Dr. Frank Cyr states forcefully that multiple classes and small group learning techniques form the basic pattern for the small school design of the future. In fact, he goes further and posits all other experimental techniques in the CAP to be but means to this end. Dr. Cyr elaborates upon this when discussing purposes:

The purpose of this Project (CAP) is to develop a basic reorganization of small school design which will increase the variety and quality of educational opportunities for the learners through the uses of multiple classes and small group learning techniques.

Dr. Cyr's thesis must legitimately be considered alongside a question raised by Dr. Harry Passow, educational psychologist from Teachers College, when speaking at the third annual RMAP workshop last June. Referring to all new aids and techniques of learning, Dr. Passow suggested the following criterion as most important when examining them: "Do they affect learning favorably, and do they improve learning?"

techniques..."

1

The Reality

After three years of experimentation with multiple classes in the CAP and the RMAP, it seems far too early for anyone to hazard more than an opinion as to the success of this technique. Yet there is a greater conflict of opinion over this technique than over any other single one described in this publication.

Its theoretical potential for small schools is seldom questioned. Its overall effectiveness to date has been questioned-often by the most conscientious and sincere teachers of multiple classes. Others have endorsed it enthusiastically. To attempt such instruction at all requires versatile, creative, intelligent and hard-working teachers, backed up by much electronic equipment and the time and knowledge to use it.

In all 23 schools which comprise the CAP, only 8 percent of the total course offerings in 1959-60 were through multiple classes. Nearly all subject fields were represented. That some of these multiple class situations have worked well is "indisputable"-except that there is little objective evidence to prove it. Several have apparently not worked well, but again there is no objective evidence.

Obviously, sound criteria and experimental control groups have been lacking. However, multiple class adherents point to the scores on standardized achievement tests, made by students from multiple classes, and say these students have done "as well as" other students in past years. This is partial evidence, certainly.

But some teachers of multiple classes feel that even the most signal gains of such combinations have been won at an unjustified human cost. The toll of the extra work load on a conscientious, devoted teacher can be excessive. Preparing for 8 or 9 courses daily in some multiple combination, rather than the typical 5 or 6, is not an assignment to be undertaken lightly. Even conducting three classes during one hour for three small groups is more demanding than conducting one class, to say the least.

This point was one of several commented upon by special observation teams from Colorado State College at Greeley, who acted as consultants with the Colorado State Department of Education when they visited RMAP schools in the spring of 1959. Concluding their comments, they stated:

Most teachers maintain that the multiple classes demand more time for planning, preparation, and evaluation than do single classes. This increased time ranged, in their estimates, from one and one-half to two times that for the single classes.

Of course, no two multiple class situations are the same. The variable factors of the number enrolled, the relationships of the multiple courses, the availability of electronic devices, and the time to prepare for the classes are all vital considerations.

School administrators in both the CAP and the RMAP are fully aware of these factors and their importance. Many teachers have designed certain projects related to multiple classes and have been paid for an extra month to develop their plans during the summer. Some are paid extra to attend Saturday workshops during the school year.

But the empirical evidence suggests that the really promising results have been achieved by truly outstanding teachers because they are outstanding teachers-not because of multiple classes. Bright, responsible students have often helped immeasurably. It is perhaps interesting to note that several of the most efficient teachers of multiple classes in both the CAP and RMAP have resigned to take teaching positions which pay better salaries in schools outside the projects. Conflicting reasons for their leaving have been suggested. The most simple explanation, unrelated to multiple classes, may be that the teachers needed a higher salary.

Perhaps it is unfortunate that the mutually exclusive techniques of multiple classes and small group methods of learning have been made the dual bases of the rationale for improving the instructional programs of small schools.

Multiple classes can never work without the use of small group learning techniques, but the latter can be applied to any learning situation. That such techniques have not been applied too frequently in recent years has been due in large part to our overcrowded classrooms and to the teachers' understandable decision to lecture to the norm group.

Certainly experimentation with small group techniques of learning in the CAP and RMAP constitutes one of the most exciting phases of the work of these projects. Although the theory of small group instruction is being given increased attention in educational literature, it remains an imprecisely defined area of instructional methodology.

For definitive statements on the use of these techniques and a listing of the most recent writings in this area, contact:

Dr. Phil Lange
Teachers College

Columbia University
New York 27, N.Y.

Many small high school administrators seem to feel that if courses are to be added to the curriculum, multiple classes serve as the only alternative. These courses are usually the specialized or advanced courses needed by juniors and seniors planning on college or a particular vocation.

Perhaps this is not the only alternative; but where it is considered to be, multiple classes will fill the need best for courses where enrollments are small, where enthusiastic and competent teachers are carefully selected and given adequate compensations, and where the subject matter for two classes taught simultaneously is closely related. The desirability of using closely related subject matter for multiple class situations cannot be to strongly urged. Such statements as the following, made by a former high school teacher in the CAP and quoted in a national magazine, would be difficult to defend and might lead to serious questioning of the total multiple class concept:

same time."

We have never tried such unrelated subjects as language and math, but if the teacher had the proper materials, there would be no reason why she couldn't do a bang-up job. In fact, it is possible that with the proper teaching aids, a skillful teacher who does not qualify in a particular subject might still be able to create an atmosphere, in a multiple class, that would make for good learning. [Italics added.]

Of course, not all so-called multiple classes in the CAP and RMAP are actually multiple courses in the sense that two or more groups of students are in a room together. Instead, it is quite common to find in these projects a group of students studying one course in a room alongside two other students "enrolled" in two separate courses. In fact, one school actually had an arrangement in an art period where twelve students were engaged independently on various aspects of art via the individual project method. This was referred to as a multiple class situation; students were given credit for different art courses; so, by this school's definition of the term, there were twelve "classes" in progress simultaneously.

Actually, such instruction on an individual project basis is quite common in certain curricular areas in many of our high schools and can scarcely be called a multiple class situation.

If the concept of multiple classes based on small group learning techniques (not a tutorial basis) is to be judged on its merit, it would seem that no less than a minimum of three students should be enrolled in each "class." A more typical multiple class situation would be a dozen ninth graders studying elementary algebra and an approximately equal number studying general math. With the development of adequate criteria and a control group on a matched basis, a more objective decision could be reached regarding the success of students in the multiple class setting.

Finally, the advocates of multiple classes need to consider fully the impact of one further contemporary movement in our schools. It is purely coincidental that the organized experiment of multiple classes was begun one month prior to the launching of Sputnik I. This event focused our attention upon some neglected aspects of American education and no doubt hastened the introduction of certain changes and emphases in the curriculum.

One result has been to place a renewed emphasis on the compartmentalization of subjects and the specialized training of teachers in distinct subject matter areas. For better or for worse-and it is not our purpose here to debate this complex problem-that is the trend in the 1960-61 school year.