Long‐term Effects of a Staff Development Programme on Effective Instruction and Classroom Management for Teachers in Multigrade Classes

Abstract

This study describes the long-term effects of a staff development programme based on selected findings from teaching effectiveness research in schools with multigrade or mixed-age classes. The short-term effects of this programme were examined in two studies directed at schools with multigrade classes. The first improvement study was conducted in the school year 1986/87; the second improvement study was conducted in 1989/90. In the latter study, the effects of coaching in addition to participation in the staff development programme were also evaluated. In the school year 1992/93, a retention or follow-up study was conducted. A quasi-experimental, treatment-control group design was used to test the long-term effects of the programme 'Dealing with multigrade classes' and the effects of coaching. Based on pre-and post-training classroom observations, the follow-up study revealed a significant treatment effect for the time-on-task levels of the pupils in the multigrade classes and for the instructional and classroom management skills of the teachers. No significant differences were found between the coached and uncoached teachers and between the teachers who followed the programme either 2 or 5 years ago. No significant differences were found between the post-test and the retention test. This suggests that the training results were quite stable. No indication of further growth in the executive control of the selected instructional and classroom management skills was found. No significant differences in achievement were found between the pupils in classes with trained teachers and the pupils in classes with untrained teachers.In this study the long-term effects of a school improvement programme directed at schools with multigrade classes are reported. In two previous improvement studies, we assessed the short-term effectiveness of the staff development programme for teachers in multigrade classes with respect to use of classroom time, instruction and classroom management. The training programme was inspired by the findings of our research into multigrade classes (Veenman et ah, 1987). The design of the training programme was guided by research into

Effects of Multigrade and Multi-Age Classes Reconsidered

“…Based on pretraining and posttraining classroom observation, these studies revealed a significant treatment effect for the time-on-task levels of the students in the multigrade classes and for the instructional and management skills of the teachers. However, no significant differences in achievement were found between the students in classes with trained multigrade teachers and the students in classes with untrained single-grade teachers (Roelofs, 1993;Roelofs, Raemaekers, & Veenman, 1991;Roelofs, Veenman, & Raemaekers, 1994;Veenman & Raemaekers, 1995).…”

“…Following this practice, four studies and one substudy excluded from the best-evidence synthesis were included in the meta-analysis. These were studies by Eames (1989) and MacDonald and Wurster (1974) that each involved only one experimental and one control teacher, training studies by Roelofs (1993) and Veenman and Raemaekers (1995), and the reading achievement part of a study by Hoen (1972) that involved incomparable samples. The data for the meta-analysis were further supplemented with three recent studies not mentioned in the best-evidence synthe sis: Pawluk (1992), Knuver (1993), and Doolaard (1996).…”

The Training of Coaching Skills: an implementation study

“…The students of coached teachers also showed greater levels of time on-task. No direct relation was found between coaching and student achievement, however (Veenman & Raemaekers, 1995).…”

Toward a Theory of Combination Classes

“…Each of these explanations fall short of giving combination class teachers credit for handling, by all accounts, a highly complex and demanding learning environment that involves a wide range of students, two curriculums, two instructional presentations, two evaluation systems, and numerous scheduling and classroom management problems. Finally, we wonder just how much training combination teachers would need to improve their student achievement, given that an apparently well-developed training program used by Veenman and his colleagues (Roelofs, 1993;Roelofs, Raemaekers, & Veenman, 1991;Roelofs, Veenman, & Raemaekers, 1994;Veenman & Raemaekers, 1995) did not raise achievement above that of single-grade classes with untrained teachers.…”