Flexible grouping strategies in the multiage classroom

Theory Into Practice, Wntr, 2002 by Jo Hoffman

While positive interaction among group members is needed, high-quality discussion is of critical importance in peer collaboration groups (Meloth & Deering, 1999). Teachers must instruct and model high-quality discussion. Before and during collaborative group work, students talk about the social skills needed to achieve goals. Palincsar and Herrenkohl (1999) identified four key social skills necessary in collaborative group work: (a) Students must contribute to the group's efforts and help others to contribute through sharing resources, discussing ideas, and taking turns with different jobs; (b) students must give reasons for ideas and provide examples if not understood; (c) students are responsible for working to understand others' ideas; (d) students must build on each other's ideas.

Students working at a higher ability level are challenged within the same open-ended activities so that they are able to remain stimulated and curious about the task at hand. For instance, in one primary multiage classroom during a unit about weather forecasting, three students were given the challenge of going to the computer center to search the Internet for information about barometers (e.g., what they measure, what high and low pressure means in relation to the forecast, etc.), and then to report back to the class with that information.

What is interesting, and perhaps unique to the multiage classroom, is how students have learned to accept differences in abilities and social behaviors. Because they work side by side with classmates whose rates of development vary cognitively and socially, they seem to appreciate one another for their various strengths (Chase & Doan, 1994). A student who may have much background knowledge to add to a problem-solving situation is respected for that knowledge; while another student working within that same group may have more developed social skills and can model fairness and sharing for classmates. Students recognize and support peer interaction, both teacher and student consider it to be a primary resource.

A variety of theoretical perspectives on peer learning can be drawn on to explain the potential power of the group learning context described above; social-motivational perspectives can be drawn on to explain why common interest groups are successful. Student choice is a key factor in supporting autonomous learning, and the opportunity to exercise choice is rewarding in and of itself. Piagetian theory (De Lisi & Golbeck, 1999) suggests that learning and conceptual development is more likely to occur in contexts where there is mutuality of power and influence, as is the case when students choose groups based on common interest. Because group members may differ in ability (even though linked by common interest), some students may provide scaffolding for other students. Vygotskian theory (Hogan & Tudge, 1999) can be drawn on to explain how differences in ability translate into learning. When one student helps another accomplish something he or she could not do without assistance (as is often the case in the multiage classroom), the more able student is operating in the other's zone of proximal development. The kind of group that is explained by Vygotskian theory (i.e., students of different abilities) seems to require the antithesis of what might be expected from Piagetian theory (a group of equal peers). Within the multiage classroom, differences in ability do not have the salience that they have in single-grade classrooms. Students expect and accept differences, and such differences do not make students unequal. Thus, within this kind of classroom, Piagetian and Vygotskian theory do not necessarily result in different kinds of groups.