Blazing New Trails - Connexions

180 CRITICAL ISSUES IN PROMOTING ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this study was to examine the beliefs of teachers and principals with
respect to multiage education and to identify the factors that contributed to the
implementation of multiage education, as well as the factors that have limited the acceptance
of multiage education as an effective learning environment. The Principles of Nongraded
Education survey developed by Dr. Barbara Pavan in 1972 and revised and updated by
Anderson and Pavan in 1993 was used to gather quantitative information regarding the
educational beliefs or assumptions of principals and teachers regarding nongraded or multiage
instruction. The instrument consisted of 36 assumptions under which multiage education
operated. The respondents were asked to indicate the importance of each assumption on a four
point scale which ranged from “not important” to “critical.” These assumptions were based
on each respondent’s educational beliefs. Access information to an online survey through
Survey Monkey was emailed to the sample population using The Principles of Nongraded
Education (Anderson & Pavan, 1993).
Authorities in the area of multiage education reviewed Dr. Pavan’s assumptions and
agreed with these statements. Prior to Anderson and Pavan’s 1993 publication
Nongradedness: Helping it Happen, this process was completed and resulted in an updated
body of research and instrument. The Principles of Nongradedness Education survey
(Anderson & Paven, 1993) is divided into six areas which include: Goals of Schooling,
Organization, Curriculum, Instruction, Materials, and Assessment. Each question was rated
from “Not Important” equaling zero to “Crucial” equaling three points. Total scores ranged
from 0-108. Any total score of 81 or higher was at least at 75 % of the maximum possible
score, as was a category score over 13. This score indicated a very high agreement with the
principles of nongradedness (Anderson & Pavan, 1993). Structural and substantive validity of
the basic Pavan instrument has been validated by its own inclusion of broad based potential
respondents. After the human data base was determined and the issues framed, the study was
self-validating. In essence, this is how Pavan prevented unusual skewed results by carefully
developing a respondent group. In her case, she sent her instrument to nearly 50 authors in the
field as well as active on-site school administrators and active classroom teachers. The online
survey was developed by ensuring a large, broad base of respondents. Since Pavan’s
instrument and findings have proven reliable, this established survey was used.
This mixed methods study examined the principals’ and teachers’ knowledge and
beliefs toward multiage programming to determine if there were philosophical differences in
their beliefs. Specifically the research questions were:
1. To what extent do teachers of multiage classrooms agree with Pavan’s
assumptions about multiage education?
2. To what extent do principals of multiage schools agree with Pavan’s assumptions
about multiage education?
3. How do teachers and principals vary in their assumptions regarding multiage
education?
4. What factors do teachers and principals believe have contributed to the success of
multiage programs in their school?
5. What factors do teachers and principals believe have limited the implementation of
multiage programs in their schools?
6. How is the institutionalization of multiage programs in the teachers’ and
principals’ schools monitored and evaluated?