Open Collections

UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Individual differences in time needed to learn : teacher coping strategies Webster, Janet Barbara 1982

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1982_A2 W42.pdf [ 15.59MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0095643.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0095643-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0095643-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0095643-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0095643-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0095643-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0095643-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0095643-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0095643.ris

Full Text

INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES IN TIME NEEDED TO LEARN: TEACHER STRATEGIES by JANET B.  WEBSTER  B.Ed., U n i v e r s i t y Of B r i t i s h M.A.,  U n i v e r s i t y Of B r i t i s h  A THESIS SUBMITTED  Columbia  1974  Columbia  1978  IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF  THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF EDUCATION in THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES Educational Psychology  We a c c e p t  this  And S p e c i a l  t h e s i s as  to the required  Education  conforming  standard  THE UNIVERSITY OF B R I T I S H COLUMBIA July  ©  Janet  B.  1982  Webster,  1982  COPING  In  presenting  this  requirements  for  thesis  an  advanced  B r i t i s h Columbia, I agree freely that  available  permission  for  for  in  partial degree  that  the  reference  extensive  fulfilment at  Library  and s t u d y .  copying  of  by  his  or  her  representatives.  copying or p u b l i c a t i o n of t h i s not  thesis  be a l l o w e d w i t h o u t my w r i t t e n  Department of  Educational  shall  Date:  12 J u l y  1982  make  I further this  thesis  for financial  i t  agree for  Department  I t i s understood gain  that shall  permission.  P s y c h o l o g y And S p e c i a l  The U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a 2075 Wesbrook P l a c e V a n c o u v e r , Canada V6T 1W5  the  t h e U n i v e r s i t y of  s c h o l a r l y p u r p o s e s may be g r a n t e d by t h e Head o f my or  of  Education  Abstract T h i s s t u d y was cope  with  conducted to  the d i f f e r e n t i a l  considered  resource.  t h e o p t i m i z a t i o n of  considered  were t h e  variability  the classroom  was  t a s k o f t e a c h i n g was  l e a r n i n g w i t h i n the c o n s t r a i n t s imposed  by  of the c l a s s r o o m .  Two  major c o n s t r a i n t s  l i m i t e d time a v a i l a b l e f o r s c h o o l i n g ,  in  that  student  time  material,  a t t e n t i o n or c o o p e r a t i o n . r e a l i z e d without t h e p r o b l e m was m a s t e r y and  needs.  a  I t was  assumed  on  the  each  considered  week  variability  securing these  of  involving  by  student  goals  may  at a c h i e v i n g the  in  the  lower  t r a d e o f f s of  the  Fall  mainland  be  others,  coverage,  term.  The  classrooms of  each classroom  the on-task  r a t e s of e a c h s t u d e n t  a c t i v i t i e s were r e c o r d e d  i n t e r v i e w s w i t h the t e a c h e r s  The  a  of  of m a s t e r y  British  f o r one  methodology  N a r r a t i v e s p e c i m e n r e c o r d s were w r i t t e n  academic  informal  as  investigator visited during  naturalistic.  non  none  that  teacher:  were c o n d u c t e d i n f i v e g r a d e 3  district  The  each v i s i t ,  As  the  and  cooperation.  school  Columbia.  and  compromising success  Observations in  was  as  makes t h r e e g o a l - l i k e demands  of  Time  conceptualized  c o v e r a g e of c u r r i c u l u m m a t e r i a l , the engendering' students  teachers  considered  the c o l l e c t i v e nature  The  how  n e e d s of s t u d e n t s .  w i t h i n an e c o n o m i c f r a m e w o r k and  as a l i m i t e d  the  time  investigate  strategies i n time  utilitarian  used  by  the  every  The  was  during  f o r academic  and  f i v e minutes  and  were c o n d u c t e d . teachers  n e e d s a r e d e s c r i b e d , and  perspective.  day  to  cope  with  i n t e r p r e t e d from  strategies  appeared  to  f u n c t i o n t o keep a c l a s s o p e r a t i n g as organism; and  k e e p i n g t h e c l a s s t o g e t h e r may  instructional difficulties  students  with  conceptualized  diverse as  utilities an  It  is  time  a v o i d the  needs.  The  suggested  a  single  managerial  p r a g m a t i s t who  teacher  that  is  o p t i m i z e s the  r a t h e r than the l e a r n i n g of  between  individual  t h e enhancement of t e a c h e r  processes  may  Specifically,  be  interpreted  e f f e c t a b a l a n c e between c o v e r a g e , m a s t e r y , this  interpretation  c l a s s r o o m as a h o m e o s t a t i c  of  the time needs of the i n d i v i d u a l  the time needs of the c l a s s .  Underlying  were  i s a c h i e v e d t h r o u g h t h e c r e a t i o n and m a i n t e n a n c e  equilibrium  classroom  it  i n h e r e n t i n t e a c h i n g c l a s s e s of  a utilitarian  l e a r n i n g of the c l a s s , students.  if  i t i s argued as and  that  functioning  to  cooperation.  of t e a c h i n g i s a model of  system.  and  the  iv  TABLE OF  CONTENTS  Abstract  i i  List  of T a b l e s  viii  List  of F i g u r e s  x  Acknowledgement  xi  Chapter  1  1  Individual  D i f f e r e n c e s And  The  C o l l e c t i v e Nature  Of  Schooling Individual  1 D i f f e r e n c e s And  S p e e d Of L e a r n i n g  5  T r a d i t i o n a l Methods  6  Time Needed To L e a r n  11  The  12  Advantage  Of Time As A M e t r i c  Time As An E d u c a t i o n a l The  N a t u r e Of The  R e s o u r c e : An E c o n o m i c  Study  The D e v e l o p m e n t Of The  . 13 15  Problem  15  General Perspectives  18  M e t h o d Of P r e s e n t a t i o n  21  Organization  23  Of The  Study  Chapter 2 The  Analogy  P r o c e s s Of Two  26 Investigation  Paradigms  26 26  I s s u e s Of D e s i g n I n N a t u r a l i s t i c S t u d i e s  31  The D e s i g n Of The  37  Study  Data C o l l e c t i o n  39  The  43  P r o b l e m Of B i a s  V  R e a c t i v i t y And  Observational  Measures  44  Generalizability Chapter  50  3  53  Organization  F o r I n s t r u c t i o n : L e v e l i n g And  Sharpening  ....  53  S e l e c t i o n Of C h i l d r e n F o r I n s t r u c t i o n  55  I n t r a c l a s s Grouping  56  Myths About G r o u p i n g  58  Grouping Decisions  62  Within  65  Class V a r i a t i o n In A b i l i t y  Organization Factors  For I n s t r u c t i o n  67  Influencing Organization  72  To G r o u p Or Not To G r o u p  87  L e v e l i n g And  92  Chapter  Sharpening  4  Variation  96 In Performance  R a t e s : F a s t And  Slow F i n i s h e r s . 96  I n d i v i d u a l D i f f e r e n c e s I n Time Needed To L e a r n P e r c e n t a g e Of Time I n W h i c h F i n i s h i n g O c c u r e d R a t e R a t i o s Of F a s t And  Slow W o r k e r s  97 100 .104  S t r a t e g i e s For Coping With Fast F i n i s h e r s  113  S t r a t e g i e s F o r D e a l i n g W i t h U n f i n i s h e d Work  118  Discussion  123  Chapter  5  Opportunity P a c e Of The  130 To L e a r n : P a c e Of I n s t r u c t i o n And  Instruction  Achievement  S t e e r i n g Group H y p o t h e s i s  130 132 134  Measurement Of P a c e  136  Teacher  147  Chapter  6  C o n t r o l Of P a c e  180  vi Time As An E d u c a t i o n a l Time As A V a l u a b l e  Resource  180  Commodity  183  The R e l a t i o n s h i p B e t w e e n Time And A c h i e v e m e n t  185  The P r o d u c t i o n  186  Function  Model  Time A l l o c a t i o n As D e c i s i o n M a k i n g  190  Time A l l o c a t i o n W i t h i n An E c o n o m i c Framework  196  A l l o c a t i o n Of Time To C u r r i c u l a r / n o n C u r r i c u l a r  201  A l l o c a t i o n Of Time To I n s t r u c t i o n  203  A l l o c a t i o n Of Time To I n s t r u c t i o n a l U n i t s  207  Chapter 7  218  Time-on-task  218  The Use Of Time By S t u d e n t s  221  A s s e s s m e n t Of T i m e - o n - t a s k  230  Reliability  233  Of The O n - t a s k D a t a  Task-related Waiting  Behavior  235  To F i n i s h S t r a t e g y  243  The L e v e l i n g H y p o t h e s i s  244  Chapter 8 Activities: Learning  .-> The B u s i n e s s  Of S c h o o l  246 246  Or C o o p e r a t i o n  .246  C h a r a c t e r i z a t i o n s Of C l a s s r o o m A c t i v i t i e s  250  I m p l e m e n t a t i o n Of A c t i v i t i e s  255  Classification  257  Activities  Of A c t i v i t i e s  As F u n c t i o n a l E n v i r o n m e n t a l  R e w a r d s And C o s t s Blotting  Paper A c t i v i t i e s  Chapter 9 Concluding  Of A c t i v i t i e s  Responses  261 264 273 281  Discussion  281  vi i L i m i t a t i o n s Of The S t u d y  281  The M a s t e r y - C o v e r a g e Dilemma  284  Time Management  285  O p p o r t u n i t y To L e a r n  286  O p t i m i z a t i o n Of L e a r n i n g  288  C l a s s r o o m Management And C o o p e r a t i o n  290  The T e a c h e r As A U t i l i t a r i a n  291  Pragmatist  A Metaphor F o r Classroom P r o c e s s e s : Homeostasis  293  V a l u e s And O p p o r t u n i t i e s  294  I m p l i c a t i o n s Of The S t u d y  296  A Critical  302  Perspective  Bibliography  304  Appendix  1 - A DESCRIPTION OF THE SAMPLE  319  Appendix  2 - NARRATIVE SPECIMEN RECORD  328  Appendix  3 - SUMMARY  333  Appendix  4 - QUESTIONS  336  Appendix  5 - CURRICULAR MATERIALS FOR GRADE 3 CLASSES ...339  Appendix  6 - EXERCISE ON BASIC FACTS  340  Appendix  7 - EXERCISE ON REGROUPING  341  Appendix  8 - TEACHER PREFERENCE SIMULATION  342  vi i i L I S T OF  Table  1 Gates M a c G i n i t i e  Table 2 Ginn  Initial  Reading  Placement  T a b l e 3 G r o u p M e m b e r s h i p And MacGinitie  Reading  Test  65  Test  67  Achievement -  Gates  Test  T a b l e 4 G r o u p M e m b e r s h i p And Placement  TABLES  74 Achievement -  Initial  Test  76  T a b l e 5 P e r c e n t a g e Of Time I n W h i c h F i n i s h i n g O c c u r r e d T a b l e 6 P e r c e n t a g e Of Time I n W h i c h The  Fastest  ..100  25% Were  Finished  102  Table 7 Correct  Response Rate R a t i o  108  T a b l e 8 Pace In Reading  140  Table 9 Pace In A r i t h m e t i c  143  Table  10 P a c e I n S p e l l i n g  144  Table  11 P e r c e n t a g e Of V a r i a n c e A c c o u n t e d  T i m e , And Table  Table  Mastery,  Group  156  12 P e r c e n t a g e Of V a r i a n c e A c c o u n t e d  Coverage,  F o r By  T i m e , And  For  By  Group  13 P e r c e n t a g e Of Time Spent  157 On  Non-curricular  Activities* Table  201  14 P e r c e n t a g e Of Time I n C l a s s r o o m  Spent  In  Instruction Table  15 P e r c e n t a g e Of Time S c h e d u l e d  A c t i v i t i e s Spent Table  204  Groups  Curricular  In I n s t r u c t i o n  16 P e r c e n t a g e Of  Reading  For  I n s t r u c t i o n a l Time A l l o t t e d  205 To 211  ix Table  17 C l a s s A v e r a g e P e r c e n t O n - t a s k B e h a v i o r  235  Table  18 P e r c e n t a g e O n - t a s k By G r o u p By V i s i t  236  Table  19 P e r c e n t a g e A c a d e m i c  And Non  Academic  On-task  Behavior  238  T a b l e 20 D i s c r e p a n c i e s I n O n - t a s k B e h a v i o r T a b l e 21 Time P e r i o d s W i t h Number Of A c t i v i t i e s  240 In  Progress T a b l e 22 - P e r c e n t a g e Of Time On A c t i v i t i e s T a b l e 23 P e r c e n t a g e Of Time S p e n t I n D i f f e r e n t F o r m a t s T a b l e A T e a c h e r T r a i n i n g And E x p e r i e n c e  256 260 ..261 320  X  L I S T OF  Figure  1 A Hypothetical  FIGURES  Indifference  Map  xi  Acknowledgement  It and  i s with great  pleasure  t h a t I acknowledge the h e l p  g u i d a n c e o f t h e c o m m i t t e e members who d i r e c t e d  project;  their c r i t i c a l  this  comments d i d much t o s t i m u l a t e  my  thinking. I a l s o w i s h t o e x p r e s s my t h a n k s t o t h e f i v e who so o b l i g i n g l y p e r m i t t e d classrooms.  teachers, in  me t o s p e n d t i m e i n t h e i r  The v i e w o f t e a c h i n g  pages i s not i n t e n d e d  presented  i n the f o l l o w i n g  t o r e f l e c t an u n c h a r i t a b l e  but t o i d e n t i f y  teachers  p i c t u r e of  some o f t h e c o n s t r a i n t s w h i c h  exist  classrooms. I owe a p a r t i c u l a r  s u p e r v i s o r , Dr. confidence  Marshall  t o p u r s u e my  d e b t o f g r a t i t u d e t o my Arlin  research  whose s u p p o r t gave me t h e  interests.  For time given  graciously,  f o r t h e s h a r i n g of i d e a s , and f o r i n t e l l e c t u a l c o m r a d e s h i p i n g e n e r a l , my g r a t i t u d e knows no b o u n d s .  1  CHAPTER 1  Individual Differences Social dilemma:  a  organizations necessary  particularistic  needs  needs of t h e group. organizations of  and t h e C o l l e c t i v e N a t u r e of are  fraught  with  tension  exists  of  individual  the  Classrooms  may  between  be  Schooling  an  inherent  meeting  and t h e u n i v e r s a l  regarded  as  where t h e n e e d s o f t h e i n d i v i d u a l a n d t h e n e e d s o f in  The  present  conflict  an  study  was  an  exploration teachers  i n time needed t o l e a r n .  investigation  c o n f l i c t might Barr  of  conceptualizations  attempts  to  Dreeben  of t e a c h i n g  to  resolve  strategies  that  fundamental  processes.  (1977)  suggested  that  a n d l e a r n i n g a r e d o m i n a t e d by a collective  situation.  the c e n t r a l o b l i g a t i o n of teaching  h a s been t o  in  societally  approved  condition  f o r the  teachers  present the m a t e r i a l  fulfillment  spend time s t u d y i n g to  the  this  l e a r n e r s with experiences which w i l l  growth  needed  of  class  to learn.  I t was a n t i c i p a t e d  t u t o r i a l model, y e t the classroom i s a  provide  the  to deal with i n d i v i d u a l  illuminate basic classroom and  Traditionally,  One a r e a  i s i n t h e amount o f t i m e r e q u i r e d  d e v e l o p e d by some g r a d e t h r e e differences  social  i n which a s i m i l a r a n t a g o n i s m between t h e needs  t h e i n d i v i d u a l and t h e n e e d s o f t h e g r o u p e x i s t s .  are  the  learn  which the teacher  i t . In  a  of  this  skills.  A  necessary  and t h a t  situation  i s not i n h e r e n t l y problematic: presents  ultimately  obligation  t o be l e a r n e d tutorial  lead  is  that  students the  time  the rate at  t h e new m a t e r i a l c a n be a d j u s t e d  to  2  t h e t i m e n e e d s of t h e when  education  individual  must  be  learner.  provided  for  I n d i v i d u a l d i f f e r e n c e s i n time needed teacher  with  a  dilemma:  r e q u i r e more t i m e and A  primary  there  to  study  of  learn be  some l e s s t i m e t h a n  purpose of t h i s  learners.  present  the  some c h i l d r e n  she  has  rate  of  who  allocated.  i s t o document how in  arise  some g r a d e  learning  in  classes. Variation  students w i l l  i n t i m e needed t o l e a r n which  a c q u i r e k n o w l e d g e and  skills  something  of a c h a l l e n g e t o t e a c h e r s .  learning  rate  are  t h e s i s of t h i s  not,  study  teachers.  school  particular  the  of  time  requirement standard  grade  in learning  in  levels.  accomplished  to  learn.  by  learning  teachers  are  is  makes t h e p r o b l e m  rate particularly  challenge the  to  differ  It  for  in  this  general acceptance  within  a  grade  of  the dual in  a  individual  trenchant. of d i f f e r e n t i a l  consideration.  facing  for  assigned  Yet  who  of  so t h a t  o f a c e r t a i n amount o f m a t e r i a l  themselves the  central  difficulties  content are  s o l u t i o n s to t h i s problem  present  reduction  student  need  amount of t i m e w h i c h  Several needs  they  of c o v e r a g e  differences  A  c u r r i c u l a are designed  r e q u i r e d t o i n s t r u c t c l a s s e s of c h i l d r e n amount  presents  However, d i f f e r e n c e s i n  exacerbate  p r e s c r i b e d amounts of s u b j e c t m a t t e r at  i n unison  ipso facto, problematic.  which  Typically,  covered  precludes that  i s t h a t i t i s the p e c u l i a r c o n s t r a i n t s  organized schooling  be  groups  will  three teachers deal with v a r i a t i o n their  Difficulties  teachers  time  Perhaps could  of w i d e v a r i a t i o n  level.  To  what  a be in  extent  3  t e a c h e r s c a n manage p r o g r a m s w h i c h student  learning  a l l o w f o r wide v a r i a t i o n  i s a moot p o i n t .  a l l o w e d t o v a r y so t h a t t h o s e who allocated  Alternately, learned  in  l e a r n e d more s l o w l y w o u l d be  more  school.  time  in  a l t e r n a t i v e on of  time might  less  than  t i m e m i g h t be p e r m i t t e d t o engage i n o t h e r  w h i l e t h o s e who  some  until  they  the  latter  education  oldsters"  d i f f e r e n c e s amongst c h i l d r e n  the  pursuits,  (1967) r e j e c t e d t h i s  were  (p. 25).  i n t h e same g r a d e i n  t e r m s of t i m e n e e d e d t o l e a r n , c o u p l e d w i t h t h e c o n s t r a i n t s a common c u r r i c u l u m and likely  present  solutions.  a l i m i t e d amount of  practical  The  problems which  s t r a t e g i e s developed  The the  problem  optimization  i m p o s e d by  I t was demands  considered  in  is  f o r s c h o o l i n g and  assumed on  that  the  variability  by  classroom  makes can  time  three  major  i n the  A b r a h a m s o n , 1974;  without are  engendering securing  i n t e r e s t s of Westbury,  time  needs.  These g o a l s  the  as  goal-like  be a c h i e v e d  s t u d e n t s o f t h a t m a t e r i a l , and  c l a s s management ( c f . collective  Two  o f a body o f c u r r i c u l a r m a t e r i a l , t h e  student c o o p e r a t i o n or a t t e n t i o n  this  constraints  i n student  compromising success at a c h i e v i n g the o t h e r s .  of mastery  simple  s t u d y were t h e l i m i t e d  t h e t e a c h e r , none o f w h i c h  the coverage  school,  conceptualized  l e a r n i n g w i t h i n the  this  of  study.  the c o l l e c t i v e n a t u r e of the c l a s s r o o m .  constraints available  student  in  by t e a c h e r s t o meet  f a c e d by t h e t e a c h e r of  time  do n o t a d m i t o f  c h a l l e n g e were t h e f o c u s of t h e p r e s e n t  be  r e q u i r e d t o spend  the grounds t h a t i t "would e x t e n d  youngsters  Fundamental  Cronbach  in  of  effective  1980).  The  n a t u r e o f t h e e d u c a t i o n a l e n t e r p r i s e means t h a t a l l  4  g o a l s c a n n o t be a c c o m p l i s h e d i n t h e l i m i t e d schooling. no  I n s i t u a t i o n s where o b j e c t i v e s a r e i n c o n f l i c t ,  acceptable  alternative exists,  d e c i s i o n maker tradeoffs  has  been  ( K e e n e y and R a i f f a ,  1976).  used  f a c i n g t e a c h e r s of m e e t i n g the needs of the c l a s s  and  individual  was  considered  is  appropriate  i n t h i s study.  at  this  learning  This  because  tradition  of achievement  of  No  of  skills,  fixed criterion  relative  rather  a  mastery,  cooperation.  and  1968).  80%).  which  important with with  than  particular In t h i s  indicates  criterion  study, mastery the  i s i m p l i e d , and m a s t e r y an  absolute  sense.  the  W i t h i n the mastery  degree  k n o w l e d g e o r l e a r n i n g a c q u i r e d by level  the  cooperation  i t s association  (Bloom,  problem  juncture to indicate  is particularly  (typically  i s c o n c e i v e d as a continuum depth  as  t r a d e o f f s b e t w e e n c o v e r a g e , m a s t e r y and  l e a r n i n g t r a d i t i o n , mastery r e f e r s to a level  decision  the  the  the  value  Accordingly,  o b j e c t i v e compared t o a n o t h e r .  reference to mastery mastery  In essence the  intuitively,  s e n s e i n w h i c h t h e words c o v e r a g e , are  involving  the  of  the needs of  It  as  or  value  a c h i e v i n g one  involving  the predicament f a c i n g  characterized  maker i s r e q u i r e d t o w e i g h , a l b e i t  dilemma  time p e r m i t t e d f o r  students.  i s used i n  In  or  contrast  mastery or depth of l e a r n i n g , coverage i s used t o r e f e r  a to  to the  b r e a d t h o r amount o f c u r r i c u l a r m a t e r i a l t o w h i c h s t u d e n t s a r e exposed.  C o o p e r a t i o n i s used t o r e f e r  b e h a v i o r a s m e a s u r e d by o n - t a s k  to  student  rates.  I n d i v i d u a l D i f f e r e n c e s and S p e e d o f L e a r n i n g  attending  5  As  a  preface  to  the  investigation  of  teacher  s t r a t e g i e s , how i n d i v i d u a l d i f f e r e n c e s a n d t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p t o l e a r n i n g h a v e been r e g a r d e d considered.  Individual  documented  phenomenon  educators Tyler,  and  1965).  i n the educational  differences which  has  psychologists  as  the  that  rule  with  than  a n d Wood  E l l i s , 1932; in  the  (1938)  many  school  exception.  she  pointed  the c l a s s r o o m argued  be  expressed  variability  that v a r i a b i l i t y  as v a r i a b l i t y  the  problem  One of  of  students  the  conducting  g r o u p e d c l a s s a t an a v e r a g e s p e e d w h i c h faster  (1965)  i n human l e a r n i n g  i n t h e speed of l e a r n i n g which  is  Thomas  i n speed of l e a r n i n g .  be p r o b l e m a t i c f o r t e a c h e r s . mentioned  Thomas a n d  how t e a c h e r s d e a l w i t h i n d i v i d u a l d i f f e r e n c e s  in  It  may  i s the  they c o n s i d e r e d t o difficulties a  they  heterogeneously  they b e l i e v e l e a d s  b e i n g h e l d back and t h e s l o w e r  to  students  overwhelmed. Ellis  (1932) a l s o d i s c u s s e d s p e e d o f l e a r n i n g  practical difficulties "thinkers"  in  the  involved i n educating  same room.  choose between t h e S c y l l a boredom.  He a r g u e d  brighter  students  the  by  d i f f e r e n c e s w i t h i n a grade a r e f a r g r e a t e r than the  concerned  being  accepted 1967;  is  i s a well  variability  rather  average d i f f e r e n c e between g r a d e s .  the  learning  (Anastasi,  R e f e r r i n g t o a s t u d y by L e a r n e d out  been  T y l e r (1965) d i s c u s s e d  accomplishment  in  literature  class  and  he  and  f a s t e r and s l o w e r  The t e a c h e r a p p a r e n t l y h a s t o  of f r u s t r a t i o n and t h e C h a r y b d i s  that i f the teacher adapts "he t a l k s o v e r travels  the  too  of  t h e work t o t h e  t h e heads of t h e m a j o r i t y of fast  f o r them"  (p.  449).  6  Conversely, slower  he  argued  better  (p.  449). E l l i s '  students  into school  until  These  classify  c h i l d r e n had a t t a i n e d t h e a p p r o p r i a t e  mental  the c h i l d r e n properly. o f speed of l e a r n i n g appear t o have  of  learning  i t s own r i g h t .  faster the  was  treated  and  l i t e r a t u r e of  in  other  a s an a d j u n c t  o f an  Common s e n s e d i c t a t e s t h a t  slower  exists  In  than as a classroom  learners w i l l  a  the  group last  t h e e x i s t e n c e of  curriculum  setting. hundred  problem  a p p e a r a s a p r o b l e m whenever  requirement of coverage of the  time  psychologists to  and q u a n t i f y v a r i a t i o n i n m e n t a l a b i l i t y .  a b i l i t i e s view of l e a r n i n g r a t h e r in  things" entry  by t h e e f f o r t s o f d i f f e r e n t i a l  speed  for  s o l u t i o n t o t h e p r o b l e m was t o d e l a y  discussions  been m o t i v a t e d  o f boredom  by " d w e l l i n g t o o l o n g on s i m p l e  and then t o c l a s s i f y  words,  of i n s t r u c t i o n t o t h e  members o f t h e c l a s s r a i s e s t h e s p e c t r e  the  age  that adaptation  A review  years  in  a  limited  o f some o f t h e  indicated  that  the  p r o b l e m o f i n d i v i d u a l d i f f e r e n c e s was a p p r e h e n d e d , b u t was n o t placed  i n the context  of d i f f e r e n t i a l  T r a d i t i o n a l Methods f o r D e a l i n g An notion the  historical  same c l a s s r o o m  curriculum. in the a l l o t e d early 1917;  teacher Dutton,  w i t h F a s t and Slow  perspective  that the existence  The d i f f i c u l t y  learners within  i n terms of coverage of  of c o v e r i n g  time i s i m p l i c i t  Learners  v a l i d a t e s t h e common s e n s e  of f a s t e r and slower  i s problematic  the required  1907; B a g l e y ,  1918; S e e l e y ,  1903;  the  material  i n many o f t h e d i s c u s s i o n s  t r a i n e r s (Bagley, 1903; S e a r s ,  time needs i n l e a r n i n g .  of  1917; B e n n e t t , White,  1893);  7  preservice  a n d i n s e r v i c e t e a c h e r s were e x h o r t e d  minute i n s c h o o l count. coverage  Although  w i t h f a s t e r and slower  explicitly,  four  strategies  t o make e v e r y  the d i f f i c u l t y learners  which  was  of c u r r i c u l u m not  a p p e a r t o be a t t e m p t s t o  alleviate  the problems a s s o c i a t e d w i t h i n d i v i d u a l  in  needed  time  addressed  t o l e a r n were i d e n t i f i e d ;  differences  they a r e i g n o r i n g ,  a d a p t i n g , g r a d i n g , and g r o u p i n g . Ignoring. twentieth Bennett, 1893)  century  writers  curriculum  at  differential  progress  addressed  The  picture  a  uniform  learning in  rate.  the  extensive  h a d made t h e g r a d e ,  to  keep  was  the general concession to ritual  problem  generated  Adapting.  widespread attempted  in there to  over  time  year  were  t h e tendency  needed some  to  a common  learn  perceived,  of  promotion  semiannually,  student  the material, who  failed  t h e y e a r ' s work.  individual  f o r the  early  through  were p r o m o t e d w h i l e t h o s e  Although  adjust  these  discussions  were r e q u i r e d t o r e p e a t  was  of f a s t e r and  However t h a t t h e p r o b l e m o f  Such  differences.  presumably  s t r a t e g y c o u l d be r e t u r n e d t o i t s p o s i t i o n  differences  by  T h o s e who h a d c o v e r e d  and  the  the  1917;  1903; W h i t e ,  r a t e s e x i s t e d , a n d was d i m l y  reviewed.  pace  Bagley,  1918; S e e l e y ,  I t seems t h a t a n n u a l l y , o r was  1907;  i s that of c l a s s e s proceding  reflected  practices.  (Bagley,  1903; S e a r s ,  directly  learners.  textbook  is  textbooks  1917; D u t t o n ,  rarely  slower  The w r i t e r s o f t h e l a t e n i n e t e e n t h a n d e a r l y  Once  the ignore  of preeminence.  to  ignore  individual  a p p e a r s t o h a v e been  experimental  t h e pace of i n s t r u c t i o n  programs  which  to individuals.  8  The  Batavia  utilized provide  plan  the  (Bennett,  1917)  s e r v i c e s of an  instituted  e x t r a teacher  tutorial  help  rapidly.  The  Pueblo  latter  mastery l e a r n i n g i n that  day  according  to the  double-track different i n t o two of  (Sears,  p a c e s of sections  involved  materials widely  i t permitted  enabled  teachers,  with  p r o b l e m of  to  whole  of  the  was  Grading. not  differences could  be  segregate Breed  bringing  vast  only  quantified. children  pace.  the  or  by  the  to  but  Cambridge  necessity  class  rate  of  None  teaching,'  of c u r r i c u l a r  i s the  numbers  strategy in  educators provided  that  classes  the  on  clear  provided,  composed  of  of it  deal  children  to  to  not  by  the the  consideration  of  with  these  used  b a s i s of  that  children  individual  were  to  ability.  impetus  to  philosophical  need t o accommodate i n d i v i d u a l pragmatic  to  a means w h e r e b y  tests  into  of  been  subjects.  Accordingly,  s o r t , was  more  Classes  vary  t e s t i n g movement a f t e r W o r l d  sensitized  ability,  c o n v i c t i o n of the but  r i s e of  (1933) made i t a b u n d a n t l y  "grade",  The  lacking in sophisticated training,  The  in  s i m i l a r to  time to  functional  m i n i m a l l e v e l s of competency i n b a s i c  One  more  slow l e a r n e r s .  A reasonable conclusion  individual differences  to  d i v i d i n g c u r r i c u l a r content  alternatives  ignoring  War  was  acknowledged the  adaptation  classroom  promoted  i n d i v i d u a l students. 1918)  city,  t i m e n e e d s of c h i l d r e n , a p p e a r s t o h a v e  utilized.  the  be  1917)  t o accommodate f a s t and  the  to the  (Bennett,  i n s t r u c t i o n by  these innovative  which  plan  York  i n the  so t h a t p u p i l s c o u l d  n e e d s of  plan  i n New  differences,  the  problem  of  heterogeneous  9  learning  rates  s o l u t i o n was learned faster were at  posed the problem of a p p r o p r i a t e p a c i n g .  to group together c h i l d r e n h i g h  quickly rate.  also  . so  that  they c o u l d cover  C h i l d r e n low  in a b i l i t y  grouped together  a slower The  in  who  l e a r n e d more  so t h a t t h e y c o u l d c o v e r  homogeneous p a c i n g more e f f i c i e n t .  make the  assumption  rationale  that  uniform across  of  that  if  ability  or achievement  a  class  I t was  In  was  other  by  discussed  further  in  chapter  "narrowing  the  range").  the pedagogic Grouping.  homogeneous  dimension  was  it  on  one  homogeneous  1959).  of  other  (This assumption  is  three i n the s e c t i o n e n t i t l e d  Accordingly, grading turned  out  not  panacea. The  formation  nature: heterogeneous c l a s s e s are academic grounds  fast  was  not n e c e s s a r i l y  of  classes  homogeneous i n  t o be e s c h e w e d by modern e d u c a t o r s  in philosophy  the  words,  a r e d u c t i o n o f w i t h i n c l a s s v a r i a n c e on Anderson,  tends  was  demonstrated that a reduction  and  of  fundamental  of  (Goodlad  problem  A  of  grade  approach  dimensions  shift  same  f o r e x a m p l e r e a d i n g , t h e y w o u l d a l s o be  accompanied  and  the  grading  t h e w i t h i n c l a s s v a r i a n c e on one  ability  t h e work-  the  homogeneity  on o t h e r d i m e n s i o n s .  be  in  several school subjects.  anticipated  dimension,  to  slowly  a s s u m p t i o n seems t o h a v e been t h a t t h e p l a c e m e n t  would  was  who  rate.  were homogeneous i n a b i l i t y  in  ability  the m a t e r i a l at a  c h i l d r e n who  flaw  The  preferred  ( E s p o s i t o , 1973; again  and  slow  confronts learners  on  as e l i t i s t  sociological  Rosenbaum, 1 9 8 0 ) . the and  in  teacher  This  with  the d i f f i c u l t y  the of  10  choosing  an a p p r o p r i a t e p a c e .  grouping  strategy  1975).  Grouping  children, The  to  refers  of  to  children  accommodate  faster  the teacher  w i t h time  of grouping  time a teacher total  ameliorate  time  within  and  slower  t e a c h e r s choose  pacing d i f f i c u l t i e s  the  w i t h i n t h e same c l a s s ,  grouping  problem  Many p r i m a r y  practice  of  i n t o groups f o r i n s t r u c t i o n . the  same  class  difficulties.  f o r each  group,  help  presents critical  instructional  given  f o r t e a c h i n g remains c o n s t a n t .  ameliorates pacing d i f f i c u l t i e s  may  A  i s t h e q u e s t i o n o f how much  can p r o v i d e  (Barr,  subdividing  l e a r n e r s , but l i k e l y  allocation  a  How  that  the  f a r grouping  a t t h e expense of e x a c e r b a t i n g  time a l l o c a t i o n problems i s worth c o n s i d e r i n g . F o u r ways o f c o p i n g w i t h slower  learners  have  the  been i d e n t i f i e d .  i n s t r u c t i o n w i t h i n a c l a s s appears t o limited  way,  and  problem  in  programs  have  which  major coping  strategies preferred at  suggest than  of i n d i v i d u a l  learning to  rates.  accommodate  rates,  the  the rate of used  in  a as  were i d e n t i f i e d a s times  during  use of t h e s t r a t e g i e s  of education  systems,  rather  t e a c h e r s , t o t h e problem of d i f f e r e n c e s i n  The p r o b l e m f a c e d by e d u c a t i o n students  f a c e d by t h e i n d i v i d u a l of t h e apparent  and  recognized  different  The w i d e s p r e a d  t h a t t h e y were r e s p o n s e s  been  were  I g n o r i n g , g r a d i n g and g r o u p i n g  l a s t hundred y e a r s .  faster  Adapting  innovative.  the  of  with  differing  systems,  time needs, i s a l s o  teacher w i t h i n a classroom.  difficulties  In  spite  inherent i n d i f f e r e n t i a l learning  r e g u l a r i t y w i t h which c o u n t l e s s t e a c h e r s  numerous c l a s s e s s u g g e s t  how  confront  t h a t c o p i n g mechanisms e v o l v e .  Given  11  the  complexity,  classrooms n a t u r e of  multidimensionality  (Doyle,  1979;  schooling  strategies  was  teachers,  investigated  Jackson,  (Dreeben,  the  The  particular  i n the  present  variation  variation  in level  variation  in  traditional  of  time  to  aptitudes  (Tyler,  not  and  manipulations. d i f f e r e n c e s was time  was  instructional as  effect  of  in  often  by  were  expressed  learning.  or  basic  aptitude  way  Carroll  (1963);  achievement,  an  a  relatively  individual  the  of  a  optimal  into individual differences  as  environmental  concept  given of  given  as  constant aptitudes level  instruction. are  of  learning.  aptitudes  i s transmuted to a conception  aptitudes  are  that  is  viewing  of  in  the  i n d i v i d u a l which i s  conception  of  as  or  is  usual  conditions  In  as  abilities  through of  than  i n achievement  assumption  change  individual differences  transformed  is  time necessary to reach  under  serve,  as a c e n t r a l v a r i a b l e i n s c h o o l  level  time,  p r e d i c t i n g the  performance,  rate  The  p r o p o s e d by  the  several  s t r a t e g i e s used  differences  ability  I n t h e C a r r o l l model t h e predicting  or  alternative  introduced  collective  l e a r n i n g , or achievement, r a t h e r  large  An  of  Learn  abilities  1965).  to  the  they  s t a b l e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of the  amenable  and  emergence of  function  r e f l e c t ''differences  organismic v a r i a b l e , enduring  in  individual  purported  simultaneity  study.  needed,  view  1968)  t y p e s of  Time Needed t o Human  the  1970), the  anticipated.  and  and  of In  conceptually  i n l e a r n i n g time.  It  12  should  be  noted that t h i s conceptual  logically stable  entail  a  rejection  The  as  differences  merely s a t i s f y  the  Carroll  (1963)  t i m e as  a ratio  and  it  Bloom  individuals.  time  not  relatively  differences  in  needed t o l e a r n does  not  academic  an  absolute  clear  and  requires  extensive  consuming,  and  researcher.  On  latter  terms  of  the  multiplication frequently  point  not  other  to  the  assessment  hand, d i f f e r e n c e s  to  and  equal  the  fact  for  those  teacher's  task.  of  which  an  between  stories  observer. of  children is  time or  is  learn  readily  variation  a  children  Therefore,  individual differences  of  amongst  to f i n i s h assignments,  read  of  comparisons  differentiation  conceptualization  that  to  metric  i n t e r m s o f t i m e i s a p r a g m a t i c way  the d i f f i c u l t i e s  point  a v a i l a b l e to e i t h e r a teacher  time r e q u i r e d  t a b l e s , and  the  the  of  Both  advantages  of c o m p a r a b i l i t y  attractive  psychometric  available  proposed that learning  viewpoint,  often the  zero  unambiguous  seek t o u n d e r s t a n d the c o m p l e x i t i e s abilities  aesthetics.  Bloom ( 1 9 7 4 ) a l s o p o i n t e d  It is this  an  Metric  (1974) a p p l a u d e d t h e  i n d i v i d u a l s w h i c h makes t i m e an  in  p r e m i s e of  individual  of  s c a l e : i t has  allows  of  in  dictates  u n i t s of m e a s u r e m e n t .  From  the  A d v a n t a g e s of Time as a  reconceptualization  abilities  who  of  does  individual differences.  The  that  transformation  and  it in  is  human  of i n v e s t i g a t i n g present  to  the  teacher. In  the  C a r r o l l model t i m e t a k e n t o r e a c h a p a r t i c u l a r  13  l e v e l of achievement calculation  of  amount l e a r n e d seems  is  significance.  per u n i t of t i m e .  On  proposed  a  that  value for  characterized  speed  of w o r k i n g , or r a t e of p e r f o r m a n c e ,  likely that  of  time needed  needed  to learn  immediate with  practical  to  finish  than  Resource: of  individual  o f t h e amount o f i n s t r u c t i o n a l t i m e be  needs  treated  has  if  Analogy  differences  s t u d i e s of  the  1979;  and  relationship Fredrick  and  other between  needed.  advantage  In  other  i t were a r e s o u r c e  resources. time  Walberg,  in  be e x p r e s s e d i n  c a p a b l e of b e i n g a l l o c a t e d t o s t u d e n t s i n textbooks  than  study.  the a d d i t i o n a l  o f c h i l d r e n may  as  cope  rates, rather  An E c o n o m i c  terms  educational  as  is  teachers  t h e c e n t r a l c o n c e r n of t h i s  the  way  learning  I t i s suggested  rather  i n performance  that  (Borg,  assignments Consequently,  T h e r e f o r e , how  of o b s e r v a b l e t i m e e l e m e n t s  same  more  i s of  terms  therefore  teachers.  ( i n the sense of measured a c h i e v e m e n t ) ,  conceptualization  may  as  time  r a t e s , was  time  it  than  Time a s an E d u c a t i o n a l  words,  basis  of s t u d e n t achievement,  significance.  i n t e r e s t to teachers.  The  of  rather  assignments,  individual differences  learning  the  as p r e c i s e  of achievement.  the assessment  greater  reflects  busy  by t h e m o n i t o r i n g  by t h e p r e c i s e a s s e s s m e n t  involves  the  t h e work o f t h e t e a c h e r i s p e r h a p s  than  r a t e which  permits  day-to-day  to a n t i c i p a t e that a concept  r a t e w i l l have u t i l i t a r i a n  appropriately  This  a v a r i a b l e , l e a r n i n g r a t e , which  unrealistic  learning It  i s of  and 1980;  much Large  and the  scale  achievement Wiley  and  14  Harnischfeger,  1974)  support the  idea that p o t e n t i a l l y  an  important  resource for learning.  a  resource  and  production  influence  f u n c t i o n view  production and  its  function  view  outputs, the  which  their  time  urgency  control  are  the  legal  week),  elementary  meet t h e  limit  how  this  production  at  needs  study.  understand  level  time w i l l  the processes level.  be u s e d .  Given  How  within  lends which  Although has  i s 25 h o u r s  per  jurisdiction t h a t time  that teachers w i l l  students,  the  typically  considerable  for a l l learners. of  of  outputs,  for school learning  have  the  of t h e c l a s s r o o m , where  of r e s o u r c e s a t t h i s  teachers  optimally  time  the  (which i n B r i t i s h Columbia  that  into  f o r an e d u c a t i o n a l  be  is a able  they attempt the  i m p o s e d by t h e c o l l e c t i v e n a t u r e of s c h o o l i n g , was of  input  of r e s o u r c e s .  i n t o achievement  r e s o u r c e i t seems u n l i k e l y  provide  a  allocation  apposite  transformed  allocation  a fixed  to  the  A p r o d u c t i o n f u n c t i o n view  regarding  if  resource a l l o c a t i o n  t h e amount of t i m e a v a i l a b l e  limited  that  t o the n e c e s s i t y of u n d e r s t a n d i n g  control  the  argument r e f e r r e d t o u n d e r s t a n d i n g  i t seems e q u a l l y a s  inputs  In  i s r e g a r d e d a s an  i t becomes i m p o r t a n t t o  control  original  processes which  classroom.  i s known as a  o f e d u c a t i o n , where i n p u t s a r e t r a n s f o r m e d  processes  system,  as  output.  (1977) argued  i s accepted, then  Although  of t i m e  of s c h o o l i n g (Thomas, 1 9 7 1 ) .  a s an  B a r r and D r e e b e n  treatment  on a c h i e v e m e n t  f o r m u l a t i o n time  student achievement  function  The  time i s  to  constraints the  concern  15  The prefatory  The  Nature  particular  style  remarks.  The  of t h e  of t h i s e n d e a v o u r w a r r a n t s  i n t e n t i o n was  nature" i n order to r e f l e c t  life  The  was  methodology  then  e x p e r i m e n t a l ; the emphasis manipulation  and  Study  control  t o " h o l d a m i r r o r up  in classrooms  on of  investigation problem.  dictate  Within  problem  is  current  the  to  that  r a t h e r than  indicate  the  static, It  is  Development of the  research  the  typically  under  research undergoing  appropriate  at  this i n the  current investigation  responsibilities  Problem  began w i t h differ  include  to  limited  a  enhance s t u d e n t  learning.  would  vary  it  assumed t h a t in  resource which I t was  the  question  Time  a  particular  was  considered  w o u l d be u s e d by t e a c h e r s anticipated  that  accordance  would  accommodate  to  w i t h the d i c t a t e s of m a x i m i z i n g  to  students  i n t h e amount o f t i m e t h e y n e e d e d t o do w o r k , teachers  of  i n t i m e n e e d s , when  covering  i n a l i m i t e d amount o f t i m e .  needs  phenomena  d e v e l o p m e n t of t h e p r o b l e m  curriculum  was  hypothesis  characteristic  framework,  t e a c h e r s c o p e w i t h s t u d e n t s who  be  the  than  investigation.  The  their  on  One  than  rather  c o n c e p t u a l i z a t i o n of t h e  modification.  The  how  the  is  naturalistic  dynamic  d e v e l o p m e n t and juncture  approach  rather  variables,  to  i t is lived.  description  g e n e r a t i o n r a t h e r than h y p o t h e s i s t e s t i n g . of the n a t u r a l i s t i c  as  naturalistic  was  some  but  student student  16  learning. to  The  a c c o m m o d a t i o n s made by t e a c h e r s  reveal coping  according  expected  strategies.  A fundamental and  were  assumption  to Doyle  u n d e r l y i n g these e x p e c t a t i o n s ,  ( 1 9 7 9 ) , an u n d e r l y i n g p r e m i s e  o f most  r e s e a r c h on t e a c h i n g , i s t h a t t e a c h i n g i s a r a t i o n a l a c t may  be u n d e r s t o o d  i n terms  o f means and e n d s ;  a s t h e means t o r e a c h t h e o b j e c t i v e , 1978). in  Consequently,  s c h o o l would  the o r i g i n a l  be u t i l i z e d  assumption  t e a c h i n g i s seen  student  learning  assumption  teachers by  enhance  is  teaching.  D u r i n g the c o u r s e of the p r e s e n t s t u d y ,  time  student  most r e s e a r c h e r s o f it  became  t h a t the c o n c e p t u a l i z a t i o n of the r o l e of the t e a c h e r  as  maximizing  for  the data c o l l e c t e d .  that  shared  to  (Gage,  made, t h a t  learning,  apparent  an  by  which  rather  student  than  achievement I n some  enhance  manipulated conditions to These o b s e r v a t i o n s which established  beliefs  was  inadequate  cases,  learning, prevent  the the  learning  to  account  data  suggested  teacher  actively  from  occurring.  ran counter both to i n t u i t i o n ,  about  and  to  t h e f u n c t i o n of t e a c h i n g , demanded  explanation. In  order  to  accommodate  the  counter-intuitive  o b s e r v a t i o n s , a r e c o n c e p t u a l i z a t i o n of the r o l e of the t e a c h e r is  proposed.  It  is  suggested  c l a s s r o o m p r o c e s s e s make b e t t e r  sense,  as f u n c t i o n i n g t o enhance t e a c h e r maximize  student learning.  i s advanced achieved  that through  the  To  the  present study  i f they are  utilities  creation  of  teacher and  that  interpreted  rather  support t h i s view  enhancement the  in  than  to  the argument utilities  maintenance  of  is an  17  e q u i l i b r i u m between t h e time needs of t h e i n d i v i d u a l time  needs  of  the  classroom processes effect  a  may  Specifically,  be  interpreted  classroom  as  as  a  homeostatic  i s an a t t e m p t  system.  i n t e r p r e t e d a s an e f f o r t a f t e r The  to  and c o o p e r a t i o n . of the  The r e m a i n d e r  t o document how  that  functioning  i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f t e a c h i n g i s a model  coping with i n d i v i d u a l differences be  i t i s argued  b a l a n c e between c o v e r a g e , m a s t e r y ,  Underlying this  report  class.  and t h e  teacher  of t h i s  strategies  for  i n t i m e n e e d e d t o l e a r n may equilibrium.  i d e a o f e q u i l i b r i u m h a s p r o v i d e d t h e b a s i s f o r much  theorizing  i n psychology.  The common d e n o m i n a t o r of t h e v a r i o u s dynamic approaches i n psychology i s t h e c o n c e p t i o n of l i v i n g t h i n g s as systems which t e n d t o m a i n t a i n a dynamic equilibrium i n r e l a t i o n t o t h e i r environment. The i n d i v i d u a l i s c o n c e i v e d a s a s y s t e m whose c o m p o n e n t s maintain a r e l a t i v e f l e x i b i l i t y of interrelations; variation i n one a s p e c t o f t h e s y s t e m may i n d u c e compensating changes in other aspects, thus maintaining the integrety of t h e system (Deutsch, 1968, p. 4 2 1 ) . The  biological  n o t i o n of a  self-regulating  system  has  been  a p p l i e d t o t h e p s y c h o l o g y of i n d i v i d u a l s and t o t h e p s y c h o l o g y of  groups.  A model o f t h e i n d i v i d u a l a s a h o m e o s t a t i c  provides the conceptual Festinger Similarly,  (1957), H u l l a  model  underpinnings (1952), Lewin  of  social  u n d e r l i e s the t h e o r i e s of Heider In  f o r the  theories  (1946) a n d P i a g e t  organization (1958)  and  the present study, the idea i s developed  system  (1975).  as homeostatic Newcomb  (1956).  that time  related  a s p e c t s o f t e a c h e r b e h a v i o r may be i n t e r p r e t e d a s a t t e m p t s establish  and  maintain  demands i n t h e c l a s s r o o m .  an  equilibrium  of  between  to  competing  18  General Perspectives  or Fundamental  I t h a s become f a s h i o n a b l e particular  Weltanschauung  upon r e s e a r c h .  t o bemoan  can  have  are  allowed  formulation. "objective" (1953)  fact  a significant  by  can y i e l d  that  science  impossible  the  a  influence  no f u r t h e r  from  insights  t h e c o n s t r i c t i n g frame o f i t s o r i g i n a l  I t h a s been s u g g e s t e d t h a t  rejected  observer.  the  The a r g u m e n t i s t h a t a p r o b l e m f o r m u l a t e d  within a p a r t i c u l a r perspective than  Assumptions  notion  (Kuhn, of  1962).  the  He a r g u e d p e r s u a s i v e l y  such c o n d i t i o n s Similarly,  scientist  make Cohen  as d e t a c h e d  that:  if the term scientific method i s used i n any significant s e n s e i t c a n n o t be s a i d t o b e g i n w i t h a tabula rasa and pure sense-impressions on i t (p. 7 8 ) . In  Cohen's  view, the necessity  have some b e a r i n g ideas  as  related  to to  assumptions are  on an  how  what  inquiry,  that we  of c o l l e c t i n g  which  actually  about the world  depends  upon  i s sought know.  the f a c t s which  Accordingly,  and about a c q u i s t i o n of  f a c t o r s i n t h e way i n  which  our  f o r c a n p o s s i b l y be  n o t " e r r o r s " t o be s y s t e m a t i c a l l y e l i m i n a t e d  controlling  whether  we  basic knowledge  but important  view  and  state  problems. This or  "blind"  However, value need  viewpoint  r e j e c t s t h e idea of extreme p o s i t i v i s m  empiricism,  the  acknowledgement  free, or completely not  untarnished  licence  that  stripped  by  science of  subjectivity.  interpretation. c a n n e v e r be  interpretive The  truly  factors,  recognition  that  19  f u n d a m e n t a l a s s u m p t i o n s o r p e r s p e c t i v e s have t h e influence as  inquiry c a r r i e s with  f a r as  Two  i s possible  schools  of  is  ecological  fundamental  that  behavior  constraints. orientation  arises  Willems has  two  which a c t i v a t e  behavior.  orientation principle; because  the  reflect  behaviors,  persuasion  w o u l d be  reflects  The the  Accordingly Merton's attention. uniformly  argued  to  that  methodology a  logical  natural  environmental an  ecological  and  conceptual.  a set  of  an  functional  factors  ecological  collect  data  of  this  in  situ  e x p e r i m e n t may  not  environment.  psychologist  sociologist  may  be  settings of  satisfied  which  elicit  functionalist  i n c l i n e d to delve f u r t h e r .  Functionalism  several  is  of  consequence  in a controlled  phenomena i n a s o c i a l s e t t i n g s e r v e  relative functionalism  It  and  orientation  p a r t i c u l a r stance adopted i n the  critique  the  a  posture that  function.  response  i s r e g a r d e d as  The  the  research.  c o n d u c t of  ecological  c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of  particular  elucidate  psychology  methodological  ecological the  an  psychologists  i n the  Whereas t h e delineating  a  (1965)  data c o l l e c t e d  behavior  adopts the  as  as  ecological  in  to  sociology.  environment  follows  to  the  the  orientation  facets,  the  guiding  influenced  a s s u m p t i o n of  Conceptually,  with  have  f u n c t i o n a l i s t approach i n A  obligation  principles  thought  p r e s e n t s t u d y ; the the  the  i t the  potential  further of  Robert  assumptions,  absolute  assumed  of  that  p r e s e n t work  Merton  for a l l participants  i s not  in a  (1967).  emanating  functionalism, behavior  a  from require  necessarily  social  group,  20  and  neither  Further,  must  it  is  s u b s t i t u t e s may The  for  b e h a v i o r may  are  behavior The  has  be  adjustment  Conversely,  system.  recognized  the  or  current  and  it  or  useful.  of  as This  orientation  and  the  extent  how  teachers  study which  system"  is  assumed  the  adaptation  by  the  that or some  individuals  by M e r t o n , and  that  other  unrecognized consequences  of a d o p t i n g  the  argument  controlling  a particular  of  that  influence  perspective  paradigms  i s conceded.  fundamental assumptions which  "right"  or  suggests  "wrong",  that  the  but value  guide  of  t o w h i c h t h e y l e n d c o h e r e n c e t o an  needs.  an  the  p r o b l e m of  need  not less  ecological work i s  understanding  individual  a  inquiry  m e r e l y more o r  a f u n c t i o n a l approach i n the c u r r e n t  cope w i t h  have  However,  n e c e s s a r i l y be d i s a d v a n t a g e o u s ; p e r s p e c t i v e s  judged  or  i t i s assumed t h a t  intended  functions  of a g i v e n  lessen  Finally,  u n i n t e n d e d and  disadvantage  existence  in time  alternatives  adopted i n the  dysfunctional  been a c k o w l e d g e d ;  need not  function.  (named l a t e n t f u n c t i o n s ) .  structuring the  105).  the be  or  c a l l e d manifest  functions the  p.  of  f u n c t i o n s may  a  those observed consequences  adaptation  a l s o be  adjustment  fulfil  functional  approach  " f u n c t i o n s are  1967,  involved,  that  elements  exist.  the  (Merton,  social  assumed  functional  assumes t h a t make  a l l  of  differences  21  Method of P r e s e n t a t i o n It  is  concerning The  a p p r o p r i a t e a t t h i s p o i n t t o make a few  the c h a r a c t e r of the p r e s e n t a t i o n  reader  is  invited  to  accompany  intellectual  e x p l o r a t i o n of the  individual  differences.  their  necessarily  Intellectual  destination.  points,  apprising  the  the  reader  of  absence of a w e l l - r e a s o n e d narratives  demands  f o r he must w a i t conclusions.  until  permits  the  instruction,  the  areas  end  reader  to  of  to  only of  the  like  gradually  this  nature  convention  of  at the o u t s e t .  discover  The  the  the  such  reader, writer's  s t y l e of p r e s e n t a t i o n i s  follow  classroom Grouping  more  closely  life  appeared  the  potentially  for  instruction,  student  time-on-task,  i l l u m i n a t e the problem  likely  pace  of  and  types  to provide  data  of d i f f e r e n t i a l  time  needs.  i n t e r r e l a t i o n s h i p s between t h e s e a r e a s i s  ( f o r example g r o u p i n g  t i m e a l l o c a t i o n , and student  with  thinking.  time a l l o c a t i o n ,  potential  recognized  an  coping  c o o p e r a t i o n from  o f a c t i v i t i e s were i d e n t i f i e d as a r e a s  Although  but  from  a d v a n t a g e of t h i s  to investigate.  might  on  explorations,  argument  p a t i e n c e and  The  Several  which  author  r a t i o n a l e a t the b e g i n n i n g of  d e v e l o p m e n t of t h e w r i t e r ' s  fruitful  study.  t a k e on t h e c h a r a c t e r o f a s l o w l y u n f o l d i n g s t o r y . departs  it  this  for  Presentations  T h i s s t y l e of p r e s e n t a t i o n  that  the  strategies  g e o g r a p h i c a l o n e s , have s t a r t i n g reveal  of  remarks  f o r i n s t r u c t i o n may  type of a c t i v i t y  is  likely  t i m e - o n - t a s k ) , f o r a n a l y t i c purposes  f o c u s of a s e p a r a t e c h a p t e r .  Although  the  influence  related  each area  to  i s the  investigation  of  22  each  area  coherence,  was  conducted  a linear  Typically, literature literature  o f t h e t o p i c , and the  o r g a n i z a t i o n has  each c h a p t e r  pertinent review  data.  s i m u l t a n e o u s l y , i n o r d e r t o enhance  to  the  by  by  the  means.  of t h e  illuminate  findings  and  of the outcomes of t h i s  particular  view  presented  to  the  of  from  The  significance  additional  some  cautionary note.  remarks  the  s t u d y was  with a  which  are  emerged i n t h e  One  the  this  through  t h e use  in this  e n t i t i e s and  the r e a l  view  study  of a n a l o g i e s . this  of is  This  requires  of the dangers of u t i l i z i n g  analogies  is  cautioned  that  t h e a n a l o g i e s and  presentation  certain  The  study  (1964),  to  development  classroom processes.  r e c u r s throughout  reader  d e s c r i b e d by K a p l a n throughout  are  raised  i s concluded  must be g u a r d e d a g a i n s t i s t h e t e n d e n c y  Accordingly,  data  data  further, aspects  the data c o l l e c t e d  reader  s t y l e of t h i n k i n g which  attention  the  study.  generated  which  of  additional  t o i n t e g r a t e t h e v a r i o u s themes w h i c h  classrooms  a  The  of  G e n e r a l l y each chapter  summary o f t h e m a j o r  a  review  f o r the p r e s e n t a t i o n of  presentation  alternate  i n the d i s c u s s i o n .  of  a  area under c o n s i d e r a t i o n .  to provide a context  i n c l u d e d t o c o r r o b o r a t e , or  One  with  D a t a p r e s e n t a t i o n i s f o l l o w e d by a d i s c u s s i o n a n d ,  collected  course  opens  adopted.  i s intended to demonstrate the  in several cases,  intended  been  are  resemblances subject  matter.  intended between  to  reification. in  t h e manner  metaphors only the  to  used direct  theoretical  23  O r g a n i z a t i o n . of The follows. and  organization C h a p t e r two  experimental  of the  research  Chapter three for  instruction  and  sharpening"  teacher  grouping  conceptualized between the aptitude amount  investigated attempts teachers fast the  and  more  to  slow workers.  In  chapter  representing  breadth  instruction.  In  is  influence teacher  is  an  equilibrium  in  ability  covered  for  or  in a limited  instruction  is  equilibrium.  spite  of  differential  with  the  rates,  p r o b l e m o f what t o do  teachers  is  organizational  performance  chapter contains  f i v e , pace of  learning It  differ  the  the  with  descriptions  t o e f f e c t an  of  equilibrium  finishers.  teachers  of  establish who  to  v a r i a t i o n i n time needed t o l e a r n  This  opportunity  o r i e n t a t i o n s of or  slow  of  to e f f e c t t h i s  s t r a t e g i e s d e v e l o p e d by  b e t w e e n f a s t and  design  organized  students)  w h i c h must be  closely.  faced  the  responding  organization  four  naturalistic  d e t a i l s of  task  to  learners  i s as  t h e p r o c e s s e s of " l e v e l i n g  The  attempting  study  c l a s s e s were  amongst  accommodate  were s t i l l  the  differences  The  chapter  how  and  i n t e r p r e t e d as a s t r a t e g y In  the  paradigm.  (disregarding  a curriculum  time.  contains  proposes that  demands o f  of  r e m a i n d e r of  naturalistic  decisions. as  and  and  describes  and  and  the  Study  opens w i t h a d i s c u s s i o n of  study w i t h i n the  similarities  of  the  i n s t r u c t i o n i s considered  to l e a r n .  I t i s suggested that  t o w a r d s d e p t h of (coverage),  argued  that  learning  influence  pace  is  as  basic  (mastery), the  pace  manipulated  of by  24  teachers  to balance c u r r i c u l a r  needs of i n d i v i d u a l  students.  coverage It is  w i t h meeting  further  the  suggested  p a c i n g a c c o r d i n g t o t h e t i m e needs of s l o w e r l e a r n i n g (a to  mastery learn  for faster  In class, The  orientation) likely  to  children  i n reduced o p p o r t u n i t y  how  teachers  the groups w i t h i n  allocate  the c l a s s ,  t e a c h e r i s c o n s i d e r e d as a u t i l i t a r i a n  time  to  management  problems.  p r a g m a t i s t and  I t i s suggested  a l l o c a t i o n of time t o s l o w e r workers to  have  the  likely  m a j o r i t y of s t u d e n t s master  superficial  mastery  learning  that greater  reflects a a limited  f o r most .of t h e c l a s s .  r a t h e r than coverage  e q u i l i b r i u m between f a s t and In and  c h a p t e r seven  time-on-task  allocation use.  of  is time  desire  number o f  slow  pursued.  The  results  is  argued utility between  is  suggest  time  tasks  recognized  that  faster  and  a c a d e m i c t a s k s , may  that  slower function  time the  i t s wise  although  r a t e s than slower  similar  has  I t i s suggested students,  faster learners,  f o r both groups.  t h a t t i m e on a c a d e m i c t a s k s l i k e l y f o r slower l e a r n e r s .  an  t i m e on n o n - a c a d e m i c t a s k s i s  on-task  academic  between a l l o c a t e d  s t u d e n t s does not guarantee  l e a r n e r s have h i g h e r t o t a l on  Time u s e d f o r  workers.  It  Time on a c a d e m i c t a s k s and  investigated.  expense  i s i n t e r p r e t e d as m a i n t a i n i n g  the d i s t i c t i o n  to  time reduce  o b j e c t i v e s r a t h e r than t o cover the c u r r i c u l u m at the of  the  i s investigated.  a l l o c a t i o n d e c i s i o n s a r e i n t e r p r e t e d as f u n c t i o n i n g t o possible  that  learners.  chapter s i x ,  and  results  time  in  t o m a i n t a i n an  It is  greater marginal that on-task  similarity rates for  equilibrium.  25  In  chapter  eight,  the  types  of  activities  assignments given t o students are i n v e s t i g a t e d . advanced  that  function  to  students,  classroom a c t i v i t i e s engage  the  and  The t h e s i s i s  and a s s i g n m e n t s appear t o  cooperation  of  and c o n s e q u e n t l y a r e c r i t i c a l  the  majority  of  t o the maintenance of  equilibrium. In primary to  the f i n a l strategy  chapter i t i s proposed that the  i s t o keep t h e c l a s s t o g e t h e r .  be a c c o m p l i s h e d by t i m e management w i t h  than a coverage o r i e n t a t i o n . likely inherent  to  reduce  the  A mastery  student achievement  It  is  i s discussed.  rather  i s seen as problems  argued  that  implies the ignoring or  t i m e n e e d s amongst s t u d e n t s .  how t h i s may c o n t r i b u t e t o a l e v e l i n g of  mastery  orientation  i n increased coverage v a r i a n c e .  of i n d i v i d u a l  T h i s appears  management a n d i n s t r u c t i o n a l  keeping the c l a s s together n e c e s s a r i l y leveling  a  teacher's  or decrease i n  Further, variance  26  CHAPTER 2  The The the  and  procedures  investigation.  b a s i c modes o f i n q u i r y , is  made.  i s to identify  which  First,  a  were  adopted  distinction  the experimental  and d e s c r i b e for  this  between  two  and t h e n a t u r a l i s t i c ,  C r i t e r i a f o r t h e s e l e c t i o n o f a mode o f i n q u i r y a r e  suggested  and reasons  paradigm  are  the d e s i g n of framework and  of I n v e s t i g a t i o n  purpose of t h i s chapter  methods  particular  Process  f o r the  given. the  This  study  of  the  naturalistic  i s f o l l o w e d by a s e c t i o n i n w h i c h  within  i s elaborated.  bias,  choice  the  Finally,  naturalistic  research  t h e problems of r e a c t i v i t y  frequently associated with naturalistic  studies, are  addressed.  Two P a r a d i g m s A distinction in education, studies  are  may be made b e t w e e n two t y p e s o f r e s e a r c h  experimental concerned  with  and  naturalistic.  Experimental  t h e m a n i p u l a t i o n and c o n t r o l of  variables: The e x p e r i m e n t a l method i s t h e one where scientists change conditions in order to observe the consequences of those changes (Shulman, 1 9 8 1 , p. 9). The  aim i s the establishment  hand,  naturalistic  studies  of nomothetic have  as  a  laws.  On t h e o t h e r  basic  purpose, the  o b s e r v a t i o n and d e s c r i p t i o n of r e l a t i o n s h i p s between v a r i a b l e s as they o c c u r  spontaneously.  Scientists  in this  mode:  27  see n a t u r e p r e s e n t i n g i t s e l f f o r i n s p e c t i o n and the role of t h e s c i e n t i s t t h a t of i d e n t i f y i n g w h i c h of the v a r i a t i o n s t h a t n a t u r e p r e s e n t s a r e associated w i t h t h e o t h e r p r o c e s s e s o r o u t c o m e s ( S h u l m a n , 1981, p. 9 ) . The  aim  is  Traditionally,  to  describe  functional  t h e two modes o f s c i e n t i f i c  relationships.  inquiry  separated  and h a v e p u r s u e d i n d e p e n d e n t c o u r s e s o f  (Cronbach,  1957).  Rist two  have  been  development  (1977) c h a r a c t e r i z e d t h e two t y p e s o f r e s e a r c h  paradigms  fundamentally  at  variance  Paradigms are used i n the Kuhnian sense  as  w i t h one a n o t h e r .  (1962)  of  "beliefs,  v a l u e s , t e c h n i q u e s , and so on s h a r e d by t h e members o f a g i v e n community"  (p. 175).  methodology  b u t " p r e d i s p o s e s one  events p. 4 3 ) . how  within  As  such  a  paradigm  is  to view the  world,  i t , i n p r o f o u n d l y d i f f e r e n t ways"  P a r a d i g m s a r e s e e n as h a v i n g t h e power  reality  is  perceived  and  to  more t h a n a  dictate  and  (Rist, to  how  the 1977,  influence i t will  be  structured. The  general epistemological viewpoints inherent  experimental  or  a  naturalistic  radically different. in  which  the  (Bruyn,  1966),  holds  o b j e c t i v e and c a n Philosophically, and  be this  deterministic.  naturalistic  to  of  known  reality as  the  a s an a r t i c l e appropriately approach The  investigator  view  is  i s the  viewed.  traditional  way The  empiricist  of f a i t h t h a t r e a l i t y i s analyzed  i s ultimately of  an  phenomena a r e  P o s s i b l y a major d i s t i n c t i o n  nature  experimentalist, also  approach  in  reality  includes the b e l i e f  and  measured.  reductionistic held  by  the  t h a t t h e knower  28  c a n n o t be  divorced  subjective  and  is  interpretation. different  the  known.  Reality  apprehended  T h e s e two  views  to  which r e a l i t y  is  through of  inherently  a  reality  c o n c e p t i o n s o f p r o b l e m s and  p r o c e d u r e s by claims  from  process  give  of  rise  to  s o l u t i o n s , to d i f f e r e n t  i s i n v e s t i g a t e d , and  to  different  knowledge.  Metaphysical produce r a d i c a l l y  assumptions  about  d i f f e r e n t modes of  the  n a t u r e of  reality  Shulman  (1981)  inquiry.  argued: It i s important to recognize that d i f f e r e n c e s in method a r e n o t m e r e l y a l t e r n a t i v e ways of reaching t h e same end o r a n s w e r i n g t h e same q u e s t i o n s ( p . 6 ) . He  showed how  methods a r e  questions that the  empiricist  deduced  refutation  by  contrast stated  mode  hypotheses empirical  methodological rigor involve variables  w h i c h can  be  f o r m of  are  means. the  stated in  principle  to  reliably quantified.  In  naturalistic  paradigm  descriptions  in  the  understanding  b e h a v i o r , and  the  internal consistency  It  seems  methodological  clear  p r o c e d u r e s and  assumptions about the ideological  that  and  of  plausibility  the  paradigms involve  s o c i a l world  epistemological"  "an  which  are  Appropriate  the  our  of  phenomena  of  generalizations.  of  of  of  canons of m e t h o d o l o g i c a l r i g o r i n v o l v e light  form  canons  reduction  the  of  within  i n the  Appropriate  p r e c i s e l y and  inductive  "very types  Questions  capable  questions raised within  i n the  the  they t e n d to r a i s e " (p. 6 ) .  traditional  logically  d i s t i n g u i s h e d by  of  of  the  human  arguments. are  more  than  i n t e r r e l a t e d set are  (Rist,  of  philosophical, 1977,  p.  43).  29  Paradigms predispose different  intellectual  entails particular about  adherents  what  constitutes t h e two  procedures.  The  way.  spectacles.  functional  paradigms  experimental  the  world  adoption  specify paradigm in a  through  of a paradigm of r e a l i t y  p r o b l e m s and  of the n a t u r a l i s t i c  solutions.  different is  and  research  associated with  precise  and  reliable  p a r a d i g m seek t o  express  relationships either numerically, via correlational  a n a l y s i s , o r by a d o p t i n g qualitative  The  appropriate  to q u a n t i f y observations  Adherents  view  assumptions about the nature  Additionally,  attempts  to  what  has  come  to  be  known  as  a  methodology.  Qualitative methodology refers to those research s t r a t e g i e s , such as participant observation, i n depth interviewing, total participation in the a c t i v i t y b e i n g i n v e s t i g a t e d , f i e l d work e t c . , which allow the r e s e a r c h e r t o o b t a i n f i r s t - h a n d knowledge about the empirical social world in question. Qualitative methodology allows the researcher to "get c l o s e to the data" thereby developing the a n a l y t i c a l , c o n c e p t u a l and c a t e g o r i c a l c o m p o n e n t s o f explanation from the d a t a i t s e l f - r a t h e r than from the p r e c o n c e i v e d , rigidly s t r u c t u r e d , and highly quantified techniques t h a t pigeonhole the e m p i r i c a l s o c i a l world i n t o the o p e r a t i o n a l d e f i n i t i o n s that the researcher has constructed (Filstead, 1970, p. 6 ) . The  two  1977)  a p p r o a c h e s a r e o f t e n p o r t r a y e d as a n t a g o n i s t i c instead  understanding  of  equally  reality  An A r i s t o t e l i a n of  no  important  (Filstead,  inquiry,  the process  of  topic.  domain of the p r e s e n t  particular  investigation  focus,  v a l i d approaches  teacher  to  1970).  perspective dictates that in  s i n g l e method of  The  and  (Rist,  i t i s necessary  which  is  the  to  appropriate  strategies,  determine to  the  and  the  indicated  the  inquiry, classrooms,  coping  face  30  selection  of t h e n a t u r a l i s t i c  as opposed t o  the  experimental  paradigm. During sixties,  the l a t e n i n e t e e n  research  f i f t i e s and  on t e a c h i n g was  The  knowledge i n t h a t f i e l d  growing  seen  s e n s e of u n e a s i n e s s  as  a  reflection  of  experimental  methodology.  methodology  continued  Cronbach,  1975;  Cronbach  (1975)  was  perhaps  interactions studies. local  limits  explanatory concepts  1974;  ( p . 5)  will  which w i l l view  of  t h a t an  of q u a l i t a t i v e  man  Stake,  of  1974; 1978).  f o r nomothetic  theory  higher-order  of the r e s u l t s  "open-eyed,  enable  allow  be  experimental  (Campbell,  presence  that  1960).  surrounding  with  generalizability  suggested  suggesting  the c o l l e c t i o n  Snow,  of  t e a c h i n g may  malaise  seventies  the  the  contemporary  C r o n b a c h was be  1972;  misguided:  I n s t e a d he  a  the  argued t h a t the search  observations"  present  general  growing  incapable Huebner,  i n r e s e a r c h on  Dissatisfaction  into  Glass,  were  ( B e l l a c k and  a  nineteen  c h a r a c t e r i z e d by a  s e n s e of d e s p a i r t h a t t r a d i t i o n a l methods advancing  the e a r l y  the  of  intensive,  generation  social  of  scientists  in society.  to  In -short,  i n t e g r a l p a r t o f r e s e a r c h must information  along  with  the  more u s u a l q u a n t i t a t i v e d a t a . Qualitative considerable analysis  of  descriptive Ahlbrand, eventually  research  tradition. classroom  This  classroom  Stevens' questioning  s t u d i e s through  1969).  into  the  trend  (1912) stimulated  1920's and to  processes  has  observational a  series  1930's ( H o e t k e r  qualitative  a  of and  research  was  s u r p l a n t e d by more q u a n t i t a t i v e i n v e s t i g a t i o n s  into  31  teacher  effectiveness  late nineteen  (Dunkin  sixties,  and B i d d l e , 1974).  t h e r e was a r e s u r g e n c e  of a q u a l i t a t i v e  approach to i n q u i r y  i n t o e d u c a t i o n a l phenomena  Smith and G e o f f r e y ,  1968).  continued 1975) ,  research.  has  been  (Jackson,  1968;  This trend to q u a l i t a t i v e a n a l y s i s  into the nineteen  and  During the  seventies  labelled  ( B o s s e r t , 1979;  ethnographic  A major c h a r a c t e r i s t i c  of  this  Lortie,  or n a t u r a l i s t i c research  i s the  adoption  o f m e t h o d o l o g i e s from t h e f i e l d s of a n t h r o p o l o g y  sociology  ( L u t z and  1976) .  Emphasis  Ramsay, is  1974;  Overhalt  and  and  Stallings,  p l a c e d upon d i r e c t o b s e r v a t i o n , a n d t h e  c o n t r i b u t i o n s of p a r t i c i p a n t s v i a i n t e r v i e w . R e s e a r c h on t e a c h i n g h a s been c h a r a c t e r i z e d a s infancy  (Brophy,  suggested  1979; D u n k i n a n d B i d d l e , 1 9 7 4 ) .  t h a t o b s e r v a t i o n and d e s c r i p t i o n  prerequisites  to  the  (Kaplan,  classroom  i s limited.  investigate in  1964).  or  phenomena  working  Information  Therefore,  the s t r a t e g i e s developed  performance  I t h a s been  d e v e l o p m e n t o f h y p o t h e s e s w h i c h may  tested s t a t i s t i c a l l y processes  of  in i t s  rates  be  regarding  i t i s proposed t o  t o accommodate within  are  the  variation  naturalistic  framework.  Issues of Design Within "design" that  experimental  of t h e study  takes  Usually  the  place  "design"  gathering  in Naturalistic paradigm  Studies to  talk  of  u s u a l l y r e f e r s to the elaborate  prior  to  the  conduct  o f an  t o secure  information  planning  experiment.  r e f e r s t o the s e l e c t i o n or g e n e r a t i o n  instruments  the  relevant  of data to  the  32  hypotheses which The of  under  consideration,  the data w i l l emphasis  within  hypotheses,  a priori. the  be  gathered  as  w e l l a s t o t h e means by  and  subsequently  analyzed.  t h e e x p e r i m e n t a l p a r a d i g m on t h e t e s t i n g  p e r m i t s t h e d e s i g n o f t h e s t u d y t o be  In c o n t r a s t t o the  naturalistic  experimental  paradigm,  design  specified  approach,  is  used  within  in  a  less  r e s t r i c t i v e way t o c o n n o t e " t h o s e e l e m e n t s  of  and  and S t r a u s s , 1961,  p.  consistency" 17)  (Becker,  exhibited  naturalistic  by  a  Geer,  study.  specification  Research out  to  test  of  The  the  naturalistic  from a d a t a base,  the  data  predictions  genesis  relevant  paradigm  collected.  p r a c t i c a l problem performance and of  of  of  investigation of  precludes  extant  theoretical  Research  within  s e t s out t o e x p l o r e n a t u r a l l y theoretical  g e n e s i s of such over  the  from  r e s e a r c h may be a the  s c h o o l s (Becker e t a l . ,  a  occuring  propositions  quality  who a p p l y a n d a r e a d m i t t e d 1961);  and  to colleges the  lack  o f an a r e a a s e x e m p l i f i e d by B o s s e r t ' s  (1979)  t h e i n f l u e n c e of the s t r u c t u r e of a c t i v i t i e s  on t h e  a s e x p e r i e n c e d by J a c k s o n waiting  the  to the fieldwork.  b e h a v i o r of s t u d e n t s and t e a c h e r s ; or a c r i t i c a l  of  the  research i s t y p i c a l l y  literature.  The  those  from  such  such as the concern  the p r o f e s s i o n a l  study  within  h y p o t h e t i c o - d e d u c t i v e model s e t s  r e l a t i o n s h i p s , and t o g e n e r a t e the  emphasis  of the design p r i o r  within  specific  propositions. review  The  system  p a r a d i g m on t h e d e s c r i p t i o n o f phenomena, a n d on  the development of hypotheses complete  Hughes  order,  in  elementary  incident  (1968) when he o b s e r v e d classrooms.  The  the  such  amount  genesis of the  33  current the  s t u d y was  amount  of  Reflection teacher  classrooms students  time  on  by  the  the  needed  practical  existence  be  learning within  conducted  they  children  to  problems  of  fast  related  assignments.  occasioned  and  for  slow workers the  in  time  the d i s t r i b u t i o n  the  within  needs  of  of time f o r  classrooms.  inability within  to specify  the complete  the n a t u r a l i s t i c  of f i e l d w o r k s h o u l d n o t i n an ad hoc  to  differed  complete  l e d t o s p e c u l a t i o n s a b o u t how might  The  the o b s e r v a t i o n t h a t  fashion.  framework p r i o r  imply t h a t such Shavelson  d e s i g n of a  study  t o the  investigations  start  proceed  (1981) s t a t e d t h a t :  f i e l d w o r k methods (e.g., p a r t i c i p a n t observation, f o c u s e d i n t e r v i e w i n g ) and a n a l y t i c t e c h n i q u e s ( e . g . , development of conceptual and c a t e g o r i c a l s y s t e m s from the d a t a themselves) have been d e v e l o p e d by qualitative r e s e a r c h e r s and h a v e t h e i r c a n o n s of m e t h o d o l o g i c a l r i g o r j u s t a s q u a n t i t a t i v e methods do (p. 459). Neither  does  naturalistic "tabula  rasa".  r e s e a r c h e r may  it  imply  paradigm  that  the  approaches  G l a s e r and  Strauss  researcher the  within  investigation  (1967) s u g g e s t e d  the with a  that  the  begin with:  a p a r t i a l framework of " l o c a l " c o n c e p t s , d e s i g n a t i n g a few p r i n c i p l e s o r g r o s s f e a t u r e s o f t h e s t r u c t u r e and p r o c e s s e s i n t h e s i t u a t i o n s t h a t he will study (p. 45). Cicourel studies:  (1964) p o i n t e d out  the dynamic n a t u r e of  naturalistic  34  Rather than e n t e r i n g t h e r e s e a r c h s e t t i n g w i t h an e x p l i c i t t h e o r e t i c a l scheme and design, the field researcher frequently develops h i s "theory" during t h e s t u d y o r a f t e r t h e d a t a h a v e been c o l l e c t e d and w h i l e w r i t i n g up t h e f i n d i n g s ( p . 7 1 ) . T h i s f o r m o f r e s e a r c h has  been d e s c r i b e d a s :  i n t e n t i o n a l l y u n s t r u c t u r e d i n i t s r e s e a r c h d e s i g n so a s t o m a x i m i z e d i s c o v e r y and d e s c r i p t i o n r a t h e r t h a n s y s t e m a t i c t h e o r y t e s t i n g ( M c C a l l and Simmons, 1969, preface). Becker  et  al.,  o r i g i n a l view end  suggested  of t h e p r o b l e m  t h a t t h e r e s e a r c h e r has  ( w h i c h may  n o t be t h e v i e w a t  of t h e r e s e a r c h ) a s w e l l a s t h e o r e t i c a l and  commitments. the  (1961)  study  They s u g g e s t e d and  as such  that these  form  an the  methodological  the framework  of  s h o u l d be e l a b o r a t e d as a s p e c t s o f  the  "design". The school  was  t h e amount anticipated  o r i g i n a l view a  limited  of  time  that  of  problem  r e s o u r c e but  they  this  required  fact  of  for  b e s t be  i n t e r p r e t e d as c o p i n g s t r a t e g i e s .  strategies.  to  During  equilibrium  as  an  t e a c h e r s and  identify the  and  course  that these  of  the of  The  coping  the  attempting  to  optimize  inadequate  t o e x p l a i n the data c o l l e c t e d . p r a g m a t i s t was  a d e q u a t e e x p l a n a t i o n of c l a s s r o o m The  e m p h a s i s on t i m e  might  was  idea  of was  rationally  rejected  Rather  the  coping  strategies  c o n c e p t u a l i z a t i o n of the t e a c h e r as  in  elicit  possible  The  the t e a c h e r as a u t i l i t a r i a n  in  was  purpose of  study  learning  It  responses  developed.  student  time  l i f e would  describe  explanation  that  learning.  classroom  responses  was  was  that children d i f f e r e d  varying  research  from  the  the  adopted  as  i d e a of  as a  more  processes.  related  i s s u e s suggested  the b a s i c  35  theoretical  framework.  long t r a d i t i o n r e v i e w ) , but such  a  i n education  have  from economics.  (see c h a p t e r  explicitly,  use  time  in  framework advantage  of  (discussed  in chapter  one).  Theoretical  An  the  social  using  (Shulman  This  development of the was  an and  time  as  not always  Witness  as e v i d e n c e  of  the  a  the  resource  detached the  from  tendency  economic model t o adopt r e g r e s s i o n Epstein,  1975).  of a p a r t i c u l a r  The  to  In  the  current  belief  that  of  the a  a l l  behavior  idea t h a t the m a n i f e s t  framework  for  classroom  serves  approach  f u n c t i o n of  t h a t the l a t e n t  the  teaching  function  was  utilities.  to classroom study,  a  some  led to  t i m e a s a r e s o u r c e , and  the  as  social-psychological  "structural-functional"  decision to treat  led  theoretical perspective.  treat  adoption  a s o c i a l - p s y c h o l o g i c a l approach initial  justification  or  t o be p r o v i d e d by  s t u d e n t c o o p e r a t i o n t o enhance t e a c h e r  an  research  implicitly  are  enhancement of l e a r n i n g , b u t  The  present  employs,  considering  p r e d i s p o s i t i o n was  entailed a  function.  of  the a d o p t i o n of a m e t h o d o l o g i c a l o r i e n t a t i o n  organism.  approach  ramifications  and  considered  commitments  utilization  initial  past  Additional  m e t h o d o l o g i c a l commitments.  investigation  historical  f r o m e c o n o m i c s i s amply  schools  was  practical  procedures  the  o f an a n a l o g y  economic models.  researchers  s i x f o r an  a  been s y s t e m a t i c a l l y e x a m i n e d u s i n g m o d e l s  The  on  theoretical  to  that  by t h e e x t e n t t o w h i c h  literature  of  i d e a o f t i m e a s a r e s o u r c e has  i t i s only recently  view  supported  The  events,  delineated  t o adopt provided areas  of  36  possibly  fruitful  concepts for  and  investigation,  p r i n c i p l e s which  suggested  m i g h t be u s e d .  (time-on-task  f e a t u r e which  was t h o u g h t  seemed  organization  logically  might  be  orientation  o b j e c t s of study.  indicated  their  in  to  the  problem  t i m e ) , or because  some way ( a c t i v i t i e s a n d  I t i s important  to stress  that  guided,  and  but d i d not d i c t a t e , the  In o t h e r words, w h i l e  i t was  anticipated  t h e r e m i g h t be some i n t e r r e l a t i o n s h i p s b e t w e e n t h e a r e a s  selected prior  f o r study, the p r e c i s e nature  view  of  the  suggested  a particular  classroom  life  the  classroom  as  s t y l e of a n a l y s i s .  not  hypothesized  a social  system  system  Although  were s e p a r a t e d a n a l y t i c a l l y  classroom as a s o c i a l  discovering events  was  t o the fieldwork. The  of  of  stages the general t h e o r e t i c a l assumptions  methodological  that  related  in allocated  related  for instruction).  the i n i t i a l  pool  a n d p a c e ) , b e c a u s e o f some p u z z l i n g  ( d i s c r e p a n c i e s among c l a s s r o o m s they  a  Areas s e l e c t e d  s t u d y were s e l e c t e d b e c a u s e t h e l i t e r a t u r e  significance  in  and  also  facets  f o r study, the view  i n d i c a t e s an i n t e r e s t i n  r e l a t i o n s h i p s b e t w e e n many k i n d s o f phenomena  considered  simultaneously. events  developing  g e n e r a l i z a t i o n s which  explanatory  frameworks.  concentrated  on  abstracting  and  The a n a l y s i s was a i m e d a t  i n t e r p r e t i n g classroom tentative  with  of  the  express  Accordingly, recurring  purpose  of  could  serve as  the  analysis  elements  or patterns  from t h e c o n c r e t e d e t a i l s o f e v e n t s . The data  base  attempt  t o generate  e x p l a n a t o r y frameworks  l e d t o the adoption of p a r t i c i p a n t  from  a  o b s e r v a t i o n as  37  t h e m a j o r method o f has  been d e s c r i b e d  investigation.  Participant  observation  as:  not a s i n g l e method b u t rather a c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s t y l e o f r e s e a r c h w h i c h makes use of a number of methods and techniques—observation, informant interviewing, document analysis, respondent interviewing and participation with s e l f - a n a l y s i s ( M c C a l l and Simmons, 1969. Preface). Participant  observation  i n v o l v e s the  researcher  participating:  i n t h e d a i l y l i f e of t h e p e o p l e u n d e r study either openly, i n the r o l e of r e s e a r c h e r , or c o v e r t l y , i n some d i s g u i s e d r o l e , o b s e r v i n g t h i n g s that happen, listening to what i s s a i d and q u e s t i o n i n g p e o p l e o v e r some l e n g t h of t i m e ( B e c k e r e t a l . , 1961, p. 23) . In  this  study  researcher.  passive  active times  investigator  B e c a u s e of t h e n a t u r e  investigation, was  the  classrooms  interacting with teachers  The decision  classrooms.  This  Study  was  pragmatic  considerations.  moratorium  on  observation  time  in  to  governed Brophy  considered  in  fewer  a  a  more  non  class  small  number  e n e r g y on a conceptual  (1979)  called  relatively Instead,  he  visited  of  small and  for  a  little suggested  t o s p e n d a g r e a t e r amount  classrooms.  so t h a t e a c h m i g h t be  assumed  both  involving  classrooms.  i t m i g h t be more p r o f i t a b l e observing  by  under  school).  to concentrate  studies  numerous  study  a  researcher  only during  D e s i g n of t h e  decision  large  but  after  made  as  organization  and  was  number of c l a s s r o o m s  that  observation  ( r e c e s s , noon h o u r , b e f o r e  A  of the  openly  f o r young c h i l d r e n , the  during classroom  role,  participated  of  F i v e c l a s s r o o m s were on  a  weekly  basis.  38  This  enabled  a  single  i n v e s t i g a t o r t o spend a c o n s i d e r a b l e  p o r t i o n o f t h e day v i s i t i n g some  the schools,  but  still  provided  t i m e a t t h e e n d o f e a c h o b s e r v a t i o n p e r i o d t o r e f l e c t on  the notes  t a k e n , and t o b e g i n  the  process  of  analysis  and  synthesis. The  five  grade  three  classrooms  were v i s i t e d  week d u r i n g a t h r e e month p e r i o d i n t h e  fall  schools  were  mainland  Columbia  i n a predominantly  situated  in  the  lower  urban  area.  s c h o o l s was made by s c h o o l d i s t r i c t suggested  by  studies.  factors  confounding.  sought.  and  The s t u d y  thereby  Accordingly,  who  had  a  the  The  personnel  of  selection  as f i v e  cooperation  of  classroom Because  five  years  management of  skills  duration  would  of  five  be  of experience  well  study,  i n d i c a t e d a d e s i r e t o cooperate  were  sought.  demonstrated  researchers. teachers interest  personnel  willingness  female  the primary had  selected  only teachers  the  t o cooperate  schools  with  to the i n d i v i d u a l  teachers.  who  for  university  A l l of t h e p r i n c i p a l s  i n the p r o j e c t , but l e f t  a  established.  P r i n c i p a l s had t o g i v e t h e i r consent before  c o u l d be a p p r o a c h e d .  was  were s o u g h t s o t h a t b a s i c  the  district  control  T e a c h e r s who h a d  of  School  the  experience  case  p o s s i b i l i t y of  F e m a l e s were c h o s e n b e c a u s e t r a d i t i o n a l l y  minimum  of  using guidelines  the  minimum o f f i v e y e a r s  The  British  was s o u g h t t o  reduce  g r a d e s h a v e been d o m i n a t e d by women.  their  1980.  was p l a n n e d  H o m o g e n e i t y amongst t h e c a s e s  extraneous  teachers  the author.  of  once a  the  expressed  the decision t o p a r t i c i p a t e  The g r a d e t h r e e t e a c h e r s  i n the  39  chosen schools  gave t h e i r  Random present is  sampling  study.  of e d u c a t i o n a l  random  sampling  key  teachers  d e s i r a b l e i n order  failure  Tukey,  of  In the e x p e r i m e n t a l  considered  discussed  consent to being  studies  necessary  meet  Accordingly,  the  classrooms are described  five  for  random  sampling  the  for s t a t i s t i c a l  Cronbach, 1975).  feasible  to generalize r e s u l t s .  Glass,  assumption  i n f e r e n c e has  1968;  Cornfield  Snow (1974) s u g g e s t e d t h a t  to g e n e r a l i z a t i o n i s to describe  detail.  not  tradition  to  e x t e n s i v e l y ( B r a c h t and  1956;  was  involved.  The of been and the  sample p o p u l a t i o n  in  schools, c h i l d r e n , teachers  and  in detail  the  the  i n Appendix  1.  Data C o l l e c t i o n Within  the n a t u r a l i s t i c  framework:  Data collection i s not a distinct phase i n the research process but rather i s one analytically distinguishable aspect of a multiplex process. Design, a n a l y s i s and write-ups are also being c a r r i e d o u t s i m u l t a n e o u l s l y w i t h d a t a c o l l e c t i o n and all four a s p e c t s c o n t i n u a l l y i n f l u e n c e and i m p i n g e upon one a n o t h e r ( M c C a l l and Simmons, 1969, p. 61). Accordingly,  i t should  used f o r t h i s for  execution  purposes,  that of  The  data  the  investigator prior  f o r the and  distinct  the  s t r u c t u r e d and during  borne i n mind t h a t  s e c t i o n , and  analytic  impression  be  subheadings  f o l l o w i n g s e c t i o n , are  are  phases  the  not  intended  were  used  t o convey  the  during  the  followed  study. collected fell unstructured.  study  were  Some  structured,  knew what d a t a  to c o l l e c t i o n .  n a t u r a l l y i n t o two of  the  in  t o c o l l e c t , and  Such s t r u c t u r e d data  the how  data  categories, collected  sense t h a t  the  to c o l l e c t i t ,  (on-task  rates  and  40  student  performance  on an a r i t h m e t i c t a s k ) were c o l l e c t e d i n  accordance with t r a d i t i o n a l (In order of  t o maintain  the c o l l e c t i o n  given  i n context).  standards  for  quantitative  c o n t i n u i t y and coherence p r e c i s e  details  and a n a l y s i s of q u a n t i t a t i v e data  w i l l be  Other data  were u n s t r u c t u r e d ,  t h a t t h e i n v e s t i g a t o r d i d n o t know p r i o r precise  nature  specifically  data.  o r form of t h e data  to  i n t h e sense  collection,  the  n o r how t h e y  were r e l a t e d  t o t h e problem under i n v e s t i g a t i o n .  Unstructured  data  were c o l l e c t e d by means o f n a r r a t i v e s p e c i m e n r e c o r d s  the  observation  of  classroom  e v e n t s and i n f o r m a l t a l k s  teachers.  The u s e o f t h e t e r m " u n s t r u c t u r e d "  construed  as  methodological (1981),  rigor.  Shulman  research long  implying  (1981),  tradition  research  within  n o t be  Wilson  which  and  (1977),  qualitative  i n that  investigators effective  Stern  i t has  are  and  a  working  appropriate  methods.  record  (Barker  Nail,  and  al.,  important  The  1 9 5 5 ; Gump,  narrative  commented,  u s e f u l t o record every  Gump,  d e s c r i p t i o n of a  ( s e e A p p e n d i x 2 f o r an e x a m p l e ) . have  specimen  1969; W r i g h t ,  S c h o g g e n , 1955) i s a n a t u r a l i s t i c  (1961)  particularly  specimen r e c o r d s .  and W r i g h t ,  stream of events  As  Becker  i ti s n e i t h e r p o s s i b l e nor event.  Therefore,  i tis  t o s i g n i f y what was i n c l u d e d a n d what was o m i t t e d i n  descriptions.  salient  and  o u t by S h a v e l s o n  t o r e f i n e and develop  Narrative  the  As p o i n t e d  with  so c o l l e c t e d a r e l a c k i n g i n  i s much l i k e q u a n t i t a t i v e r e s e a r c h ,  continually  et  the data  should  of  In  the present  f e a t u r e s of classroom  life  study  which might  a  record ofthe be  associated  41  with  time  u s e was r e q u i r e d .  Consequently,  ends of l e s s o n s , t h e s u b j e c t m a t t e r given a  studied,  the  and  assignments  t o s t u d e n t s , a n d w h e t h e r i n s t r u c t i o n was t o t h e c l a s s o r  group,  students what  the beginnings  were  recorded.  Additionally,  a b o u t w o r k , how l o n g t h e y  to  do  when  finished,  teacher  had, and  directions  about  noted.  Other aspects of  were n e g l e c t e d , p a r t i c u l a r l y  i n t e r a c t i o n s among  classroom  life  students,  because they  were  comments t o  were n o t c o n s i d e r e d  of s i g n i f i c a n c e  to  the problem s t u d i e d . Informal  interviews.  Informal  interviewing  teachers  took  p l a c e on an o n - g o i n g b a s i s .  use  the  word  of  "interview"  may  i n t e r a c t i o n s were i n t h e f o r m o f an  a  variety  of  topics  was  conversing  with the teachers  Although  unstructured,  dialogue, the conversations the  i n v e s t i g a t o r took  conversation covered  on  a  be  a  following  were  not  of  the  lunch  hours.  conventions  haphazard.  research  the  the course of  and  advantage of a classroom topic  sense,  Information  during  recesses  the  misnomer, f o r t h e  conversations. gathered  at  and  I n one  of  Typically,  e v e n t t o open a  interest.  The t o p i c s  d u r i n g a p a r t i c u l a r c o n v e r s a t i o n were d i c t a t e d by  circumstances  of  the  investigator.  The  flexibilty  permitted  follow-up  teachers.  Replies  questions. one t e a c h e r  moment  of to  Questions  teachers.  of  the  queries  the the  often  interests  of  conversational  spontaneous  which e l i c i t e d  were s u b s e q u e n t l y  with the other  and  remarks  prompted fruitful  incorporated  of  in  of  the the mode the  additional  responses  from  conversations  42  During questions 3).  the  relating  Not  teachers  the  of  the  these  questions  a s some q u e s t i o n s  spontaneity disadvantage  advantages  and  list  naturalness,  of were  of t h e  (see  Appendix  were a s k e d o f a l l o f t h e  o r t h e a n s w e r was a p p a r e n t  The  a  o b v i o u s l y d i d not apply  were a l l a s k e d i n t h e same  sequence.  research  t o t h e p r o b l e m was g e n e r a t e d  a l l of  classrooms,  Neither  course  manner, the  from or  i n some  observation. in  the  same  conversational  judged  to  of  mode,  outweigh  the  of l a c k of s t a n d a r d i z a t i o n i n t h e q u e s t i o n - a s k i n g  procedures. To m a i n t a i n during as  t h e c o n v e r s a t i o n a l mode no n o t e s were  the dialogue.  soon  as  was  A review  convenient  The m a j o r d i s a d v a n t a g e reliance  on memory.  o f t h e m a i n t o p i c s was a t t h e end o f e a c h  of t h i s approach  i s , of  recorded  conversation. course,  However, t h e l a c k o f i n h i b i t i o n ,  o f s p o n t a n e o u s comments d u r i n g  conversation,  taken  was deemed  the  typical to  be  adequate compensation f o r the l a c k of p r e c i s i o n . Data  reduction The  method  considerable problem this  participant  amount o f d a t a .  becomes  study,  of  one o f d a t a  observation  generates  Consequently, a major reduction.  During  a n d f o l l o w i n g S m i t h and G e o f f r e y  practical  the course  (1968),  a  of  the f i e l d  n o t e s were r e a d a t t h e end o f e a c h day and a w r i t t e n r e c o r d o f impressions constituted  and i d e a s was made ( s e e Appendix. 4 ) . a  also contained research  summary  of the o b s e r v a t i o n s  This  made t h a t day a n d  t e n t a t i v e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s . T h i s phase  process  record  m i g h t be c h a r a c t e r i z e d a s r e f l e c t i o n  of  the  on t h e  43  o b s e r v a t i o n s o f t h e day w i t h a v i e w t o them.  Reflection  and e v e n t s  similarities. belong  to  comparison  particular  As t h e  classes  category. were  and  these  the major concepts idea  of  across  is  classes  as  labeled.  At  record  characteristic  the  amount  brief,  illustrations  ( G l a s e r and S t r a u s s ,  of  end  these  of  the  provided  develop  strategy. sort  the  A major  is  that  i t  data necessary  convenient concepts  for  already  observations  of  other  t o emerge; the  the b a s i c coping  j u s t i f y conclusions in a  reported  began  to  commonalities  a n d themes w h i c h were u s e d t o  to  1967).  candidates  progressed,  w i t h q u a l i t a t i v e a n a l y s i s of t h i s  impossible  using  Subsequently,  summaries of t h e d a i l y  equilibrium  difficulty  of  considered  considered  research  p a t t e r n s were i d e n t i f i e d and fieldwork,  were  i n t h e c a t e g o r y , were c o m p a r e d w i t h e v e n t s  in the category. within  ( G l a s e r and S t r a u s s ,  w h i c h were s i m i l a r  i n c i d e n t s and e v e n t s , w h i c h membership  out  o f t h e day were c o m p a r e d i n a s e a r c h f o r  Events a  sense  was c a r r i e d o u t i n a d e l i b e r a t e way,  t h e method o f c o n s t a n t Incidents  making  way.  to  Typically  or p r i n c i p l e s are  1967).  The P r o b l e m o f B i a s T h e r e a p p e a r s t o be g e n e r a l a g r e e m e n t t h a t poses the  problems concerning data  Cicourel, Viditch, the  collected 1964;  (Becker  et  and t h e v a l i d i t y o f  a l . , 1961;  Bruyn,  1966;  K e r l i n g e r , 1964; S c h w a r t z a n d S c h w a r t z , 1 9 6 9 ;  1966; Z e l d i t c h ,  principal  the r e l i a b i l i t y  observation  concerns  1969).  McCall  (1969) s u g g e s t e d  that  r e g a r d i n g o b s e r v a t i o n a l d a t a w e r e : 1)  44  t h e r e a c t i v e e f f e c t s of t h e p r e s e n c e observer  on  the  phenomenon  or the  under  behavior  of  the  investigation;  2)  the  d i s t o r t i n g e f f e c t s of s e l e c t i v e p e r c e p t i o n and on  the  part  of  the observer  observer's a b i l i t y phenomena  in  to witness  question.  regarding l i m i t a t i o n s witness  a l l  position  within  information c o n s t r a i n t s on study.  because  might  denied  observer the  what him.  a  Stanley,  1963;  s e t t i n g s and  to  the  present by  the  events  Fundamentally  effects of  the  are  discussed  distorting  a for  first,  effects  of  observers  do  interpretation.  O b s e r v a t i o n a l Measures  behavior  t h a t the r e a l  access  i s d i s c u s s e d under the concern  discussion  affect  and  observer's  a l l classroom  T h e r e seems t o be g e n e r a l a g r e e m e n t t h a t  Schwartz,  to  Organizational  simultaneously.  Reactive  s e l e c t i v e p e r c e p t i o n and  the  concern  s t u d y , t h e l i m i t a t i o n s were o c c a s i o n e d  distorting effects.  R e a c t i v i t y and  the  the  of  (1969) the  from  and  of a c c u r a t e l y w i t n e s s i n g  by  aspects  of  stemmed  have  of p e r c e p t i o n , t h i s  followed  ability  organization  some o f them o c c u r e d  problem  relevant  i n f o r m a t i o n were n o t a f e a t u r e of  In t h i s  impossibility  the  aspects  the  this  a l l  3) t h e l i m i t a t i o n s on  In M c C a l l ' s paper  on  relevent  and;  interpretation  (Barker  Cook  and  Sechrest,  and  Wright,  Reichardt, 1956).  i s s u e s a r e how  1955;  1979;  Webb,  However, Weick  e x t e n s i v e the  Campbell  Campbell,  (1968)  impact  and  argued  is,  which  p r o c e s s e s a r e most v u l n e r a b l e t o i t s e f f e c t s ,  whether  interference  observer  e f f e c t s may  be  can  be  detected.  localized  and  that  He  suggested they  should  and that be  45  documented.  An  extreme  position  t h a t even l o s s o f i n i t i a l  a w a r e n e s s i s no g u a r a n t e e o f u n c o n t a m i n a t e d b e h a v i o r , t a k e n by s e v e r a l Sherif  and  moderate  Sherif,  position  habituation with  and John, Purcell  their  subjects  The  Researchers  that  a  and  period  reported of  reactivity  Brady  (Purcell  (1966)  considerably  of  as  of after  to  transmitters,  and Soskin  sets  and John of  that  threatening  which failed  diminished intense  intimate fidelity  verbal  or  1966;  and John  (1963)  couples  awareness  of  involvement.  a  two  adolescents t o report  of  apparatus  who  dropped  Independent but  the l i v e  who  observer;  observer.  be  between  reasonable  i s potentially  recordings  can  were  o r t h e dummy  significant differences I t seems  wore  evening.  study  sessions.  transmitters  interactions  t h a n by a l i v e  the  P u r c e l l and Brady  the  wore  radio  o f two w e e k s .  f o r one h o u r e a c h  regarding  the f i r s t  live  the verbal  the behavior of adolescents  remarks  invasion  via  for a period  transmitters  t h e use as  more  Brady,  (1963) s t u d i e d  married  b e h a v i o r u n d e r t h e two c o n d i t i o n s . suggest  a  adaptation  and  o b s e r v e r s who were f a m i l i a r t o t h e a d o l e s c e n t s , naive  take  r e a d i l y become a c c u s t o m e d t o  Soskin  studied  "dummy"  percentage  who  1964;  procedure i snecessary t o deal  w h i c h were worn d a i l y  (1966) s i m i l a r l y  1962; R o s e n t h a l ,  1963).  two  periods  "live"  of  subjects  of  transmitters  during  argue  privacy.  interaction  The  1964).  and  suggested that of  (Orne,  t o the observation  the problem  Soskin  researchers  h a s been  of  as  t h e most  made a n d w i t h  Y e t even i n t h e s e  to  greater studies  46  behavior,  either  a p p e a r t o be  (1979)  argued  a  functional  is  environment. pattern  If this  of  is  that  or s u b j e c t i v e l y , d i d not  so,  could  then  have  enough  to  and  s t u d e n t s , by  other,  have  expectations  Consequently,  one  would  to  an  teachers  behavior which expression which  and  of  concern  suddenly  evidenced  are by  The  likely  to  be  research time.  reviewed During  two  about children  o b s e r v e r was  interactions  anticipated  that  cause  For example, a  Similarly, by  occur.  reactivity  becomes n o i s y , w i l l  met  each  unusual  student  of  class likely  teacher  puzzlement,  suggested  "visitor"  grade t h r e e c l a s s e s . expressed  that reactive  effects  t h e f i r s t o b s e r v a t i o n i n e a c h room  t h e c h i l d r e n were t o l d t h a t t h e  or  to  increased question asking.  d i m i n i s h over  learning  events.  will  t h e u s u a l w o u l d be t h e  draw f o r t h t e a c h e r r e m o n s t r a t i o n s . directions  was  by e i t h e r p a r t y .  i s u s u a l l y q u i e t but  Classroom  pronounced  It  being a force  exposure  behaviors  that  students.  d e v i a t e d from  of  behavior.  e f f e c t s would l e a d t o a m o d i f i c a t i o n of the u s u a l between  habitual  constitute  their  what  expect  particular  students are p u b l i c  of  of  in  the  a b o u t o n l y by a m a j o r  alter  reason  that  in  t h a t knowledge  impact  o f b o t h t e a c h e r s and  Teachers  to  brought  radically  behavior  changes  I t seems u n l i k e l y  d i s r u p t i v e enough performances  teacher  response  behavior are l i k e l y  d i s r u p t i v e event. observed  objectively  influenced significantly.  Doyle classroom  rated  interest  interested  in  At the r e c e s s break  one  in  the  r e c o r d i n g on t h e c o d i n g s h e e t .  was  the  "numbers"  During  subsequent  47  visits  children  r a r e l y approached the o b s e r v e r  d u r i n g c l a s s time d i d a teacher that  the  class  was  refer publically  being observed.  s t u d y , a l l of t h e t e a c h e r s t h o u g h t room  and  o n l y once  to  the  fact  A t t h e b e g i n n i n g of  that  an  observer  the  in  the  w o u l d n o t d i s r u p t t h e c l a s s a s t h e c h i l d r e n were u s e d t o  v i s i t o r s being  i n t h e room.  teacher spontaneously ignored the  T o w a r d s t h e end  commented  on  the  of t h e s t u d y ,  way  her  one  class  had  observer:  It's as i f you're p a r t o f t h e woodwork. E v e n B. (the c h i l d i n the desk directly in front of the observer) hasn't been squirming around to bother you.  Consequently, probably  it  is  concluded  A  second  observational distorted  effects  were  Interpretation  principle  studies  is  concern  that  the  assumption  Implicit  i n the concept  that "objective"  independently  of  reality  an o b s e r v e r .  expressed  observations  by t h e s e l e c t i v e p e r c e p t i o n s and  the o b s e r v e r .  the  reactive  minimal.  S e l e c t i v e P e r c e p t i o n and  must be  that  of  distortion can  circumstances  to  reflect  be  be  is  of the  assessed  notion i s that perception  s t r i p p e d of a l l c o n c e p t u a l c o n t a m i n a t i o n  observation  may  interpretations  e x i s t s and  The  about  "reality".  a r e d a t a c o n s i d e r e d t o be  Only  i n order  for  under  these  " o b j e c t i v e " and  hence  "scientific". An socially  equally  tenable  embedded a c t i v i t y  position  is  that  science  c a r r i e d o u t by human b e i n g s who  is a are  48  h e i r s t o some i n t e l l e c t u a l p r e f e r e n c e s this  formulation a l l  qualitative, have  been  According  are  observations,  the  filtered  product  whether  Within  quantitative  of i n t e r p r e t a t i o n because  through  t o Claude Bernard  and v i e w p o i n t s .  the  mind  (1865),  of  the  or they  observer.  q u o t e d by B l a c k  (1954):  pure observation i s a m y t h . What s h a l l c o u n t a s a fact i n any w e l l - d e v e l o p e d science is already largely determined by t h e o r y embodied i n the d i s p o s i t i o n of s c i e n t i f i c instruments, the s e l e c t i o n of "competent" scientists, and t h e p o s t u r e of " c o r r e c t " observation (p. 19). Philosophers  of  science  n o t , and cannot be, v a l u e  free  Kuhn,  1972;  1962;  Scriven,  observations which enjoyed  greater  considered  that  interpretation.  themselves  quantification  data  o b j e c t i v e of t h e i r  observations is  a  between  cogent  Typically,  quantification  effects. of  Gould  observation  s e t s , he showed how a p r i o r i level,  who were c o n s i d e r e d  Gould  to  1961).  have  (1981)  i s open t o  (1981) is  the  data  collected  time. demonstrated  demonstration  contrasting  by  t o be amongst t h e most e m i n e n t  that  quantification  no g u a r a n t e e o f o b j e c t i v i t y .  objectivity  to  assumptions  of  an  interesting  distinction  a n d s u b j e c t i v i t y made by S c r i v e n  but t h a t they  of  His reanalysis  S c r i v e n argued t h a t o b j e c t i v i t y and s u b j e c t i v i t y a r e be  1964;  a s " o b j e c t i v e " a n d h a v e been  distorting  i n f l u e n c e d , a t an u n c o n s c i o u s  and  Toulmin,  Kaplan,  I n h i s r e a n a l y s i s o f what were c o n s i d e r e d  impeccable  scientists  argued that science i s  ( B l a c k , .1954;  respectability  t o be f r e e o f  demonstrated  be  lend  have  (1972). held  a r e w i d e l y used t o r e f e r  to  t o two  49  different  contrasts:  In the first of these contrasts "subjectivity" refers t o what c o n c e r n s o r o c c u r s t o t h e i n d i v i d u a l subject and his experiences, qualities and dispositions while " o b j e c t i v e " r e f e r s to what a number of s u b j e c t s o r j u d g e s experience—in short, t o phenomena i n t h e p u b l i c d o m a i n ( p . 9 5 ) . He to  s u g g e s t e d t h a t as whom  Scriven  reference  the d i f f e r e n c e i s i n the  number of  is  is quantitative.  made  this  contrast  people  continued:  I n t h e s e c o n d of t h e two u s e s , t h e r e i s r e f e r e n c e t o t h e q u a l i t y of t h e t e s t i m o n y o r t h e report or the (putative) evidence, and so I call this the "qualitative" sense. Here "subjective" means unreliable, biased or p r o b a b l y b i a s e d , a m a t t e r of o p i n i o n , and " o b j e c t i v e " means r e l i a b l e , factual, c o n f i r m a b l e o r c o n f i r m e d and so f o r t h ( p . 9 5 ) . He  maintained  research number  i s to fuse  the  two  be  one  one  is  the  test  of  by  need  sense.  the  a  person,  person  s u b j e c t i v e i n the q u a l i t a t i v e  suggested t h a t the a c i d t e s t  science  reports  r e p o r t s by  S c r i v e n a r g u e d t h a t r e p o r t s by  necessarily  in social  meanings such t h a t  o f p e o p l e become o b j e c t i v e , and  subjective. not  that a fundamental confusion  He  credible  witness: If we can test someone's c l a i m s on a v e r y l a r g e number of occasions and find them extremely reliable, we h a v e good reason t o b e l i e v e him on o t h e r o c c a s i o n s when he t e s t i f i e s a b o u t e v e n t s o f a kind that we know t o e x i s t e v e n t h o u g h we c a n n o t c h e c k them d i r e c t l y o u r s e l v e s ( p . 96) Typically, pertinent  r e p o r t s of  literature,  r e s u l t s , and  conclusions.  a p a r t i c i p a n t observer, c a n n o t be  as  assessed  research well  as  i n c l u d e a review a  presentation  of of  the data,  In the c a s e of s t u d i e s c o n d u c t e d  where t h e c r e d i b i l i t y  directly,  Scriven's  of the  argument would  by  fieldwork suggests  50  t h a t c r e d i b i l i t y may the  be e s t i m a t e d b a s e d upon c l a i m s made a b o u t  l i t e r a t u r e which i s a c c e s s i b l e to a l l .  reported other  by a p a r t i c i p a n t  free  from  distorting  the adequacy of n a t u r a l i s t i c p o i n t out  t h a t t h e end  i s not acceptance of  confidence  (Rozeboom,  i960).  propositions  i s a product  that  j u d g e m e n t of  evaluation  of any  can  of  in  (1981)  advised that confidence  in  a  should  set  of  include  an  i n commonsense  Suppes (1969)  and  i n a r e p o r t s h o u l d be  e v a l u a t i o n o f t h e c o h e r e n c e and  degree  (1969) a d v i s e d  is plausible  C r o n b a c h and  the  propositions  McCall  study  to  investigation  the  confidence  of whether the account  Bruyn  arguments  of  in discussing  scientific  judgement.  terms.  an  Finally,  place  naturalistic  (1966),  by  probability  of p r o p o s i t i o n s , but  Ultimately  a  data  r e s e a r c h , i t seems a p p r o p r i a t e  product  one  higher  effects.  or r e j e c t i o n  that  addition  observer, which are c o r r o b o r a t e d  r e s e a r c h e r s i n t h e a r e a , have a  being  In  Shulman based  i n t e r n a l c o n s i s t e n c y of  on the  presented. Generalizability  Science particular.  i s more c o n c e r n e d This preference  generalizability. findings  from  The  one  w i t h the u n i v e r s a l  reveals i t s e l f  q u e s t i o n asked  context  may  to  generalizability  i n the concept what  degree  be assumed t o a p p l y  s e t t i n g s or under o t h e r c o n d i t i o n s . addressed  i s to  than  Attention  is  the of the  i n other typically  from the p a r t i c u l a r  sample of  s u b j e c t s t o some l a r g e r u n i v e r s e o f s u b j e c t s o f w h i c h t h e y  are  s a i d t o be  one  might  ask  representative. how  far  the  In  this  conclusions  particular drawn  from  study, the  five  51  classrooms  investigated apply to other classrooms.  t h e s m a l l number of c l a s s e s i n v o l v e d , and sampling, but  no  unwarranted  neither  are  the  i d i o s y n c r a s i e s of "worlds  individual  i n a g r a i n of s a n d " .  similarity  classrooms,  i t might reasonably  few c l a s s r o o m s  a r e common t o a l l . revealed be made by  the reader.  the classrooms  investigation  of  the u n i v e r s a l i t y  the  p r i n c i p l e s generated investigation. all  of  during  Kaplan  the  Strauss  (1967) s u g g e s t e d  the  generation  of  which  that  this  i n Appendix  were  important  course argued  Typically,  used  to  judgement, 1.  issue  the of  is  the  concepts a  and  naturalistic  t h a t t h e most b a s i c o f by  which  these  he  means  categories  from  Further,  they  the concept  that  the accuracy  i s not  Glaser  research  the c o n c e p t u a l c a t e g o r i e s have a l i f e maintained  flow  generalizations  describe reality.  that n a t u r a l i s t i c  conceptual  may  c o n c l u s i o n s i s an  generated  used t o generate  study  or r e c u r r e n t c o n s t i t u e n t s i n the  (p. 8 5 ) .  concepts  the  t h a t the  i s a judgement t h a t  of  one  other  processes  identifications,  become  the  of  some p r o c e s s e s  of s p e c i f i c  more  (1964)  making of e n d u r i n g experience"  on  generalizability  g e n e r a l i z a t i o n s are  "the  world  In o r d e r t o f a c i l i t a t e  important q u e s t i o n , perhaps a question  the  the  are d e s c r i b e d i n d e t a i l  Although  a r e made;  reflect  be a n t i c i p a t e d  common a r e  i n the p r e s e n t  to  random  W i l l i a m B l a k e wrote of  with  might shed l i g h t  How  of  I n so much t h a t t h e w o r l d o f  shares  a  intended  teachers.  classroom  of  the l a c k  claims to generalizabilty  results  a  Because of  and  involves  data.  Once  of t h e i r  own.  of t h e  fundamentally  evidence  problematic,  52  because "the concept most  accurate  itself  facts  will  change"  not  change,  (p. 2 3 ) .  a r g u e t h a t t h e most a p p r o p r i a t e q u e s t i o n naturalistic and  studies  principles  and  Because the of  was  the n a t u r a l i s t i c  the dynamic n a t u r e  process  of  specified  adopted was  of the  opposed  a priori.  r e q u i r e d t h a t two and  question  of  naturalistic  be  might  addressed of t h e  design to  The  major  distorting the  during  e f f o r t was of  the  hypothesis rather  by  concepts  present the  study:  a  of  effects,  be a d d r e s s e d .  discussed.  framework  hypothesis results  of t h e  aspects  of  study.  research  o b s e r v a t i o n a l nature the  the  made t o e m p h a s i z e  testing  than  generalizability  r e s e a r c h was  the  conducted w i t h i n  p a r a d i g m , an  investigation  reactivity  to  one  the  c o n c e r n e d w i t h the d e s c r i p t i o n of  procedures  as  Therefore,  i s the g e n e r a l i z a b i l i t y  investigation  generation  even  generated.  This chapter methods  while  problem  the  in a  design research of  bias,  Finally,  the  results  of  53  CHAPTER 3  Organization  f o r I n s t r u c t i o n : L e v e l i n g and S h a r p e n i n g  A fundamental d i f f i c u l t y the  necessity  of d e a l i n g with  Often organizations (Rosenbaum,  1980).  of  a  by many o r g a n i z a t i o n s i s  the diverse  respond t o d i v e r s i t y  enterprise dictates groups  faced  The that  system f o r o r g a n i z i n g  of  clients.  by c r e a t i n g  subgroups  magnitude learners  convenient  needs  size.  of  must  the  be  educational  organized  While the necessity  l a r g e numbers o f l e a r n e r s  into  f o r some  i n t o groups i s  a p p a r e n t t h e means by w h i c h t h i s may b e s t be a c c o m p l i s h e d long  been t h e s u b j e c t  two  methods  of  o f d e b a t e ; Shane ( i 9 6 0 )  f o r g r o u p i n g w h i c h h a v e been t r i e d .  s e l e c t i n g t h e most a p p r o p r i a t e  been  complicated  further  by  literature  on  the  method o f  the  d i f f e r e n c e s amongst l e a r n e r s . profuse  documents  The p r o b l e m  of  Even a c u r s o r y  has  individual  glance  organizational  problem of i n d i v i d u a l d i f f e r e n c e s provides  thirty  organization  existence  has  at  the  responses t o the  ample  justification  for the dictum: No scheme o f s c h o o l o r g a n i z a t i o n however e l a b o r a t e l y worked o u t , p r o v i d e s f o r t h e t y p e s and ranges of learner variability encompassed by t h e school ( G o o d l a d , 1962, p. 2 1 0 ) . Shane  (1962)  organizational that  grade  century  noted  basic  trends  responses t o i n d i v i d u a l d i f f e r e n c e s .  levels  were  t o reduce the  nongraded  four  schools.  introduced  individual  He p o i n t e d  in  the  differences  out that  in  the  He a r g u e d  mid-nineteenth found  i n the  i n an a t t e m p t t o make  54  the  graded approach l e s s a r b i t r a r y " m u l t i p l e t r a c k " plans  introduced (see  permitting  discussion  students to progress at d i f f e r e n t  i n chapter one).  t o w a r d s homogeneous g r o u p i n g as by  ability.  grouping It change  Finally,  i n the  received  its  force  individual light  from  a  This  of S h a n e ' s r e v i e w  methods of o r g a n i z a t i o n .  the  belief social be  curriculum. ensure that the  risk  to complete the explore  to  t h a t change  was  to  also that  an  problem  of  the  (1960) of  the  number o f  different  to  l e a r n e r s who  In c h a p t e r one,  if a  f a c e a f u n d a m e n t a l d i l e m m a : t h e y have differ  i n a l i m i t e d amount of  so t h a t  the  n e e d s of  w i l l not  be  i n t i m e needs c o v e r time.  If  teachers  i n d i v i d u a l s a r e met,  enough t i m e t o  i f they organize  cover  it the  for i n s t r u c t i o n to  curriculum,  they  likely  run  a l l o w i n g enough time f o r i n d i v i d u a l s t u d e n t s  work.  The  extent  f i v e classrooms represents dilemma of  has  v i e w seems u n d u l y o p t i m i s t i c i n  c l a s s c o v e r s the  what  only  to  schools  I t seems r e a s o n a b l e t o q u e s t i o n  Conversely,  of n o t  the  impetus  was  that there  the  the  it  t h a t g r o u p s of  seems l i k e l y  of  found  teachers  classes  pupils  towards ungraded  grounds, but  argued that  organize  trend  not  desirable solution exists.  a common c u r r i c u l u m  movement  years.  completely  ensure  the  rates  attempt to organize  structure  solution could  differences.  identified  u n f a i r comment t h a t  p h i l o s o p h i c a l or  organizational  an  e a r l y elementary an  He  noted  organizational  d e s i r a b l e on  the  he  i s perhaps not  the  were  purpose  of  organization a resolution  individual differences  this  is  to  for i n s t r u c t i o n in  the  of  chapter  this  i n time needs. ,  fundamental  55  The  exploration  form of o r g a n i z a t i o n the  begins with  This  is  followed  c l a s s e s were o r g a n i z e d . it is  i s argued that a  their This  ideal  nature  philosophically daily  On  the  the  achievement  of  chapter  is  purpose  individuals. an  at  demands o f  necessity  amount of  of c o v e r i n g  a common  is  appropriate selected  of  masse.  organization  for  than  maximizing  the  final  part  of  of  the  I t i s argued  that  to e f f e c t a  curriculum  compromise  t i m e needs in  a  and  limited  controlled  by  to  b e g i n w i t h a d i s c u s s i o n of  that  several  who  will  factors:  be  Both Thelen  selection  s o c i o l o g i c a l , a d m i n i s t r a t i v e and of  for Instruction  for instruction.  ( 1 9 6 6 ) have n o t e d  selection  reality  time.  c h i l d r e n are Yates  be  the  students with d i f f e r i n g  S e l e c t i o n of C h i l d r e n It  the  the  may  l e a r n e r s en  classrooms.  between  five  with  interpretation  for instruction functions  the  with  other  organization  the  teachers  Consequently, the  in  this  observations,  variance  that  alternative  on  individual differences  life:  conclusion  organization  the  these  i n c l i n e d t o i n d i v i d u a l i s m , but  offers  of  literature  b a s i s of  classroon  serve a  Consequently,  a d e s c r i p t i o n o f how  work c o m m i t s them t o d e a l  i n s t r u c t i o n may  function  by  which  of  a n a l y s i s prompts the  the  of  t h e a c c o m m o d a t i o n of  philosophical  collective  e x a m i n a t i o n of a major  for i n s t r u c t i o n , grouping.  c h a p t e r opens w i t h a r e v i e w  topic.  an  these  for  (1959)  and  instruction  is  might  be  labeled  The  initial  i s a f u n c t i o n of  society.  instructional.  educated  how  56  Thelen  (1959) n o t e d  economic point  factors,  which  selection  initially  delineate  of s e l e c t i o n ,  schools  of  that  still  the  the  level  of  and  of  sociological  learners. in  attend.  The  selection  school.  instruction.  intraclass teacher,  grouping,  And  c o n c e r n of  Intraclass In r e v i e w i n g learners some of  for  the  the  points  discussion,  while  of  The  different  countries  be  some  population  of  second  Europe the  busing  point  of  t h i r d point  In  on  regarding  the  for  the  c o n t r o l of  the  chapter.  organization  generated  United  selection,  little between to  approprite the  issue  controversy  to  of  over  In both N o r t h America assignment  that  appears  the  States  of  considerable  fluctuates  constitutes the  and  classes,  sometimes h e a t e d debate between  homogeneous  contrast  the  school  selection.  proponents  grouping.  the  a p p e a r t o h a v e commanded  In  the  of  present  have  what  g e n e r a t e d a p r o l o n g e d and  of  r e a d i l y becomes a p p a r e n t  into  has  level  finally,  belong  the  have h i g h l i g h t e d a  of  the  assignment  w i t h i n each s o c i e t y there  about  learners.  d e s e g r e g a t i o n and the  but  is  Grouping  it  others  age. o f e n t r y  consensus  the  selection  the  interest.  under  literature  instruction,  second  f o u r t h l e v e l of s e l e c t i o n ,  potentially  which i s the  A  third  involves decisions  It is this  socio-  nature,  w i t h i n c l a s s subgroups to which students w i l l p u r p o s e of  later  a d m i n i s t r a t i v e d e c i s i o n about  l e a r n e r s t o c l a s s e s w i t h i n the  fourth  pool  students w i l l  i n v o l v e s an  age,  and  heterogeneous  ability  t o d e c i s i o n s about which s c h o o l s  and  57  classes children w i l l been  subjected  attend,  to  review a r t i c l e  on  within  little  class  scrutiny.  organization  Heathers  has  (1969) i n a  g r o u p i n g comments:  The mere h a n d f u l of s t u d i e s on i n t r a c l a s s p r o v i s i o n s for meeting differences among learners contrasts sharply with the large volume of research on i n t e r c l a s s g r o u p i n g (p. 567). The  interschool  emphasized  the  m e m b e r s h i p on  and  interclass  social  Heather's large  dearth one this  of  to  topic.  but  there  positive paucity  on  the  contrary, does  i s a pervasive been  or  the  the  contrast  a  literature body  but  of  negative  surprising  grouping.  Heathers  in  to  effects  view  Report  reported  the  existence  of  classes  for  reading  and  arithmetic.  The  adequate  of  of  the  (1969) r e f e r s t o  Association  of  1962  literature  much o f  document this  in  a  on on  rather  this  is  a  work,  either  the  practice.  The  widespread National  notion  is  nature  of  Educational  which elementary p r i n c i p a l s  subgroups i n four two  lead  assumption that grouping  attempt  the  is silent  i t i s hortatory  theme u n d e r l y i n g  little  to  between  not  o f a t t e m p t s t o v a l i d a t e t h i s commonly h e l d  further  provide  attention  i n t e r c l a s s g r o u p i n g and  exist, The  group  curious.  educational  in nature.  has  on  of  have  of  i n t r a c l a s s grouping should  the  grouping  thing  research  that On  than e m p i r i c a l good  of  debates impact  lack  is particularly  information assume  the  (1969) comment r e g a r d i n g  volume  intraclass  psychological  i n d i v i d u a l s : hence  within c l a s s grouping  the  and  degrouping  thirds  ubiquity  of  the  reason  to  attempt  of  practice to  fifths their would  of  their  classes seem  substantiate  in to the  58  p r e v a i l i n g myths about  grouping.  Myths About The  W e b s t e r ' s New  Grouping  C o l l e g i a t e D i c t i o n a r y (1979)  defines  myth i n f o u r ways: 1: a u s u . t r a d i t i o n a l s t o r y o f o s t e n s i b l y h i s t o r i c a l events t h a t s e r v e s t o u n f o l d p a r t of t h e w o r l d v i e w of a p e o p l e or e x p l a i n a p r a c t i c e , b e l i e f or n a t u r a l phenomenon 2: p a r a b l e , a l l e g o r y 3 a : a person or thing having only an imaginary or unverifiable e x i s t e n c e b: an i l l - f o u n d e d b e l i e f h e l d u n c r i t i c a l l y esp. by an i n t e r e s t e d g r o u p 4: t h e whole body of myths. Myth,  in  connection with i n t r a c l a s s grouping,  s e n s e of 3b and the  writing  i s i n t e n d e d t o c o n v e y t h e n o t i o n t h a t much  on  the  s u b j e c t r e f l e c t s b e l i e f s which  been s u b j e c t e d t o e m p i r i c a l T h e r e a p p e a r t o be n o t i o n of  accruing  d i f f e r e n c e s and myths  not  to  Two  of the myths r e l a t e  learners;  the  to  the  t h e myth o f p r o v i d i n g f o r The  remaining  c o n c e n t r a t e on t h e a d v a n t a g e s f o r t e a c h e r s ; t h e myth o f of i n s t r u c t i o n and  the  myth  of  narrowing  range.  M y t h One:  Providing for Differences  Hook class  (1960) a r t i c u l a t e d  level:  "we  group  in  the reason  order  d i f f e r e n c e s t h a t e x i s t amongst any (p. 421). not  have  f o u r dominant myths s u r r o u n d i n g  t h e myth o f i n d i v i d u a l i z a t i o n .  e a s i n g the problem the  of  scrutiny.  i n t r a c l a s s grouping.  advantages  i s used i n the  How  clearly  grouping specified.  to  for grouping  provide  for  a g g r e g a t i o n of  the  at  the vast  individuals"  provides for individual differences i s One  would a n t i c i p a t e  that in order  to  59  provide  for i n d i v i d u a l d i f f e r e n c e s there  differences  kinds  of  Rosenbaum ( 1 9 8 0 ) n o t e d t h a t  the  commonly  in  the  assumes t h a t  commented on teaching  the  methods  instruction ability  teachers  l a c k of  are  qualitative  for  each  grouping  group.  literature  d i f f e r e n t i a t e i n s t r u c t i o n , and  explicit  that  w o u l d be  discussion  most  regarding  appropriate  the  for d i f f e r e n t  levels. M y t h Two:  Individualization  Implicit  in  myth  one  is  the  recognition  d i f f e r e n c e s b e t w e e n i n d i v i d u a l s e x i s t and an  o b l i g a t i o n to provide  may  be  f o r them: myth two  accomplished.  Anderson  p u r p o s e s of  learning opportunities"  (p. 251).  of  opportunities receive  the  desire  individual  individual  attention  enhance l e a r n i n g .  The  n a t u r a l l y a r i s e s as  summarized  large  body  of  belief  learning.  research  g r o u p i n g by a b i l i t y  i n t o homogeneous and  does  achievement.  Rosenbaum He  enhance (1980)  a d o p t e d an  nature  of  published  argued  accounting  the  that  Yet the  and  and  of the  in  1968.  a  r e s u l t s are  fifty  that  the  will for  this  will  t o how  far  Yates  (1966)  suggested  heterogeneous  p r o c e d u r e t o show  results  b e t w e e n 1960  desire  question  enhancement o f  a  the  the  learning  that each c h i l d  from  to the  not  individualized  results  grouping leads a  teachers  individualized  Presumably  has this  Anderson suggested that  expectation  attention.  teacher  s p e c i f i e s how  fostering  for  i s the c u l t u r a l  the  ( 1 9 6 2 ) assumed t h a t  have subgroups " f o r the  genesis  that  that  recent  that  classes review  contradictory. contradictory  best c o n t r o l l e d  studies  60  The r e v i e w s by Y a t e s (1966) a n d largely  concerned  with  grouping  f o u n d no e f f e c t  (1980)  intraschool organization  i n t o c l a s s e s by a b i l i t y . contrasting  Rosenbaum  W a l l e n and Vowles  of c h i l d r e n  (i960) i n a  a n d no g r o u p i n g w i t h i n  t h e same  o f g r o u p i n g on a c h i e v e m e n t .  are  In s p i t e  study classes of  the  c o n t r a d i c t o r y e v i d e n c e on i n t e r c l a s s g r o u p i n g , a n d t h e l i m i t e d evidence  regarding  division  of c h i l d r e n  the  effects  of i n t r a c l a s s g r o u p i n g , the  i n t o s u b g r o u p s a p p e a r s t o be  organizational pattern.  Y a t e s ' (1966) comment  educational  there  community  r e g a r d i n g changes  is  dominant  that within the  considerable  in organizational practice  a  conservatism  seems  justified.  Myth T h r e e : E a s i n g t h e Problem of I n s t r u c t i o n Myth  three provides a r a t i o n a l i z a t i o n  emphasizes  the  Westby-Gibson  advantages (1960)  to  suggested  g r o u p i n g a s somewhat e a s i n g they  add,  rather  the  teacher.  Wilhelms  problem  in  view  of of  instruction"; their  elaboration,  "-a p e r c e p t i o n n o t t o be t a k e n l i g h t l y "  The  of  notion  implicit when have  grouping  as  in their writing,  an  and  "Teachers have t e n d e d t o see  their  cryptically  of grouping which  instructional  lack  (p. 411).  strategy  but i s not developed.  of  is  Questions of  i t i s u s e d , a n d w i t h what e f f e c t i v e n e s s , do n o t a p p e a r t o been  addressed.  N e i t h e r do W i l h e l m s a n d  s p e c i f y how g r o u p i n g " e a s e s " t h e p r o b l e m o f  Westby-Gibson  instruction.  M y t h F o u r : N a r r o w i n g t h e Range In children  the to  larger classes,  debate the  concerning argument  the  used  assignment for  of  homogeneous  61  g r o u p i n g was teachers Gibson  that  had  i t narrowed the range of a b i l i t y w i t h  to deal  ( H e a t h e r s , 1969).  W i l h e l m s and W e s t b y -  (1960) commented t h a t t e a c h e r s d e s i r e d t h e n a r r o w i n g o f  range presumably because t h e r e d u c t i o n of t h e range a s f a c i l i t a t i n g t e a c h i n g and l e a r n i n g . reduces would  which  the  range  predict  then  even  a logical  greater  was  seen  I f i n t e r c l a s s grouping  e x t e n s i o n of the argument  homogeneity  with  intraclass  grouping. The (Clarke, 1965;  assumption  appears not t o  in  homogeneity  has  been  1958; E a s h , 1961; G o o d l a d and A n d e r s o n ,  Wilhelms  (1953)  of  and  Westby-Gibson,  reduce  reported  California language  variability  1959;  Clarke  (1958)  appreciably.  found  that  regrouping  on t h e b a s i s o f IQ s c o r e s r e d u c e d v a r i a b i l i t y Reading t e s t by  2%.  s c o r e s by 9%  Students  may  and  become  in  In the  reduction  in variation  arithmetic  in  by  20%.  i s l i k e l y n o t t o be  Goodlad  and  Anderson  and  on t h e  factors.  a  t h e C l a r k e s t u d y (1958) g r o u p i n g by r e a d i n g s c o r e s variability  i n the  more s i m i l a r  E v e n when g r o u p i n g i s c a r r i e d o u t s p e c i f i c a l l y the  Petty  achievement  c h o s e n f a c t o r b u t r e m a i n q u i t e h e t e r o g e n e o u s on o t h e r  area,  Tyler,  Grouping c h i l d r e n  a wide range i n b o t h a b i l i t y and  i n t r a c l a s s groups.  children  the  1960).  questioned  subject great. reduced (1959)  commented: The more we d i v i d e g e n e r a l d e v e l o p m e n t i n t o s p e c i f i c traits, the e a s i e r it is to group pupils homogeneously on a s i n g l e t r a i t but the h a r d e r i t becomes t o g r o u p them h o m o g e n e o u s l y on a l l traits (p. 18).  62  They r e j e c t e d homogeneous g r o u p i n g a s a " w i l l o ' t h e w i s p " , a n d concluded  that  i t d i d not a d e q u a t e l y address the problem of  individual differences  in learning.  Grouping  both  Decisions  In s p i t e o f t h e f a c t t h a t  t h e presumed  teachers  have  and  demonstrated, there exhorts  teachers  pupils exists  to  a  not  been  substantial  group;  Alexander  (1976) p r o v i d e  advice  on how t o g r o u p p r e v a i l s b u t l i t t l e describing  Several  writers  grouping. the  have  Yates  basis  of  achievement,  how  nature  such  by  and  available.  suggested  criteria  special  governed  the  terms,  portable  within  the school  amount  of  which  prescriptive  a t t e n t i o n h a s been  grouping  decisions. influence  interest  and  pragmatic  interpret textbooks,  aptitude, motivation.  grouping  decisions  considerations;  the  i n s t r u c t i o n a l resources resources  in  materials  material and space  building. hand B a r r  rather  than  (1975) and H e a t h e r s physical  that  within class a b i l i t y  or  factors  as  (1969)  than i n a b i l i t y  teachers  see  paramount.  i n t r a c l a s s g r o u p i n g i s more l i k e l y  i n heterogeneous c l a s s e s he b e l i e v e d  intelligence,  physical  furniture,  Heathers suggested that  since  Much  (1962) s u g g e s t e d t h a t  essentially  On t h e o t h e r  occur  literature  f a c t o r s w h i c h may  as  needs,  He a p p e a r e d t o  psychological  make  consistently  (1966) s u g g e s t e d t h a t g r o u p s may be f o r m e d on  A l t e r n a t e l y , Anderson are  examples.  teachers  for  (1979) and S m i t h and  Johnson  paid to  typical  advantages  grouped  to  classes  employ g r o u p i n g t o a c c o m p l i s h  achievement  level  grouping.  Barr  63  (1975) i s more s p e c i f i c .  She r e p o r t e d  g r o u p e d when t h e y f o u n d t h a t from  others  in  instruction  difficult.  Further,  with  she  o r a t t e n t i o n , so t h a t the  same  to  t o be a t y p i c a l ;  managing  materials  became  suggested that grouping occured i n  r e s p o n s e t o two t y p e s o f l e a r n e r s who were teachers  teachers  some p u p i l s d i f f e r e d s u f f i c i e n t l y  their ability  total-class  t h a t g r a d e one  perceived  c h i l d r e n who h a d d i f f i c u l t y  by  the  attending  i n s t r u c t i o n , and e x t r e m e l y good l e a r n e r s who were e a g e r t o  move a h e a d a n d became r e s t l e s s i f t h e y d i d n o t . Although  the  literature  on  intraclass  grouping  meager i t c o n t a i n s  some i n t e r e s t i n g s p e c u l a t i o n s .  suggested  teachers  that  group  in  and a t t e n t i o n ,  range  a class will  of  variability  grouping d e c i s i o n s . that  grouping  resources, appear  is  within  Apart from Anderson's also  the p o s s i b i l i t y  not  to  that  springs  classroom  mangagement.  time the teacher  This  the  pattern  should  teacher decisions  to  time  that  (1962)  management  to to  is  the  the  teacher  suggestion  a v a i l a b i l i t y of  constraints  on  grouping  One  possible  pragmatic  t h e whole c l a s s students  of o r g a n i z a t i o n  are  mind  that  influence  the  pupil  one  of  Grouping f o r i n s t r u c t i o n reduces the  spends w i t h  be a p p o r t i o n e d  independently  of other  by  to  and  have been g e n e r a l l y c o n s i d e r e d .  constraint  increases  influenced  I t h a s been  response  c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s , mainly a b i l i t y  is  skills  must work  involves decisions  groups,  be  and  and  managed. may  a p p e a r n o t t o have been  how How  necessarily independently.  a b o u t how  children time  influence investigated.  time  working  elements and organizational  64  One  interesting  facet  of g r o u p i n g  for instruction i s  the extent to which  this ubiquitous practice continues in  face  which  of  evidence  tendency  to adhere to  described  as  to  serve  a  functions  called  (Merton,  organization  (Yates,  1966);  of  between  behavior  the manifest  1967).  and  question  is  to  of  what  the  been  however,  I t has  typically  grouping.  extent  does  point,  recognized  literature the l a t t e r  been s u p p o s e d t h a t  differences  t h i s may  with  Therefore, grouping  initial  facilitate  the  Within  the  this  study the q u e s t i o n i s r e p h r a s e d t o ask  differential evidence grouping,  which the  questionable, function  time  grouping needs?  suggests  differences.  an  boundaries  does  alleviates  the  Additionally, that  accommodation  the of  problem  in  the  manifest  individual  to of  face  function  of of  differences, is  i t seems r e a s o n a b l e t o i n v e s t i g a t e  exists.  a  be d e s c r i b e d a s  individual  extent  and  latent  of  what  and  the  accommodation of  an  grouping  the unrecognized  f u n c t i o n s and  student l e a r n i n g ;  function  has  intraclass  In the s o c i o l o g i c a l  manifest  to maximizing  This  I t seems a p p r o p r i a t e a t t h i s  t e a c h e r s g r o u p t o accommodate i n d i v i d u a l view  effectiveness.  of  distinction  consequences.  are  it  i s t h a t t h e p r a c t i c e of  consequences  unintended former  forms  some p u r p o s e .  reintroduce  intended  old  conservative  a l t e r n a t i v e view may  questions  the  if  a  latent  65  Within Class V a r i a t i o n i n A b i l i t y It  has  been  may be a c a t a l y s t Accordingly, classes  suggested  that within c l a s s  f o r grouping  information  selected  for  ( B a r r , 1975;  regarding  study  is  the  In it  was  keeping  available. results:  to  capitalize  A l l of the t e a c h e r s  to  on  grouping.  administered  . Teacher  4  Placement t e s t , Ginn,  only the Gates while results  of  administered Teacher  i n the  prior  Teacher  the  information  the  Gates  t o achievement  1976 ( T a b l e gave  MacGinitie  year,  but a s an  2).  only  1)  and  an  T e a c h e r 3 gave  the  (Primary  Ginn. B,  The  form  1)  available for  gave no t e s t s  i n September  of the Gates given a t the beginning  o f g r a d e two  the  results  will  be r e p o r t e d a s an i n d i c a t i o n  achievement  C, f o r m 1 ( T a b l e  As t h i s t e a c h e r  test  T e a c h e r 5 gave t h e G a t e s  a t t h e e n d o f g r a d e two were a l s o  1's c l a s s .  a  already  t e s t s d u r i n g September and  1  to  emphasis of the study,  had a c c e s s  MacGinitie reading t e s t , Primary Initial  variability  some o f t h e r e s u l t s were f r o m t h e p r e v i o u s  four of the teachers aid  1969).  for instruction.  with the n a t u r a l i s t i c  decided  Heathers,  presented,  d e s c r i p t i o n o f how t h e y were o r g a n i z e d  heterogeneity  in  g i v i n g any t e s t s  her  class.  inarithmetic.  None  of  the of  range  of  the teachers  reading reported  66  Table 1 Gates M a c G i n i t i e Reading  Test  Class %ile  1  2  3  4  5  0-24  -  3*  3  1  4  25 - 49  -  3  12  4  3  50 - 74  4  2  5  7  8  15  8  7  10  6  1 62 - 98 1  7 12 - 90 3  0 14 - 99 5  2 24 - 99 3  5 0-99 0  75 -  100  a b c Note  * a b c  i n d i c a t e s t h e number o f s t u d e n t s w i t h i n e a c h % i l e r a n g e # o f s t u d e n t s f o r whom no t e s t r e s u l t s were a v a i l a b l e Range o f c o m p r e h e n s i o n s c o r e s i n p e r c e n t i l e s # of s t u d e n t s a t t e n d i n g L e a r n i n g A s s i s t a n c e C e n t r e s The  four  of  levels.  x  r e s u l t s of the r e a d i n g t e s t the  classes  contained  seem t o  indicate  a wide range of  The h e t e r o g e n e i t y o f r e a d i n g a c h i e v e m e n t  the c l a s s e s c o n t r a s t s s h a r p l y w i t h the homogeneity Teacher who  t e a c h e r s g r o u p l a r g e l y on t h e b a s i s literature  used  four  in Class  suggests,  of  1.  children  achievement,  t h e n we m i g h t a n t i c i p a t e  of  as  If the  t h a t Teacher 1 the  others  p r e f e r t o group. Only  test  in  i n reading achievement.  would t e a c h t h e c l a s s as a whole i n r e a d i n g w h i l e may  achievement  1's c l a s s a p p e a r e d t o be l a r g e l y composed o f  were a b o v e t h e 7 5 t h p e r c e n t i l e  that  (Ginn,  three  of  t h e t e a c h e r s gave an I n i t i a l  1976) t o d e t e r m i n e t h e l e v e l  (Table 2 ) .  Placement  of t h e r e a d e r  to  be  I n two o f t h e c l a s s e s (1 and 5) t h e c h i l d r e n  67  ranged from l e v e l 2) t o l e v e l  6 ( r e a d e r recommended f o r g r a d e  1  4) .  9 ( r e a d e r recommended f o r g r a d e 3 o r g r a d e 7 or l e v e l  scored at e i t h e r l e v e l  Class 4 the c h i l d r e n  Table Ginn I n i t i a l  grade  or  In  8.  2 Placement  Test Class  Level  1  4  5  6  1*  -  3  7  9  9  2  8  6  13  5  9  4  -  12  N o t e * i n d i c a t e s t h e number o f s t u d e n t s a t e a c h  Organization At first  the  an  students.  list  the  in  In  and  some  rooms  teachers  the for  some  subtle  in  their  subjects,  curricular  differentiation,  the  accompanied  was  Some t e a c h e r s preferring  m a t e r i a l s (see Appendix  o f c u r r i c u l a r m a t e r i a l i n u s e i n B. C.  is  of t h e i r  of s t u d e n t s f o r t h e purpose of i n s t r u c t i o n  different  groups  progressed  classification  two a p p r o a c h e s a r e n o t m u t u a l l y e x c l u s i v e ; of  had  r e c o g n i z e d i n t h e f o r m a t i o n of groups.  were more assign  of  i n f o r m a l 'stage  classification publicly  for Instruction  b e g i n n i n g o f t h e c u r r e n t s t u d y , t h e end o f t h e  month i n s c h o o l , ) a l l  beyond  level  schools).  to  5 for a These  often the formation  by d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n  i n the type of  68  material  which  instruction  is  used.  matters  for  certain  g r o u p i n g was  activities  of  which  emerged i n e a c h room, b e f o r e p r o c e e d i n g t o the  factors  the  which  perhaps  a  first  a l l describe  I t may  that  to  of  i n use.  suggested  of  a discussion  grouping  organization  form  instruction to  when  was n o t o v e r t , t h e p a r t i c u l a r p a t t e r n o f c h i l d r e n  s e l e c t e d t o engage i n covert  Even  clarify  organization  appeared  to  for  govern  decisions.  Organization  i n Class 1  Teacher  1  had  three reading groups.  The g r o u p s were  l a b e l e d w i t h t h e name o f one o f t h e members o f t h e g r o u p . top  g r o u p , c o n s i s t i n g o f s e v e n c h i l d r e n were r e a d i n g How  Nowadays ( G i n n , l e v e l  8).  The i ti s  The m i d d l e g r o u p , c o n s i s t i n g o f t e n  c h i l d r e n were r e a d i n g G o l d e n T r a i l s w h i c h i s t h e s e c o n d r e a d e r of  g r a d e two o f t h e L a n g u a g e P a t t e r n s s e r i e s  (Holt,  Rinehart  and W i n s t o n ) .  The b o t t o m g r o u p , c o n s i s t i n g o f t h r e e  children,  were  The Dog N e x t Door  Two  reading  (Ginn,  level  before the Christmas vacation another c h i l d reading  diagnostic  7).  returned  u n i t a n d became a f o u r t h g r o u p .  weeks  from  a  Teacher 1  t a u g h t t h e c l a s s as a whole f o r s p e l l i n g and a r i t h m e t i c . Organization  i n Class 2  Teacher children Series),  were  2  had using  recommended  their class reader. reader  in  the  two  groups  for  reading.  B e t t e r than Gold  f o r the f i r s t  (Macmillan of  grade  Reading  three,  as  T h i s group a l s o used the second grade  two  series  part  Seventeen  ( M a c m i l l a n ) f o r r e a d i n g and a n s w e r i n g  69  comprehension questions six  members.  previous  assigned 2  and were  for  that  first  children these  Enchanted Gates  p a r t of grade two.  (Macmillan) They were n o t  f o r i n d e p e n d e n t work b e c a u s e  Teacher  n e e d e d t o work u n d e r c l o s e  B o t h of  the  reading  groups  had  not grouped f o r e i t h e r s p e l l i n g  i n Class  reading  names.  4  How  reading  groups:  i t i s Nowadays ( G i n n ,  8) a n d t e n were  i n a c t i o n were o n l y o b s e r v e d on two o c a s s i o n s ;  were  groups.  I n v e s t i g a t i n g School  for  Nineteen  Mathematics  However  (the  In  However  Teacher  arithmetic were  using  prescribed  text  book)  Mathematics  t h e c l a s s was  t h e same a r i t h m e t i c a s s i g n m e n t .  reading  children  g r o u p o f f o u r c h i l d r e n were u s i n g  I n d i v i d u a l Achievement.  given  7).  work t o t h e c l a s s a s a w h o l e .  two  small  level  level  children  groups  4 often assigned  (Ginn,  thirteen  The Dog N e x t Door  a  The  or a r i t h m e t i c ;  reading  while  teacher  s u b j e c t s the c l a s s worked as a whole.  T e a c h e r 4 had two  there  had  help during the  they  were  Organization  were  group  initially  supervision.  in  the  assigned  a second reader  felt  The s e c o n d  These c h i l d r e n had had r e m e d i a l  year  prescribed  independently.  frequently  S p e l l i n g was t a u g h t  to  the c l a s s as a whole. Organization  i n Class  5  Teacher'5 d e s c r i b e d her program as claimed  that  observation were  using  she  (the f i r s t the  same  didn't  have  individualized  groups.  On  week i n O c t o b e r ) a l l o f reader,  I n s i d e Out  the the  (Ginn,  and  second  children level 9).  70  However by t h e s e c o n d week i n O c t o b e r i n t o four groups. level  9  book,  T h i r t e e n c h i l d r e n were  8),  three  (level  7),  and  children  were  October  the  The Dog N e x t  group  (level 6).  a n d work was p l a c e d on t h e c h a l k b o a r d  under  the group  but  consisted  of  groups.  The t o p g r o u p  In  arithmetic  c h i l d r e n i n t h e t h i r d and f o u r t h r e a d i n g t h e same u n i t was a s s i g n e d  3 h a d t h e most c o m p l e x  She d e s c r i b e d h e r p r o g r a m no g r o u p s  "hidden"  as i n d i v i d u a l i z e d ,  group.  formally identified  and indeed  by name.  t o do c e r t a i n a s s i g n m e n t s . progressive  groups  emerged.  levels  of  c h i l d r e n were r e a d i n g How  the  from a l i s t  specifically  of  children  into  end o f S e p t e m b e r a l l t h e  i t i s Nowadays  up t o t h e r e a d i n g c i r c l e  difficulty  In s p i t e of the c l a i m t o  differentiation At  there  Children rotated  i n t h e c e n t e r s , and some c h i l d r e n were  were c a l l e d  the  system of o r g a n i z a t i o n .  t h r o u g h c e n t e r s , b u t work o f d i f f e r e n t  no g r o u p s , a  but  in Class 3  Teacher  directed  the  in arithmetic consisted  o f work r e q u i r e d was r e d u c e d f o r t h e s e c o n d  was p l a c e d  in  and second r e a d i n g g r o u p s ; t h e bottom  As w i t h s p e l l i n g ,  Organization  unit  t h e amount o f work r e q u i r e d was r e d u c e d f o r t h e  had two g r o u p s .  groups.  Door  formally  of c h i l d r e n i n t h e f i r s t  read  i t i s Nowadays  A l l o f t h e c h i l d r e n were w o r k i n g on t h e same  teacher  the  been  members o f t h e t h i r d a n d f o u r t h  were  reading  t o Grow On  groups  split  had  spelling  amount  reading  t h r e e were r e a d i n g One  By t h e l a s t week i n  names.  still  f i v e c h i l d r e n were r e a d i n g How  (level  labeled  t h e c l a s s had been  (level  8),  but  they  i n g r o u p s ; t h e names were  of t h e r e s u l t s of t h e Gates M a c G i n i t e  reading  71  test. in  Work  assigned  t o t h e c h i l d r e n was a l s o  terms of d i f f i c u l t y .  who  were  sent  of a u t h o r s authors  read  while  stories.  that the f i r s t to  to the l i b r a r y  of books  of  F o r e x a m p l e , one  group  of  group  rationale  had  Assistance  Center  (  regularly  LAC  )  were  list  the  f o r t h i s a s s i g n m e n t was  g r o u p o f c h i l d r e n were r e a d y t o  The c h i l d r e n who  t h e names  to  be  encouraged  books w h i l e t h e second group c o u l d s t i l l  stories.  children  were r e q u i r e d t o l i s t  another  The  differentiated  went  to  only  the  manage  Learning  n o t r e q u i r e d t o do e i t h e r  activity. Although group  t h e r e were no  membership  could  be  formally flexible  c e r t a i n l y appeared that the teacher head  which  she  used  groups:  led  t o the p r a c t i c e of a s k i n g  members  the beginning  of  (level  children  were  included i n the  top  group.  o f December t h e a b s e n c e o f f o r m a l g r o u p names f o r " a l l t h e c h i l d r e n who d i d n ' t  o r a l t e r n a t e l y naming a c h i l d a n d a s k i n g t h e same g r o u p t o come f o r w a r d .  of the year  same book  had a b i l i t y  fixed, i t  t o determine the i n s t r u c t i o n a l  the  the  than  and  i n her  By  read yesterday",  rather  groups,  strata  none o f t h e LAC c h i l d r e n was e v e r middle  labeled  a l l c h i l d r e n began  8 ) , by t h e f i r s t  for  Although at  reading  i n the  week i n December f o u r o f t h e  b e i n g g i v e n a s s i g n m e n t s f r o m The Dog N e x t D o o r  (level 7). Similarly, progressive differentiation noted.  Initially,  s p e l l i n g work c a r d s . children  were  a l l children In  selected  the to  second start  were  assigned  week the  in spelling  of  the  October  prescribed  was same four  spelling  72  program By  b e c a u s e t h e y h a d done w e l l on t h e G a t e s r e a d i n g  the  middle  of  s p e l l i n g program. were  attending  November a n o t h e r g r o u p was s t a r t e d on t h e  The r e m a i n i n g s e v e n c h i l d r e n , the  LAC  were  c a r d s w h i c h h a d been a s s i g n e d not s t a r t for  still  four of  i n September.  The  because  teacher  "it  By t h e e n d o f November some movement o f  groups f o r s p e l l i n g .  on  different  separately. still  units  and  In  introduced,  i t was  H o w e v e r , when  introduced  introduction  of  five  a  was  stressed.  children  new  concept  value  h u n d r e d was  was a l s o  was  differentiated.  For  p l a c e v a l u e was done w i t h one hundreds  to  A second group of n i n e c h i l d r e n  one were  children.  i n t r o d u c e d , b u t c o u n t i n g by t e n s t o one  stressed.  Factors Influencing The s e e m i n g classrooms  who  t o two g r o u p s o f  c a l l e d up by name: t h r e e o f t h e s e c h i l d r e n w e r e LAC Place  were  a s s i g n e d t h e same  separately  g r o u p o f f o u r t e e n c h i l d r e n , a n d c o u n t i n g by thousand  groups  program.  c h i l d r e n , a n d t h e l e v e l o f t h e work was the  were  t h e r e f o r e h a d t o be t e s t e d  a r i t h m e t i c , t h e c h i l d r e n were a l l  w o r k c a r d s and a c t i v i t i e s .  example,  Both  The t h i r d g r o u p c o n s i s t e d o f  had n o t s t a r t e d a s p e l l i n g  there  G r o u p one now h a d t w e l v e  c h i l d r e n , a n d g r o u p two h a d t e n c h i l d r e n . working  did  i s t o o much  group membership had o c c u r e d b u t i t appeared t h a t distinct  whom  w o r k i n g on t h e s p e l l i n g  them on t h e s p e l l i n g p r o g r a m  them t o h a n d l e " .  three  test.  may  diversity obscure  Organization  in  organization  some  in  underlying  the  five  general  73  characteristics. the  I t i s perhaps the  general  c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of  o r g a n i z a t i o n a l s t r u c t u r e s w h i c h have g r e a t e r  than the  details.  crystallized This  In t h i s  from  section  influencing  the  section several commonalities  observational  begins  significance  with  a  organization.  data w i l l  discussion  be  of  In p a r t i c u l a r the  is  suggested  that  achievement l e v e l s , of  time.  organization  S e c o n d l y , the  is discussed, a  and  functional  environment. reading,  is  Finally,  concluded  traditional  the  i n d i v i d u a l n e e d s of and  the  O n l y one  of  on  basis  the  the  raise questions the  reflects  the  classroom  task  of  in  in arithmetic,  characteristics about the  the  teacher  of  validity is  to  of  meet  students. Grouping  the  information teachers, of  of  this  a whole, i s examined.  general  child's  a c h i e v e m e n t t e s t s and Usually,  c l a s s as  used t h r e e  the  constraints  of g r o u p m e m b e r s h i p  demands  distinct  to group p u p i l s : anecdotal from  student  d i f f e r e n c e between o r g a n i z a t i o n  these  view t h a t  teachers  written,  consider  g e n e r a l l y g r o u p e d , and  that  Achievement L e v e l s  the  taught the  the  in order  to  the  organization  The  stability  idea  i s examined.  a l s o r e f l e c t s the  general  response  where t e a c h e r s  classroom  teachers  factors  traditional  the p r o p o s i t i o n advanced t h a t  where t h e y g e n e r a l l y It  although  discussed.  the  that achievement i s r e l a t e d to grouping d e c i s i o n s It  which  kinds  reports,  previous  information  either  teacher,  r e s u l t s of t h e i r from s e v e r a l  of  own  oral  or  results  of  observations.  s o u r c e s was  combined.  T e a c h e r 2, a p p e a r e d t o g r o u p  information  from the  previous  solely  teacher.  In  74  addition,  she  commented  "natural"  group.  from the p r e v i o u s of  the  teacher,  test.  only test  grouping  the  The o t h e r  decisions.  each  from  three  teachers  suggests  that  classroom  T e a c h e r s seemed t o  achievement children group.  level  into  at d i f f e r e n t Rosenbaum  have  Gates  of  the  appear t o have used judgement.  achievement  influences  with  of  was  the  groups  one-to-one  l e v e l and g r o u p s  (see T a b l e  different  (1980)  ability.  test  no  placed  levels  of i n v e s t i g a t i o n  on t h e b a s i s o f  a  information  results  s u g g e s t s t h a t t h e r e was  children groups,  on  f i n d i n g of  the homogeneity  of  and  achievement  comments  phenomenon a s a c h a r a c t e r i s t i c focus  to  formed  H o w e v e r , a c o m p a r i s o n of t h e a c h i e v e m e n t  c o r r e s p o n d e n c e between achievement 3).  the  w i t h t h e i r own  i n c o m p r e h e n s i o n on t h e  within  children  b u t c h a n g e d h e r g r o u p s on t h e b a s i s  information  literature  LAC  1 grouped a c c o r d i n g  information, together  The  levels  Teacher  additional  placement  that  this  the  same  conversely,  into  the  same  "overlapping"  studies  where  the  o f g r o u p s composed  75  Table 3 Group Membership and Achievement L e v e l s Gates M a c G i n i t i e s Reading Test %ile 0-24  Group  range 50 - 74  25 - 49 Class  1 2 3  75 - 100  1  -  3 1  7 7 1  2  8  5 3 2  4 2  4 4  9  6 2  6  Class 2 1 2  2 1  3  Class 3 1 2 3  3 4 1  1 2  Class 4 1 2  1  4 Class 5  1 2 3 4  3 1  1 3 An  investigation  of  the  members o f e a c h g r o u p , a s m e a s u r e d suggest  that  achievement  teachers than f o r o t h e r s . standardized characteristics  test  the  of  reading  had It  achievement  by t h e G a t e s t e s t , greater  might  Gates  be test  achievement;  p r a g m a t i c v a l u e may be l i m i t e d .  levels  saliency argued  of  seems t o for  that  measures  the  some as  a  general  consequently, i t s  76  T h r e e o f t h e t e a c h e r s gave t h e G i n n P l a c e m e n t t e s t ( s e e Table  4).  The  practical  recommends a t w h i c h l e v e l should  be  placed.  T e a c h e r 5's primarily  of the r e a d i n g s e r i e s  The c o m p o s i t i o n  groups as  advantage of t h i s t e s t  (Table  4)  the  students  o f T e a c h e r 4's g r o u p s a n d  suggests  that  a r e s u l t of t h e Placement t e s t :  do n o t r e f l e c t a s c l o s e l y  i s that i t  they their  grouped groupings  t h e r e s u l t s of t h e Gates t e s t  (Table  3) . Table 4 Group Membership and Achievement I n i t i a l Placement Test  Levels  Levels 6  Group  7  9  8  N  Class 1 1 2 3  1* 5 3  1  2 2  4 2  7 10 3  Class 4 13 10  13  1 2  10 Class 5 12  1 2 3 4 Note  -  * i n d i c a t e s t h e number o f s t u d e n t s a t e a c h l e v e l N i n d i c a t e s t h e number o f s t u d e n t s i n e a c h r e a d i n g Factors  organizat ional information  other  than  decisions.  influences  probably, idiosyncratic, are  5  3 -  3  13 6 3 4  the  achievement The  extent  decisions  b u t i t seems  to made  group  influence  may  which s u b j e c t i v e by  teachers  l i k e l y that a l l  i n f l u e n c e d t o some d e g r e e by t h e i m p r e s s i o n s t h e y  is  teachers form  as  77  a r e s u l t of d a i l y contact with the c h i l d r e n . teachers,  classroom  particular  probably  was  T e a c h e r 3 made a p o i n t o f e x p l a i n i n g  " t o s e e what t h e y search  information  In t h i s group of  can  do  f o r information  during  used.  that  September".  In  she l i k e s  Teacher  was s l i g h t l y more f o r m a l i z e d  4's  i n that  she gave h e r own t e a c h e r - m a d e t e s t s d u r i n g t h e s e c o n d week school.  It  seems r e a s o n a b l e t o c o n c l u d e t h a t a c h i e v e m e n t a s  m e a s u r e d by t e s t s , figured  by a n e c d o t a l r e p o r t s  prominently  in  teachers, but perhaps children  of  by  observations,  t h e g r o u p i n g d e c i s i o n s made by t h e s e  d i d not  i n instructional  or  determine  groups i n a l l  the  placement  of  theclassrooms.  Time C o n s t r a i n t s a n d O r g a n i z a t i o n Teachers better  suit  individual  typically  instruction students.  achievement  level  decisions.  Yet  variability  in  talk  to  the  of  abilities  • Accordingly,  would  grouping  one  significantly  as  a means t o  and  aptitudes  would  predict  influence  Furthermore,  that  grouping  t h e d a t a shows t h e e x i s t e n c e o f w i t h i n reading.  of  i f teachers  group group  a c c o r d i n g t o t h e i n d i v i d u a l d i f f e r e n c e s o f s t u d e n t s , one w o u l d anticipate  that  classes  which  were  a c h i e v e m e n t w o u l d have more  groups  while  homogeneous  would  have  less  groups.  heterogeneous those Clearly,  s u p p o r t e d b a s e d on t h e o b s e r v a t i o n s i n t h e s e f i v e While classes  teachers d i du t i l i z e in  Additionally,  reading,  which this  did  not  for  were i s not  classrooms.  achievement data t o o r g a n i z e  they  in  their  arithmetic.  c h i l d r e n were moved f r o m g r o u p s on t h e b a s i s o f  t h e i r c l a s s r o o m performance, rather than t h e i r achievement  as  78  measured  by  tests.  This  d e c i s i o n s may have been  seems  to  influenced  suggest  by  that  concerns  grouping  other  than  m a x i m i z i n g t h e p o t e n t i a l of i n d i v i d u a l s . One  possible  explanation  i n f l u e n c e d by t h e t r a d i t i o n a l  i s that teacher  conceptualization  m e e t i n g t h e i n d i v i d u a l needs o f l e a r n e r s . teacher  action  necessity the  may  be  teachers  perceive  the  instruction.  influence  of  only  one  time  on  Teacher 2 reported  b a s i s of i n f o r m a t i o n  indicated that  by  that  teacher  of  her reading  split  i t . She m a i n t a i n e d t h a t  group  intact  really  organized  ready  was  move  Patterns).  that  into  a  another  few  influenced  teacher's by  the  "You have t o be  three  necessary that  groups".  She  to  (Language split  the  t h e s e r i e s was h a r d e r  o f t h e c h i l d r e n w o u l d be a b l e  f a s t e r p a c e a n d do t h e h a r d e r This  of time:  keeping  s e r i e s of readers  She t h o u g h t i t w o u l d be  a  of  she c o u l d  t h e g r o u p a f t e r C h r i s t m a s when t h e y w o u l d be  group a t t h i s t i m e because she f e l t and  her  Teacher 2 remarked  t h e advantage  organization  for  She a l s o  between  g r o u p s was l a r g e a n d t h a t  and watch your time w i t h  to split  to  the  to  she g r o u p e d p r i m a r i l y on  p u p i l s because of t h e c o n s t r a i n t s of time.  intended  organization  she d i d n o t d i f f e r e n t i a t e f u r t h e r  one  enough  appeared  f r o m t h e g r a d e two t e a c h e r .  that  hand,  Although a l l  of not h a v i n g  her  as  the p r a c t i c a l  learners.  t a l k e d about the d i f f i c u l t y done,  of t e a c h i n g  On t h e o t h e r  constrained  of d e a l i n g w i t h groups of  time t o get e v e r y t h i n g  the  more  t a l k may be  " t o move a t a  exercises".  organization  in  the c o n s t r a i n t s of time.  spelling  was  also  She t a u g h t t h e c l a s s  79  as a w h o l e b e c a u s e i t " t a k e s l e s s t i m e t o t e a c h whole". "there not  She  also preferred  reported  time  that  variation intend  she  in  to s p l i t  children teacher  are was  had  grouped the  one  who  that the  grouping  other  factors.  not  cover  in  the  may  aim  have  of  for  of  teachers  individual  a  may  time  that  use  "the this at  a  in  a  seemed  organization influenced  to  not  practical.  may  wedded  practical  The  reflect  by  time  the  necessity may  the  class  Although notion of  lead  of  covering to  the  of a c l a s s  into  accommodation  to  division an  Teachers  level. to  year  a  i n d i v i d u a l students  grade  the  for  i n d i v i d u a l needs w i t h i n  permitting  be  compromise.  groups  but  the  a c e r t a i n amount o f work d u r i n g  instructional  appreciate,  o f t h e i r mandate i s t o h a v e  i n d i v i d u a l needs, the  development  as  Although  grouped  been  of m e e t i n g  luxury  material  philosophically meeting  reading  t i m e as p a r t  the  year  didn't  (Time a l l o c a t i o n d i f f i c u l t i e s  setting is idealistic  have  unlimited  She  the  in chapter s i x ) .  Perhaps the  collective  to  who  seems r e a s o n a b l e t o c o n s i d e r  instruction  this  affected  teachers  She  y e a r b e c a u s e of  in that c l a s s .  appeared  and  children".  i n achievement".  time a l l o c a t i o n problems. discussed  previous  a  because  groups p r o p e r l y  individual  levels  similar  only  level,  It  do  with  the  the c l a s s f o r a r i t h m e t i c  c l a s s r o o m , a l l of  are  work  quite  the  conscious  to  achievement  c l a s s as  to group i n a r i t h m e t i c  w a s n ' t enough t i m e t o work w i t h  enough  face  not  the  d i f f e r e n c e s a t a g r o s s l e v e l of a n a l y s i s ; a l t h o u g h  g r o u p s were no't homogeneous i n c o m p o s i t i o n t h e  faster  learners  80  g e n e r a l l y a p p e a r e d t o be  separated  once grouped, the c h i l d r e n through 1975,  i n an  from the s l o w e s t .  instructional  However,  group proceeded  t h e c u r r i c u l a r m a t e r i a l s a t t h e same r a t e ( c f . p.  492).  organization n e e d s of  Consequently,  i t i s suggested  functions to e f f e c t  i n d i v i d u a l s and  that  Barr,  classroom  a compromise between the  the time  needs  of  the  class  time as  a  whole.  Stability Generally,  group  the g e n e r a l s t a b i l i t y that  changes  occur  but  the  were  i t was  school  of  m e m b e r s h i p was  i n group never  Even  relatively  membership  made.  n o t common and  year.  Groups  in  should  not  imply  Movement b e t w e e n g r o u p s d i d  took the  s t a b l e but  place quite early rooms  which  had  on  in  clearly  i d e n t i f i e d g r o u p s w i t h s t a b l e m e m b e r s h i p , t h e r e seemed t o be settling where  i n p e r i o d , the  teachers  individual I n two  were  first  apparently  s t u d e n t s and  teachers  reported  b a s i s of a c h i e v e m e n t t e s t moved up t o t h e n e x t was  from  the  middle  group.  assessing  the  of  occured  in  school,  f i t between assigned.  initial  I n C l a s s 4,  one  two  In the other  moved down.  One  g r o u p , and  room, C l a s s child one  of t h e t o p g r o u p c h i l d r e n were  group on  child  r e a d i n g group because the teacher  bottom to the middle  t o t h e t o p : two  weeks  t h a t t h e y moved s t u d e n t s  results.  "incorrectly placed".  c h i l d r e n moved up and  to three  t h e g r o u p t o w h i c h t h e y were  of t h e rooms where c h a n g e s  placement  he  two  a  the was  decided 1,  two  was  moved  from the  middle  moved  to  the  81  It  i s probably incorrect  made t h e s e moves s t r i c t l y  on t h e  results.  the  In  Class  4,  t o assume t h a t t h e s e t e a c h e r s basis  child  of  to  teacher's  How  decision  to  which  far finishing quickly  he  influenced  assigned  because  he  " c o u l d n ' t c o p e " and r a r e l y  f o u r moves i n C l a s s  of them r e f l e c t s  from  the  c h i l d r e n who  top group.  top  to  also scored at l e v e l  The  achievement  who  7) on t h e p l a c e m e n t t e s t  was  f o u r t h move, a boy who  level  in this class  a " b r i g h t boy" who she  commented  s c h o o l because  he  was  scored at  The  9) was  t e a c h e r s may then  initially  make  from  she was  highest  moved f r o m t h e  t e a c h e r commented Later  on  that in  h a v i n g t o keep him i n  finishing  up were b o t h d e s c r i b e d by t h e t e a c h e r a s b e i n g  but  the  his  t o t h i s p o o r w o r k e r , t h e two c h i l d r e n who  suggestion a r i s i n g  one  from the m i d d l e t o the  (level  not  of t h e o t h e r  up:  not working w e l l .  that was  Two  7 were moved  h i g h e s t group t o the middle group.  The  the  a boy  b o t t o m t o t h e m i d d l e g r o u p and one  contrast  finished  the r e s u l t s of achievement t e s t i n g ;  the middle group.  after  test  one  moved  term  the  only  (level  the  of  1 a r e i n t e r e s t i n g as  scored at the lowest l e v e l  he was  was  work.  The  the  also  i s h a r d t o e v a l u a t e , b u t she d i d move one  c h i l d down i n m a t h e m a t i c s , w i t h o u t t h e c o r r o b o r a t i o n results,  test  be moved up was  o b s e r v e d t o be f i n i s h e d a h e a d o f t h e g r o u p o r i g i n a l l y assigned.  achievement  from t h e s e o b s e r v a t i o n s  work.  In  were moved  "good" w o r k e r s . is  that  some  f o r m g r o u p s on t h e b a s i s o f a c h i e v e m e n t  adjustments  according  t o whether  c h i l d r e n c a n k e e p up w i t h t h e s p e e d o f t h e g r o u p .  particular  82  In  g e n e r a l g r o u p i n g , whether  more s t a b l e t h a n f l e x i b l e and be  linked to s t a b i l i t y .  by m i d S e p t e m b e r  (1,  groups  remained  study.  Class  operating,  3),  at  and  where  least  more  a  There appeared  stable  the  groups  emerged, most n o t i c e a b l y  groups  certain  (still  somewhat.  identified  t h i s as a " d e m o c r a t i c " g r o u p i n g  wished  to  into  five  s e l e c t e d which of f i v e do.  Also  at  this  w h i c h was  two g r o u p s  and  achievement g r o u p s had previous second  the  level read  day group  direction  For t h i s  of  of the  and read the  questions o r a l l y .  work  one  or  teacher  two and  story  more  observed. teacher  procedure  because  story  from  were  another  s t u d i e s work b e i n g divided  according One  the  of t h e the  r e a d i n g passages o r a l l y .  The  pages then  independently  to  into  on  A l t h o u g h t h i s was  therefore represents a  t o have  t i m e , t h e r e a d i n g books  differentiated  turns  most  The  t h e members o f t h e g r o u p s .  took  for  was  s t o r y , t h e c l a s s was  complete  be  s e t s o f s p e l l i n g work t h e y  a s s o c i a t e d w i t h some s o c i a l  done by t h e c l a s s .  this  I n December  groups.  t e m p o r a r i l y abandoned i n o r d e r t o r e a d a book  to  u n l a b e l e d ) appeared  i n s p e l l i n g , a change  regrouped  These  i n grouping  t o be t h r e e c o r e g r o u p s  were  children  formally  appeared  flexibility  Children  the  fourth  to  grouped  d u r i n g t h e p e r i o d of  "hidden"  was  of g r o u p i n g appeared  the term but membership d i d f l u c t a t e  when  "hidden",  l a b e l e d g r o u p s by e a r l y O c t o b e r .  demonstrated  arrangments. of  and  stable 3,  rapidity  or  T h r e e o f t h e c l a s s r o o m s were  2  o r g a n i z e d room (5) had  formal  silently answered  under  the  comprehension  a c h a n g e i n g r o u p i n g , and  flexible  approach,  achievement  83  level was  still  seemed t o be t h e d o m i n a n t  reached that apart  membership grouping  was  rather  in  the  changes  than  topics  etc.  did  The  conclusion  generally  dynamic.  reading  1979; S m i t h and J o h n s o n ,  friendship, these  static  advocated  (Alexander,  from i n i t i a l  force.  The  methodology  flexible literature  1 9 7 6 ) , b a s e d on  not  group  interest,  a p p e a r t o be u t i l i z e d  by  teachers.  Discussion It  i s a r g u e d t h a t t h e g r o u p s emerged i n r e s p o n s e t o t h e  demands  of  the  general  stability  settling  i n p e r i o d was  organizational  classroom of  environment.  group  Consequently,  membership  after  the  i n t e r p r e t e d as r e f l e c t i n g  pattern.  The  a  elaboration.  been  conceptualized  c l a i m t h a t g r o u p i n g emerged a s a  learners. practical time  It  is  needs  of  perhaps  students.  the  needs  instructive  to  In  of  investigate the  anticipated.  take  more  differences Differences  managerial consequences; perennial  the  individual  o r d e r t o meet i n d i v i d u a l  t i m e as t h e y r e q u i r e d t o c o m p l e t e the work.  consequently  individual  time  t e a c h e r s w o u l d have t o p e r m i t i n d i v i d u a l s  some s t u d e n t s w i l l  a  meeting  requires  t h e j o b o f t h e t e a c h e r has  r a m i f i c a t i o n s o f a t t e m p t i n g t o meet  needs p r e s u m a b l y much  Traditionally, as  original  functional  r e s p o n s e t o t h e demands o f t h e c l a s s r o o m e n v i r o n m e n t some  the  nightmare  time  in in  and  others  performance  performance  Indubitably less  rates  rates  as  time; may  likely  be have  s t u d e n t s w i t h t i m e on t h e i r h a n d s a r e for  teachers.  Differences  in  84  performance  rates l i k e l y  c h i l d r e n who curriculum  work  quickly  than  in  performance enable grade  will  children  r a i s e s two q u e s t i o n s : classes  a l s o have i n s t r u c t i o n a l  who  to  which  likely work  what  there  cover  are  more  slowly.  extent  can  consequences; of  This  analysis  teachers  substantial  the  manage  differences  r a t e s , and s e c o n d l y , t o what e x t e n t  can  in  teachers  s t u d e n t s i n such c l a s s e s t o cover the m a t e r i a l  f o r the  level. A t t e m p t s t o meet t h e t i m e n e e d s o f i n d i v i d u a l s may  consequences  which  instructionally.  are  undesirable  Consequently,  both  have  managerially  and  i t i s proposed that teachers  a t t e m p t t o s t e e r a m i d d l e c o u r s e and o r g a n i z e t h e i r c l a s s e s that they a v o i d s u b s t a n t i a l d i f f e r e n c e s and  substantial differences  have t h e p o t e n t i a l avoid  extremes  to e f f e c t  i n coverage. this  i n performance  by c o n d u c t i n g g r o u p s  of  in  performance  rates  Grouping appears to  compromise.  Teachers  r a t e s and e x t r e m e s  learners,  so  similar  in  may  i n coverage time  needs,  t h r o u g h t h e c u r r i c u l u m a t t h e same t i m e . It  h a s been a r g u e d t h a t g r o u p i n g i s a c o m p r o m i s e w h i c h  p e r m i t s t e a c h e r c o n t r o l o f c o v e r a g e , and y e t some In  extent,  effect,  performance may the  the  problem of d i f f e r e n t i a l  g r o u p i n g may rates  amongst  reduce performance traditional  individual  needs.  utilizing  the  be s e e n  as  notion  that  performance  reducing  students.  r a t e s seems  The  of  manifest  and  rates.  differences  diametrically  grouping  to  in  idea that grouping opposed  functions  T h i s a p p a r e n t p a r a d o x may  concepts  ameliorates,  be  to  resolved  latent  to meet by  functions  85  (Merton,  1967).  The was  distinction  introduced  by  between m a n i f e s t a n d  Merton  (1967)  conscious motivation f o r social consequences. are  both  which  Accordingly,  one  are  might  unintended  argue  be  the  intention  p e r m i t s a more  materials  to  consequence  student  of  teachers.  are  grouping  However,  treated  the latent  functions provides  is the  as  functions  a  has  the  consequences of t h e i r  and  which  unrecognized.  when  matching levels.  certainly they  of  group.  curriculum  Presumably  and  unintended  f u n c t i o n of  This  teachers  this  recognized and  i s that students with  by  unrecognized different  time  a s i n g l e u n i t and t h e r e f o r e c o v e r t h e A c c o r d i n g l y , one  conceptual from  the  potential the  might  i s t o reduce  propose  differences  between m a n i f e s t and l a t e n t tool  which  consequences  t h e a n a l y s i s of g r o u p i n g  c o n t r a d i c t i o n between  The  i t s objective  and  intended  The d i s t i n c t i o n  intentions  Consequently,  of  f u n c t i o n of g r o u p i n g  amongst s t u d e n t s .  separating  between  f u n c t i o n s are those  needs.  appropriate  c u r r i c u l u m a t t h e same t i m e . that  and  that the manifest  achievement  consequence of grouping needs  behavior  i s t o b e t t e r meet i n d i v i d u a l  to  Grouping  differentiate  i n t e n d e d and r e c o g n i z e d ; l a t e n t  grouping  functions  M a n i f e s t f u n c t i o n s a r e those consequences  consequences  seems  to  latent  to  intentions  is  useful  of  behavior.  i n terms of i t s resolve of  the  teachers  in  latent apparent  and  the  actions.  a r g u m e n t t h a t s i t u a t i o n s o r e v e n t s have  unrecognized consequences  does  not  imply  a  unintended one-to-one  86  correspondence Merton of  between  (1967) e x p l i c i t l y  functions.  the  situations  He  r e j e c t e d the  e v e n t s and  i d e a of  conversely  t h a t the  f i l l e d by a l t e r n a t i v e s o c i a l  f o r m of  Accordingly,  one  forms.  amongst  students,  This  or  serve be  idea  of  to the concept  might q u e s t i o n  organization, besides grouping,  differences  f o r m s may  same f u n c t i o n may  f u n c t i o n a l a l t e r n a t i v e s stands in opposition universality.  functions.  the u n i v e r s a l i t y  argued that d i f f e r e n t s o c i a l  same f u n c t i o n and  diversely  or  i f any  functions  to  i f g r o u p i n g has  of  other reduce  different  funct ions. It main argued  i s appropriate  thread  of  that  the argument.  the  individual  manifest  differences,  observational  d a t a of  reasonable to maintain organizational function.  at t h i s  If this  It will  does  that  the  then  of  its  unintended discussion  latent  will  be  The  functions  p r o c e s s e s than the the m a n i f e s t  provides  it  the  greater  of its  purpose  persuade  traditional  f u n c t i o n of  or  it  an  this  point  seems  reasonable pattern  the reader of  insights  this  adaptive  unrecognized  of the  it  the  s u r v i v a l of has  was  meeting  Yet  and  the  explain  i t becomes e m i n e n t l y  i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of g r o u p i n g from latent  that  to  grouping,  completely  existence  to  return  r e c a l l e d that  of  existence  functions,  consequences.  to  classrooms.  suggests  to attempt to account f o r the terms  not  five  i s so,  be  function  the  pattern  juncture  view  in and  following that  the  of  its  into classroom  i n t e r p r e t a t i o n which emphasizes  grouping.  87  To  G r o u p o r N o t To G r o u p The  most n o t i c e a b l e  observational reading that  is  but  groups  Analogously  each  i n reading,  groups which i m p l i e s actuality  she g e n e r a l l y  The  differentiation of  two  differences  in  possible  coverage,  the  and  children  i n reading  and l a c k  to  the  ensuing  examined.  First,  predilections  are  of for  constraints  are  management  and  instruction  reduce such problems. a  a  o f t i m e c o n s t r a i n t s on  possibility  grouping r e f l e c t s  coverage f o r mastery.  In  cultural  Organization  prompts  f o r the d i f f e r e n c e s  Classroom time  functioning  conversely,  spelling  are  influence  the  problems.  suggested that  some  of  subjects.  from g e n e r a l  increasing  and  explanations  are considered.  as  sets  explanations  these  organization  interpreted  implies  operated as a whole.  particular  arithmetic  Secondly,  instructional  i n a r i t h m e t i c and  which  of d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n  discussed.  as  for  Teacher 4 and Teacher  generally  selected  between  arising  pupils  a l t h o u g h Teacher 5 c l a i m e d n o t t o have  some p o s s i b l e  organization  conclude  times.  prevalence  discussion  seen  differences  arithmetic  class  the  l a c k of d i s c r i m i n a t i o n of d i f f e r e n c e s , i n  to read a t d i f f e r e n t  section  in  from  One m i g h t amongst  A l t h o u g h two o f t h e t e a c h e r s ,  differentiation,  in  or s p e l l i n g .  appeared t o ignore  d i d have  arising  the teachers tended t o group i n  the teachers tended t o d i s c r i m i n a t e  spelling.  of  that  but not i n a r i t h m e t i c  reading  5,  data  generalization  tradeoff  of  mastery  is I ti s for  no g r o u p i n g r e f l e c t s a t r a d e o f f o f  88  First, reflected  the  differentially  is considered. that  proposition that  On  the  individual  marked than the spelling.  language  Smith,  in  such  might  in reading  differences.  of a r i t h m e t i c and  schools;  exposure  these  achievement. variability to  keep t h e  may  reflect  one  (Harris may  and  influenced  by  exposure  to  to  and be  more  increased  Smith,  an  1976;  organizational  traditionally  the  province  t h a t many s t u d e n t s h a v e had to  significantly  might  in these subjects  reasonably  of  the  influence  The  tendency  i n a r i t h m e t i c and  homogeneity  of  anticipate less  than i n r e a d i n g .  c l a s s working together greater  lead  However,  subjects  Hence,  be  s p e l l i n g h a v e been t h e  i t is less likely  to  to  to  in reading  argue  arithmetic  differential  achievement  to  achievement are  appears  expected  be  for i n s t r u c t i o n  feasible  in reading  that  be  Grouping  response to these  the  h a n d , i t seems  reading  factors  1978).  teaching  organization  d i f f e r e n c e s i n achievement i n  use  variability  one  differences  Skill  experiential  i n the  s t u d e n t a c h i e v e m e n t may  achievement  spelling in  these  subjects. On across  the  the  other  hand, a c t u a l v a r i a b i l i t y  different  d i f f e r e n t i a t e only concomitant  of  in  subjects reading  grouping  for  instructional  t i m e amongst t h e  as  has  a  whole  the  p r e s e n t e d to a l l the limited,  one  and  may  teachers  for  particular  be may  comparable choose  reasons.  i n s t r u c t i o n i s the d i v i s i o n groups.  advantage  that  c h i l d r e n at the  might a n t i c i p a t e that  I n s t r u c t i n g the the  material  same t i m e .  teachers  If  w o u l d be  to A of  class may  be  time  is  reluctant  89  to  group,  as  i t would  be d i f f i c u l t  t o i n s t r u c t each group  a d e q u a t e l y , and a l s o c o v e r t h e p r e s c r i b e d  amount o f  material:  it  explicitly  made t h i s  will  be  recalled  that  Teacher  argument f o r h e r l a c k o f g r o u p i n g to  be  a  possible  organizational schools  for  Language  for  Language  for  Arts  minutes f o r a r i t h m e t i c  of  i n reading  the time allotment  minutes  in arithmetic.  explanation  patterns  (45%  likely  limited  time  or  three  differentiation In reading that  the  students  material w i l l quickly,  in  the  teachers  of  Accordingly, functions  time  to  make  i s more t i m e i n w h i c h However,  the  hampers t h e i n s t r u c t i o n o f f o r the lack  likely while  assigned  of  I t seems  lead  books of d i f f e r e n t  reasonable reading  to  the  faster  the slower reader w i l l of  which  differentiation  to  the  argue  l e v e l s t h e same students  require  material  f a s t e r workers r e c e i v i n g harder  assignments,  Extra  teachers  groups.  disparate  which presumably take longer, easier  640  t i m e ) and 200  time).  an e x p l a n a t i o n  D i f f e r e n t i a t i o n of t h e l e v e l  results  is  subject.  l e v e l s t o each group.  finishing time.  likely  provides  in this  reading  giving  reading  reading  in arithmetic  g r o u p s , and t h e r e f o r e  there  in  I n B.C.  grades  of the t o t a l  permits  appears  differences  primary  (14% of the t o t a l  Arts  two  the  This  and a r i t h m e t i c .  the  d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n s amongst s t u d e n t s : to deal with  2  more likely  assignments,  and t h e s l o w e r w o r k e r s r e c e i v i n g presumably  require  less  time.  o f t h e l e v e l o f t h e work  t o reduce the performance  rates  amongst  In e f f e c t , i t i s proposed t h a t d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n  likely  students.  of t h e l e v e l of  90  work  may  function  students.  to  equalize  the performance rates of the  Perhaps grouping c h i l d r e n of s i m i l a r  ensuring  that  reading  to  each group has m a t e r i a l commensurate w i t h  a c h i e v e m e n t , may b e t t e r  ameliorate  be i n t e r p r e t e d a s  In a r i t h m e t i c the  and  same  work,  Teaching the c l a s s as a curriculum avoiding  material  to  functions  i t is  to equalize  argued  permits  the  a l l students problem of  both  are  responses  to  presentation  differential no g r o u p i n g  time  of thus  coverage.  in arithmetic  Therefore,  w h i c h have  the  generally  modifications.  i t might  and  lack  consequences  terms of e q u a l i z i n g performance r a t e s or e q u a l i z i n g coverage,  rates,  a t t h e same t i m e  differentiation  amongst s t u d e n t s ,  were  with  content coverage.  that  differentiation  students  proposed that  their  differences.  sometimes  whole  the i n s t r u c t i o n a l  Consequently,  be  spelling  and  functioning  t h e problem of d i f f e r e n t i a l performance  t h a n a s an a c c o m m o d a t i o n t o i n d i v i d u a l  assigned  ability,  in  curriculum  constraints  c l a s s r o o m , a n d f u n c t i o n t o r e d u c e management a n d  of  of  the  instructional  problems. A f u r t h e r a n a l y s i s of o r g a n i z a t i o n warranted.  Grouping t y p i c a l l y provides  difficulty  level  consider  the  difficulty levels mastery  of  instructional  provision  to reading  of d i f f i c u l t y (or  depth  differentiation  of  groups. likely  of  books  for  A s an e x a m p l e ,  differing  Exposure t o books of leads  learning).  of readers represents  to  is  f o r d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n of  material. of  instruction  differing  levels  of  different levels  of  I t i s suggested that the a compromise between t h e  91  incompatible students, three  goals  of coverage and mastery.  irrespective  of r e a d i n g  To  ability,  require a l l  t o read  book w o u l d p r e s u m a b l y r e q u i r e much t i m e .  the grade  The  likelihood  e x i s t s t h a t a p a c e o f i n s t r u c t i o n w h i c h w o u l d be s u i t a b l e f o r the  poorer readers  would slow p r o g r e s s  c l a s s would not f i n i s h suggested  that  material, for  by  teachers  coverage  Specifically, likely  the prescribed  text.  differentiating  the  grade  the l e v e l  the c h i l d r e n  in  a grade three  the c h i l d r e n i n t h e h i g h e r  three the  level  that the  In e f f e c t ,  a r e t r a d i n g - o f f m a s t e r y by  of  reach  to the extent  of the reading some  curriculum lower  students, by  groups  of reading  i t is  others.  would  not  achievement, but  g r o u p s w o u l d be a b l e  to  cover  the  curriculum. On  the  typically  other  h a n d , no g r o u p i n g  (whole c l a s s  i n v o l v e s a lack of d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n  materials.  As  an  example,  consider  of  that  s p e l l i n g were t a u g h t t o t h e w h o l e c l a s s , u s i n g same  instructional  progress  i n unison,  material.  In  coverage i s l i k l e y  case coverage of t h e c u r r i c u l u m is  suggested  among  coverage to,  and  reflects  compromise  is  di fferent iation.  next  individual directed  be  and  basically  the  slow;  class to in  f o r mastery.  between  this It  the  curriculum  t h a n an a c c o m m o d a t i o n  differences. to  arithmetic  or lack of d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n  c u r r i c u l u m mastery rather  or disregard o f ,  attention  a  to  instructional  f o r the  i s traded-off  that d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n  students  order  teaching)  Consequently,  processes  underlying  92  L e v e l i n g and S h a r p e n i n g  first  There  i s some e v i d e n c e t h a t even  week  with  a  at  the  end  of  the  new c l a s s t e a c h e r s a r e c a p a b l e o f m a k i n g  d i s c r i m i n a t i o n s amongst s t u d e n t s (Good  and Brophy,  1978).  spite  s t u d e n t s as  individuals  of  progressive  dicta  to treat  these i n i t i a l  i m p r e s s i o n s seem t o s u g g e s t t h a t  to  students.  classify  tendency t o c l a s s i f y teacher  to  complexity comments of  has  been  i s functional  reduce  what  ( D o y l e , 1979; of  suggested  in  that  otherwise  Shavelson  teachers that  this  i t enables  would  and  tend  be  Stern,  the  inordinate 1981).  The  t e a c h e r s t o r e s e a r c h e r s o r c o l l e a g u e s a t t h e end  the f i r s t  influence  It  In  week  or  no  are  doubt  related  are  informal,  to later  and  how  c l a s s i f i c a t i o n s which are  f o r m a l i z e d as i n s t r u c t i o n a l  groups, i s a q u e s t i o n which  be  N e v e r t h e l e s s , an e a r l y  answered  empirically.  these  might  tendency of  t e a c h e r s t o n o t e s i m i l a r i t i e s a n d d i f f e r e n c e s amongst s t u d e n t s h a s been  established.  The groups  classification  implies  that  of  students  of  involve  the  unique  individuals,  suppression  highlighting  of  of  others.  features which are s a l i e n t characteristics  instructional  teachers are responding to s i m i l a r i t i e s  and d i f f e r e n c e s amongst t h e i r p u p i l s . composed  into  which  Given that c l a s s e s  grouping  some  are  appear t o  characteristics  Presumably for  would  their  teachers  purposes  irrelevant.  The  and t h e t e n d e n c y t o r e s p o n d e x c e s s i v e l y  to  fine  and attend  and  the to  suppress  tendency  d i s r e g a r d o r o b l i t e r a t e d i f f e r e n c e s h a s been c a l l e d  are  to  "leveling" nuances  or  93  small  d i f f e r e n c e s h a s been c a l l e d " s h a r p e n i n g " .  argues that  " l e v e l i n g " and " s h a r p e n i n g " a r e  shape p e r c e p t i o n  Klein  (1951)  principles  which  a n d a r e ways o f r e s o l v i n g d i s e q u i l i b r i u m when  the  task  i s t o cope w i t h d i f f e r e n c e s .  task  of the teacher  i s t o deal with  I f we a c c e p t t h a t t h e  the i n d i v i d u a l d i f f e r e n c e s  p r e s e n t e d by a c l a s s o f c h i l d r e n , t h e c o n s t r u c t s  of " l e v e l i n g "  and  teachers  " s h a r p e n i n g " may p r o v e t o be u s e f u l .  Some  " s h a r p e n " t h e d i f f e r e n c e s amongst p u p i l s a n d t h e r e f o r e move  towards  preferring rather  a  more  t o spend time  than  spend  choose t o " l e v e l " deal with  time  adaptation  form  or disregard  responses  whole  coverage.  or  small  whole c l a s s .  the d i f f e r e n c e s ,  groups  O t h e r s may  and  tend  to  It  was  of  the  to  bring  about  an  l e v e l i n g of d i f f e r e n c e s , i n  functions  suggested  and t e a c h  " l e v e l i n g " and " s h a r p e n i n g "  teaching,  that  functions  to  equalize  to  equalize  teachers  performance  g r o u p when t i m e i s  t h e c l a s s a s a w h o l e when t i m e i s l i m i t e d . for instruction functions  e q u i l i b r i u m between t h e t i m e  dictates  to instruction,  Conversely, sharpening of d i f f e r e n c e s ,  I n t h i s way o r g a n i z a t i o n an  the  designed  class  i n t h e form of g r o u p i n g ,  plentiful  with  I t i s proposed that  of  curriculum  rates.  individuals  (1951) s u g g e s t s t h a t  equilibrium. the  with  approach  perhaps  the c l a s s as a whole.  Klein are  individual  may  needs  curriculum.  In  of  to maintain  students  and  the  e f f e c t , i t i s argued  that  g r o u p i n g and whole c l a s s t e a c h i n g ,  although  different  of l e v e l i n g and s h a r p e n i n g ,  are  perceptual  functional  strategies  alternatives  because  the  governed  by  unintended  the  and  94  unrecognized  consequence,  the  between the time needs of curriculum,  i s the  or  material  may  disregarding be  to  class  of  to cover  the  the m a t e r i a l .  move  units  i n the c u r r i c u l u m .  the next  To  topic,  or  attempt  a  of  the  material  which  has  the p o t e n t i a l  the  f a s t e r and  frustration  before  not c o v e r a l l the  r e g i m e n t h e c l a s s may  The  presence  of  groups  match  T h i s may  The  result  be in  amongst  formation  and  grouping  between  student  to  permits  the  time  of  r a t e of needs,  a  t o a v o i d b o t h boredom f o r  f o r the slower.  s t r e n g t h of g r o u p i n g w h i c h  the  teachers  assignments  Presumably  better  this  instructional  of a  groups p r o v i d e s the o p p o r t u n i t y f o r students  teachers  procedure  way  at  the extent t h a t  disadvantages.  speeds.  presentation  move  differentiation  progress at d i f f e r e n t to  groups.  boredom f o r some s t u d e n t s .  sharpening,  s t u d e n t s , has a d v a n t a g e s and  to  t h e y may  Under t h i s  o p p o r t u n i t y t o l e a r n and  instructional  to  A major d i s a d v a n t a g e  e x p o s e d t o a l i m i t e d number o f o b j e c t i v e s .  Similarly  curricular  of t i m e  i s the tendency  members.  they  reduced  that  t o a l l s t u d e n t s a t t h e same t i m e .  w a i t u n t i l a l l t h e s t u d e n t s have c o m p l e t e d to  the  t h i s w o u l d a p p e a r t o be an e f f i c i e n t  slowest  on  of  major advantage of  is  of t h e a l l o c a t i o n  f u n c t i o n i n g in unison  speed  coverage  The  differences  presented  is limited,  attempt  and  Disadvantages.  T h i s a v o i d s the problem When t i m e  individuals  equilibrium  same.  A d v a n t a g e s and leveling  m a i n t e n a n c e o f an  It  is  precisely  i s a l s o i t s g r e a t e s t weakness.  within  a  classroom  t i m e be d i v i d e d amongst t h e g r o u p s .  requires that The  teacher  95  may  feel herself  grouping, group.  but  better may  able  not  have  meet  individual  "ease"  of  instructional  allocation difficulties, independent  instruction  a  activities  group.  proposed  that  s h a r p e n i n g and l e v e l i n g  Coupled  each of  of t h e  with  time  This  concurrently  forms  of  likely  with  form of o r g a n i z a t i o n  likely  Accordingly,  organization  which  provide only p a r t i a l  the  i t  reflect solutions  t h e problem of d i f f e r e n t i a l time needs of s t u d e n t s . It  dictum  is  instructive  at  this  time t o r e c a l l  (1962) t h a t no s y s t e m o f o r g a n i z a t i o n c a n  individual  differences.  individual  Grouping  may  and  increased  classroom  better  management  That g r o u p i n g i s a t b e s t a compromise w i l l chapter  four.  arrangements performance  In  to  spite  accommodate  accommodate allocation problems.  be d e m o n s t r a t e d  elaborate  individual  in  organizational differences  in  r a t e s a l l of t h e t e a c h e r s e x p e r i e n c e d t h e problem  f a s t and slow w o r k e r s .  investigating  of  Goodlad's  provide for  d i f f e r e n c e s , but a t t h e expense of time  difficulties  of  problem  by  g r o u p i n g a l s o r e q u i r e s t h e management  seatwork  of  time.  makes demands on t e a c h e r management s k i l l s .  to  the  t o some d e g r e e , b u t i n c r e a s e t h e d i f f i c u l t y  allocation  is  needs  enough t i m e t o s p e n d w i t h  S h a r p e n i n g , o r g r o u p i n g , may  instruction  of  to  individual  Chapter  four  differences  were m a n i f e s t e d i n t h e f i v e c l a s s r o o m s .  is  concerned  with  i n time needs as t h e s e  96  CHAPTER  Variation  i n Performance Rates: Fast  In t h e world an  that  not  only  and Slow F i n i s h e r s  a t l a r g e v a r i a t i o n i n human p e r f o r m a n c e i s  a c c e p t e d phenomenon.  indicate  4  N o b e l p r i z e s and O l y m p i c g o l d  an a w a r e n e s s o f i n d i v i d u a l d i f f e r e n c e s b u t  they a r e valued.  In the world  of the  school  d i f f e r e n c e s a r e n o t a l w a y s so h i g h l y t r e a s u r e d . of  c h i l d r e n who d i f f e r  teacher  medals  in their ability  w i t h problems of a p r a c t i c a l  individual  The  existence  to learn presents  the  nature:  Probably the severest handicap that confronts education, e s p e c i a l l y when i t i s continued t o the secondary and h i g h e r l e v e l s , i s t h e d i f f i c u l t y of providing materials of i n s t r u c t i o n and methods of t e a c h i n g t h a t w i l l meet the v a r i e d abilities and proclivities of l a r g e unselected groups (Bagley, 1934, p. 1 1 0 ) . One way e d u c a t o r s h a v e a t t e m p t e d through  their  chapter  i t was  functions,  to  organization argued  maintain  In  f u n c t i o n of rates. rates  particular, grouping  equilibrium  problem  In the  is  previous  for instruction  between t h e o p p o s i n g  individuals  i t was  proposed  the  equalization  In t h i s chapter the extent  that of  of d i f f e r e n t i a l  and the  of  the  latent  performance performance  i s investigated. Traditionally,  the  was  this  organization  demands o f t h e t i m e r e q u i r e m e n t s o f class.  solve  for instruction.  that an  to  organization  f o r i n s t r u c t i o n f o c u s e d on  l e v e l o f a c h i e v e m e n t , o r amount o f l e a r n i n g , d i s p l a y e d  students.  The e m p h a s i s on a c h i e v e m e n t s h o u l d  commonly h e l d n o t i o n  t h a t amount o f  learning  by  not obscure the is  related  to  97  s p e e d of  learning.  heterogeneous  Thomas and  and  Thomas ( 1 9 6 5 ) i n d i s c u s s i n g  homogeneous a b i l i t y  what t h e y b e l i e v e t o be  grouping debate  a dominant v a l u e  judgement  the  stated  in  North  America: It i s u n f a i r t o h o l d back t h e f a s t l e a r n e r s and a t the same t i m e overwhelm the slow learners by conducting heterogeneously grouped class at one a v e r a g e speed (p. 101). The  tendency during  together  children  prevailing low  belief  ability  first  part  of  like  achievement l e v e l s r e f l e c t s  that high  children learn  The between  the  layman's level  of  learning.  Traditional  to school Individual  to learn to a given instruction.  Under  predicts that time,  and  are  students  to  group this and  ceteris  paribus  in  of  psychology  school  related  a l t e r n a t i v e view. as  the  conditions  time needed of  optimal  conditions, this  students  is  postulates  t h o u g h t t o be  ability  that  learning  model  p r e s e n t e d an  under  relationship  of  (1963)  criterion  students high  the  speed  conceptualized  will low  learn in  in  ability  model less will  time.  Individual Differences The  and  of  which are  Carroll  conversely,  r e q u i r e more  notion  differential  or a p t i t u d e s  differences  century  children learn quickly  in Carroll's  achievement.  this  slowly.  achievement  clarified  stable a b i l i t i e s  ability  intuitive  conceptually  of  central have  feature  differential  i n Time Needed t o of  the  Carroll  time needs.  Learn model  M o s t of  the  is  that  evidence  98  concerning v a r i a b i l i t y studies  conducted  Consequently, magnitude  i n time  within  the  most o f t h e  of  needed  Block,  learn  in  l e v e l of  Anderson  (1976) c o n c l u d e d  that these  with  performance 1970).  if  time  research  (Block,  1970),  and 1 t o 7 ( A r l i n ,  1973).  s t u d i e s support  i s approximately  i s held constant, variation  anticipated.  Studies  in  (Arlin,  The r a n g e i n  Carroll's  (1970) e s t i m a t e t h a t t h e r a n g e i n t i m e - t o - c r i t e r i o n learning  the  t h e amount o f t i m e  t i m e - t o - c r i t e r i o n h a s been r e p o r t e d a s 1 t o 3.4 1970),  from  tradition.  concerned  1970; C a r r o l l a n d S p e a r i t t ,  1 t o 4 ( C a r r o l l and S p e a r i t t ,  comes  learning  were  differences  required to achieve a c r i t e r i o n 1973;  mastery  studies  individual  to  one t o f i v e .  in  school  Conversely,  i n amount l e a r n e d w o u l d be  computer  assisted  instruction  c o r r o b o r a t e e x t e n s i v e i n d i v i d u a l d i f f e r e n c e s i n amount l e a r n e d «  when  time  is  held  constant.  Atkinson  (1968)  reported a  d i f f e r e n c e s of over  4,000 p r o b l e m s b e t w e e n t h e f a s t e s t a n d t h e  slowest student  a  in  grade  one  computer  assisted  reading  program. A  mastery  approach  t o l e a r n i n g emphasizes the s e t t i n g  of f i x e d a c h i e v e m e n t g o a l s and a l l o w s l e a r n i n g  time  accordingly.  of  In  more  students are allowed particular  a  u n i t or task.  traditional fixed  programs  amount  of  time  to  vary  instruction to  learn  a  In t h e absence of t e s t s t o determine  w h e t h e r l e a r n i n g h a s t a k e n p l a c e , i t i s p r o b a b l y more a c c u r a t e to c h a r a c t e r i z e t r a d i t i o n a l  programs as the a l l o c a t i o n  to  tasks.  students f o r p a r t i c u l a r  In the day-to-day  of time business  o f r u n n i n g a c l a s s t e a c h e r s a l l o c a t e a c e r t a i n amount o f  time  99  (a  lesson  to  complete  children  or a p e r i o d ) i n which they would l i k e an  will  differences importance  assignment. finish  in  more  is  the  f i n i s h e r s w h i c h i s of  possible  of  liklihood  quickly  than  time-to-criterion  i t  magnitude  The  differences practical  these  may  differences  i n f l u e n c e on c l a s s r o o m  is  that  others.  be  of  between  concern  the students  and  slow  teachers.  The  i n performance processes  Although  theoretical  fast  to  some  are  r a t e and areas  the  to  be  investigated. Chapter four  i s c o n c e r n e d w i t h t h e i n v e s t i g a t i o n of t h e  phenomenon o f d i f f e r e n t i a l three  classrooms.  performance  The  initial  rates  task  i n the f i v e  undertaken  d e t e r m i n e t h e e x t e n t of the p r o b l e m of c h i l d r e n the  assigned  teacher. standard  work  in  Performance task  less  of  rates  were  and by n a t u r a l i s t i c  classrooms. the  differential The  magnitude  of  performance strategies slow  the  adopted  studied  by  means  observations.  of  supports  performance  rates  in  are  i n performance  Next, a t t e n t i o n to  Finally, the  the  the  the  rates  is directed  problem of  f r a m e w o r k o f m a n i f e s t and l a t e n t  and  functions.  five is  to  the  differential  ramifications  interpreted  the  between  of  t e a c h e r s t o accommodate f a s t  discussed,  a  The c h a p t e r  which  teachers  by  to  finished  evidence  of the d i f f e r e n c e  rates.  workers  who  second q u e s t i o n addressed i n t h i s c h a p t e r  f a s t and s l o w f i n i s h e r s . responses  was  t i m e t h a n t h a t a l l o c a t e d by t h e  opens w i t h t h e p r e s e n t a t i o n of existence  grade  within  the and the  100  P e r c e n t a g e o f Time i n w h i c h F i n i s h i n g In  order  performance was  t o e s t a b l i s h t h e e x i s t e n c e of d i f f e r e n c e s i n  rates within  adopted.  the c l a s s e s , the f o l l o w i n g  A t t h e end o f e v e r y f i v e m i n u t e s  s t u d e n t s who h a d f i n i s h e d Students  were  the  assigned  task  Teachers  activities time.  can  the  in  times.  concert  finishing  is at  t h e number o f was  recorded.  that  children  unlikely  to  times.  the  same  o f c l a s s r o o m s i t seems will  complete  t h a t many c h i l d r e n  be  another  expected to orchestrate  nature  I t was r e a s o n e d  different  be  o r began  f i n i s h at precisely  collective  reasonable t o expect different  hardly  so t h a t a l l c h i l d r e n  Given  procedure  c o n s i d e r e d t o be f i n i s h e d t h e a s s i g n e d t a s k i f  t h e y h a n d e d i n t h e work, c l o s e d t h e i r b o o k s , activity.  Occured  as  work  at  finishing  p r o b l e m a t i c as c h i l d r e n  Many  children  finishing  simultaneously  c a n be a c c o m m o d a t e d by t h e i n t r o d u c t i o n o f t h e  next a c t i v i t y .  I t i s the  assignments problem.  at  management  different  The amount  of  r a t e s which time  in  of  children  seems a more  which  p r o b a b l y r e f l e c t s the e x t e n t of t h e problem  finishing  finishing difficult occurred  to a better  degree  t h a n t h e a c t u a l number o f c h i l d r e n who h a d f i n i s h e d a t any one time.  Consequently,  finishing  the  percentage  occurred i s reported.  of  time  i n w h i c h any  101  Table 5 P e r c e n t a g e o f Time i n w h i c h  F i n i s h i n g Occurred  Class Visit  1  2  3  4  5  0 0  0 0  0 0  33 60  18 0  0 0  0 44  2  B A  30 60  3  B A  0 8  24 1 1  4  B A  —  23  24 0  0 0  25 67  29 33  5  B A  8 0  22 0  0 0  17 29  6 67  6  B A  67 8  55 0  0 29  40 0  53 50  7  B A  36 -  40 0  0 0  21 17  0 0  8  B A  -  44 0  8 17  30 —  0 14  9  B A  80 -  29 0  8 0  0 31  0 71  10  B A  -  -  10 -  0  -  -  Note B i n d i c a t e s t h e p e r c e n t a g e of time i n which f i n i s h i n g occurred before recess A i n d i c a t e s the percentage of time i n which f i n i s h i n g occurred a f t e r recess - i n d i c a t e s t h a t no o b s e r v a t i o n s were made Table 5 i n d i c a t e s that classes.  The  f i n i s h i n g occured  low amount o f t i m e  i n which  i n a l l of  f i n i s h i n g occurred  i n C l a s s 3 i s somewhat m i s l e a d i n g ; t h e r e was no s e t number assignments of  the  a n d t h e c h i l d r e n were " n e v e r  teacher.  of  f i n i s h e d " i n t h e eyes  As soon a s s t u d e n t s c o m p l e t e d  work t h e y began a n o t h e r , w i t h o u t w a i t i n g  the  one p i e c e o f  f o r the remainder  of  1 02  the c l a s s . 4),  nor  avoided  Neither a teacher-paced a  student-paced  the problem  others.  Class  group  2  p e r m i t s an  program,  given  the  Although  times.  of  basically  After  a  children  instruction  s t r a t e g i e s t o keep the c l a s s w o r k i n g  a t t h e same s p e e d  discussed  in  this  percentage  of time  chapter  data is  a  five),  i n which in  and  a l l were  Table  5  seems  the  schooling.  given  most  students are working.  fastest  children  in  Table  6.  The  Although conclusion  finishing  occured  m a j o r i t y of the c h i l d r e n  to  ask  to  results for  were  occupied.  extent  results  of  at  of  occupied  are  t h a t 75% of  most  adept  The  e x c l u d i n g the  The  show  that  nature  what  the  i n a l l o f t h e rooms, a  i s t h a t the t e a c h e r s  i n the  fruitfully  a l l students  performed.  i n e a c h c l a s s were o c c u p i e d  be  life.  collective  A further analysis,  25% of e a c h c l a s s , was  presented  the  I f t h e d i f f i c u l t y of k e e p i n g  i s a c k n o w l e d g e d , i t seems r e a s o n a b l e  (to  contention  f e a t u r e of c l a s s r o o m  unrealistic  several  is reflected  e x p e c t a t i o n t h a t t e a c h e r s s h o u l d keep a l l s t u d e n t s occupied  was  working.  support  fundamental  did  teacher-paced  e v i d e n t , and  recess  while  children  teacher u t i l i z e d  finishing  class.  was  groups:  other  the  Before  This  The  whole  ahead  reading  the  s t u d e n t p a c i n g of s e a t w o r k  to  (Class 5),  i n t e r e s t i n g comparison.  instruction  seatwork.  f i n i s h e d at d i f f e r e n t  finishing  p r o v i d e d t o two  received  independent  i n d i v i d u a l i z e d approach  of some c h i l d r e n  r e c e s s i n s t r u c t i o n was one  whole c l a s s program ( C l a s s  the  time.  reasonable  keeping  the  103  Table Percentage  6  o f Time i n w h i c h t h e F a s t e s t 2 5 % were  Finished  Class Visit  1  2  3  4  5  2  B A  10 0  0 0  0 0  0 0  0 0  3  B A  0 0  12 0  9 0  0 0  0 1 1  4  B A  0 0  12 0  0 0  13 0  29 33  5  B A  0 0  6 0  0 0  17 7  0 27  6  B A  60 8  18 0  0 29  13 0  0 0  7  B A  9 -  0 0  0 0  14 8  0 0  8  B A  -  44 0  0 0  10 —  0 14  B A  30 —  6 0  0  0 0  0 43  B A  -  -  10  0  -  —  —  —  —  —  9 10  —  Note B i n d i c a t e s occurred A indicates occurred - indicates The  above  the p e r c e n t a g e of time i n w h i c h before recess the p e r c e n t a g e of time i n which after recess t h a t no o b s e r v a t i o n s were made analyses  were  conducted  finishing finishing  to establish  f i n i s h i n g was a phenomenon o f  these  perhaps  stage the q u a l i t y or usefulness  be n o t e d  of t h e a c t i v i t i e s discussed; eight.  types  that at t h i s provided of  for  activities  the  classrooms.  children  will  However, i t seems r e a s o n a b l e t o  has  It  that  not  should  been  be d i s c u s s e d i n c h a p t e r postulate  that  some  1 04  activities  may  busy, but  be  fill  of  activities  be  students  finishers teacher  extremely  finishing  Teacher 2 thought to  when t h e y  times  had  in  discussed  children  valuable are  i t important  engaging  this period  d e a l of t i m e and  limited educational value.  may  differential  up a g r e a t  each  (visit  finished  to provide  child's before  recess),  and  went on  t o do  children  rates  will  teachers  wait  concluding  the  children  "neutral". by  To  will  work  most  l e s s o n and may  and  m o v i n g on  spend  a  some e x t e n t ,  necessitated  activity  a  was  while  large  the  During  number This  observed being  is  students  to  determine  t o t h a t s p e n t by  differential  from the c l a s s r o o m :  others  to  more  have the  considerable  some  slowly.  finished next  One rate ratios  the  before  task,  be  slow workers.  of the d i f f i c u l t i e s i s the  l a c k of  ratio  of  If  then  p e r i o d of time i n  t i m e i n n e u t r a l may  slow  was used  influenced One  way  t h e m a g n i t u d e o f t h e d i f f e r e n c e b e t w e e n f a s t and  •workers  of  Slow Workers  children  t h e d i f f e r e n c e s b e t w e e n f a s t and  explore  This  feedback  some c o l o r i n g .  be a b o l i s h e d  quickly  until  example,  immediate  seems i m p r o b a b l e t h a t t h e phenomenon o f  performance  some  For  that  occupied.  R a t e R a t i o s of F a s t and It  such  story individually.  8,  room t o k e e p s t u d e n t s  be  unavoidable.  the o n l y time a non-academic a c t i v i t y in t h i s  but  alternative  student  A l t e r n a t e l y , other  written a story.  an  keep  t i m e s p e n t by  to slow fast  students. with previous  clarity  studies  regarding  the  utilizing reference  105  groups.  In  computer  assisted  instruction  (Suppes,  1966)  a p p e a r s t h a t t h e t i m e t a k e n by o n l y two s t u d e n t s , t h e and  the  s l o w e s t , was u s e d t o compute t h e r a t i o .  of e s t a b l i s h i n g computer this  the r a t i o ,  assisted  study as being u n l i k e l y  to reflect  teacher encounters i n a c o l l e c t i v e that  because  classroom  t e a c h e r s were more students  who  who were e x t r e m e .  to  similar  be  It  influenced  i n time needs  T h e r e f o r e , i t was d e c i d e d  order  to  that a  reasoned i n nature,  by  groups  individuals compute  the  i t was n e c e s s a r y the  two  groups.  p r o b l e m was t o d e t e r m i n e two g r o u p s o f s t u d e n t s s u c h  group  similarity  between  and t h e g r e a t e s t d i s s i m i l a r i t y  The p r o b l e m i s a n a l o g o u s t o maker:  of  t h e f a s t e s t and the  t o determine the rate r a t i o  t h e r e w o u l d be t h e g r e a t e s t  that  which  the  highest  Kelley  (1939)  from  determined  requirements of w i t h i n dissimilarity  were  group  the  members  between  lowest  similarity  within  the  test  discriminate  most  achieving  empirically  that  the groups.  confronts  i t e m s h a v e t o be s e l e c t e d w h i c h w i l l  clearly  that' and  students. the  between  twin group  b e s t met when t h e g r o u p s c o n s i s t e d o f t h e  t o p a n d b o t t o m 27% o f t h e p o p u l a t i o n test.  was  t h a n by  t o f i n d a non a r b i t r a r y way o f e s t a b l i s h i n g  the  a  groups. In  The  in  was r e j e c t e d f o r  i s collective  r a t e r a t i o b a s e d on t h e d i f f e r e n c e b e t w e e n slowest  cases  the v a r i a b i l i t y  setting.  instruction  likely  were  program,  fastest  T h i s method  b a s e d upon two e x t r e m e  individualized  i t  Accordingly, this  which  had  r a t i o n a l e was a d o p t e d  the f a s t and t h e slow groups w i t h i n t h e  written  the  i ndetermining  classroom.  However,  1 06  the  realities  membership  of o b s e r v a t i o n i n elementary  is  departure  inclined  from  the  test  expedite on-the-spot instead slow  to  fluctuate,  makers  suggested  procedure.  calculations,  o f 27% a s t h e c r i t e r i o n  where  a  In  i t was d e c i d e d  to  slight  order  to  use  25%  f o r membership i n t h e f a s t o r  group. A s a t i s f a c t o r y method o f d e t e r m i n g  slowest  groups  was d e t e r m i n e d  class variability assessed The  classrooms,  in  experimental  needs  involved  investigator involved  ways,  to  establish  administration  selected task,  the  needs.  timing  Time  needs  were  e x p e r i m e n t a l l y and n a t u r a l i s t i c a l l y .  attempt the  the  i n order to i n v e s t i g a t e w i t h i n  i n terms of time  two  t h e f a s t e s t and  while  variability  to  the  the  in  classes  time  of  naturalistic  an  attempt  o f t a s k s s e t by t h e t e a c h e r : t h e f o r m e r  has  the advantage of i n c r e a s e d r e l i a b i l i t y  has  t h e advantage of i n c r e a s e d  while  the  latter  validity.  E x p e r i m e n t a l l y Determined Rate R a t i o s The (Teachers the  classes  her  often  in  their  used whole c l a s s  to give a standard  classes.  3 a n d 5) t h o u g h t  these  task  The r e m a i n i n g  toa l l  two t e a c h e r s  i t w o u l d n o t be " v a l i d "  One  of  teachers these  own r e c o r d o f t h e  preferred  teachers  students'  an  for  their  (Teacher  progress  individualized 3) s u g g e s t e d  in  assigned  would p r o v i d e a b e t t e r b a s i s f o r j u d g i n g r e l a t i v e records  instruction  a s t h e y u s u a l l y d i d n o t do t h e same a s s i g n m e n t a t t h e  time;  approach.  who  1, 2 a n d 4) a g r e e d  children  (Teachers  same  teachers  proved  to  be  extremely  informative  speeds. and  will  that work The be  1 07  discussed  later.  One l i m i t a t i o n be  easy  enough  reasonable selected  to  amount from  arithmetic  o f t h e s t a n d a r d t a s k was t h a t i t h a d be  of  the  completed  time.  by a l l c l a s s members i n a  Accordingly,  supplementary  program c u r r e n t l y  two,  regrouping  is  inordinately Subsequently, worksheet  as  the  about  the  capability  classes  basic  7)  which  only  the  and  students  covered  prove  students.  2)  did  this  1 a n d 4) r e p o r t e d expressed  doubt  t o do t h e e x e r c i s e .  the  same  source  (see  a d d i t i o n and s u b t r a c t i o n of  facts. Each of t h e t h r e e t e a c h e r s p r e s e n t e d  the  numerals  not  three  (Teachers  T h e s e c l a s s e s were g i v e n m a t e r i a l f r o m Appendix  digit  (Class  t h a t work y e t  of  two  grade  two o f t h e t e a c h e r s  t h a t they had not c o v e r e d  o f t h e g r a d e two  t h a t i t would  for  o n l y one o f  was  t o be u s e d a t t h e e n d o f g r a d e  t o expect  difficult  exercise  i n use ( s e e Appendix 6 ) . As t h i s  intended  i t seemed r e a s o n a b l e  an  material  w o r k s h e e t on a d d i t i o n a n d s u b t r a c t i o n o f with  to  children  in their  own c l a s s .  down on e a c h c h i l d ' s d e s k .  The  the worksheets  to  The s h e e t s were p l a c e d  face  teacher  informed  the  class  t h a t t h e y were g o i n g t o be d o i n g an e x e r c i s e f o r t h e " v i s i t o r " (the  author)  were t o l d mistakes.  and s h o u l d n o t b e g i n u n t i l  t o l d t o do s o .  t o work q u i c k l y b u t t o t a k e c a r e When  they  were  finished  take t h e i r  paper t o  the  stopwatch  as  as the teacher  soon  the time t h a t each c h i l d  "visitor".  finished.  not  to  They  make  any  t h e y were i n s t r u c t e d t o The  said  author  started  a  " b e g i n " , and r e c o r d e d  108  The s c o r e s o f t h e c h i l d r e n  i n the c l a s s e s which  w o r k s h e e t on b a s i c f a c t s  (Classes  variability;  s c o r e was 24 and t h e h i g h e s t was 28.  the  lowest  The s c o r e s o f t h e c h i l d r e n who addition  and  subtraction  greater v a r i a b i l i t y was  7  both  by  calculated  dividing to  a  and  the  4)  showed  worksheet  regrouping  i n t h e number  accuracy,  and  did  with  and t h e h i g h e s t was 24. speed  1  d i d the  correct;  involving  ( C l a s s 2) showed the  lowest  In order t o take correct  little  score  into  response  account  rate  was  t h e number c o r r e c t by t h e t i m e  taken.  per  hour.  a  response  correct  T h i s was  converted  Correct  r e s p o n s e r a t e was r a n k  rate  o r d e r e d and t h e a v e r a g e o f t h e give  t o p a n d b o t t o m 2 5 % was c o m p a r e d t o  a  correct  response  r a t i o (Table 7).  rate  Table  7  C o r r e c t Response Rate R a t i o Class 2  Group  4  1  Fastest  N X S.D.  6 226.37 28.62  5 509.21 46.10  6 543.03 61 .58  Slowest  N X S.D.  6 85.22 28.79  5 209.52 36. 15  6 253.83 55.61  1:2.66  Ratio  The  results  i n d i c a t e t h a t w i t h i n each c l a s s the r a t i o  of t h e average c o r r e c t response the  1:2.14  1:2.43  r a t e of the f a s t e s t  that  of  Prior  t o t h i s t a s k , t h e t e a c h e r s had been  group  s l o w e s t g r o u p v a r i e d b e t w e e n 1:2.14 a n d asked  to  to  1:2.66. estimate  109  the  difference  slowest  25%  estimated  of  in  their  that  the  time w h i l e Teacher results  from  teachers'  time  the  intuitive  For  the  performance  recorded  the  2  and  Teacher  4  r e q u i r e d t w i c e a s much  t h r e e t i m e s a s much t i m e .  The  i n v e s t i g a t o r administered task support the n o t i o n s about  how  much  extra  time  was  children.  Determined D i f f e r e n c e s i n Performance Rates naturalistically in  rate ratios,  knew t h a t  t h e f a s t e s t and t h e  Teacher  children  1 estimated  rates,  determined  between  classes. slowest  n e e d e d by t h e s l o w e s t Naturalistically  needs  tasks  contrast  determined to  differences in  the  experimentally  n e i t h e r the teachers nor the c h i l d r e n  were  being  timed.  The  investigator  when t h e t a s k was b e g u n , when t h e f a s t e s t  c l a s s h a d f i n i s h e d a n d when o n l y 2 5 % were s t i l l  25% of t h e  working ( i e . ,  t h e t i m e when 7 5 % o f t h e c l a s s h a d f i n i s h e d ) . A necessary in  c o n d i t i o n f o r the assessment of v a r i a b i l i t y  p e r f o r m a n c e r a t e was t h a t a t a s k be a s s i g n e d t o a l l o f t h e  students  i n a c l a s s a n d t h a t t h e y b e g i n work a t t h e same t i m e .  Selection  of t a s k s proved  investigator  had  to  to  wait  be  somewhat  until  a s s i g n e d an a p p r o p r i a t e t a s k .  arbitrary  the teachers  I t was d i f f i c u l t  f o r m o f s t a n d a r d i z a t i o n on t h e c o l l e c t i o n  as  the  spontaneouusly t o impose  any  o f t h i s d a t a a s some  t e a c h e r s a s s i g n e d a t a s k t o t h e whole c l a s s q u i t e o f t e n , w h i l e others t y p i c a l l y assigned proved class,  to  t a s k s t o groups.  be t h a t e v e n when a t a s k was a s s i g n e d  s o m e t i m e s i t was c u r t a i l e d  finished.  Another  In  spite  of these  before  difficulty  t o t h e whole  75% of t h e c l a s s  had  l i m i t a t i o n s t h e data appear t o  1 10  corroborate  that  variability  in  time  needed  to  complete  assignments i s a f e a t u r e of c l a s s r o o m l i f e . In  Class  1 a a r i t h m e t i c a s s i g n m e n t was  f i n i s h e d by  f a s t e s t g r o u p i n 15 m i n u t e s b u t t h e s l o w e s t were s t i l l on  i t after  24 m i n u t e s .  took the f a s t e s t were the  still  group  working  same c l a s s ,  In C l a s s  and  was  a  on i t a f t e r  the r a t i o  finished  because  in a printing and  30  their  e x e r c i s e was  seconds.  A  of r e c e s s .  The  teacher  a s s i g n m e n t was  6 minutes  i n 27  minutes  few  minutes  a  continued after  w o r k i n g on i t  20  own  25%  had f i n i s h e d  minutes while the slowest s t i l l  had  work  minutes.  pace,  the  I n C l a s s 2, t h e c h i l d r e n  to  do  i n 90 -  100  after  160  o f t e n d i d t h e same work b u t  t e a c h e r a c t i v e l y p a c e d them t h r o u g h i t .  She w o u l d p o s e a  q u e s t i o n , w a i t f o r the c l a s s to w r i t e the response, carry  on  with  the  lesson.  As  children  t h e m s e l v e s a t a common t a s k , p e r f o r m a n c e be a s c e r t a i n e d . program  minutes  I n C l a s s 5, where c h i l d r e n p r o c e e d e d t o a s s i g n m e n t s a t fastest  the  In  comprehension  by t h e f a s t e s t c h i l d r e n  r e c e s s and some c h i l d r e n were s t i l l later.  exercise  7 m i n u t e s and 5 s e c o n d s .  15 s e c o n d s and t e r m i n a t e d by t h e  later  punctuation  working  1 m i n u t e and 20 s e c o n d s and t h e s l o w e s t  25 s e c o n d s t o 10 m i n u t e s exercise  4  the  also  did  and  then  n o t work  rate ratios could  In C l a s s 3 the i n d i v i d u a l i z e d d i d not p e r m i t the c a l c u l a t i o n  nature of a  of  by not the  performance  r a t e r a t i o b e t w e e n f a s t and s l o w w o r k e r s . Variability concomitant groups.  of  i n performance  whole c l a s s  r a t e s , w h i c h seems t o  i n s t r u c t i o n , a l s o appeared  I n C l a s s 5, t h e t o p g r o u p was  told  t o p u t away  be  a  within their  111  work i f t h e y had working.  In  finished  stopped a f t e r  still  kept  within  remained  group, c o n s i s t i n g of 7  on  another  assignment.  14 m i n u t e s and when t h e  39 m i n u t e s , one c h i l d  3  detailed  Records  were  who  in  the  lesson  bottom  d e s c r i b e d her program as  records  of  available  the  group  a  progress  The  good d e a l of d i f f e r e n c e  they  worked.  the  records revealed  in  In s p e l l i n g ,  arithmetic  completed  that  reflects  the  t h e r a n g e was  there  workcards  was  from  1  speed  from  c a r d s c o m p l e t e d w i t h 8 a s t h e m e d i a n and 4 as t h e range  children.  i n t e r m s of t h e amount o f work  done by t h e c h i l d r e n w h i c h p r e s u m a b l y which  of  individualized  f o r t h e number o f w o r k c a r d s  s p e l l i n g and a r i t h m e t i c .  was  of the t o p group  had n o t c o m p l e t e d t h e w o r k . Teacher  in  third  simultaneously working  children  was  one  t h e same room t h e b o t t o m  c h i l d r e n , was Two  finished:  1 to  mode.  to  at  10  15 The  with  4  r e p r e s e n t i n g b o t h t h e m e d i a n and t h e mode. C o m p r e h e n s i o n e x e r c i s e s were a r e g u l a r activities  provided  t h e r e was  no w r i t t e n  exercises  finished,  f o r the c h i l d r e n r e c o r d of the  many were t o be f i n i s h e d assignments sections  in  the  such The  section.  had  as  On  of  amount book  of  Although  teacher said that  how  time.  The  divided  into  emphasized the  the  comprehension  were  finding  main  selected idea  and  she w a i t e d f o r a l l  b e f o r e she  the s i x t h v i s i t  room.  of  r e q u i r e m e n t s about  which  c l a s s t o complete each s e c t i o n  following  in this  number  in a certain  exercises  skills,  for details.  teacher  comprehension  containing  comprehension reading  the  the  feature  introduced  one c h i l d  was  the  observed  11 2  to  be w o r k i n g  others visit off  were  on t h e n i n e t e e n t h c o m p r e h e n s i o n still  working  on t h e t h i r t e e n t h .  home t h e work Christmas  so  that  vacation.  t h a t some  l o n g e r than  would  be  The v a r i a b i l i t y  the f i r s t  to finish  One c h i l d was i n s t r u c t e d t o t a k e  she  children  while  On t h e t e n t h  t h e t e a c h e r made a p o i n t o f d i r e c t i n g c h i l d r e n  the nineteenth exercise.  such  exercise  required  finished  finished  before  the  i n speed of working  approximately  four  was weeks  t o c o m p l e t e t h e r e q u i r e d number  of comprehension e x e r c i s e s . The  data  seem t o s u p p o r t  gathered  the c o n t e n t i o n that d i f f e r e n c e s i n performance  r a t e s were s u b s t a n t i a l . finished  relatively  Consequently, concern  e x p e r i m e n t a l l y and n a t u r a l i s t i c a l l y  A l lclassrooms  q u i c k l y a n d o t h e r s who were much  g e t t i n g work f i n i s h e d  f o r most  had some s t u d e n t s  of  the  seemed t o be  teacher.  It  an  slower. area  of  time  work  and  otherwise to  said  with  to  the c l a s s :  finish".  to  plans  "We'll  complete  hard".  instructions  about  because  lesson the some  Teachers a l s o encouraged  other now  students  arithmetic,  you  The a n n o u n c e m e n t s were a l s o r e p l e t e what  to  do  with  work  a t t h e end o f t h e l e s s o n : " I f y o u h a v e n ' t  P i l g r i m poem, do i t i n y o u r  impossibility  class.  leave the sentences  " I f you're not f i n i s h e d your  be w o r k i n g  unfinished your  t o move on i n o r d e r  we won't  get f i n i s h e d :  should  instructional  p r e s s u r e s : f o r example, d u r i n g a s p e l l i n g  teacher decided  of  was common f o r t h e  t e a c h e r s t o make " f i n i s h i n g " a n n o u n c e m e n t s t o t h e w h o l e Sometimes t e a c h e r s changed t h e i r  who  spare  time".  that  was  finished  Sometimes  the  o f f i n i s h i n g was a c k n o w l e d g e d : " I know y o u won't  1 13  finish  b u t g e t a s much done a s y o u c a n " . I t was a n t i c i p a t e d  time  needed  groups,  to  would  teachers  t h a t t h e e x i s t e n c e of v a r i a b i l i t y i n  finish  be  assignments,  problematic  readily  classroom  f o r teachers.  identified  c h i l d r e n who w o r k e d s l o w l y  both w i t h i n c l a s s e s and Although  the  c h i l d r e n who w o r k e d q u i c k l y a n d  both  in  discussion  and  i n the  - " I know t h a t some o f y o u a r e f a s t w o r k e r s b e c a u s e  y o u ' v e h a d so much p r a c t i s e a t a l p h a b e t i z i n g " - t h e y g e n e r a l l y insisted  t h a t t h i s was n o t a p r o b l e m f o r them.  the d i s c r e p a n c y classroom  between t h e r e p o r t s o f t h e  observations  work a t d i f f e r e n t  may  Superficially,  teachers  and  appear c o n t r a d i c t o r y .  times has t h e p o t e n t i a l  to  be  Finishing  a  practical  p r o b l e m f o r t e a c h e r s , i f t h e y do n o t d e v i s e means t o d e a l it.  A l l the  teachers  dealing with fast finished.  in  the  t h a t f a s t and slow  cause d i s r u p t i o n s i n the classrooms, upon "no p r o b l e m " becomes  Strategies  incomplete  f i n i s h e r s d i d not  the teachers'  insistence  with Fast F i n i s h e r s  I n t h e w o r l d o f work a d u l t s a r e r e w a r d e d e i t h e r  work.  Although  of c h i l d r e n  of  work  ( p i e c e w o r k ) , or f o r t h e time  classrooms  i n the schoolroom  p o i n t of view  (cf.  work  reasonable.  f o r Coping  amount o f work c o m p l e t e d  with  group had c o n t i n g e n c i e s f o r  f i n i s h e r s and f o r g e t t i n g  To t h e e x t e n t  the  f o r the spent a t  a r e not workshops, the a c t i v i t i e s may be r e g a r d e d  Brown a n d S a k s ,  from  1980); e i t h e r  a  similar  a s e t amount  i s r e q u i r e d , o r t h e c h i l d r e n must work f o r a c e r t a i n  p e r i o d of time.  A disadvantage  o f s p e c i f y i n g a s e t amount  of  114  work  is  t h a t some c h i l d r e n w i l l  a d v a n t a g e of the  whole  insisting time  p r o b l e m of  fast  finishers not  is  in session i s that i t avoids  only occur  way  of  This  when a s e t amount o f  coping  In  might  the  i n the c e n t e r s  be  card".  -  take another  finished certainly clear  of  is fast  c o m p l e t e d each day.  requirements  functioned  to  s e n s e t h e r e was  t h r e e done".  g a v e an  T h e r e were as  no  there  was  N e i t h e r was  t h e r e any  considered  to  completing  be  an  never  I t was  t h i n g get  The  l a c k of  c h i l d r e n who  never  two  be  done,  specification  worked q u i c k l y : i n a  always something f o r these  positive  you're  openendedness t o the program which  accommodate  approach  mean  many c a r d s were t o  " I f y o u ' v e done one get  room.  the "Just  i d e a t h a t work was  much work o r how  From a r e i n f o r c e m e n t this  doesn't  the  with  the c l a s s time:  it  The  finished"  (Class 3),  occupied  seemed e n d e m i c t o t h i s  j u s t how  y o u ' v e done two  done  "never  classroom  f o r the d u r a t i o n - o f  finished  quickly  the  work  problem  the  t o keep t h e m s e l v e s  are  whether  the  labeled  because your c o r r e c t i o n s  of t h e  with  individualized  c h i l d r e n were e x p e c t e d  if  during  i s t o s t r u c t u r e t h e p r o g r a m so t h a t t h e p r o b l e m d o e s  approach.  really  working  One  finishers.  One  arise.  work  that c h i l d r e n continue  school  F i n i s h i n g can specified.  f i n i s h ahead of o t h e r s .  perspective,  c h i l d r e n to might  question  would s u s t a i n r a p i d working  behavior.  contingencies merely  more  negative  for of t h e  completing  work  same t o be  done.  reinforcement.  aversive  i t q u i c k l y d i d not  one  do.  stimulus  release  them  If  work  for children, from  is then  unpleasant  11 5  circumstances. no l e g i t i m a t e take  Under respite  illicit  f r o m work.  breaks  p h y s i c a l arrangement provided  the "never f i n i s h e d "  ideal  and  in  However, this  o f t h e room.  conditions  for  ample  scope  for  work.  I t was  not u n u s u a l f o r i n d i v i d u a l  centers  t o be q u i t e  in  room,  the  assignments who  to  collect  lack on  of  a  directing  children  required routine to  finished  to  be  provided  deposit  a  from  between  completed  the  amount  students  of  morning  assignments There  there  were  appeared  depending  r a r e l y approached piece  of  those to  to  session  As t h e s e s s i o n p r o c e e d e d  particular  work  a l s o be s e e n as r e l a t e d  t o t h e v a r i o u s t y p e s o f work  the c h i l d r e n  that  barriers  l e g i t i m a t e movement  t e a c h e r began e a c h  redirected.  for this;  report  program  and  of  may  upon what t h e y n e e d e d t o f i n i s h . children  the  f r o m one c e n t e r t o a n o t h e r .  basis The  did  conferences.  transitions  The  supplies  specification  daily  management p r o b l e m s .  the  of  wanted t o t a k e time out  lengthy a f f a i r s .  spent a long time g e t t i n g  required  the  was  a i d e d by  i n t o t e t r a y s , a l s o served to camouflage  The  by  who  were  whispered  t h e s e l f - p a c e d n a t u r e of  there  children  presence  Additionally,  children  the  they  The  regimen  and who  be no s e t  the  work was  teacher finished.  U s u a l l y , the t e a c h e r would n o t i c e t h a t the wandering, b e h a v i o r had  increased  were d o i n g . generally  and  The  typical  followed  finished frequently told  she w o u l d a s k a p a r t i c u l a r c h i l d  ?".  by  what t h e y  r e s p o n s e " I ' v e g o t n o t h i n g t o do"  was  a  "Have  you  positively  were  Those  standard who  to take another  liturgy  responded  card.  -  11 6  The p r o b l e m seemed t o s t e m f r o m t h e f a c t  t h a t t h e r e was  no c l e a r l y d e f i n e d r u l e a b o u t what c o n s t i t u t e d being  f i n i s h e d , o r what t h e s t u d e n t s  finished. tacit  B e c a u s e t h e r e were no  for  (except  one o f k e e p b u s y w i t h s o m e t h i n g ) ,  became  a  time  t o do.  probably  This  because  spent  monitoring  approximately  calendar:  the  work,  after  recess  generally  t o engage i n  capacity. 10  a  work  hit-and-miss  i t d e p e n d e d on t h e w i l l i n g n e s s o r  c a p a b i l i t y of the students teacher's  perhaps  a n d no p r o c e d u r e s f o r  other  was  of were  when t h e t e a c h e r was i n v o l v e d i n f i n d i n g  the c h i l d r e n  affair,  state  s h o u l d do when t h e y  rules  e n s u r i n g t h a t s t u d e n t s move on t o  the  minutes  t h e y were u n n o t i c e d  subterfuge,  and  On one o c c a s i o n  three  playing  an  with  the girls  advent  b e c a u s e t h e y were o b s c u r e d  from  t h e t e a c h e r ' s v i e w by a d i v i d e r . In what  the remaining  constituted  much e a s i e r t o allocated  four classrooms,  the  required  identify  time.  those  Teachers  assigning extra a c t i v i t i e s . related off  i t was  much  clearer  amount o f work a n d t h e r e f o r e who  finished  provided  ahead  f o r these  The e x t r a a c t i v i t i e s  of  the  c h i l d r e n by were  either  t o p r e v i o u s work, and t h e r e f o r e c o n s t i t u t e d f i n i s h i n g  work f r o m p r e v i o u s l e s s o n s , o r  were  completely  new  and  o f t h e t e a c h e r s a s s i g n e d work t o be c o m p l e t e d  from  u n r e l a t e d t o p r e v i o u s work. Two previous placed  lessons. on  the  I n C l a s s 2, a l i s t side  chalkboard  of " t h i n g s  each morning.  numbered a n d p r i o r i z e d  i n t h a t a c a d e m i c work was  be  unfinished a r t projects.  completed  before  to  do"  was  The l i s t  was  required  to  Each morning,  11 7  the teacher that  a l l  finished  read through the c h i l d r e n  the l i s t  t h e a s s i g n e d work.  w h e n ' t h e y had  child  who  had  Typically  activities the  finished.  f i n i s h e d and  remaining  1) t o l d  w a n t e d t o know  that  extra a c t i v i t y one  engaged  she  structured  i n response to  do  typically  by  those  liked  who  At  the  finished.  activities who  beginning  in  by  of t h i s and  the  children.  name  and  In order  cards  can  do  games  a  under  chart  seemed t o be  ideal.  could  naming  each heading:  I n some c a s e s ,  activity.  a  handful  of  children  would  difficulty  so  the that  fast  explanation  amount attempt to  with providing extra a c t i v t i e s  p r e s e n t s an a d d i t i o n a l p o s s i b i l i t y  the  activities.  the  In a d d i t i o n , e x t r a p r o j e c t s take time  be  smooth  t o d e a l w i t h t h e p r o b l e m of  o f what t o do when f i n i s h e d consumed a f a i r only  more  different  t o ensure the  t h e o p p o r t u n i t y t o engage i n t h e d i f f e r e n t  finishers  teacher  such as m u r a l s f o r her  a system whereby  s y s t e m , t h e t e a c h e r had placed  This  have f i n i s h e d  T e a c h e r 4 had  None o f t h e s e a t t e m p t s  Another  next.  assigned  c h i l d r e n ' s name c a r d s were r o t a t e d on a w e e k l y b a s i s  yet  to a  assigned.  such as c l a y work, p a i n t i n g  activities  had  they  t h e c l a s s what t o  what  teachers  because "those  drawing".  activities,  all  ensure  that  this  U s u a l l y t h i s was  two  to  m o r n i n g , T e a c h e r 5 g e n e r a l l y e x p l a i n e d an a r t p r o j e c t  commented  running  to  u n r e l a t e d t o the c l a s s program.  w h i c h c o u l d be done  than  (Teacher  class  i n the event  In c o n t r a s t  f i n i s h i n g an a r t p r o j e c t was  The  of  the  knew what t o do  approach, the other teacher do  with  for d i f f e r e n t i a l  of  time,  the e x t r a prepare. i s that i t finishing  1 18  times.  The  spectre  of  an i n f i n i t e  regression  in finishing  a p p e a r e d t o be a p p r e h e n d e d by a t l e a s t one o f t h e t e a c h e r s remarked: " I haven't given finished  (today)  them any a c t i v i t y  b e c a u s e y o u c a n h a v e t o o much  Strategies f o r Dealing In  addition  to  the teachers  to  about u n f i n i s h e d work.  with  up".  to  collective  Therefore  time  completed  the  distinguished an  must  be  the  that a l l w i l l provided  work.  piece  of  t h a t an i n d i v i d u a l  behind  catch  up when t h e y  was  group  finish  likely  nature in  Finishing  off  of  concert.  so t h a t a l l s t u d e n t s  work,  a schedule.  while  Catching  student,  is  have  to  be  Individual  are behind  their  schedule.  Catching  up  also  usually contains  children  are  told  group or c l a s s . have  that  i t involves reference  fallen  the  i n d i v i d u a l or the c l a s s .  t o a time standard  s o l u t i o n t o the problem of  to  Teachers behind  up a p p e a r s t o be a more c o m p l e x  in  most r a d i c a l  the l a t t e r  o r t h e whole c l a s s , has  t a l k a b o u t c l a s s e s c a t c h i n g up when t h e y  The  unfinished  f r o m c a t c h i n g up, i n so f a r a s t h e f o r m e r r e f e r s  fallen  their  what  When u n f i n i s h e d work  instruction:  assigned  individual  idea  finished  o f f a n d c a t c h i n g up a r e  r e f e r s t o s e v e r a l p i e c e s o f work. the  who  on a w e e k l y b a s i s t h i s was r e f e r r e d t o a s " c a t c h i n g  s c h o o l i n g makes i t u n l i k e l y  to  children  Teachers d e a l t with  The p r o b l e m o f f i n i s h i n g  endemic  finishing".  were a l s o f a c e d w i t h t h e p r o b l e m o f  work on a d a i l y and a w e e k l y b a s i s . completed  they've  w i t h U n f i n i s h e d Work  coping  quickly do  f o r when  who  term  external to  incomplete  1 19  work  a p p e a r e d t o be t o c o l l e c t  i t i n " f i n i s h e d or not".  s o l u t i o n o n l y a p p e a r e d i n one c l a s s r o o m type  of a c t i v i t y  (Class  for  a  end;  p r e s u m a b l y most o f t h e c h i l d r e n f i n i s h e d  and  only  w h i c h h a d a c o l o r i n g component a t t h e  G e n e r a l l y , the completion  of  extra  Teachers accomplished  time  4),  This  be p r o v i d e d .  two ways; e i t h e r e x t r a t i m e  unfinished  the " r e a l "  work.  required  that  work  this  i n one o f  i n s c h o o l was u s e d o r t h e c h i l d r e n  were r e q u i r e d t o f i n i s h t h e work o u t o f c l a s s t i m e . The  provision  accomplished incomplete lesson  by  of  extending  work t o a l i s t  to permit  extra the  within  lesson  of " t h i n g s t o  completion  one o f t h e c l a s s r o o m s  time  or  by  do".  o f work o c c u r e d  (Class 4).  school  was  adding  the  Extending  the  regularly  i n only  T h i s s t r a t e g y seemed  to  be  u s e d w h e n e v e r t h e c h i l d r e n were e n g r o s s e d i n t h e t a s k a t h a n d . The  suggestion  that high on-task  r e i n f o r c i n g , and encourages time,  is  hard  to  resist.  s t a f f r o o m , one t e a c h e r she  often  some  regularly  so w e l l .  flexible to  according  permit  conversation teacher  because  the  with  time  was  another  in  speed, f i n i s h i n g  the whom time  children  who  who  had was  rigorously  I n C l a s s 2 a l l l e s s o n s were e n d e d  t o t h e d i c t a t e s o f t h e c l o c k and i n c o m p l e t e  Classes  be  extra  with  I n c o n t r a s t t o t h e one t e a c h e r  the timetable.  added t o t h e l i s t In  During  to  may  c o n f e r r e d t h a t she h a d e x t e n d e d t h e amount o f  working  adhered  of students  teachers  reported t o another  devoted t o the morning a c t i v i t i e s been  behavior  work  was  of " t h i n g s t o do". 3 and 5, where c h i l d r e n w o r k e d a t t h e i r o f f took  p l a c e on a d a i l y  basis.  In C l a s s  own 5,  1 20  the l a s t off had  20 m i n u t e s o f t h e m o r n i n g was d e s i g n a t e d  time.  continued  working.  to  The f i r s t  f u n c t i o n e d as a f i n i s h i n g  a  half  off  story  while  finishing is  others  hour of t h e a f t e r n o o n  period.  Although  the  work  of  the  morning.  o f f extended during the f i r s t  reasonable  In  also  officially  activities  t o c o n s i d e r t h a t the e x t r a time  from being  Even children  additional be c o m p l e t e d  the  kinds  of  undertaken.  had work t o c o m p l e t e .  school  3,  required to  other  w i t h the p r o v i s i o n s of f i n i s h i n g  still  Class  hour of t h e a f t e r n o o n .  c o m p l e t e p r e v i o u s l y u n f i n i s h e d work p r e v e n t e d  there  the  r e a d i n g time, the m a j o r i t y of c h i l d r e n d i d c o r r e c t i o n s  or f i n i s h e d  It  finishing  T h o s e c h i l d r e n who h a d c o m p l e t e d t h e m o r n i n g work  the o p p o r t u n i t y t o l i s t e n  silent  as  time  To  o f f p e r i o d s some  avoid  the  teachers often i n s i s t e d  i n t h e s t u d e n t s ' own  time.  In  seemed t o be a common u n d e r s t a n d i n g  use  of  t h a t t h e work  most  classrooms,  t h a t work w h i c h  was  u n f i n i s h e d a t t h e end o f t h e e x t r a t i m e w o u l d be c o m p l e t e d  at  home.  Generally  one  or  two  students  i n s t r u c t e d t o t a k e work home t o f i n i s h . the t e a c h e r s generate  A remark  when t h e work  i s taken  home.  practice  sending  work  s o m e t i m e s become q u i t e Teacher  1  had  one  of  this  was  already completed the  a work  to  be  assigned  to  the  workers  required.  problem because the next  who  zealous  abandoned  home w i t h one o f h e r s l o w  b e c a u s e he i n v a r i a b l y c o m p l e t e d more t h a n was that  by  I t a p p e a r s t h a t some c h i l d r e n  work r e l u c t a n t l y a t s c h o o l w i l l  found  specifically  i n d i c a t e d t h a t t h i s t o o was n o t i d e a l a s i t c o u l d  f u r t h e r problems.  of  were  She  day he h a d the  class.  121  Sometimes before  students  were  they had t h e i r  children  required  l u n c h , and  were o b s e r v e d  t o c o m p l e t e an a s s i g n m e n t  on  several  returning early  occasions  some  from l u n c h i n order t o  c o m p l e t e t h e i r morning work. The commonest  way  of  dealing  with  the  problem  of  u n f i n i s h e d work was what was l a b e l e d by one o f t h e t e a c h e r s a s the  "three  o'clock c l u b " .  the procedure not  until  done  to  unduly  T h i s p l e a s a n t euphemism  of r e q u i r i n g c h i l d r e n  work was c o m p l e t e d , satisfy  t o remain a f t e r  at least until  the teacher.  One c h i l d ,  t o stay i n after  no d i f f i c u l t y  s c h o o l t h a n m i s s gym".  o f t h e " e x c l u s i v e c l u b " was q u i t e l i m i t e d .  the  chronic  their  "slowpokes"  finishers  i n . Membership  Usually  only  one  These c h i l d r e n  were  consistently  failed  the teachers g e n e r a l l y denied were  they had d e v e l o p e d be  cases  T e a c h e r s had  to finish  Up  Although  to  who  friend,  work.  Catching  slow  f o r membership.  been  d i d n o t seem  t o her  i n . n a m i n g s t u d e n t s who were k e p t  o r two s t u d e n t s q u a l i f i e d  had  p e r m i t t e d t o go t o  t h e gym i n s p i t e o f u n f i n i s h e d w o r k , commented "Better  school, i f  enough  This requirement  onerous t o the c h i l d r e n .  describes  a  spontaneously,  a l l of about  B a s i c a l l y c a t c h i n g up o c c u r e d  were  and  because  s t r a t e g i e s which allowed  order  them t a l k e d r e a d i l y , a n d i n some the  problem  of  catching  a s a w e e k l y phenomenon,  i n C l a s s 3 c a t c h i n g up was n o t e d children  fast  p r o b l e m f o r them, p r e s u m a b l y  some c o p i n g  maintained,  that  over  up.  although  a longer p e r i o d of time:  g i v e n s e v e r a l weeks t o f i n i s h a c e r t a i n  amount  1 22  of  work. Three  weekly  o f t h e t e a c h e r s ( 2 , 4 a n d 5) p r e f e r r e d t o h a v e  c a t c h up p e r i o d .  Friday.  Teacher  t o complete  "things  do".  over  F o r two o f them (2 a n d 5) t h i s was a  2 a s s i g n e d l e s s o f t h e r e g u l a r work t o e n a b l e  the c h i l d r e n to  a l l of the a c t i v i t i e s  week.  on t h e l i s t  T h i s t e a c h e r wanted t o a v o i d c a r r y i n g  i n t o t h e n e x t week:  afresh".  "I  like  them  to  start  I n t h i s c l a s s r o o m t h e r e was a d e f i n i t e Each  day  the  " t h i n g s t o do" l i s t , everything  would  teacher  fully  tried  to  caught  finish  The  work week  t o the  a d d e d more a s s i g n m e n t s  to the  finished.  up.  of  rhythm  u n t i l F r i d a y , when i t was  be  the  expected  I n C l a s s 5, i t was  that  customary  f o r t h e t e a c h e r t o show a f i l m w h i c h was w a t c h e d by t h o s e were  a  who  r e m a i n i n g members o f t h e c l a s s  a l l incomplete  assignments.  recalled  t h a t t h i s c l a s s a l s o had f i n i s h i n g  Teacher  4  It  will  be  o f f time each day.  h a d a c a t c h up p e r i o d o n c e a week, b u t t h e day was  not a p p o i n t e d .  I f she f o u n d work m o u n t i n g  up, she w o u l d  give  t h e c l a s s t i m e t o c a t c h up i n t h e a f t e r n o o n . Catch  up  assignments  sessions  that  are  are  notable  being  for  completed  the  and  other  Many  concurrently During  themselves  children  likely  these  catch  free  be t h e m a i n  e v e n t s , s u c h a s t h e m o v i e , were e x t r a n e o u s :  such e x t r a a c t i v i t i e s a r e l i k e l y occupied.  of  simultaneously.  G e n e r a l l y when c a t c h i n g up was a n n o u n c e d , i t w o u l d event  number  from  finishing  presents up  planned  t o keep t h e f i n i s h e r s  different  assignments  a complex s u p e r v i s o r y problem.  periods,  instruction  teachers  tended  s o t h a t t h e y were  to  keep  available  1 23  to help During  individual these  children  and  to  supervise  who had f i n i s h e d a l l t h e o u t s t a n d i n g  S o m e t i m e s t h e a s s i g n m e n t s t o be f i n i s h e d were chalkboard.  Another  common  c h i l d r e n who had i n c o m p l e t e chalkboard;  class.  s e s s i o n s , t e a c h e r a t t e n t i o n seemed t o d i r e c t e d t o  determining  work.  the  procedure  assignments.  listed  on  was t h a t t h e names o f  a s s i g n m e n t s w o u l d be l i s t e d  t h e names were e r a s e d a s t h e s t u d e n t s  T e a c h e r s who a d o p t e d t h i s  the c l a s s t h a t they had spent  the  on t h e  f i n i s h e d the  s t r a t e g y u s u a l l y announced t o  the previous evening  marking the  students' notebooks.  P r e s u m a b l y t h e e x i s t e n c e o f t h e names on  the c h a l k b o a r d  to signify  served  t o the c l a s s that the teacher  was i n e a r n e s t .  Discussion In t h i s chapter five  classrooms  differential  were  performance r a t e s  investigated.  Under  c o n d i t i o n s the performance r a t e d i f f e r e n t i a l slow is  workers  likely  a  performance exercise. teacher  conservative rates  because  between f a s t  was o f t h e o r d e r  estimate of  controlled  the  of  the  1:2.  and This  differences in  c o n t r o l l e d nature  of the  S u b s t a n t i a l d i f f e r e n c e s amongst s t u d e n t s w o r k i n g assigned  classroom, existed  i n three classrooms  i n the  tasks,  under  were a l s o d o c u m e n t e d .  in  spite  of  teacher  v a r y i n g degrees of d i f f i c u l t y . developed for having  procedures slower  f o r keeping  conditions  natural  to  on the  Performance r a t e d i f f e r e n c e s attempts  to  Consequently,  p r o v i d e work o f a l l t e a c h e r s had  f a s t e r workers  students complete  assignments.  occupied  and  1 24  Strategies rates,  like  for  coping  may  having be  and  and  students  representing  - the m a n i f e s t  catching  proposed that  up  may  may  also  latent  have  catching  move on  to the  finished,  completed  coverage. likely  Consequently, strategies curriculum  expectation  of  finishing  a  whole  three  i t was  functioned  A  up  also  corrollary  objectives  Accordingly,  rather  work  coverage.  function i s to  of  the  equalize  argued that teaching  function of  than  the likley to  the  coverage.  s t r a t e g i e s of to  equalize  e q u a l i z a t i o n of  the  tradeoff  of  t h e c l a s s a s a w h o l e , may coverage  for  mastery.  be  In  finishing curriculum curriculum  to master a l i m i t e d cover  class  number  curriculum.  time devoted to f i n i s h i n g assignments, l i k e  devoted to teaching a  have  of  curriculum  up  to  i n t e r m s of  amount  catching  less  students  to equalize curriculum  coverage i s that c l a s s e s are  as  interpreted  allowed  variance  latent  i t i s suggested t h a t the  catching  coverage.  of  and  It is  coverage.  t h i s chapter, o f f and  off  are  slower  of  differential  i t i s argued t h a t the  In c h a p t e r as  curtails  be  off  c o m p l e t e more o r  i s increased  Homogenization  Finishing  up may  the  up  student  functions.  finishers  next assignment before  the  curriculum  If fast  in  concern  a d e s i r e t o enhance schooling.  same amount o f work.  discussed  classes catch  f u n c t i o n of  f i n i s h i n g o f f and  finishing  Teacher  having  as a t t e m p t s t o e n s u r e t h a t most s t u d e n t s the  be  latent functions.  f i n i s h work and  i n t e r p r e t e d as  learning  differential  organizational strategies,  t e r m s of t h e i r m a n i f e s t with  with  time  interpreted  Time g i v e n  up  to  1 25  f i n i s h i n g assignments, class  operating  a  as  mastery  one  organism;  u n t i l a l l assignments are keeping  the  to  problem  the  differences adopting  The posing one  managerial  is a frequent teachers.  sink  is  coverage  The  kept  into  work f o r i d l e h a n d s "  and  avoid  keep  springs  to  generally  occupied:  t e a c h e r s and  mind  the  "norm  reasonable  t o what e x t e n t  ask  composed o f l e a r n e r s who w h i c h they work. order half  of  two  the time  assignments.  Given  t o one,  seen  for  of  beginning children  finds 1979).  time. teachers  refers Yet,  to it  this seems  t e a c h e r s c a n manage c l a s s e s i n the  speed  a performance rate d i f f e r e n t i a l students w i l l  i t r e q u i r e s f o r the slower I f the teacher  will  "devil  that  (1979)  substantially  the f a s t e r  do  provisions for  rationality".  differ  to  Arlin,  some  as and  schoolroom  (cf.  have  Doyle  e x p e c t a t i o n as the to  be  managerial  c o m p l e t e t h e a s s i g n e d work a h e a d of  classes  by  increased  t i m e n e e d s may  T h e r e seems t o be a g e n e r a l e x p e c t a t i o n will  individual  P u r i t a n n o t i o n that the  teachers  c h i l d r e n who  compromise  image o f c h i l d r e n w i t h n o t h i n g  The  that  problems.  busy a t a l l t i m e s o t h e r w i s e  Consequently,  introduced  seems t o be an u n w r i t t e n r u l e t h a t  chaos.  the  i t i s argued that  teachers  nightmare for student  There  in  proposed  k i n d s of p r o b l e m s f o r t e a c h e r s , one  instructional.  must be  It  e x i s t e n c e of d i f f e r e n t i a l  two  work i s n o t  Furthermore,  compromise  i n s t r u c t i o n a l and  results  represents a p r a c t i c a l  curriculum  i n time needs. this  new  completed.  c l a s s together of  emphasis,  be  students  i n t r o d u c e s the next  of  finished to  at the in  complete  assignment  as  1 26  soon  as  the  f a s t e s t c h i l d r e n have f i n i s h e d ,  exposes the slower c h i l d r e n Conversely, involve  to  boredom  frustration student for  most  the  and  boredom  the  are  teachers.  demonstrated  Consequently,  frustration  allowance  f o r the  the  class  were  the  time.  The  children usually and  5 which  likely  i s finished  may  Typically,  i n h i g h r a t e s of  undesirable i t seems  slowest. will  amount o f s t u d e n t c o o p e r a t i o n . i n Table  frustration.  condition  reasonable t o  may  be  directed  v i a m e d i a b e t w e e n boredom f o r t h e f a s t e s t  f o r assignments  data  she l i k e l y  slowest.  t h a t time a l l o t m e n t s f o r assignments a  of  whole c l a s s  f o r a l l but  establishing  and  until  deal  i n a t t e n t i v e n e s s ; p r e s u m a b l y an  suggest at  wait  to a great  then  suggests  kept  In  other  words,  be made t o e n s u r e T h i s view  time  the largest  i s supported  by  that a l l but the f a s t e s t  the  25% of  o c c u p i e d w i t h a s s i g n e d work f o r most o f  provision  of  served t o reduce  extra  for  these  t h e management p r o b l e m s  which  r e s u l t when t o o many c h i l d r e n  activities  finish  t h e a s s i g n e d work  then have n o t h i n g t o do. The  managerial  concerns  p e r h a p s be o v e r - d r a m a t i s e d ; chaos merely However,  o f i n e x p e r i e n c e d t e a c h e r s may  classrooms  b e c a u s e some c h i l d r e n  the  effect  of  attempts  to  l e t the  curricular materials at their herself room.  managing  several  f i n i s h assignments  differential  i n s t r u c t i o n w o u l d a p p e a r t o be a teacher  r a r e l y degenerate  quickly.  finishing  thornier students  times  problem.  on  I f the  progress  own s p e e d , she m i g h t  into  through  soon  find  i n s t r u c t i o n a l p r o g r a m s i n t h e same  This i n v o l v e s not only e x t r a planning  and  preparation  1 27  time  but  also  would  seem  class  f o r implementation.  to require extra  It is difficult  time w i t h i n the  t o s e e how t e a c h e r s  c o u l d o p e r a t e under t h e s e c o n d i t i o n s , e s p e c i a l l y w i t h of  young  children  work more o r unfinished  who l a c k t h e n e c e s s a r y s e l f - d i s c i p l i n e t o  less  unaided.  Having  work a n d p r o v i d i n g t i m e  c l a s s covering the c u r r i c u l u m suggested in  classes  complete  f o r c a t c h i n g up, keeps t h e speed.  It is  t h a t t e a c h e r s a v o i d t h e management p r o b l e m s  inherent  a diversity  at  a l l children  of i n s t r u c t i o n a l  a  similar  p r o g r a m s by k e e p i n g t h e c l a s s  together. Keeping differential  the c l a s s together a l s o avoids the coverage  of  the c u r r i c u l u m .  s u r m o u n t t h e management p r o b l e m s progress one  at  their  own s p e e d ,  faster  next  This situation  grade  with  students  the rate d i f f e r e n t i a l  o f two t o  that  likely  have  by  completed  present the teacher  of  problems.  o f f a n d c a t c h i n g up a p p e a r  to  the The  ensure  a l l s t u d e n t s c o v e r more o r l e s s t h e same amount o f w o r k .  A p o s s i b l e d i s a d v a n t a g e of t h i s grade  i s completed  management a n d i n s t r u c t i o n a l  s t r a t e g i e s of f i n i s h i n g  that  inherent i n l e t t i n g  s t u d e n t s the slower s t u d e n t s would  only h a l f .  of  I f teachers could  i n d i c a t e s t h a t when t h e work f o r t h e y e a r  the  problem  level the  objectives  may  not  mastery is  by  i s t h a t a l l t h e work  be c o v e r e d . most  However, i t i s m a i n t a i n e d  students  of  p r o b a b l y more f u n c t i o n a l  management t h a n t h e  coverage  of  f o r the  more  fewer  curricular  i n terms  of c l a s s r o o m  objectives  by  fewer  students. Finishing  off  and  catching  up  may be c o n s i d e r e d a s  1 28  functional alternatives.  I t i s proposed  that they  m e c h a n i s m s by w h i c h t e a c h e r s keep t h e c l a s s organism. covers  Of c o u r s e n o t e v e r y o n e  the  same  strategies class of  for  i s caught  the  class  amount ensuring  the  one  but  the  or  different  work i s f i n i s h e d and  that  the  moving t h r o u g h the c u r r i c u l u m a t a p p r o x i m a t e l y I t i s argued  management and  differential  performance  consequences  for  for  that keeping the c l a s s  i n s t r u c t i o n a l problems rates.  students  devoted to f i n i s h i n g available  f u n c t i o n i n g as  w o r k s a t t h e same s p e e d ,  material,  that  major  up seem t o be d i r e c t e d a t k e e p i n g a l l members  t h e same s p e e d . avoids  of  are  may  However, not  be  o f f and c a t c h i n g up  covering  new  together  inherent in  the  practical  so d e s i r a b l e . i s time which  material.  Time  is  not  These s t r a t e g i e s  may  lead to decreased opportunity to learn  f o r some s t u d e n t s .  One  might  to  and  argue  catching  that may  the  time  serve  to  devoted depress  the  time.  The  finishing  performance long  off  term  in school, decision  i t may of  consequences  in performance In  this  time  the  and  to  to  rob  be t o i n c r e a s e  Peter  in  order  the  ways  in  extra  allocated  be t h a t t h e t e a c h e r i s c o n f r o n t e d  having  to  of  to which  to  homogeneity  Given that time i s a l i m i t e d  (Chapter s i x d e s c r i b e s f u r t h e r allocated  instruction,  of  o f t h e s l o w e s t , by g i v i n g them  and c a t c h i n g up may  of s t u d e n t achievement.  off  the . performance  b r i g h t e s t , by k e e p i n g them f r o m f u r t h e r enhance  finishing  resource with pay  the Paul.  time  is  s t u d e n t s i n o r d e r t o compensate f o r d i f f e r e n c e s rates). chapter,  the  existence  of  fast  and  slow  129  finishers  i n each  rates  finishing  of  teachers  to  room was  observed  mitigate  the  t i m e s were d e s c r i b e d . extra  examined.  I t was  but  Not  strategies  suggested  that teachers  t i m e t o s t u d e n t s t o p e r m i t work t o be managerial  further  provision  suggested  that  the  f u n c t i o n to reduce  the  learning  finishers  of  slow  differences  depressed  instruction catch  because  is likely  but are i n e f f e c t up.  The  they waiting  instruction.  do  extra  by  provide  not  was  time  may  students  receive  f o r the slower  that  It  enhanced because faster  the  finishing  students.  next c h a p t e r , chapter f i v e ,  w i t h o p p o r t u n i t y t o l e a r n as t h i s of  of  different  f i n i s h e d and  problems.  between  r e c e i v e e x t r a t i m e w h i l e t h e l e a r n i n g of likely  used  e f f e c t s of d i f f e r e n t i a l  t h i s a v o i d s i n s t r u c t i o n a l and  to  o n l y were  The they is  further students  i s concerned  i s r e p r e s e n t e d by  the  pace  1 30  CHAPTER 5  Opportunity A  to Learn:  fundamental c o n f l i c t  meeting the p a r t i c u l a r i s t i c universal  needs  of  the  i n teaching  needs of t h e class.  d i l e m m a i s t h r o w n most s h a r p l y i n s t r u c t i o n a l pace. conditions  It  is  that present  attempt t o cover  of  in  fast  the  group  limited  and  individual  into relief  the teacher  a  slow  i s the n e c e s s i t y of  P e r h a p s one a r e a  material specified  group of s t u d e n t s existence  Pace of I n s t r u c t i o n  Pace  is  problematic  proceeding allow  unlimited for  concerned  with  grade three  nature  of  the  the the  if  grade  Teachers  amount workers  of  time.  within  n o t be o p t i m a l  Yet  a  she  is  level.  to The  in this  study  classroom introduced,  for a l lchildren. are capable  cover  the  present  of  teacher material  chapter  is  t o deal w i t h the problem of  pace.  t h a t pace of i n s t r u c t i o n , i s introduced,  students  the  p r o c e d u r e s a n d s t r a t e g i e s a d o p t e d by t h e  (Arlin  represents and  Grouws a n d B e c k e r m a n , 1 9 7 8 ) . more  classroom  f o r the grade l e v e l w i t h a  A fundamental assumption u n d e r l y i n g  material  this  w i t h a dilemma.  because not a l l students  time  teachers  instructional  is  where  a t a homogeneous r a t e , a n d n e i t h e r c a n t h e  prescribed  pace  the  i s i n the matter of  i n d i c a t e s t h a t t h e s p e e d a t w h i c h new m a t e r i a l i s the pace of i n s t r u c t i o n , w i l l  and  the  literature  or the r a p i d i t y with opportunity  Westbury,  to  1976; B a r r ,  exposing  students  which  learn  for  1975; Good,  T e a c h e r s who p a c e r a p i d l y  of t h e c u r r i c u l u m , thereby  on  cover  t o more  new  131  material  which  Conversely,  a  curriculum  presents slow  pace  coverage,  consequently,  less  greater  less  of  instruction  exposure  opportunity  f a s t e r o r a s l o w e r pace of terms  of  curriculum  opportunity  to  to  coverage  results new  learn.  instruction  to  learn. in  less  material,  and  Accordingly,  has  consequences  a in  and l e a r n i n g o p p o r t u n i t i e s f o r  students. The d i l e m m a f a c i n g dichotomy:  coverage  t h e t e a c h e r may be  o f more c u r r i c u l a r  presented  m a t e r i a l or mastery  less.  Coverage of t h e c u r r i c u l u m t a k e s time and  depth  of l e a r n i n g , a l s o r e q u i r e s t i m e .  of t h e  educational  enterprise  the  limited  means time  as  mastery,  The c o l l e c t i v e that  both  a of or  nature  cannot  be  accomplished  in  Consequently,  t h e teacher has t o weigh, perhaps i n t u i t i v e l y or  at a l e s s than conscious l e v e l , objective  compared  instruction  to  the  another;  l i m i t e d time a v a i l a b l e The  The  literature  on  first the  in  pace  is  c h a p t e r , pace of  coverage  and m a s t e r y  in  the  section  falls  contains  a  i n t o f o u r major review  of  the  r e l a t i o n s h i p of pace t o achievement and a influence  the f i v e classrooms.  although v a r i a b i l i t y classes  one  i n v a l u e t r a d e o f f s and t h e  r e p o r t s t h e pace of i n s t r u c t i o n  spelling  achieving  f o r schooling i s addressed.  d i s c u s s i o n o f f a c t o r s w h i c h may  and  of  this  o r g a n i z a t i o n of t h i s chapter  sections.  section  value In  i s t r e a t e d as a problem  q u e s t i o n o f how t e a c h e r s b a l a n c e  permitted for schooling.  i n pace e x i s t s  relatively  pace.  The  second  i n reading, arithmetic I t i s concluded  between  homogeneous  classes, for  that, within  a l l students.  1 32  Homogeneous p a c i n g rather  than  a  is  interpreted  coverage  s a c r i f i c e of coverage f u n c t i o n s t o reduce The two,  idea  i n s t r u c t i o n a l and from  than  a  In t h i s  management  that  objectives  of  a  i s assessed  in  three.  making  a n a l y s i s of t e a c h e r v a l u e p r e f e r e n c e s f o r c o v e r a g e  mastery  are reported.  results  exercises  i n d i c a t e t h a t mastery  coverage.  It is  itself  suggested  i n an a t t e m p t  speed.  Finally,  strategies  results  terms  section  The  of  a  value  decision  this  preference  f o r keeping  observations  goal  P a c e o f I n s t r u c t i o n and of  intrinsic  than  manifests  on  the c l a s s t o g e t h e r are  and  preference  t o keep the c l a s s o p e r a t i n g a t a  qualitative  Although  the  of  i s a more i m p o r t a n t  that  the  problems.  in  orientation,  the  mastery  reported in section  interpreted  coverage section  of fewer  the data  be  a  I t i s argued  i n f a v o r of mastery  generated  rather  reflecting  orientation.  t h a t t e a c h e r b e h a v i o r may  mastery  as  similar  potential  presented.  Achievement  interest,  the  achieved  literature  i t s r e l a t i o n s h i p to achievement.  Good,  (1978) s t u d i e d e i g h t e e n t e a c h e r s o f  grade  Grouws and four  Beckerman  mathematics  achievement covered  in  who their  d u r i n g two  and  consistently students. one  in  the  of  i n s t r u c t i o n a l p a c e has b e c a u s e of  prominence  question  produced A  record  research  high  or  of.' t h e  h a l f months ( O c t o b e r  to  c o l l e c t e d and  t h e a v e r a g e number of p a g e s c o v e r e d  was  calculated.  Teachers  covered  more  low a c h i e v e m e n t  pages (0.7).  p e r day  produced  (1.1)  than  high  content  December)  was  who  low  per  day  achievement  t e a c h e r s who  produced  1 33  Barr reading  (1974) i n v e s t i g a t e d t h e  achievement  of  grade  e f f e c t of  one  students.  v a r i a b l e s were p e r c e n t a g e o f w o r d s l e a r n e d introduced,  general  word r e c o g n i t i o n  Range V o c a b u l a r y T e s t and McGinitie,  1965).  differentially word  paced at  learning  and  differentially  facilitated All  low  learning  that  relative  rates,  high,  words  the  or  and  (Gates were  level  than  for  for  those  paced  than a slower,  and  of  classes  average, a b i l i t y  p u p i l s were p a c e d s l o w l y  Wide  that  r a t e s , mean  a f a s t e r , rather  in  to  in classes  higher  the  dependent  as m e a s u r e d by  high  were  slower  Generally  ability  revealed  variance  The  on  comprehension score  relatively  paced at  homogeneously.  a reading  Analysis  pacing  pace  pupils.  achievement  was  low. Speed the  of  c o n t r o l of a t e a c h e r .  (1976)  examined  instruction  on  levels.  defined  as  answered  the  the  A  of  dependent  number of new per  instruction)  pacing the  demonstrated conditions.  had more  no  a  group.  difference  and  the  variable  self-paced  grade  was  The  learning  students;  and rate,  information  rate variance  of  the  authors  r a t e was  the  of  self-paced  concluded  e f f e c t on lower  ten  learning  Group l e a r n i n g The  under  Westbury  t e a c h e r - p a c e d and  deleterious  able  Arlin  l e s s than that  l o w e r u n d e r t e a c h e r management.  s c o r e s of  by  c o n c e p t s of d i s c r e t e  hour.  t e a c h e r - p a c e d g r o u p was  teacher  n e c e s s a r i l y a l w a y s be  study  effect  The  correctly  (programed  not  achievement i n Science at  eleven  the  c o v e r a g e may  also that  achievement  ability  students  i n achievement under e i t h e r  pacing  1 34  In  their discussion Arlin  and Westbury  t h a t t e a c h e r p a c i n g had a l e v e l i n g limiting  that  adapted  Similarly,  achievement  to  the  Dahllof  needs  (1971)  a steering criterion S t e e r i n g Group Dahllof instruction Furthermore,  he  of  and  lower  ability  Lundgren  the  instruction  t o t h e needs  hypothesised  the  progress  argued  necessary  the  that  that  made there  teachers  by  their  tenth  instruction and  criterion  the  Thus, to  twenty-fifth  In e f f e c t ,  these  group f o r c u r r i c u l a r  needed t o e n a b l e  these  students t o reach  of  will  reduce  achievement  the  denied  exposure  needs  of  that pupils  p e r c e n t i l e of the students a c t as  satisfactory  The t i m e levels  f o r t h e mastery  s t u d e n t s may  depressed.  Some c o n f i r m a t i o n o f D a h l l o f s h y p o t h e s i s t h a t p a c e i s geared  of  Consequently, the  a c h i e v e m e n t l e v e l o f t h e c l a s s may be a r t i f i c i a l l y  instruction  a  for learning.  The more c a p a b l e  to curriculum content.  class  he p r o p o s e d  the time a v a i l a b l e  a l i m i t e d number o f o b j e c t i v e s .  t o begin  the  decisions.  C o v e r a g e o f t h e m a t e r i a l may be s a c r i f i c e d  be  of  adapt pupils.  i s a tendency  prerequisites.  performance d i s t r i b u t i o n . steering  of  Hypothesis  teachers adjust their between  students.  (1972) c l a i m e d t h a t  t e a c h i n g a new u n i t o f work when t h e m a j o r i t y have  They  group.  (1971)  to  by  t h e t e a c h e r s a p p e a r e d t o s e t a p a c e t h a t was  t e a c h e r s a d j u s t t h e pace of t h e i r  The  on  suggested  the opportunity t o learn of the abler students.  maintained better  effect  (1976)  of  t o t h e s t u d e n t s between t h e t e n t h and  1 35  t h e t w e n t y - f i f t h p e r c e n t i l e s was Lundgren  p r o v i d e d by L u n d g r e n  i n v e s t i g a t e d t h e r o l e p l a y e d by t h e s t u d e n t s  group i n pedagogic communication. r e c i p i e n t s of  more  teacher  An leveling  effect  of t e a c h e r  artificial  traditional  According  to  original  as  Bloom,  i n n a t u r e and  and  also  differences  (Arlin,  1979).  order  to  is  the  pace  the  s t e e r i n g group performance determining  Under constant:  exacerbation heterogeneity  teacher  Class-paced  pacing  ability  instruction.  needs  rates  within  is the  of  students, a  amongst  may  learners be  c h i l d r e n as a s t e e r i n g group T h i s may  result  tenable, class  the d e l e t e r i o u s consequences  i n the  of p a c e n e c e s s a r y  o f s t u d e n t s of l o w e r  hypothesis  of  decisions  forms of s c h o o l i n g  similarities  l e a r n e r s b e i n g h e l d b a c k by t h e s l o w n e s s accommodate  perpetuate  I n o t h e r w o r d s , homogeneous a c h i e v e m e n t may  a f u n c t i o n of u s i n g lower  the  individual differences.  g o v e r n e d by a s t e e r i n g g r o u p o f l o w e r a b i l i t y  seen as c r e a t i n g a r t i f i c i a l  they  students.  increased  However, i f  c o n t r a r y p o s i t i o n emerges.  the  group i s the  for learning i s held  outcome and  that  functions to  between  a f u n c t i o n of the  achievement v a r i a n c e .  in  t h a t t h e y were  B l o o m (1968) a r g u e d t h a t  differences  varies  in this  students.  pace.  o r g a n i z a t i o n , time  achievement  be  found  i s s u e r e l a t e d to the s t e e r i n g c r i t e r i o n  s c h o o l system i s e l i t i s t  are  He  questions  r e s p o n d e d more o f t e n t h a n o t h e r  the  (1972).  ability.  then may  be for  the  fast to  I f the  range  of  important  in  higher  ability  students. Apart  from  the  investigations  by D a h l l o f (1971)  and  1 36  Lundgren  (1972),  possible of  instruction.  students  If  will  to  be  keep  a  teacher  increased,  The  increase  in  Faster  at  the  paces  but  addressed  to  the  c o n d i t i o n s on  pace  quickly,  it  pacing  expense  group nature variance  heterogeneity (Evertson,  up.  but  variance.  of  is  unlikely  Sanford  and  may of  which  increased  is  achievement  but  reduce  increased  problems  suggests that teachers of d e c r e a s i n g  who  the negative  with  per  day  Beckerman in  period.  These  i n c l u d e d an variable  In  estimate  was  of how  Barr  to a student  r a t e " , the  mean  to  avoid  the  It also  h a v e f o u n d ways pace.  in  number of  ways. pages  (1974) measured a  on how  Arlin  much was  and  This analysis  been m e a s u r e d i n s e v e r a l  (1978) measured the  contrast  "learning  decrease  faster pacing.  studies concentrated  introduced.  teachers  Pace  arithmetic.  number o f w o r d s i n t r o d u c e d  the  curtailed  c o n s e q u e n c e s of a f a s t  i n s t r u c t i o n has  Good, Grouws and  may  pace q u i c k l y l i k e l y  Measurement o f Pace of  on  increased  if  be  reduced i n order  associated  mean  achievement  Conversely,  Slower pacing  be  be  i n c r e a s e d management p r o b l e m s  achievement v a r i a n c e .  s u g g e s t s t h a t c o v e r a g e may  will  tolerable;  Emmer, 1 9 8 1 ) .  reduced.  that a l l  produce higher  s l o w l y , c o v e r a g e of t h e c u r r i c u l u m w i l l  covered  curriculum  schooling places a l i m i t  i s associated with  achievement thereby  was  been  i n a c l a s s which i s heterogeneous i n a b i l i t y  achievement  pace  a t t e n t i o n has  c o n s t r a i n i n g e f f e c t s of c l a s s r o o m  coverage  able  little  and  learned.  specified much new Westbury Their  number o f new  the time  material (1976) dependent  concepts  of  1 37  d i s c r e t e u n i t s of The  former  measures  c o v e r e d ; the an  latter  assessment  learned  these  a l l  comparable  the  reasonable  the  level  of  of  pace  presented  i n the  difficulty. of  " The  cover the  assumption  levels  e q u a t e number o f p a g e s c o v e r e d of p a g e s c o v e r e d following  the  becomes  matched r e a d i n g Therefore, a  reader,  books t o the  i n s p i t e of  the  f o r each student.  with  easier  book and  I t was  the  is  How  of the  in  of  a r e we  to  number  students.  w i t h the  a n a l o g y may  of  subjective  words, the poor  of  the  teachers  or d i f f i c u l t y  cover  An  when  study,  a s i m i l a r degree of  number o f p a g e s .  do  books  with  In t h i s  amounts  same  if  discrepant  book l i k e l y h a v e t o e x p e n d c o m p a r a b l e the  of  eventually  assumed t h a t  good r e a d e r  a  probably  reading  ability  In other  i s of  i n most e l e m e n t a r y  objective easiness  e a c h book p r e s e n t e d  assumption  e a s i e r reader  reading  index  questionable  common.  i n an  adopted.  difficulty the  is  to  assumption  students  i n a more d i f f i c u l t b o o k ?  r a t i o n a l e was  amount  same m a t e r i a l ; e v e n  This problem surfaces  difficulty  includes  studies  information  c l a s s r o o m s where t h e p r a c t i c e o f a s s i g n i n g differential  it  The  using m a t e r i a l which i s o b v i o u s l y  terms of d i f f i c u l t y .  quantity  attempts  the m a t e r i a l .  units  This  are  of  e a s i e r than others  same work.  hour.  coverage because t o t a l  measures  across  are  per  measure.  when a l l s t u d e n t s  pages  students  of  material  level  comparability  some  i n the  the d i f f i c u l t y  that  correctly  of p a c e a r e p u r e l y m e a s u r e s o f  quality-  i s included  directly  answered  i s more s o p h i s t i c a t e d i n t h a t  of  None of  is  information  reader  difficult energy  be  drawn  to to  1 38  horseracing. additional thought  which  weights  as  h a v e won  a  the  question same  handicapped  handicap.  discussed. measure  number  of  pages,  limitation  I n one  classroom in  t h e y were s i l l y " The  it  Teacher  remaining  remains  book.  than  may  The  will  he  the  non  the  does  a  merely  not  much was  be  difficult  to  s t o r i e s were  not  o u t some s t o r i e s the  "because  children  teachers covered  liked  the s t o r i e s i n  p o s s i b l e t o e s t i m a t e t h e i r pace w i t h  purely  have  o r how  extremely  5 left  take  However,  measure well  number  of  pages  o f q u a n t i t y and d o e s  the  read  a d d i t i o n a l work on t h e s t o r i e s .  coverage  more,  because  four  i n c l u d e an e s t i m a t e of how  study  or  was  a r e a s o n a b l e degree of a c c u r a c y .  Children  harder  and d i d o t h e r s " b e c a u s e  s e q u e n c e t h e r e f o r e i t was  covered  a  be  of t h e d a t a on p a c e n e e d s t o  reading  i n sequence.  them".  of  carry  good r e a d e r may  t h a t even w i t h t h e h a n d i c a p  other  coverage  covered  is  The  race  student.  One  this  in a previous  o f as c a r r y i n g t h e h a n d i c a p  interesting cover  Horses  stories  the  The  pages  were or  not  covered. have  done  e s t i m a t e of pace used  i n t o account  the thoroughness  in of  learned.  Procedure D u r i n g each v i s i t c h i l d r e n were d o i n g and was was  recorded.  In  a r e c o r d was  made  of  the  t h e page number of t h e t e x t b o o k  r e a d i n g the t o t a l  number of p a g e s  d i v i d e d by t h e number of d a y s b e t w e e n t h e f i r s t  observation  to  pages c o v e r e d per  yield day.  work  an  estimate  of t h e a v e r a g e  the  i n use covered  and  last  number o f  1 39  The e s t i m a t e o f p a c e i n a r i t h m e t i c difficult assigned  as  teachers  teacher-made  seatwork.  to  determine  P a c e was e s t i m a t e d textbook  exercises  the  or  commercially  of  each  textbook.  on  In  which u n i t  by t o t a l l i n g unit  somewhat  of t h e l e s s o n and this  way  t h e c l a s s was  t h e number  completed,  produced  of  i t  pages  and d i v i d i n g  in  observation.  one  recorded  for  instruction  was  each  a r i t h m e t i c , b e c a u s e even i n t h e two c l a s s e s (4 had  groups i n a r i t h m e t i c , the c h i l d r e n  assignments,  or  slightly  modified  the  t h i s by t h e  and l a s t  of  was  working.  number o f d a y s b e t w e e n t h e f i r s t pace  more  not a l w a y s use t h e t e x t b o o k , but  A r e c o r d was made o f t h e c o n t e n t  t h i s was m a t c h e d w i t h possible  did  was  Only  class in  and  5)  which  f r e q u e n t l y d i d t h e same versions  of  the  same  assignments. P a c e i n s p e l l i n g was somewhat e a s i e r t o e s t i m a t e . of t h e t e a c h e r s u s e d t h e same s p e l l i n g u n i t p e r week, w h i l e t h e words  p e r week.  fifth  Consequently,  book a n d i n t r o d u c e d one  teacher  introduced  t h e number o f w o r d s  was d i v i d e d by t h e number o f d a y s b e t w e e n t h e last  Four  ten  new  introduced  first  and  the  reported  that  observation.  Results Pace i n Reading. they covered the  of  the teachers  one t o two s t o r i e s p e r week, a n d  same number o f s t o r i e s w i t h a l l o f t h e i r  2 estimated Three  Four  t h a t she c o v e r e d  of the teachers  two t o t h r e e  that  they  groups.  stories  did  Teacher  per  week.  ( 1 , 4 a n d 5) r e p o r t e d t h a t t h e c h i l d r e n  1 40  would p r o g r e s s they do  through  a n t i c i p a t e d the slow  it.more  slowly.  groups t o f i n i s h Pace The  t h e same s e q u e n c e o f r e a d e r s , b u t group would cover  None o f t h e t e a c h e r s  four  expected  of i n s t r u c t i o n  i n reading  classrooms,  maintained  covered other  because  p e r day  this  been three  by  Teacher  2.  At t h e b e g i n n i n g  room c o v e r e d  groups i n other identified  more t h a n  rooms. as  had  received  assistance  teacher.  In  is  The  this  of the year  t w i c e a s many  reported  8. for  (discussed  fastest  c l a s s both  pace groups  g r o u p s i n any o f t h e the lowest  group i n  pages  the  as  top  Y e t t h e s i x c h i l d r e n i n t h i s group had having  r e a d i n g problems, and u n t i l  remedial  teaching  from  M o s t were r e a d i n g a t g r a d e  m e a s u r e d by t h e G a t e s M c G i n i t i e r e a d i n g of grade two.  slow  i n Table  of the d i f f i c u l t y  more p a g e s p e r d a y t h a n a n y o t h e r  rooms.  their  i s reported  p r e v i o u s l y ) o f e s t i m a t i n g p a c e i n C l a s s 5. was  l e s s m a t e r i a l and  the c u r r i c u l u m .  a v e r a g e number o f p a g e s c o v e r e d  only  that  a  grade  learning  1.6 l e v e l a s  test given at the  end  141  Table  8  Pace i n Reading A v e r a g e Number of P a g e s C o v e r e d p e r  Day  Group 1  Class 1  2  3  1 .65 (3)  4.04 (2) 1 .48 (3)  4.33  (3)  5.36 (2) 1 .75 (3)  3  1 .44 (3)  1 .44 (3)  4  1 .69 (3)  1 .47 (3)  2  Note Grade l e v e l  of the reader  Similarly more p a g e s p e r also  more  this  appeared  revealed  group not o n l y  the top group i n the  same  t h a n t h e t o p g r o u p s i n c l a s s e s 3 and  that  somewhat these  anomalous.  teachers  (1 and  4.  Further  investigation  2) managed t o have  reading  level. teachers s t a r t e d the lower  group c h i l d r e n  e a s i e r b o o k s a t t h e b e g i n n i n g of t h e y e a r . group  S e p t e m b e r , and  began had  reading the  f i n i s h e d by  first  early  In  t o p g r o u p cover.ed  139  pages.  the r e g u l a r grade t h r e e r e a d e r ) .  November.  her  i n t e n t i o n was  (The The  Class  lower easier  reading 2,  the  r e a d e r o f g r a d e two  e a r l y p a r t of the y e a r , the slow group c o v e r e d the  but  Initially  c h i l d r e n c o v e r more p a g e s by u s i n g b o o k s a t an  second  covered  room,  ability  Both  (2)  i s enclosed i n parentheses  i n C l a s s 1 the second  day t h a n  1 .66  During  251  in the  pages w h i l e  t o p g r o u p were r e a d i n g  teacher  indicated  t o have the s l o w e r group c o v e r  that  t h e work a t a  1 42  faster lot  pace  than  t h e t o p group because these c h i l d r e n had a  o f c a t c h i n g up t o d o .  w h i l e t h e y were r e a d i n g covered  an  average  During  the  of  the e a r l i e r  easier  5.36  p a r t of t h e year  reader,  pages  the  low  group  p e r day compared t o t h e  a v e r a g e o f t h e t o p g r o u p o f 4.33 p a g e s p e r d a y . H o w e v e r , when they  finally  transferred to the regular  grade  t h e a v e r a g e d r o p p e d t o 1.75 p a g e s p e r d a y . even  i n t h e grade three reader  were s t i l l in  1 adopted  a similar  g r o u p o u t on a r e a d e r w h i c h  grade two.  lower a c h i e v i n g c h i l d r e n  strategy. i susually  grade three reader When  She s t a r t e d h e r read a t t h e end  transferred  second  76  to the  t h e a v e r a g e p a c e d r o p p e d t o 1.48 p a g e s  t h e second  group f i n a l l y  pages  group t r a i l e d  of t h i s behind  reader.  per  began t h e new r e a d e r , i t  was t h e b e g i n n i n g o f November, a n d t h e t o p g r o u p covered  children  I n t h i s e a s i e r book t h e c h i l d r e n were c o v e r i n g  4.04 p a g e s p e r d a y . When t h e y were f i n a l l y  day.  I t i s notable that  rooms.  Teacher  of  reader,  c o v e r i n g more p a g e s t h a n h i g h e r a c h i e v i n g  the other  second  these  three  had  already  As m i g h t be e x p e c t e d , t h e  the f i r s t  g r o u p a n d when t h e f i n a l  o b s e r v a t i o n was made i n l a t e December 80 p a g e s s t i l l  separated  t h e two g r o u p s . In all  C l a s s 3, t h e p a c e o f i n s t r u c t i o n was  students.  In  this  reader, but the teacher As of  both  3  the  instructed  children  same f o r  u s e d t h e same  t h e two g r o u p s  separately.  g r o u p s r e a d t h e same s t o r i e s , a t t h e same t i m e ,  i n s t r u c t i o n was  Class  room,  the  had  homogeneous  rather  than  t h e s l o w e s t pace of i n s t r u c t i o n  pace  differentiated. (1.44 pages p e r  1 43  day). Pace i n A r i t h m e t i c . Table  9.  Teacher 2 the f a s t e r pacer  f a s t e s t pacer is  even  than  The p a c e o f 1.65  that  the  maintained  pages  Beckerman  account  i n these e s t i m a t e s but i t i s i n t e r e s t i n g  problem  pace  (advanced  multiplication).  of  difficulty  (1.65) unit  level  on  place  value  The s l o w e s t p a c e  and  (.75)  introduced  .85  2  1 .65  3  .91  4  1 .09  5  .75  the  T h r e e o f them one  difficult unit  on  9  1  Pace i n S p e l l i n g .  spelling.  a  that  Day  # of pages  Class  of  t o note  into  was a l s o o b t a i n e d on  Pace i n A r i t h m e t i c A v e r a g e Number o f P a g e s C o v e r e d p e r  Four  study  unit.  Table  10.  In  i s not taken  was o b t a i n e d on t h e most  t h e most a d v a n c e d p l a c e v a l u e  Table  study.  i n t h e same  The  units  day  s l o w e s t p a c e o f .75 p a g e s p e r day i s c o m p a r a b l e  (.7).  fastest  per  by t h e h i g h a c h i e v i n g  the pace of the lower a c h i e v i n g t e a c h e r s  the  in  i n r e a d i n g , was a l s o t h e  ( 1 . 1 ) i n t h e Good, Grouws a n d  contrast to  in arithmetic.  faster  teachers  Pace i n a r i t h m e t i c i s r e c o r d e d  Pace i n  spelling  teachers (Teachers  u n i t p e r week.  used 2,  4  is  displayed  in  t h e same s e r i e s i n and  5)  generally  T e a c h e r s 2 and 4, t h e  fastest  1 44  pacers i n s p e l l i n g , covered a l l Teacher June.  5 had o n l y  her  own  Hallowe'em,  lists  of  Thanksgiving  but i n t r o d u c e d  different to  times.  be c o v e r i n g  c a u g h t up. the  new  spelling  spelling  child  contributed  31 by t h e b e g i n n i n g o f  words:  for  i n t h e book example,  at with  T e a c h e r 3 a l s o u s e d t h e same  i t to different  groups of c h i l d r e n  Although the second group appeared  at  initially  than the t o p group, they never  1 f o l l o w e d h e r own p r o g r a m a n d i n t r o d u c e d  a week.  the  D u r i n g t h e f o l l o w up v i s i t  i t became program.  apparent  selected  an  that  i n June  the  a s we've c o v e r e d a l l  error  i t to the c l a s s l i s t  from  their  f o r t h e week.  own  ten  i n the  students  The c h i l d r e n were i n s t r u c t e d  y o u r e r r o r s t o make up a l i s t Each  but  g r o u p one h a d c o v e r e d 27 u n i t s a n d g r o u p t w o , 23  lesson  completed  June  and C h r i s t m a s words a s s o c i a t e d  t h e words f a s t e r  Teacher  words  by  A t t h e end o f t h e y e a r n e i t h e r g r o u p s h a d f i n i s h e d  program;  units.  units  interspersed the u n i t s  t h e s e o c c a s i o n s were i n t r o d u c e d . program,  36  f i n i s h e d up t o u n i t  Teacher 5 f r e q u e n t l y  with  the  had  t o "Use  our words". work  and  1 45  Table  10  Pace i n S p e l l i n g A v e r a g e Number o f Words C o v e r e d p e r Class  # of  pages  1  1 .45  2  2.57  3  Group  Day  1  1.47  2  2.45  4  2.57  5  1 .98  Discussion These instruction between  data in  the  considered pacer.  suggest  reading,  five  that  variability  arithmetic  classes.  When  and the  the  three  established  rooms the  questionable. book,  (1,  the  degree  1.69  of  differential  differentiated  per  day  reading a l e v e l  s e v e n book,  read  1.47  unlikely  that  this  covered.  The  represents  expectation relative  f o l l o w up v i s i t  are  fastest  while  clearly  pacing  real  i s that these  t o each o t h e r  the lower  pages per  day.  differences groups would  for  pacing.  In C l a s s 4 the top group, reading a l e v e l  covered  order  as  subjects  2 and 4) where g r o u p s were  pages  their  three  of  existed  a d o p t e d some f o r m o f g r o u p i n g  r e a d i n g which would appear t o f a c i l i t a t e In  pace  spelling  s i m u l t a n e o u s l y , T e a c h e r 2 emerges  A l l of the t e a c h e r s  in  is eight  group, It  is  i n amount maintain  a t t h e end o f t h e y e a r .  i n June r e v e a l e d t h a t each group f i n i s h e d  A one  1 46  reader  and  would  respectively  of  within  1 and 2 a l l o w  coverage each  difficulty  proceeding  to  in  b e c a u s e t h e c h i l d r e n i n g r o u p s one and  two  eventually was  read  constant  the  there  day).  However  in  second  group  anticipated  the year  having  and  variance  (1.65  the  teacher  1.48  day  pages per day.  while  I t might  groups  in  achievement in Class  found  The p o s i t i v e  Class  a l l o w s the p r e d i c t i o n t h a t  of  slowing  top  would  intended  achieve  this  t o t r a n s f e r t h i s group  three  readers  after  over  up  the  top  t h i s teacher's  onto  a  Christmas.  of  c h i l d r e n therefore covered  but  t h e y were a l l a t t h e g r a d e t h r e e  most  of  1  three  by  achievement  the  year  but  group. plan  "harder"  the  It is  for  her  g o a l ; she i n d i c a t e d t h a t  she  series  of  A f o l l o w up v i s i t  in  J u n e r e v e a l e d t h a t she had c a r r i e d o u t h e r p l a n .  In s p i t e of g r o u p i n g  be  between  increase i n Class 2 unless  t o s p e c u l a t e whether  group  relationship  1 would remain c o n s t a n t  ways  is  r e a d a c o m p a r a b l e amount b u t t h a t  interesting  that  to  difference  pages per  i n t h e two  t h a t achievement v a r i a n c e would  grade  4.33  Once  l i t t l e difference 1  2  book.  w o u l d be a g r e a t d i f f e r e n c e b e t w e e n t h e amounts r e a d  t h e two g r o u p s i n C l a s s 2. pace  was  Class  1.75  that the students  would f i n i s h there  covered  same  Class  c o n s i d e r a b l e ; the top group covered the  nine  comparison  room level  per  e i g h t and  f o r some means o f  between t h e pace of e i t h e r g r o u p i n pages  levels  i n the f o l l o w i n g year.  Classes rate  be  readers  Thi