, two principals and two Core French teachers interested in the study were
identiﬁed. The teachers were qualiﬁed Core French teachers who taught the single gade
severn, the combined seven and eight, and the single gade eight classes. As well, both had
at least two years experience teaching multigade classes. Assignment of students to the
single gade or multigrade classrooms followed the regular administrative methods of
classroom orgarnization within the schools. In gade severn, there were 40 students in the
single gade classes and 36 students in the multigade classes. In gade eight, there were
56 students in the single gade classes and 15 in the multigade classes. The total number
of student participants was 147.

All students completed the listening, reading and writing tests. To determine
which students would complete the oral interviews, a random sample was conducted. For

each class, the names of all students were written on individual pieces of paper and placed

44

in an ernvelope. The two French teachers drew the names of eight students per class in
their respective schools.

Permission to participate was obtained from the board of education, the principals,
the teachers, the parents of the students and the students themselves. Students were able

to withdraw from the study at any time, with no penalty.

TREATMENT

During the 1994-95 school year, the students in gades seven and eight in both
schools received instruction in Core French for forty nninutes each day. The qualiﬁed
French teachers moved ﬁ'om classroom to classroom to deliver the progam to the
students in their homerooms. The Ontario Ministry of Education mandates a four skills
approach in the Core French programs with speciﬁc time allotments for each skill (OMB,
1980). Teachers should instruct and evaluate student progess based on designated
percentages of time. At the intermediate divisiorn, in gades seven and eight, the
percentages are as follows: 30% for listening; 30% for speaking; 20% for reading; and
20% for writing. Both teachers used the resources of the sanne commercial program that
was approved by the ministry of education.

The independent variable was the assignment of students to either a single or a
multigade class. The dependent variable was the second language learning that took

place within an academic year. The pretest and posttest provided raw score means.

45

Comparison of the pretest and posttest scores provided gain scores for each student.
Comparison of the gain scores of the students in single gade classes with the gain scores

of the students in the multigade classes provided ﬁnrther data for analysis.

DATA COLLECTION

Data was collected in 1994-95 in a pretest and posttest, using The Grade Eight
Core French Test Package. This section contains details of the instrument used, and the

admirnistration and scoring of the tests.

Testament

The instrument used was The Grade Eight Core French Test Package developed
by Harley and Lapkin (1994) at The Ontario Institute for Studies in Education to test
student achievement in Core French. The tests are designed to reﬂect the principal stated
aim of Core French progams in Ontario and throughout Canada, which is to develop
communication skills in both receptive and expressive aspects of French. The test includes
four components to evaluate the communicative competence of students:

1. The listerning test, Test de comprehension auditive, is a thirty nninute tape
recorded interview with two francophone students in Montreal. Students answer global

comprehension questions in a multiple choice format.

46

2. The reading test, Test de lecture, is a thirty minute test in which students match
pictures to written signs. They also answer multiple choice questions based on postcards
written by Quebec students on a trip, and the dialogue of a magazine interview with a
thirteen year old.

3. The writing test, Test d'écriture, is a thirty nninute test in which students
perform a dictation task, prepare an advertisement for a magazine and give a brief opinion
on a school related issue.

4. The oral interview, Test oral, is an individually administered, ﬁfteen minute test
which is tape recorded. The students invite a ﬁiend to the interview and give the ﬁiend
instructions related to picture tasks and a written menu.

The test was designed to be administered to students having between six hundred
and eight hundred hours of accumulated instruction in French. The test includes notes for
the adnninistration of the four tests as well as a detailed scoring manual.

The validity of the test, whether it measured what it was supposed to measure, was
considered by the authors of the test. Test items reﬂect real-life communication situations
wherever possible. This is in line with current ministry objectives for the Core French
programs as well as the National Core French Study which outlines proﬁciency objectives
of the language syllabus and communicative activities syllabus. The test items were
designed to show what students can do in the second language rather than what they
know about the language (Harley & Lapkin, 1988).

The tests are also based on real-life situations involving students at school in the

province of Quebec. They reﬂect the cultural objectives of Core French for both the

47

ministry and the National Core French Study. Because teenagers in Ontario are familiar
with the life ofteenagers in Quebec, the familiarity would be an asset in perfornning the
tasks. Thefourtestsernphasizethefourskillareasoflistening, speaking, reading and
writing, allowing students in a classroom setting to be ”...tested on as wide a range of
language dimensions and tasks as is practically feasible and educationally desirable in
terms of progam objectives" (Harley & Lapkirn, 1988, p.3).

The reliability of a test refers to the consistency with which it measures the
intended outcomes. In a reliable test, high scores are awarded consistently for good
performances and low scores for poor performance. The individual test items should be
neither too difﬁcult nor too easy. They should discriminate between high and low
proﬁciency with respect to the particular aspect of language being measured. The authors
therefore developed "...tests that could be measured statistically as to reliability only where
possible without unduly compronnising the realism of the language task” (Harley &
Lapkin, 1988, p. 3). To ensure consistency in scoring, precise scoring criteria were
provided to assure inter-rater reliability and intra-rater reliability.

Along with the Grade Eight Core French Test Package, questionnaires, which are
included in appendices D through F, were designed for principals, teachers and students to

gather relevant backgound information.

48

ll i'| I'

Pernnission to conduct the study was received ﬁ'om the school board, principals,
teachers, parents and studernts. These consent forms are included in appendices A through
C. The pretest and the questionnaires were completed in early November, 1994. The two
French teachers admirnistered the listening, reading and writing components of the test to
all participants. The researcher chose, by random sample, eight students from each
classroom and conducted the oral interview with them. The same test, the posttest, was

administered in the same manner by the French teachers and the researcher in June, 1995.

m
All the pretest data was scored by the researcher as well as all the posttest data
except for the listening test. Inter-rater reliability was assured due to the precise scoring
criteria that was not subject to variation depending on the scorer. Intra-rater reliability
was assured in the written tests by marking 10 tests, waiting two months, and re-marking

the tests. Sinnilar procedures were carried out with 5 oral tests.

ANALYSIS OF DATA

Several analyses were conducted to determine if students in straight gade classes

49

achieve more than students in multigade classes. An analysis of variance with repeated
measures and t tests were conducted on the following data:

1. The mean scores on the pretest by type of class assignment.

2. The gain scores by class assignment.

3. The gain scores by gade level.

4. The gain scores by gender.

5. The gain scores by teacher assignment.

CHAPTER4

PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS OF DATA

The purpose of this study was to determine if the organization of single grade or
multigade classes has an impact on student achievement in listening, speaking, reading
and writing in elementary Core French. Students completed a pretest and a posttest in
1994-95 using The Grade Eight Core French Test Package. A multiple analysis of
variance with repeated measures (MAN OVA) and t tests were calculated on the scores of
students in the single gade and multigade classes. Calculations for listening, reading and
writing were based on the scores of a sample of one hundred and forty-seven students.
Calculations for the oral test were based on the scores of a subsarnple of forty-four
students. Computations included an analysis of the mean gain scores of students in single
gades and multigades; the gain scores by gade; and the pretest scores by gade. This
chapter will provide a presentation of data with results of the statistical analyses,

hypotheses tested and a summary.

50

51

STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

A multiple analysis of variance with repeated measures (MAN OVA) was
calculated on the Grade Eight Core French Test scores of students in the single grade and
multigrade classes. Analysis of variance is used to make inferences about the means of the
populations from which samples have been drawn. These different samples have been
treated diﬁ‘erently to detemnine if the treatment, or independent variable, had an effect on
the dependent variable. In this case, the scores on the reading, listening, writing and oral
tests are the dependent variables and the assignment to single or multigade classes is the
treatment or the independent variable. The test of the null hypothesis, that the mean gain
scores are equal across the four class goups, for each of the four measurements, was
conducted using an analysis of variance for repeated measures and t tests. An alpha level

of .05 was used for all statistical tests.

The mean scores on the pretest for the four test components, type of class
assignment, and gade level showed no signiﬁcant diﬁ‘erences. Table 1 contains the mean
performance scores of one hundred and forty-seven students by gade in listening, reading

and writing in the pretest.

Table l

52

Mean Performance Scores by Grade in Pretest in Listening, Reading and Writing

 

 

 

Total Scores

Possible 15 20 81

Grade Listening Sig. Reading Sig. Writing Sig. n
oft oft oft

7 7.825 9.000 38.675 40
.053 .659 *.006

7 of a 7/8 6.583 8.778 50.194 36

8 of a 7/8 6.533 8.267 49.600 15
.990 .271 .440

8 6.571 7.286 46.179 56

 

Table 1 shows that, at the beginning of the year, neither the single gade nor the
multigade classes showed consistently higher achievement in listening, reading and
writing. In some components of the test, the students in the single gade classes scored
higher marks. At the same time, in other components of the test, students in the
multigade classes scored higher marks, depending on both the gade level and the speciﬁc
component of the test. The MANOVA indicated an interaction eﬁ‘ect (p =.001). Analysis
of each gade level, in the three tests, using t tests indicated no signiﬁcant diﬁ‘erences in all
cases except writing. The students in the multigade seven classes scored higher in writing

than the students in the single gade seven classes at a statistically signiﬁcant level

(p = .006).

53

The oral scores of forty—four students in the pretest are contained in Table 2. No

signiﬁcant diﬁ‘erences were found by gade, by type of class assignment or by type of test.

Table 2

Mean Performance Scores by Grade in Pretest in Oral Test

 

 

 

Total Scores Possible 39
Oral Sig.
Grade Pretest oft n
7 23.500 14
.212
7 of a 7/8 27.875 8
8 ofa 7/8 25.714 7
.505
8 24.067 15

 

At the end of the pretest, given that there was only only one signiﬁcant diﬁ‘erence
by gade, by class assignment or by type of test, the credibility of the gain scores is
strengthened.

Write

Another analysis indicated that differences in learning were not affected by student
assignment to either teacher. Table 3 contains the gain scores compared by teacher for the

forty-four students who completed all four tests.

Table 3

54

Gain Scores by Teacher across Grades and by Class Assignment

 

 

 

 

 

Teacher Pretest Posttest Mean Standard Sig.
Mean Mean Gain Deviation n of F
L
I
s 1 6.857 7.143 .286 3.002 21
g .679
r; 2 8.261 8.957 .696 3.169 23
N
G
R
i 1 7.429 9.238 1.810 3.188 21
2 .852
g 2 8.348 9.913 1.565 4.727 23
W
i 1 46.667 53.810 7.143 12.014 21
g .607
g 2 46.565 56.174 9.609 13.527 23
o 1 24.762 28.429 3.667 4.531 21
g; .875
L 2 24.913 28.783 3.870 3.969 23

 

Comparing the gains by teacher allowed for an investigation of the effect of the
two teachers on the achievement of the students. The tests of signiﬁcance indicated that
there were no signiﬁcant differences in the instruction of the two teachers. Both teachers
provided instruction that increased student achievement in the four skill areas. These

results show no statistical signiﬁcance for the teacher effect which strengthens the

credibility of the gain scores when compared by class assignment.

55

Wanna!

Analysis of the mean gain scores of all students combined, in single and multigade
classes, indicated no signiﬁcant diﬂ‘erences in listening and reading. Table 4 indicates that
students in both types of classrooms gained in achievement during the year in these two

skill areas.

Table 4

Mean Gain Scores of Single and Multigrade Classes in Listening, Reading and
Writing

 

 

 

 

Class Pretest Posttest Mean Standard Sig. of
Mean Mean Gain Deviation n F
L
I
s Multigade 6.531 7.776 1.245 2.997 49
E .055
N Single Grade 7.102 7.265 .163 3.125 98
I
2
R
E
A Multigrade 8.612 9.102 .490 3.202 49
D
969

I e
2 Single Grade 8.020 8.480 .459 3.909 98
W
i Multigade 50.224 52.633 2.408 9.456 49
i *.001
2 Single Grade 43.092 51.561 8.469 11.346 98

 

56

Students in the multigade classes had geater gain scores than the students in the
single gade classes in listening and reading, but this diﬁ‘erence was not signiﬁcant.
However, students in the single gades had higher gain scores than students in the

multigades in writing, at a statistically signiﬁcant level (p = .001).

The computation of the oral scores also indicated a statistically signiﬁcant
difference in achievement. The students in the single grade classes scored signiﬁcantly
higher than the students in the multigade classes (p =.051). Table 5 indicates that there
was mean gain for students in multigade and single gade class assignments. However,
students in the single grades made geater gains in learrning than the students in

multigades, at a statistically signiﬁcant level.

Table 5

Mean Gain Scores of Single and Multigrade Classes in Oral Test

 

Class Pretest Posttest Mean Standard Sig. of
Mean Mean Gain Deviation n F

 

Multigrade 26.867 28.933 2.067 4.079 15
*.051

{"3'WO

Single Grade 23.793 28.448 4.655 4.047 29

 

Statistically, .051 is not signiﬁcant at the .050 level, but it is signiﬁcant at the .05
level. The difference of .001 is so small that the results will be considered to be

statistically signiﬁcant in this analysis.

57

Results of the analysis of mean gain scores for single and multigade classes

indicated that there were no statistically signiﬁcant diﬁ‘erences in the receptive skills of

listening and reading. There were, however, signiﬁcant differences in the expressive skills

of speaking and writing.

MW

Additional analysis was calculated using the gain scores of the sirngle gade and

multigade classes by gade level.

Table 6 contains the gain scores by gade in the

listening, reading and writing components of the test.

Table 6

Mean Gain Scores by Grade in Listening, Reading and Writing

 

Reading

PretestPosttest

Sig.

MeanMean Gainoft

Writing
Pretest Posttest

Sig.

MeanMeanGainoft

 

Listening
Pretest Posttest Sig.
Grade Mean Mean Gain of t
7 7.825 6.750 -l.075
*.0001
7of7/8 6.583 8.444 1.861
80f 7/8 6.533 6.267 -.267
.096
8 6.571 7.589 1.018

 

 

9.00 8.750

8.778 9.500

8.267 8.400

7.286 8.196

-.250

.722

.133

.911

.263

.415

 

38.675 47.475 8.800

‘.007

50.194 52.944 2.750

49.600 51.933 2.333

.119

46.179 54.429 8.250

 

36

15

 

Students in the single gade seven classes showed a negative mean gain ﬁ'om

pretest to posttest in listening and reading. The gade seven students in the multigade

classes made greater gains in listening, at a statistically signiﬁcant level (p = .0001), and

58

inreadingthangade seven studerntsinthesingle gade classes. Inwriting, however, the
students in the single gade seven classes showed geater mean gains, at a statistically
signiﬁcant level (p = .007), than the students in the multigade classes. In gade eight, the
students in the single gade classes showed geater gains, in all three components of the

test, than the students in the multigade eight classes.

In Table 7, analysis of the gain scores by gade for the oral test inndicated that
students in the single gades in both gades seven and eight made geater gains than the

students in the multigade classes. However, none of the differences by gade level were

signiﬁcant.

Table 7

Mean Gain Scores by Grade in Oral Test

 

 

Oral
Grade Pretest Mean Posttest Mean Gain n Sig. of t test
7 23.500 29.071 5.571 14
.105
7 of 7/8 27.875 29.875 2.000 8
8 of7/8 25.714 27.875 2.161 7
.285
8 24.067 27.867 3.800 15

 

Table 7 indicates that while all students made gains in their oral skills, the students

in the single gade seven classes showed geater mean gains in achievement than the

59

students in the multigade seven classes. In gade eight, the students in the single gade
eight classes showed geater mean gains than the students in the multigade eight classes.
Results of the analyses of gain scores by gade indicated that in gade seven,
students in single gades achieved higher gain scores in two skill areas, speaking and
writing (p = .007). However, gade seven students in multigade classes achieved higher
gain scores in listening (p = .0001) and in reading. In gade eight, the students in single
gade eight classes achieved higher mean gains than the students in the multigade eight

classes in all four skill areas.

Although not originally part of the study of the achievement of students in single
gade and multigade classes, a comparison of achievement by gender indicated one
statistically signiﬁcant diﬂ‘erence. Table 8 contains the pretest means, posttest means, gain

means and standard deviations for single gades and multigades divided by gender.

Table 8

60

Comparison by Gender, Across Grade Level and by Class Assignment

 

 

 

 

 

Gender Pretest Posttest Mean Standard Sig.
Mean Mean Gain Deviation n oft
L
I
3 Male 7.938 7.687 -0251 2.938 82
E .129
r; Female 7.393 8.321 0.928 2.653 68
2
R
i Male 7.813 7.875 0.062 4.015 82
2 .438
2 Female 7.964 10.571 2.607 3.132 68
W
'2 Male 41.875 48.125 6.250 18.110 82
1‘ *.016
2 Female 49.321 59.000 9.679 11.598 67
0 Male 23.500 27.063 3.563 6.005 16
g .805
1. Female 25.607 29.500 3.893 5.966 28

 

The females scored higher than the males in all four components of the test. In

writing, the diﬁ‘erence was statistically signiﬁcant (p = .016).

RESULTS OF HYPOTHESES TESTED

The null hypothesis tested for this study states that there is no statistically

signiﬁcant difference in the second language achievement of students in single gade

61

classes compared to the second language achievement of students in multigrade classes.
Overall, the null hypothesis was not rejected for the listening and reading components of

the test. The null hypothesis was rejected for the oral and written components of the test.

SUNINIARY

The results of the statistical analysis of data were reported in this chapter. The
administration of The Grade Eight Core French Test Package to one hundred and forty-
seven students in the fall of 1994 and the spring of 1995 provided data for the study.

Analysis of the total gain scores indicated no statistically signiﬁcant differences for
students in single or multigade classes in listening and reading. However, in the oral and
written tests, students in the single gade classes showed geater gain than the students in
the multigade classes at statistically signiﬁcant levels.

Analysis of the gain scores by gade indicated that gade seven students in
multigade classes achieved higher gain scores in listening, at a statistically signiﬁcant
level, and in reading. The gade seven students in single gades achieved higher gain
scores in the oral component and in writing, at a statistically signiﬁcant level. The data
shows that students in the single gade eight classes showed geater gain than the students
in the multigade eight classes in the listening, reading, writing and oral tests, but not at a

statistically signiﬁcant levels.

62

Analysis of the mean pretest and posttest scores by gade and by type of class
assignment also indicated no overall pattern showing higher achievement. Students in the
multigade seven classes showed higher achievement in listening, at a statistically
signiﬁcant level, whereas students in the single grade seven classes showed higher
achievement in writing, at a statistically signiﬁcant level. Students in single gade eight
classes showed higher achievement in all four skill areas, though not at a statistically

signiﬁcant level.

CHAPTERS

SUWARY, IMPLICATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

This study compared the achievement of students in single grade classes with the
achievement of students in multigade classes using The Grade Eight Core French Test
Package. From the ﬁndings, it is possible to see that some of the data supports literature on

the subject while other ﬁndings contribute new krnowledge in the area of French as a Second

Language.

The analysis of the data provides the following ﬁndings:

1. The null hypothesis was not rejected for two components of the test when gades
were combined. The results indicated that the achievement of students in single grade
classes and students in multigade classes is approximately the same in listening and reading
when gades are combined. No pattern emerged showing that the students in either gade
seven or eight, in single or multigade classes consistently scored higher in a statistically
signiﬁcant way in these components of the test.

2. The null hypothesis was rejected for two parts of the test. The results indicated

that the mean gains on the oral and written components of the test by

63

64

students in single gade classes was geater than that of students in multigade classes at a
statistically signiﬁcant level. This represents new ﬁndings in the area of student
achievement in Core French as a Second Language.

Also, although not part of the major question, the results indicated the existence of
signiﬁcant differences in gain scores by gernder. In both gades seven and eight, in all four
parts of the test, females made geater gains than males. In writing, the diﬁ‘erence was

statistically signiﬁcant.

DISCUSSION

In two of the four components of the test, the results indicated that there were no
signiﬁcant differences in the achievement of students in single or multigade classes when
gades were combined. In gades seven and eight these two components, listening and
reading comprise 50% of the French as a Second Language progam. From the literature
this appears to be due to progam organization (Moscovitch, 1991); adjustments for
multigade classes (Reed, 1991); and eﬁ‘ective teaching strategies of the teacher (James,
1991). Students demonstrated similar gains in achievement in listening and reading
regardless of assignment to single or multigade classes when gades were combined.

The literature makes it clear that French teachers believe that oral communication
skills of students in single gades are better developed than oral communication skills of
students in multigade classes. This is supported by the study. From the literature, it
would appear that in multigade classes there is a reduction in teacher and student

interaction time (Campbell, 1991; Reed, 1991; Moscovitch, 1991); fewer oral activities

65

(Campbell, 1991; Reed, 1991; James,l991; Moscovitch, 1991); increased amounts of
written work (Darniel, 1988; Campbell, 1991; Reed, 1991; Melnyck & Daniel, 1990);
studernt communication in English due to limited second language skills (Daniel, 1988;
Moscovitch, 1991; Reed, 1991) and gaps in learrning if teachers choose a progam for

either the lower or the higher gade (Shapson et al., 1978; Daniel, 1988; Veilands, 1988).

In writing, although students in multigade classes are assigned increased amounts
of written work (Daniel, 1988; Campbell, 1991; Moscovitch, 1991), the students in the
single gades achieved geater gains. This appears to be due to reduction in teacher and
student interaction time (Campbell, 1991; Reed, 1991; Moscovitcln, 1991); a distracting
classroom environment (Moscovitch, 1991); not understanding what they are supposed to
be doing (Moscovitch, 1991) and gaps in learning if teachers choose a progam for either

the lower or the higher gade (Shapson et at, 1978; Darniel, 1988; Veilands, 1988).

STUDY LIMITATIONS

The thesis addressed the issue of student achievement by exarrnining the impact of
assignment of students to single or multigade classes. Signiﬁcant diﬁ‘erences appeared in
oral and written communication skills. The study did not include all factors that may have
inﬂuenced the results. Factors that could also aﬂ‘ect achievement that were not included in
this study are the teaching styles of the teachers; the amount of English spoken by the
teachers; the attitude of the learners towards the learning of French; and the composition

of the classroom relating to gender, student ability, personality and behavior.

66

The study was conducted with teachers and materials ﬁom one board of education.
As such, the ﬁndings represent the reality of a medium size metropolitan area. Findings

could be diﬁ'erent in other boards of education or in other regions of the province.

IMPLICATIONS

Multigade classes exist, and will continue to exist, in the educational systerrns of
North America. Based on ﬁndings from the literature review and the study of student
achievement in single or multigade classes in Core French, a number of implications for
educators can be formulated. These implications relate to adrrninistrators, teachers,
teacher educators and publishers.

The study contains ﬁndings that have decision making innplications for school
administrators. The orgarnization of single gade and multigade classes in elementary
Core French does not appear to have a signiﬁcant impact on student achievement in the
receptive skills of listening and reading. However, the orgarnization of single gade and
multigade classes does appear to have a signiﬁcant impact on student achievement in the
expressive skills of speaking and writing, favoring those in the single gades. The results of
the analysis on oral and written skills are contrary to the stated aim of the Core French
program which is to develop communication skills in French (OMB, 1980). In gades
seven and eight the development of oral and written skills in French is a key component of
the progam in which 50% of instructional time should be devoted to the development of

these skills (OMB, 1980). Educators might conclude that the organization of single grade

67

classes in elementary Core French will signiﬁcantly strerngthen the achievement of students
in French as a Second Language.

Based on the literature review and the study results, educators might consider the
creation and revision of board policies on multigade classes in ways that would be
beneﬁcial for principals, teachers, parents and students. Policy makers could refer to the
pedagogical organization of multigade classes with regards to class size (Strauber, 1985);
teacher selection (James, 1991; Strauber, 1985); student selection (Reed, 1991;
Moscovitcln, 1991; Niagara South Board of Education); and curriculum and supervision
(Craig & McLellan, 1987). Also, based on the literature review and study results, it seems
that there is a real need for revised staff development progams (Reed, 1991; Moscovitch,
1991; Craig & McLellan, 1987) and appropriate resources (Darniel, 1988; Leblanc, 1990;
Campbell, 1991).

Staﬂ‘ development could focus on creating links between the philosoplnical reasons
for establishing multiage classes and the philosophical reasons for establishing multigrade
classes. Examination of mixed ability goupings, thematic curriculum and strategies such
as cooperative learning in the multiage classrooms rrnight provide positive transfer to
multigade classrooms.

Based on the ﬁndings that females made signiﬁcantly geater gains than males in
French as a Second Language, it nnight be concluded that gender bias may exist in the
French as a Second Language curriculum and in the attitudes of teachers and students.

Teachers’ perceptions that students in single gade classes achieve more than

students in multigade classes in oral and written communication were generally supported

68

in this study. Teachers nnight conclude that teacher involvement in classroom research
could identify the most eﬂ‘ective strategies for teaching the oral and written
communication skills in multigade classes.
Implications for second language teachers in the faculties of education are twofold.
Since most faculties of education do not include speciﬁc preparation for, or practice
teaching opportunities in multigade classes (Lapkin et al., 1993; Strauber, 1985), faculties
should implement changes in curriculum. Teacher training curriculum should include both
the planning of curriculum for multigade classes and eﬂ‘ective strategies for teaching
multigade language classes, especially the oral and written communication skills.
Implications for students in French as a Second Language progams are that they
nnight expect to achieve more, in oral and written communication, if assigned to single

gade classes rather than multigade classes.

RECOMMENDATIONS FOR PRACTICE

From this study, several recommendations can be made for educators relating to
policy making and practice. Recommendations for use of this study are as follows:

1. School boards should consider the ﬁndings of this study when making policies
for multigade classes and providing professional development for teachers.

2. Administrators should analyze the ﬁndings of this study when making decisions
about the orgarnization of single and multigade second language classes in schools as a
reduction in the use of multigade class assignments could signiﬁcantly strengthen the

achievement of oral and written skill development of students in elementary core French.

69

3. Administrators should consider the ﬁndings in this study when orgarnizing
professional development for Frernch teachers, assuring that strategies for teaching
multigade classes in general, and strategies for teaching the speciﬁc skills of speaking and
writing are included in the professional development activities.

4. Administrators should apply the ﬁndings of this study when considering the
orgarnization of the multigade classes, relating the philosophy of multiage classrooms to
multigade classrooms.

5. Adrrnirnistrators should apply the ﬁndings in this study when advising teachers
regarding their responsibilities for the delivery of curriculum.

6. Teachers should apply the ﬁndings of this study when developing curriculum
and choosing teaching strategies, making efforts to highlight the development of oral and
written communication skills.

7. Teachers should lobby for professional development in the areas of teaching
multigade language classes and strategies to enhance oral and written skill development in
multigade classes.

8. Teachers should participate in classroom research to examine the most effective
strategies for teaching multigade language classes.

9. Publishers should consider the development of thematic units of study when
developing commercial materials for the Core French progam.

10. Teachers responsible for the French as a Second Language progams at
teacher training institutions should consider the ﬁndings of this study when determirning

the content of their courses.

70

RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FURTHER STUDY

The ﬁndings of this study indicate that there is need for further investigation irnto
the impact of multigade classroom organization on student achievement in Core French.
To provide more information on the achievement of students in French as a Second
Language, the following recommendations are proposed:

1. Replicate this study at the primary division, where listening and speaking skills
comprise 100% of the progam, or in the junior division where listening and speaking
skills comprise 70% of the progam in French as a Second Language.

2. Replicate this study in the Extended or Immersion programs to learn more
about the impact of multigade classes on student achievement in other types of second
language progams.

3. Conduct a study to track the frequency of individual student placement in
multigade classes in elementary school, attempting to determine the impact that continued
placement in single or multigrade classes has on student achievement and attitude in Core
French.

4. Expand this study to include multigade classes of three diﬁ‘erent gades as is
found in multiage classroom organizations.

5. Conduct a study to examine the most effective strategies for teaching
multigade language classes.

6. Conduct a study to identify the most eﬁ’ective strategies for developing the

expressive skills of speaking and writing of students in multigade classes.

71

7. Conduct a study to examine, tlnrough extended classroom observatiorn, teacher
and student actions in single and multigade classrooms relative to the development of
speaking and writing skills in Core French progams.

8. Conduct a study to examine the impact of cooperative learrning strategies on

student achievement in Core French.

CLOSING COMMENTS

The organization of multigade classes has increased dramatically within the past
ten years, posing challenges to educators. Teachers have been expected to teach
multigade classes without the beneﬁt of preparation at faculties of education, professional
development or appropriate resources. Administrators faced with declining student
populations, mobility of students, economic inﬂuences and teacher contract considerations
often organize multigade classes due to administrative needs.

Although in this study it was found that the organization of single grade second
language classes could enhance student achievement in oral language, the reality is that
multigade classes will continue to be organized for both administrative and pedagogical
reasons. It is vital therefore, that research in this area be continued to assist adrrnirnistrators
and teachers in making informed decisions to improve the quality and the delivery of

French as a Second Language progams.

APPENDICES

APPENDIX A

PRINCIPAL CONSENT FORM

PRINCIPAL CONSENT FORM

Dear Principals:

I am delighted to be working with you, your teachers, your students and your school
board in a study of student achievement in Core French in grades seven and eight.

Knowledge of the results of this study will allow administrators, teachers and parents to
make better informed decisions about the placement of students in straight or split grade

classes for Core French in future years.

The second language test that will be used with students was designed at the Ontario
Institute for Studies in Education. The three skill areas of listening, reading and writing
will be examined within three regular periods of French instruction. The French teachers
will be asked to administer these three components of the test for both the pretest in
November, 1994, and the posttest in June, 1995. The oral skills will be examined with a
random sample of students in a relaxed, ten minute interview that includes two students
and the researcher, Professor Cher Evans-Harvey from the Faculty of Education at
Nipissing University in North Bay. Ms. Evans-Harvey will score all components of the
test. Students will also be asked to complete a questionnaire that provides information on
their maternal language and the F. S.L. programs in which they have participated.

Principals will be asked to complete a questionnaire regarding the total number of hours of

72

73

French instruction the students have had as well as the normal procedures for student

placement within the school.

There are no foreseeable risks to any student, teacher or principal. All participation is
voluntary. Any participant may withdraw from the study at any time without penalty. We
do, in fact, anticipate several beneﬁts for students, teachers and principals. Students may
experience a sense of accomplishment and service through participation. The test has
interesting and relevant tasks to perform which they might ﬁnd challenging and
worthwhile. In the oral interview, the students chosen by random sample are asked to
bring a ﬁend to the interview to help them. The ﬁiends would feel helpﬁrl and needed.

All students would learn French from the carefully designed, communicative activities in
the test itself. Teachers and principals may experience personal and professional
development ﬁom participation in the study, discussion of student achievement and from
access to the Grade Eight Core French Test Package with its emphasis on communicative

competence.

All results will be treated with strict conﬁdence. The students, the teachers, the principals
and the schools will remain anonymous in any report of research ﬁndings. When the study
is complete, a presentation will be made to the teachers, principals and board personnel.

A letter would be available to all participating students and parents with the results of the

study.

74

I would like to thank you, in advance, for your support of and participation in this

worthwhile educational project. Please complete the following consent form and return it

to Professor Evans-Harvey.

If you have any questions please contact me at Nipissing University (705) 474-3450.

Sincerely,

Professor Cher Evans-Harvey

 

CONSENT FORM
I hereby agree to participate in the study of student achievement in elementary Core French

conducted by Cher Evans-Harvey.

(Signature)

 

 

 

 

APPENDIX D

QUESTIONNAIRE FOR PRINCIPALS

QUESTIONNAIRE FOR PRINCIPALS

Thank you for participating in this study to determine the impact of multi-level classes on

student achievement in elementary Core French.

Please answer the following questions:

1. Name of school.

 

2. Generally, how many hours of French instruction would the students have entering

grade seven?

 

3. Generally, how many hours of French instruction would the students have entering

grade eight?

 

4. Please describe the regular method of assigning students to straight grades.

 

 

 

 

 

 

81

82

 

 

 

5. Please describe the regular method of assigning students to split grades.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

APPENDIX E

QUESTIONNAIRE FOR TEACHERS

QUESTIONNAIRE FOR TEACHERS

 

2. Teaching qualiﬁcations

O.T.C. YES_ NO_
F.S.L 1 YES_ NO_
F.S.L 2 YES_ NO_
F.S.L 3 YES_ NO_
Other qualiﬁcations

 

 

 

 

 

3. Number of years of teaching experience in total.

 

4. Number of years of teaching experience in F.S.L.

 

83

84

Number of years of experience teaching split grades in total

 

Number of years of experience teaching split grades in F.S.L.

 

Do you have a preference for teaching straight grades or split grades? Please

explain.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

85

8. Do you think students in straight grades in Core French achieve more than, as

much as or less than students in split grade classes?

 

 

 

 

 

 

9. What do you think the results of this study will show?

 

 

 

 

 

 

APPENDIX F

QUESTIONNAIRE FOR STUDENTS

QUESTIONNAIRE FOR STUDENTS

Thank you for participating in this study on the impact of split-grade classes on student

achievement in Core French.

Please answer the following questions.

 

 

1 Name
2. School
3. Grade

 

4. Are you in a split grade? Yes_ No_

5. What language do you speak at home?

 

6. How long have you lived in Canada?

 

7. Have you ever been enroled in French immersion?

 

86

87

How many years were you in French immersion?

 

Please circle the letter of the sentence that best describes your perception.

A. In second language classes, I feel I learn as much when I'm in a split grade
as I do when I‘m in a straight grade.

B. In second language classes, I feel I learn more when I‘m in a split grade
than I do when I'm in a straight grade.

C. In second language classes, I feel I learn less when I'm in a split grade than

I do when I am in a straight grade.

Please

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Acheson, I. F. (1984). Memorandum on combined classes. Edmonton Catholic School
Board, Program Services.

Adair, J. H. ( 1978). An attitude and achievement comparison between kindergarten and
ﬁrst grade children in multi and single grade classes. (Doctoral dissertation,
Boston College, 1978). Dissertation Abstracts International, 39 659A-660A

Adams, I. J. (1953). Achievement and social adjustment of pupils in combination classes
enrolling pupils of more than one grade level. Joumal of Educational Research,
47(October), 151-155.

Alberta Teachers' Association. (1986) Third Working Conditions Survey. Edmonton,
Alberta.

Berger, M. (1993). From theory to practice: implementing multi-age classes in an
elementary school. Dissertation Abstracts International. (University Microﬁlms
No. AAC MM70423)

Bowman, B. L. (1971). A comparison of pupil achievement and attitude in a graded
school with pupil achievement and attitude in a nongraded school 1968-69, 1969-
70 school years. (Doctoral dissertation, University of North Carolina at Chapel
Hill, 1971). Dissertation Abstracts International, 32, 66OA-661A

Brown, K. & Martin, A. (1989). Student achievement in multigrade and single grade
classes. Education Canada, 29(2), 10-13.

Burns, G. E., Haché, D., & Haynes, P. (1992). Transformational planning in FSL and
regular English program innovation and implementation. Contact, 11(4), 2-9.

Campbell, G. (1991). Research proposal: assessing the impact of multi-grade classes on
Core French programs. Unpublished master’s thesis, University of Toronto,
Ontario.

Campbell, G. (1991). The results of the OMLTA survey on split grades in elementary
Core French. Ontario Modern language T eachers’ Association, Toronto, Ontario.

88

89

Canadian Parents For French. (1988). Report of the Annual General Meeting. C.P.F.
Ontario.

Chace, E. S. (1961). An analysis of some eﬂ‘ects of multiple-grading groupings in
elementary schools. (Doctoral dissertation, University of Tennessee, 1961).
Dissertation Abstracts International, 22, 3 544.

Craig, C., & McLellan, J. (1987). Split grade classrooms: an educational dilemma.
Education Ccmada, 27(4), 4-9.

Craig, C. & McLellan, J. (1988). Using multigrade classrooms more rationally. The
Canadian School Executive, 7(8), 30.

Daniel, I. H. (1988). Doing the splits: Core French in the elementary schools. The
Canadian Modern Language Review, 45(1), 146-154.

Drier, W. H. (1949). The diﬂ‘erential achievement of rural elementary school children.
Journal of Educational Research, 43, 175-185.

Finley, C. 1., & Thompson, J. M. (1963). A comparison of the achievement of
multigraded and single-graded rural elementary school children. Journal of
Educational Research, 56(9), 471-479.

Forshay, A W. (1948). Interage grouping in the elementary school. (Doctoral
dissertation, Columbia University, 1948).

Gajadharsingh, J. (1983). The multigrade classroom in Saskatchewan. Saskatchewan
Bulletin, Saskatoon.

Gayfer, M. (Ed.). (1991). The multi-grade classroom: myth and reality. A Canadian
study. Canadian Education Association Report, Toronto, Ontario.

Goodlad, I. I. & Anderson, R. H. (1987). The non-graded elementary school (Revised
Edition). T eachers' College Press, New York.

Harley, B., Hart, D., & Lapkin, S. (1990). The grade 8 Core French test package.
Toronto: OISE Modern Language Centre.

Harley, B., Lapkin, S. (1988). Testing outcomes in Core French: The development of
communicative instruments for curriculum evaluation and research. (Project Rep.
No. 1053). Toronto: OISE Modern Language Centre.

Harvey, S. B. (1974). A comparison of kindergarten children in multigrade and
traditional settings on self-concept, social-emotional development, readiness

90

development and achievement. (Doctoral dissertation, Virginia Polytechnic
Institute and State University, 1974). Dissertation Abstracts International, 35
3340-A

Hoen, RP. (1972). An evaluation of multi-age classes at Carnarvon school. Vancouver
Board of School Trustees, Department of Planning and Evaluation, British
Columbia.

Holmes, M. (1979). Instruction time and academic achievement. Ministry of Education
Research Publication.

James, W.E. (1991). Observations of a selected group of exemplary multi-grade classes.
The Carleton Board of Education, Nepean, Ontario.

Johnson, D., Johnson, R, Pierson, W. &Lyons, V. W. (1985). Controversy versus

concurrence seeking in multigrade and single grade learning groups. Journal of
Research in Science Teaching, 22(9), 835-848.

Knight, E. E. (1938). A study of double grades in New Haven city schools. Journal of
Experimental Education, 30(Decernber), 249-253.

Lalonde, D. et al. (1980). Evaluation of combined grades. Ottawa RC.S.S.B.
Committee Report, Ottawa, Ontario.

Lapkin, 8., Harley, E, & Taylor, S. (1993). Research directions for Core French in
Canada. The Canadian Modern language Review, 49(3) 477-508.

Leblanc, R (1990). A synthesis: national Core French stuay. Canadian Association of
Second Language Teachers, Winnipeg, Manitoba.

Levy, S.L. (1982). Teaching multi-level foreign language classes. Brooklyn, NY:
Roslyn Public Schools. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 221 056)

Lincoln, R D. (1981). The eﬂ‘ect of single grade and multigrade primary school
classrooms on reading achievement of children. (Doctoral dissertation, University
of Michigan, 1971). University Illicroﬁlms International.

MacDonald, P. A. & Wurster, S. R (1974). Multi-grade primary versus segregated ﬁrst
grade: eﬂects on reading achievement. United States Department of Health,
Education and Welfare. Bethseda, MD. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service
No. ED 094 336)

Melnyck, J. & Daniel, I. (1990). Questionnaire re combined Core French classes:
summary of responses. Modern Language Council, Toronto.

91

Milburn, D. (1981). A study of multi-age or family grouped classrooms. Phi Delta
Kappan 62(March), 513-514.

Moscovitch, B. (1991). Review of split grades in Core French. Report to the Middlesex
County Board of Education, London, Ontario.

Niagara South Board of Education. (1987). Report of the Split Grades Study
Committee, Welland, Ontario.

Ontario, Ministry of Education. (1977). Teaching and learning French as a second
language in the I980s. Toronto: Ministry of Education, Communication Services
Branch.

Ontario, Ministry of Education. (1980). French, Care Programs 1980: Curriculum
Guideline for the Primary, Junior, Intermediate and Senior Divisions. Toronto:
Ministry of Education, Communication Services Branch.

Ontario, Ministry of Education. (1986). French as a Second Language: Core French,
Extended French, Immersion French. Curriculum Guideline: Ontario Academic
Courses. Toronto: Ministry of Education, Communication Services Branch.

Perras, J. (1983). La classe combinée: du concept a la réalité. Montreal Catholic
School Board, Service des études.

Pratt, D. (1983). Age segregation in schools. Montreal, Quebec: American Educational
Research Association. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 231 03 8)

Reed, L. (1991). Results of the survey on Core French split grades. Wentworth County
Board of Education, Dundas, Ontario.

Rule, J. G. (1983). Eﬂects of multiage grouping an elementary student achievement in
reading and mathematics. Mesa, AZ: Mesa Public Schools, Department of
Research and Evaluation. (ERIC Document Reproduction Services No. ED 250
327)

Sexton, D. (1992). Student achievement in combination classes: decision-making
implications. (Doctoral dissertation, University of Alabama, 1992). Dissertation
Abstracts International, 93, 13070.

Shapson, S. M., Kaufman, D. & Durward, L. (1978). French study, an evaluation of
elementary French programs in British Columbia. Burnaby, BC: Simon Fraser
University (mimeo).

92

Stimson, J. (1991). The eﬂ‘ects of multigrade classes on student achievement in year-
round schools (Doctoral dissertation, Northern Arizona University, 1991).
Dissertation Abstracts International, AAC 9136518.

Strauber, S. K. (1985). Observing and evaluating the multi-level language class: some
guidelines and explanations. NASSP Bulletin, 69(483), 92-99.

Way, J. W. (1981). Achievement and self-concept in multi-age classrooms. Educational
Research Quarterly, 6(Summer), 69-75.

Veilands, J. (1988). The issue of .mlit grades in the Core French program. Modern
Languages Council, Toronto, Ontario.

GENERAL REFERENCES

Adams, J. J. (1953). Achievement and social adjustment of pupils in combination classes
enrolling pupils of more than one grade level. Journal of Educational Research,
47(2), 151-155.

Alexander, R (1978). Is the country school the newest thing in education? Instructor,
88(3), 107-111.

Anderson, RC. (1962). The case for non-graded homogeneous grouping. Elementary
School Journal, 62(4), 193-197.

Bienvenu, H. J., & Martyn, K. A (1955). Why fear combination classes? American
School Board Journal, 130(4), 33-34.

Bishop, J. (1982). The single grade versus the multigrade classroom. Journal of
Education, 7(3).

Burchyett, J. A (1972). A comparison of the effects of non-graded, multi-age, team
teaching vs. the modiﬁed, self-contained classroom at the elementary school level.
(Doctoral dissertation, Michigan State University, 197 7). Dissertation Abstracts
International, 33, 5998A-5999A

Carbone, R F. (1962). A comparison of graded and non-graded elementary schools.
Elementay School Journal, 62(1), 82-88.

Daresh, J. C. (1984). School size, grade level organization, and school management
trends. Cincinnati, OH: Oak Hills Local Schools Task Force. (ERIC Document
Reproduction Service No. ED 292 178)

Day, B., & Hunt, G.H. (1975). Multiage classrooms: an analysis of verbal
communication. Elementary School Journal, 75(7), 45 8-464.

Edmonds, E. L. (1981). The small rural schools of Prince Edward Island. Canada:
Prince Edward Island. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 297 922)

Elkind, D. (1981). Multi-age grouping. Young Children, 43(1), 2.

93

94

Firlik, R J. (1976). Family style grouping: yes or no. Childrood Education, 52(3), 138-
141.

Ford, B. E. (1977). Multiage grouping in the elementary school and children's aﬁ'ective
development: a review of recent research. Elementary School Journal, 78(20),
149-159.

Franklin, M. P. (1967). Multigrading in elementary education. Childrood Education,
43(9), 513-515.

Freeman, J. (1984). How I learned to stop worrying and love my combination class.
Instructor, 93(7), 48-49, 53.

Gulliford, A (1985). The one-room school lives. Principal, 65(1), 6-12.

Hillson, M., Jones, J. C., Moore, J. W., & Devender, F. V. (1964). A controlled
experiment evaluating the effects of a non-graded organization on pupil
achievement. Journal of Educational Research, 57(10), 548-550.

Koontz, W. F. (1961). A study of achievement as a function of homogeneous grouping.
Journal of Experimental Education, 30(2), 249-252.

Leithwood, K., & Montgomery, D. (1978). Effects of declining enrollments on the
curriculum: Perceptions of supervisory oﬂ‘icers. Toronto: Comission on
Declining School Enrollments in Ontario. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service
No. ED 197 460)

Morris, V. R (1968). An evaluation of pupil achievement in a nongraded primary plan
after three and also ﬁve years of instruction. (Doctoral dissertation, Lehigh
University, 1968). Dissertation Abstracts International, 29, 3809A

Mycock, M. (1966). A comparison of vertical grouping and horizontal grouping in the
infant school. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 37(1), 133-135.

Myers, D.A., & Sinclair, R (1973). Improved decision making for school organization:
what and what for. National Elementary School Principal, 52(4), 43-50.

Stern, H. H. (1982). French core programs across Canada: How can we improve them?
The Canadian Modern Language Review, 39, 34-37.

Strasheim, LA. (1983). Coping with multi-level classes eﬂectively and creatively.
Fredericksburg, VA: American Classical League Conference. (ERIC Document
Reproduction Service No. ED 232 454)

95

Traynelis-Yurek, E. & Strong, M. W. (1987). Remedial math program for split grades.
Rural Educator, 8(2), 23-26.

Veenman, S. (1985). Classroom time and achievement in mixed age classes.
Educational Studies, 13(1), 75-89.

 

MICHIGAN STnTE UNIV. LIBRARIES
1|1111111111111111111111111111111111111
31293014217255