Should Schools Do Away With Grade Levels?
Because all children do not learn at the same pace, teachers are generally forced to follow a curriculum that teaches to the lowest common denominator. While this method may indeed meet the needs of the kids who need more time to master a particular skill, it can slow down and even frustrate a child who is ready to move on to the next challenge. But in a classroom full of students of varying abilities, it’s the only way to ensure that nobody gets left behind. Or is it?
Some school districts around the country are trying a different approach to the standard grouping of students based on grade level. Rather than have each student spend a year in each grade, students of different ages are grouped together based on their ability in each subject. Students work within the groups on assignments that are specifically tailored to their skill level. As soon as a skill is mastered, the student moves on to the next level. Those who need more time can have it. Those who don’t, aren’t held back.
This grouping by skill level isn’t a brand new idea. Montessori schools have always done this and many smaller private schools do it. But now the idea is being embraced by some larger public school districts who are desperate to turn around their failing schools. Last year, the Adams County School District in Denver successfully implemented such a program and this fall, Kansas City is giving it a try. Kansas City Superintendent John Covington believes that the time has come to rethink the way students are taught.
“The current system of public education in this country is not working. It’s an outdated, industrial, agrarian kind of model that lends itself to still allowing students to progress through school based on the amount of time they sit in a chair rather than whether or not they have truly mastered the competencies and skills.”
And research would seem to indicate that this new method holds promise. In evaluating test data for over 3,500 students in 15 school districts in three states, Marzano Research Laboratory finds that students who were taught this way were 2.5 more likely to score at a level that indicates they have a good grasp of the material they need to know to pass reading, writing, and mathematics exams.
My own child was a Montessori student for three years before moving into public school. Not only is she a fast learner who quickly masters new skills, her late September birthday makes her one of the oldest students in her grade. My biggest fear when moving her from private to public school was that she’d be bored and frustrated. And she is.
Her public school’s inability to meet the individual needs of all students is never more apparent than when she and her best friend do their homework together. While her friend, who struggles to master new subjects, becomes frustrated at the difficulty of the work, my own child breezes through it complaining all the way about what a waste of time it is. Neither child is doing the work they should be doing.
If there is a drawback to this idea, I sure can’t see it. What about you? Would you support this kind of change in your child’s school?
Image: Orange42/Flickr
More from this author:
Many Parents Blind to Kid’s Weight Problems
Sometimes “Sorry” Really is the Hardest Word
Should We Tell Our Daughters They’re Pretty?
Barbecue Dangers You Didn’t Know Existed
Cynthia Rowley Designs Pampers
Fruit Roll Ups Dangerous and Unhealthy?
School’s Massage Program Rubs Parents the Wrong Way
Teen Girls Use Alcohol and Drugs to Cope
Should Peanuts be Banned on Airplanes?
I see a major drawback. My son doesnt breeze through his school work and is already the oldest kid in his class would he be forced in with kids that are even younger than than they already are?
@JZ, your son would probably have a few classmates older than him, too, depending on the subject, but I see your point. I went to a school where kids were grouped by ability (we had separate classes for math, English, etc at an earlier age than public schools) for academic subjects and grouped by birthdate for arts, music, PE, and social activities, and I really think it was the best of both worlds. But, it was a small school with a certain type of teacher, and I don’t think it would work as well in a public school setting.
jttt – that sounds like an ideal school! My son was bored and signed himself out on his birthday. He ended up missing ONE question on the GED exam – without any preparation- and being out of school for 4 months doing volunteer work. I really wish he would have been given different avenues to continue in high school with his peers, but everything has worked out. I have a different plan for my 2 year old when she reaches school age, I am hoping to make sure that she is always challenged in her school work and remains interested in the offered activities. I will keep my fingers crossed that there is a school available to meet these needs. Oh yea – and I will remember that she is a different kid and may do well in any public school. We will see – but at least now, I know the signs to look for.
When I was in elementary school, my public school had this. There were about five groups of varying size, and you might be in a different level for reading than math, for example, depending on your testing and performance. We had PE, recess, music, and homeroom with kids from all levels. When this went away, I really missed it, and would love to see this return to public schools.
It sounds like a wonderful idea- I am all for it!
My schools dealt with differing abilities by offering different classes. Entry tests determined what class you started in when you moved to Junior high and high school. Then you progressed from there, with teacher permission required for entry into the advanced classes. The slower kids took the basic classes that covered the minimum graduation requirements. The more advanced kids went the college prep, AP route. My schools were large, though, and I think that allowed for a wider variety of course offerings.
[...] Grouping Kids by Skill Level, Not Grade [...]
My kids go to an alternative school with multi-age classrooms, and grouping by skill level is one of the things I love about it.
My son is in Montessori and I love it. He’s done preK3, preK4 and will do K in the same room with the same teacher and kids. He’s able to help the younger kids and be helped by the older kids. He’s excelled at reading and math and did Kindergarten level work last year because he was interested in it. This kind of multi-aged classroom has so many advantages, and I think he’s getting a better education than my daughter who is in a traditional private school. My daughter just finished 3rd grade and by looking at the work hung on the bulletin board, you can see a huge range of ability just in one classroom. She’s not top of her class, but it’s frustrating to her when she gets paired with the kids who are behind or can’t keep up because she ends up doing the work just as it’s got to be frustrating for them to always feel like they are one step behind everyone else. having kids grouped by skills makes so much more sense.
Is it better to be in a classroom full of the ‘dumb kids’ of the same age or the older kid in an ability-based class/pair? Does anyone have a kid in one of these programs who isn’t keeping up with his/her peers? Do they suffer especially?
Well, one of mine does breeze though- college level reading and language skills, going into 6th grade- and she is consistently at the highest levels across the board. Not sure I’d want her socializing with her classmates if they were all 17-18 years old. Her social skills and maturity levels can’t keep pace with that. Other child would not do so well and would end up with the younger kids. Not sure HIS classmates’ parents would appreciate some of his ideas being introduced to their young kids, LOL.
As an 8th grade English teacher I have taught in classrooms that the level ranges from 2nd to 12th (+) and logistically as many can imagine it is very hard to meet the needs of everyone. This past year however I taught an “honors” class where the range was limited a bit more of only being 6th to 12th (+). I thought it was very successful, and would agree that some grouping would be a good idea with the idea of standards based proficiency. I saw a lot of students that were much farther behind others but met the challenge. I do know however, that the other teachers that taught the “regular” English classes were left with the students that were at a 2nd to 6th grade level and this proved to be a major challenge for them. The high school in the district I work in is at the forefront of this proficiency movement and while it is new to everyone (teachers and students)and all are trying to get used to it there are some logistical nightmares for all that need to be considered. Overall they are seeing much higher failure rates from students because the majority of students now just don’t get the concept that they have to try and try again on a test or essay until they get it right, and prove their mastery. Lack of motivation is a big issue seen again and again at many of the higher levels. And I must say as a person that thinks about the “product” that we are turning out year after year (AKA the students) one has to wonder about what we are really teaching them at the core of all these new ideas that are supposed to fix a broken system? What will happen with these students once they are out in the real world (or even college for that matter) when they are used to only working with like minded individuals, what will happen with the social construct as we know it, as well as working in a group of people that might be different than you (this segregation idea again as another parent pointed out)? Not to mention that the majority of school districts trying the proficiency system do have the policy that you can retake and retake to your hearts content until you have proven that mastery. In the real world are you allowed to turn in a sub-par report to your boss with the hope that you can redo until it is acceptable? I am the first to admit that what is going on in public schools is making us less and less competative (we are testing at the same level as countries like Lithuania – as reported by NBC news in January… this lead to a great discussion in my classroom on education in America) I think it would be helpful to see what other countries are doing and try and take bits and pieces and fit those into our school systems. We do run into a problem however in that America teaches EVERYONE, not the select few…
I am a Montessori teacher. I taught in a traditional setting for 10 years prior to becoming a Montessori teacher. I love the Montessori multiage environment. Even though we are a public school, I’m able to tailor the work to each child’s learning level. A key element in the Montessori classroom is the building of community. Third grade students don’t think twice about working with a first or second grade child. Each child may progress at his or her own pace. I find this works very well for children of all ability levels. For example; I may have a first grade student who is working on grade level in math but is reading at a third grade level. That child isn’t on his or her own in the “high” reading group, instead the child is simply placed in a group that matches his or her skills level. The same holds true for students who struggle. Rather than becoming frustrated because they can’t keep up, they are provided with work and support that allows them to build skills at their own pace. I absolutely love that I have the freedom as a teacher to honestly meet each child’s learning needs and styles.
These types of programs are fantastic for the high achievers. The high achievers do very well and fly through the material.
The kids on the bottom end however don’t do well. They generally do worse than they would have before and socially its just not appropriate for a bright second grader to be in a group with normal fourth graders and a couple slow eighth graders.
Sara;
I don’t believe anyone is thinking in terms of a “one room schoolhouse” setting. I do not know how other programs handle these groupings, but in the Montessori setting each class has 2 – 3 grades present. Usually the break down is 1st, 2nd, and 3rd in the Elementary 1 room and 4th, 5th, and 6th in the Elementary 2 room. I find that struggling students do very well because the materials offer the flexibility they need. The entire class may be studying the animals of Antarctica. The materials for this study may include research books at a huge range of levels, three part picture and information cards, maps, experiments, a field trip to hear a talk at a local zoo or aquarium, videos, books on cd, and access to computers for research. It is my responsibility to make sure that the students have the materials they need at the appropriate reading level. I can also be flexible in my assignments. A student who struggles with writing may create a poster and oral report on a topic. It involves a great deal of work for me, but it is absolutely worth it. I’m also fortunate because the Montessori math materials are designed to work for a wide range of concepts and skill levels. For example a group of students working with Golden Beads may be working on place value, addition or subtraction (basic or advanced), or multiplication and division (again basic or advanced). A third grade who is still struggling with basic subtraction isn’t usually embarrassed to use the materials because their is no stigma. All the students use the materials based on their learning goals. This sort of environment involves a great deal of work and planning on the part of the teacher. I find it to be much more productive though.
I was a Montessori kid growing up and loved it, but my brother did horrible in the environment. I also think in addition to skill level, learning style needs to be taken into consideration. Some kids will work harder and strive to be on top harder when there is more structure others do better conceptual environments and group guided learning. Either way learning is not prescriptive and it bothers me as well with my 3 year old. I would love to see if the Montessori environment works for him but another great factor – MONEY – needs to be taken into consideration. Therefore, because we don’t have the funds to put him in an ideal learning environment we will have to ramp up the work on our end. He also is cursed/blessed (depending on your view) with the September birthday. At any rate I love the idea of this process of grouping like learners or like levels of skill, but there also has to be a socialization/cross over aspect that doesn’t create this “elitist” situation even amongst the youngest of children.