Continuous Progress Approach

This article provides an overview of the continuous progress approach including attributes, school practices, issues, concerns, and research. It emphasizes the identified attributes such as developmentally appropriate practices, multiage and mixed-ability grouping, professional teamwork, authentic assessment, qualitative reporting, and parental involvement found in a variety of educational settings. The continuous progress model is embedded as part of good teaching practices that encourage children to progress to the best of their potential allowing for differences at each current learning level. Continuous progress focuses on the redesigning of school programs to nurture the social, emotional, intellectual and physical developmental needs of all children using nongraded and multigraded classes or multiage groups, continuous progress, continuity, parental involvement, and cooperative learning to assist individual progress of students by eliminating graded classifications and expectations.

Keywords Alternative Assessment; Benchmark; Cooperative Learning; Continuity; Continuous Progress Approach; Heterogeneous; Mixed Age Grouping; Multiage Grouping; Multi-level Grouping; Nongraded; Standards

Overview

The daunting challenge in education today is closing the achievement gap. A school's restructuring process struggles with students who come to school with language, culture, ethnic, and learning differences. The ultimate goal of any school-wide program is to improve students' academic performance. The continuous progress approach is a reform initiative that demonstrates learning tasks designed for students' developmental stages to include the cognitive, emotional, social and physical elements that do not conform to grade level work. The continuous progress approach creates an alternative program with multiage or mixed grouping, continuity, families, cooperative learning, and process-oriented instruction. Children's individual growth on an intellectual, emotional, social and physical level addresses a child-centered approach on skill and content curricula. Schools' goals, objectives, and actions support children learning and the future needs of students. The continuous progress approach can be defined as grouping children of multi-age and ability levels together with maximizing teaching practices. The continuity of the approach allows children to stay with their age-related peers no matter whether or not they have met or exceeded pre-specified achievement expectations. Heins (2000) emphasized individualized curriculum so that teaching and learning objectives are responsive to each child's prior experiences and rates of progress, regardless of age.

Continuous progress is designed using a multi-age and multi-level framework organized around students' learning rather than specific grades, grade levels, and curriculum scope and sequence. The continuous framework accommodates individual progress rates, eliminating grade classifications and expectations. Students of different chronological ages are assigned to the same classroom. These classrooms will have students of an age range within two or more years and ability levels to include students who have been retained. The concept is that all students do not develop at the same rate. Students are no longer retained and teachers have the flexibility to make instructional modifications. Nye (1993) found that applying the continuous progress approach utilizing grouping children of various age and ability levels maximizes teaching and learning practices. Teachers use activities to include child interaction, experiential learning, and cooperative learning while children experience a continuous progression of cognitive and social skills at each individual rate. This prevents premature failure of meeting established benchmarks.

The continuous progress approach developed during the early 1900's, as a result of the one room schoolhouse concept. This evolved to open education, ungraded classrooms, multiage grouping, the whole language approach, and continuous progress approach. The use of these various concepts justified grounds that are effective means of raising academic achievement. During the past century, 20 or more children according to their ages have been grouped in one class with one teacher who teaches the same curriculum to all students. Many school districts continue to refine and develop the multi-age grouping. Goodlad and Anderson (1987) found that placing students in classrooms according to their chronological age within a given time to cover curricular expectations was detrimental to their academic, social, and psychological growth. Katz (1996) found that continuous progress programs allowed for the focus on individualized instruction that promoted teaching and learning objectives regardless of age, which was responsive to students’ previous learning experiences and progress rates. Children progress to their individual learning rates and development without being restricted to meet specific expectations. As a result, students grow and progress at their own pace.

A greater focus has been placed on early intervention efforts to restructure the educational system. Teachers commonly practice dividing students into small groups for short periods of time during the school day according to students' ability levels. Skills learned in various subject areas are organized in a hierarchical series covering all grades covered in the program. The curriculum recognizes that children learn better when they are placed in groups according to their developmental levels and materials that appropriately meet their individual needs. Students are individually challenged to continue their learning to the next level within the classroom. These students are not restricted specifically to grade level materials. Copeland (1998) found that a child's learning is affected when he or she is retained or forced to follow grade level constraints.

The continuous progress approach curriculum framework involves critical elements to include heterogeneous grouping, individual progress rates, small group instruction, and team teaching. This educational reform initiative included an organizational framework, grouping students across age and ability, team/cooperative teaching, core curriculum and cooperative learning. Students have an opportunity to practice knowledge and skills in a variety of capacities to include direct instruction and cooperative groups. Students work naturally at their own levels without being labeled or pulled out for remediation, or enrichment. Katz (1992) stated when children progress at their individual learning rates developing without being compelled to meet age-related academic expectations, the result is an alternative that is developmentally appropriate. In turn, teachers become more aware of the normal variability of childhood development stages that can occur within a single age group. This approach is slowly becoming an alternative to traditional school practices.

Continuous progress is grounded in research that supports child development and learning. Nye (1993) found that children's cognitive, social, and emotional abilities do not develop at the same age or at the same rate. Therefore, a student's progress does not conform to another child's developmental growth. The child's growth is measured by the individual child's developmental benchmarks. It provides the opportunities of a spiraled curriculum in which students benefit through individual, critical reactions to thematic units. The continuous progress approach leads to outcomes that improve children's attitudes toward school, fewer discipline problems, increased attendance, improved peer relations, and improved teachers' attitudes toward work. The goal of continuous progress approach is to eliminate competition by requiring high expectations of all children. The realization that children develop at various levels, using various patterns, and at different rates of progress, is not considered in the match to rigid grade level expectations and standards.

Hunter (1992) found that multiage, nongraded grouping, continuous progress, interdisciplinary curriculum and alternative assessment improve instruction in nongraded classrooms. Emphasis was placed on vertical team teaching, early intervention, and interdisciplinary curriculum connecting to life. A continuous progress approach affects students' attitudes toward school, readiness scores and mastery of subject matter. Continuous progress enhances multi-age classrooms using a child's learning needs, background, and experience to improve academic achievement.

This approach requires educators to restructure classrooms into multiple and flexible groups. Teachers take an active role in their personal learning and the development of the instructional model for continuous learning and development. Teachers deliver instruction in a variety of ways, including mix-age programs that allow for flexible learning arrangements and developmentally appropriate teaching processes for all students. This approach creates an active learning environment that encourages individual development and fosters the growth of staff and students providing opportunities for teamwork, leadership and creativity.

One critical element of the continuous progress approach is how students are placed in groups. Students are placed heterogeneously based on their developmental levels, ages, and abilities with the flexibility to change membership. These groups are not placed in grades or specific grade levels. Students make progress individually with small group experimental instruction, continuous progress, and cooperative learning strategies, whole language instruction and social development.

The continuous progress approach integrates the curriculum in a cyclical format. A relationship is developed between teachers, students and parents over a span of years rather than months. Cooperative learning strategies implemented within a continuous progress classroom provide a collaborative teaching and learning concept rather than a competitive learning environment.

Applications

According to Wassermann (2007), school wide continuous progress begins when schools demonstrate their successes and identify areas of improvement. The continuous progress approach includes strong leadership from administrators to protect the school from district and state requirements and a school system that is not afraid of autonomy in meeting academic standards. This approach does not provide the school with a beginning or end point. Children's academic achievement is always work in progress, continuously striving and adjusting to meet higher goals. The continuous progress approach draws from several measurement strategies. All assessment measures indicate accelerated growth for students in a total community.

Calkins (1992) stated continuous progress approach produces superior academic performance and children do better academically and with little decline in students' ability to cope with academic demands. Children are grouped for skills using materials appropriate to their needs. Comparisons of graded and nongraded classes using standardized achievement tests continue to favor nongraded classes. The continuous progress approach recognizes that each child learns best when he or she is developmentally ready. This approach groups students for language arts, reading, and math according to their skill level, using materials developmentally appropriate for their needs. Students are individually challenged to continue to the next learning level within their classroom. Students are not restricted to grade level materials.

Implementing the Continuous Progress Approach: Strategies

Cooperative Learning

Cooperative Learning is a strategy that teaches social and cognitive development skills. This strategy focuses on structured social interaction that attempts to further the development of social skills and a clarified understanding of academic behavior. In addition, it generates a constructive classroom environment and teaches students to work together effectively and positively as a group. Students build a sense of responsibility, self-discipline and confidence.

Developmentally Appropriate Curriculum

A developmentally appropriate curriculum groups its students in a flexible manner in order to ensure that participatory involvement is active and that knowledge is presented through interdisciplinary themes. Educators apply the best practices for what they know about students and how they learn. It uses the holistic approach to include social, cognitive, social and emotional development of the individual child. Students are taught and assessed according to their ability rather than age. McIntyre et. al., (1996) concluded that continuous progress approach is based on constructivists' theories to facilitate developmentally appropriate learning. It embraces a flexible curriculum that encompasses standards and integrated interdisciplinary units based on concepts. The school schedule is can be extended to year round to accommodate each child's learning style and pace. This provides many occasions for each child to achieve academic success through acceleration and enhancement.

The continuous progress approach is considered part of a nongraded, multi-age, multi-level program that continuously seeks to assess the relationship between teaching and learning.

Nongraded Programs

A nongraded curriculum is defined as a system in which students of varying ages and abilities are not divided by different curriculums or grade-levels. Students who participate in nongraded classes using the continuous progress model significantly outscore students from traditional classes. Nongraded programs have cognitive and social benefits for students and progressive practice benefits for teachers and school administrators. Nongraded programs refer to grouping children in nongraded classes while remaining in the same class with the same teacher for two years or more. The framework involves interaction, experimental learning and flexible small group participation allowing children to experience the continuous progress of learning. These children are no longer placed in specific grades based on age and ability, so children of different ages and abilities work together. Hoffman’s (2003)research on nongraded programs has furthered the understanding of achievement and affective gains. Children in nongraded groups usually achieve the same set of standards or higher than children involved in graded groups. Nongraded grouping generates academic achievement results that are oftentimes superior to the results developed by traditional graded structures.

Multi-Age Groups

Multi-age groups are designed to promote a comfortable atmosphere in which students can perform at their own developmental level. The system is structurally organized so that children of different ages and ability levels can work together. These grade levels range from two or more traditional grade levels taught by one teacher in the same classroom setting. These classes do not divide children or the curriculum into steps identified by a specific grade level. Children of different ages and grades are placed in the same classroom setting. The variety of teaching and learning maximize the various range of knowledge in the group. The multi-age classrooms allow children to construct meaningful knowledge by working with their peers and sharing learning experiences. Rathbone (1993) found that this framework enhanced education through a child-centered approach using specific teaching strategies. Children are not compared to their peers' academic achievement, but rather focus on their own overall progress.

Multi-Level Grouping

Multi-level grouping refers to students of various ages and ability levels mixed for educational purposes. The continuous progress model focuses on reading instruction based upon frequent assessment of children's skills. The restructuring of classes into multiple flexible groups provides opportunities for continuous learning and development. Multi-aged classrooms support each student's continuous progress based upon the child's experiences, background, learning needs, strengths and interests.

Professional Teamwork

Every person in the professional setting communicates and works toward meeting the needs of all children. Cross-grade-level placement in the core subjects using the continuous progress approach allows teachers to use a variety of approaches to help children. The instructional staff and student body are divided into various ranges consisting of three grade levels and teachers from various departments. This personalized instruction program provides increased opportunities for success through the continuous progress curriculum, and the integration of grade levels through various ranges. The professionals share ideas, provide support, and develop team activities. Teachers design tasks to give children more opportunities to practice. They also provide different opportunities to master concepts and skills. Teachers become actively involved as professionals within the school and school system while still maintaining their roles and responsibilities in the classroom. Teachers work together to set goals, determine methodology, and conduct ongoing research and assessment to meet the demands of their students. The team teaching and family-like atmosphere create a better learning environment.

Alternative & Authentic Assessment

Learner focused assessments respond to the student's performance level. Alternative assessment is used according to mastery of interim growth stages and outcome objectives. Students are encouraged to progress to the best of their abilities allowing for teacher flexibility and differences in each child's current learning level. Children advance at their own pace on a continuum progressing from easy to difficult material and from simple to complex strategies. Children continuously move through the system upon attainment of benchmark standards. Students work at their own pace through various sequences in each learning area. The content varies for the development of creative thinking, critical thinking and creative problem solving. Learning assessment focuses on core concepts using students' learning as the driver for curriculum and collaboration. The program uses diagnostic learner focused assessments to depict learning. Checklists, portfolios, teacher observations, and anecdotal notes determine student's progress. In addition, videos, conferences and reports to communicate authentic information are used. Alternative assessment allows students to be evaluated in innovative ways using the continuous progress model with integrated thematic instruction and cooperative learning. Authentic assessment measures children's academic performance and social/affective factors.

Inclusion Model

The inclusion model requires restructuring the classroom to implement a shared decision making structure, developing a learning curriculum and using portfolio assessment. The inclusion model provides for the individual needs of the learner. Students are assigned to groups based on students' interests, abilities, performance and other maturity factors, regardless of chronological age. The continuous progress approach promotes the inclusion model of exceptional students, allowing teachers of special programs to serve as consulting teachers. Children are exposed to opportunities for a unique sporadic growth, alternative placements, and full inclusion with all students eliminating the possibility of being retained.

Classroom Climate

The classroom climate is based on the transformation of a traditional classroom into a setting that meets the needs of all children. In a traditional classroom setting students have to meet the needs of the school. Children are placed in multi-age multi-ability classrooms. This program allows children to maximize on their individual potential and develop holistically instead of at divided intervals with only one dimension. The instructional practices address social, emotional, physical, and aesthetic and developmentally appropriate practices. The non-competitive nature of the classroom environment helps children to learn from their peers. The program enhances the continual academic growth of the students while allowing them to gain a better understanding of themselves and their surroundings. It creates a safe, nurturing, and challenging environment so that each child can expound upon his or her own capacity and ability to learn.

Qualitative Reporting

This type of reporting provides a regular individualized report that describes what the children learn, the techniques involved in teaching them, and what sort of individual accomplishments, interest, abilities, and attitudes were present during the teaching process. Qualitative reporting is effective in the continuous progress as it relates to the development of the whole child as he or she stands apart from other children of the same age or ability level. Qualitative reporting is based on the individual child's developmental and educational standards. This report can be given in various formats to include rubrics, checklists, conferences, anecdotal records and portfolios.

Parental Involvement

Parental Involvement in the continuous progress approach recognizes the role of a three-way partnership involving parent, student, and teacher. It requires commitment from staff, students and parents working together for the development of the child. Parents need opportunities to participate in all aspects of the continuous progress approach. Parents can contribute to helping children at home, volunteering in the classroom and participating on various committees or activities at school. The continuous involvement of parents allows for a continuous exchange of vital information. In addition, parents develop a partnership between themselves and the school. Building a relationship between teacher and parent promotes understanding and increases the success rate for students. Parents are afforded opportunities to be in and out of the classrooms, participate in scheduled school activities, discuss problems and concerns, and participate on fieldtrips.

Viewpoints

The continuous progress approach is not the panacea that will solve every problem in education. But when properly focused and implemented, the continuous progress approach is one alternative that schools can use to raise academic achievement, thereby increasing confidence among teachers, students, and the community regarding the effectiveness of public education. The success of the continuous progress approach is based on parental involvement, teacher commitment, skilled paraprofessionals and administrative support. Although multiage grouping is an effective educational strategy, it is not the only way that children can achieve. Schools need to provide developmentally appropriate strategies in all classrooms. Teachers become more reflective about their teaching practices when implementing the continuous progress approach. The curriculum must be modified in order to allow for many different activities that all children can participate in. Small multi-age groups create opportunities for students to work together as a whole in addition to capitalizing on their individual achievements (Katz, 1992).

Teachers have reported that through the implementation of a continuous progress approach, they experienced fewer classroom behavior problems. Students become self-regulating and help enforce classroom rules. In a classroom that uses the continuous progress approach, students experience more time learning and exposed to various learning modalities. Children progress at their own rate, making personal progress instead of limiting themselves to developing solely on the basis of grade-level structures.

However, there are risks to a continuous progress approach model. Younger children placed in mixed age grouping may become burdensome to older students, increasing the chance for the younger to become overwhelmed and feel incompetent. Teachers may also overlook older and more experienced students' need for challenge. Many educators and parents believe that children should be placed in a single grade or a single age classrooms to better meet their needs. Schools also have limited resources for teaching materials and training that help to advance the proficiency and achievement level of their students.

Terms & Concepts

Alternative Assessment: Students select their own work from combined work over a period of school years to demonstrate learning and improvement in content areas. Evidence of the learning process becomes an active demonstration of learning and knowledge of the student.

Benchmark: A standard to measure a skill for a specific task to provide impartial information that can be used to evaluate or compare student performance.

Child-Centered Approach: This approach provides stimulation that actively engages students to construct knowledge by exploring and interacting with individuals and materials in their environments. Students are encouraged to make their own decisions, be responsible, solve problems, and contribute to the classroom dynamic. Students make mistakes without fear of punishment, or failure to maximize cognitive abilities and self-esteem.

Cooperative Learning: Students interact in a structured heterogeneous group that encourages learning in the same group. It fosters collaborative learning by encouraging students to work together to acquire interdependence, accountability, interaction, self-assessment and collaborative skills.

Curriculum Framework: Curriculum framework is defined as a set of educational goals that students should achieve as the result of the curriculum. It provides a plan around programs to ensure students achieve learning outcomes. It identifies common learning outcomes for all students. It provides the knowledge base and skill set that students are expected to possess by the end of a designated time period.

Direct Instruction: This is an approach used to teach essential skills in various learning modalities to meet the individual needs of students maximizing the learning possibilities of each student.

Flexible Grouping: This is an approach where children of different ages, histories, and skill sets are grouped to meet instructional needs based on individualized goals, activities, and requirements.

Heterogeneous Grouping: This type of grouping involves placing students with diverse abilities, talents, and gifts into the same instructional group. These students' instructional levels include basic, intermediate and advanced abilities.

Inclusion: Students with special needs are placed in a classroom in which every effort is made to ensure students' academic needs are met.

Interdisciplinary Curriculum: The application of methodology and language from more than one discipline to examine a central theme, topic, problem, and issue.

Process-Oriented Instruction: This strategy provides students opportunities to learn and find answers effectively and positively in a group setting.

Bibliography

Calkins, T. (1992) Off the track: Children thrive in ungraded primary schools. School Administrator 49 , 8-133.

Charlesworth, R. (1989). Behind before they Start? Deciding how to deal with the risk of kindergarten failure. Young Children 44 , 5-13.

Chase, P., & Doan, J. (1994). Full circle: A new look at multiage education. Portsmouth, New Hampshire: Heinemann.

Cohen, L.M. (2011). Natural acceleration: Supporting creative trajectories. Roeper Review, 33, 218-227. Retrieved December 15, 2013, from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=65551414&site=ehost-live

Davenport, M. R. (1998). A legacy of learning and love: A multiage classroom. Primary Voices, 6, 19-35.

Edwards, P. A. (2004). Children's literacy development: Making it happen through school, family, and community involvement. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

Eisner, E. W. (1991). The enlightened eye. New York: Macmillan Publishing Co.

Feldman, J. & Tung, R. (2001). Using data-based inquiry and decision making to improve instruction. Educational Research Services Spectrum, 10-19.

Gerard, M. (2005). Bridging the gap: Towards an understanding of young children's thinking in multiage groups [Electronic version]. Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 19 , 243-250. Retrieved June 12, 2007 EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=16851387&site=ehost-live

Goodlad, J. I., & Anderson, R. H. (1987). The non-graded elementary school. New York: Teachers College Press.

Goodman, J. (1992). Elementary schooling for critical democracy. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.

Hall, B., & Hewitt-Gervais, C. (2000). The application of the children portfolios in primary-intermediate and self-contained multiage team classroom environments: Implications for instruction, learning and assessment. Applied Measurement in Education, 13 , 209-228. Retrieved June 15, 2007 from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete.

Harris, M. (1979). Cultural materialism. New York: Vintage Books.

Heins, E. D., Tichenor, M. S., Coggins, C. J., & Hutchinson, C. J. (2000). Multiage classrooms: Putting theory into practice. Contemporary Education, 71 , 30-35. Retrieved June 12, 2007 from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=4467694&site=ehost-live

Hoffman, J. (2003). Multi-aged teachers' beliefs and practices. Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 18 , 5-17.

Hunter, Madeline. 1992. How to change to a nongraded school. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Katz, L. G. (1992). Nongraded and mixed-age grouping in earlychildhood programs. Urbana, IL: ERIC Clearinghouse on Elementary and Early Childhood Education. (ERIC Document Reproduction No. ED 351148). Retrieved June 12, 2007, from http://www.eric.ed.gov/contentdelivery/servlet/ERICServlet?accno=ED351148

Katz, L. G. (1996, fall/Winter). Addressing the potential risks of mixed-age grouping. The MAGnet Newsletter on Mixed-Age Grouping in Preschool and Elementary Settings, 5 .

McGee, C. D. (1993). Development of social responsibility and student ownership of the educational process: The eighth attribute critical to the Kentucky Education Reform Act Primary Programs. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Louisville, Louisville, Kentucky.

McIntyre, E., Kyle, D., Gregory, K., Moore, G., Wheatley, V., Clyede, J. & Hovda, R. (1996). Teaching young readers and writers in multi-age classrooms. Language Arts, 73 , 384-394. Retrieved June 12, 2007 from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=9702193982&site=site=ehost-live

McKenzie, E. (2013). National board certification and developmentally appropriate practices: Perceptions of impact. Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 27, 153-165. Retrieved December 15, 2013, from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=86277451&site=ehost-live

Nye, B. (1993). Questions and answers about multiage grouping. Educational Research Service (ERS) Spectrum. 38-45.

Rathbone, C., et al. (1993). Multiage portraits: Teaching and learning in mixed-age classrooms. Peterborough, NH: Crystal Spring Books.

Ross, D. D., Bondy, E., & Kyle, D. W. (1993). Reflective teaching for student empowerment. New York: Macmillan Publishing Co.

Stone, S. (1994). Strategies for teaching children in multiage classrooms. Childhood Education, 71 , 102-105.

Wassermann, S. (2007). Dare to Be Different. Phi Delta Kappan. 88 , 384-390. Retrieved July 12, 2007 from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=23727088&site=ehost-live

Yarborough, B. H., & Johnson, R. A. (2000). Nongraded schools: Why their promise has not been realized and should be reconsidered. Contemporary Education, 71 , 42-48. Retrieved June 15, 2007 from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=4467697&site=ehost-live

Suggested Reading

Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R.T. (1996). Cooperation and the use of technology. In D. H. Jonassen (ed.), Handbook of research for educational communications and technology (pp. 1017-1044). New York: Simon & Schuster Macmillan.

Kentucky Department of Education. (1993). State regulations and recommended best practices for Kentucky's Primary Program. Frankfort, KY: Kentucky Development of Education.

Miller, B. A. (1989). The multigrade classroom: A resource handbook for small, rural schools. Portland OR: Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory.

Privett, N. (1996). Without fear of failure: The attributes of an ungraded primary school. The School Administrator, 1 , 6-11. Retrieved July 12, 2007 from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete.