[ Home | Search | Research ]

Designing and Supervising Intervention

Programs for Under-Achieving Students

by

Lora Haston

May 6, 1999

Table of Contents

Introduction

Research

Recommendations

Bibliography

Education has left the "feel-good" era of the seventies and eighties and is making an effort to enter the age of accountability in the nineties. No longer can a site supervisor look at low test scores, pat teachers on the back, and say, "I know you are a good teacher and your students had a rewarding experience this year." While the teacher most likely is a good teacher and the students most likely had a rewarding experience during the school year, improving test scores are also necessary. California Governor Gray Davis has asked for an in-depth analysis to determine the effectiveness of existing programs directed toward assisting students in kindergarten through third grade (Davis, p. 4).

Site supervisors must weigh several factors when designing and overseeing intervention strategies for under-achieving students. While retention is always an option and will become more so as promotion becomes contingent on achieving grade level standards, research indicates that retention in and or itself does not enable students to gain lost academic ground. While planning for traditional one grade – one classroom configurations is the most common elementary school approach, supervisors may find it beneficial to create a multiage (multigrade) or multiyear (more than one year with the same teacher) classroom setting. An examination of the research will offer support for these considerations.

Retention has been a component of the education system of the United States since the mid-1800s (Education Research Service, 1998, p. 1). During the 1960s and 1970s, the practice shifted from retention to social promotion (Education Research Service, 1998). Site supervisors as well as other educators weighed heavily a student’s chronological age along with social issues when deciding to retain or to promote in the light of poor academic achievement. However, the focus on standards has educators once again looking at retaining students who fail to meet grade level proficiencies. The difference between the 1990s and previous practice is that these under-achieving students are being targeted for interventions that include after-school tutoring and mandatory summer school attendance (Ritter, 1997).

However, Walker (1984) found that conclusive proof cannot be offered that retention in and of itself resulted in improved student performance nor can it be proven that students who were retained and showed improved achievement would not have done so had they not been retained. State test scores and dropout rates emphasize that the failure to master minimum skills increases geometrically whether grade level retention or its opposite, social promotion, is the policy. Research suggests that retention results at best in short term gains (Walters and Borgers, 1995). In order to avoid appearing to punish students who fail to achieve minimum proficiencies by requiring them to repeat a grade, educators are making a concerted effort to determine which skills students have failed to gain, then to create intervention programs designed to assist the students in acquiring the skills needed (Walters and Borgers, 1995).

One opinion regarding social promotion was expressed in the California Educator (1999) article, "No More Passing the Buck," when Keffrelyn Brown of the Teachers Association of Long Beach stated, "I don’t believe in social promotion in most cases. Students should definitely be held accountable for their work" (p. 1). In the article, "Failure is a Learning Experience," California Educator reported that students who do not take their studies seriously in Long Beach find themselves enrolled in Long Beach Preparatory Academy, an alternative school for eighth grade students who fail more than one class.

The subject of the MacNeil-Lehrer News Hour of March 8, 1999, was social promotion. In the ensuing dialogue, Paul Vallas, Chief Executive Officer of the Chicago Schools, stated that social promotion not only hurt the child promoted by placing him/her in a situation for which he/she was not prepared, but hurt students who were on grade level or above because the teacher had to lower standards (Online News Hour, 1999). Broaching yet another view, Ernest House of the University of Chicago, while acknowledging the benefit of the interventions initiated by the Chicago schools, suggested that the interventions should be used before students fall so far behind that they cannot meet grade level expectations (Online News Hour, 1999).

In California, political leaders have expressed concern that too many students are not achieving at a level appropriate for their grade level. According to Governor Gray Davis (1999), "California invests nearly $43 billion from all funds in the education of 5.5 million pupils. And although our schools are succeeding in some areas, too many children still enter high school without fundamental knowledge in English, math, science and history. And too many young people graduate high school without the basic skills necessary to begin a college education or master the high-paying jobs of tomorrow" (p. 2).

Elementary site supervisors have a need to expand their vision of classroom design beyond traditional boundaries. Instead of looking at effective classrooms as always being "same-age students" studying the same curriculum at the same time, supervisors might want to consider having a multiage classroom designed to include students across a two- or three-year age span or establishing a multiyear classroom wherein students stay with the same teacher for more than one year. Secondary site supervisors have long dealt with classroom groupings of this nature. Students are required to take and pass certain core subjects. If the student fails one of these classes, then that student must retake the class, ending up with younger students.

In attempting to analyze the philosophies of retention versus intervention, several areas will be examined in this article: developmentally appropriate classrooms; teacher involvement in innovative programs; effects of student chronological age on achievement; factors other than age that affect learning; effect of retention on standardized test scores; the importance of having a district-wide policy governing grade level retention; and the ongoing results of the Chicago Public Schools reform.

Referring to Slavin’s Team Assisted Individualization and Clay’s Reading Recovery program as examples of individualized interventions designed to allow children to succeed, May, Kundert, and Brent (1995) suggested that the move should be toward individualized instruction, including multiage classrooms that mix students of different ages, thereby allowing students to progress at individual levels (p. 293).

O’Connor (1996) concurred, contending that students in a multiage classroom would experience more satisfaction than their counterparts in traditional classroom settings because they would have a natural environment for peer tutoring, opportunities to experience different roles, form friendships, and be exposed to many choices for learning Younger students were able to listen to what was being taught the older students and often learned from those instructions. The age differences encouraged children to branch out and perform in different capacities. Students were more likely to provide and observe good role modeling. Socially and emotionally students benefited from the multiage program, forming many new friendships, and being "more tolerant and accepting of others" (O’Connor, 1996, p. 29). Without the specter of artificial grade

level standards hanging over their heads the teachers felt that the classroom climate was more conducive to learning.

According to O’Connor (1996) schools in the beginning were multiage, one-room entities. America moved away from that concept in 1860 as numbers grew. After World War I some began questioning the need for graded schools. In the 1960s a few programs adopted a multiage approach, using individual learning plans for individual student needs. non-gradedness is basically "a system for grouping children in classes without grade-level labels" with the classes containing children who have more than a one-year age difference (O’Connor, 1996, p. 3).

Central Elementary School District, a K-5 school located in a low income area of Bellingham, initiated a unique program with the goal of enabling students to become self-starters able to learn according to their individual styles. In order to do this, the six teachers involved adjusted the curriculum to meet the special needs of each student, grouping them according to ability for reading and math instruction. Students were allowed to choose which activities to complete first as well as whom they might work with. The instructors felt that having many activities going on at one time would stimulate the interest of others in the classroom to select new activities. Cooperative learning was encouraged along with peer assistance by using an "ask-three- before-you-ask-me" rule (O’Connor, 1996, p. 19). This approach also allowed the teacher to be more of a facilitator. While it had been expected that the older children would be eager to assist the younger students, it was found that some of them were reluctant to do so.

O’Connor (1996) reported that challenges in managing multiage classrooms included the need to be flexible in forming nonpermanent groups; assessment that adequately reflected what was taught; having individualized instruction; and integrating instruction through thematic units. Teaching science with a hands-on approach remained an essential approach. The math, reading, and language arts curriculums for grades one and two were blended while science and social studies were staggered, with first grade taught one year and second grade taught the second. In having a student-centered curriculum an effort was made to individualize the curriculum as much as possible while teaching integrated thematic lessons thereby keeping the students’ interest. Teachers taught to the top of the class, or to the older children, with the expectation that children who did not quite understand their first year would grasp the concepts the second year.

May, Kundert, and Brent (1995) undertook a study to determine whether delayed kindergarten entry significantly reduced the need for grade retentions, special education services. Their findings noted that delayed school entry occurred most often for male children and resulted in no significant effect on retention. They also concluded that being held out of kindergarten had no statistically significant effect on later retention. Whereas 12.8% of all students in this district were retained in Grades K through 5, just 6% of the held-out students were later retained (May, Kundert, & Brent, p. 291). May, Kundert, and Brent (1995) suggest that having a developmentally appropriate program should eliminate delayed school entry or retentions in the primary grades as well as reducing inappropriate academic demands on students who may not be developmentally ready.

When the after school intervention programs supported by Migrant Education, Title I, and SBCP funds are analyzed, those responsible for school leadership are able to verify that these programs are accomplishing their objectives. After-school programs that are designed to focus on the specific skills needed in reading, language development, and mathematics enable students to perform at a higher level on standardized tests. Students also progress at a faster rate toward meeting grade level standards. Strategies used to teach low-achieving elementary school students reading, writing, and mathematics are valid models for intervention programs at the middle school and high school levels. Key recommendations for intervention programs that should be in place at the elementary, middle school, and high school levels include:

1. Establish after school intervention programs for second language learners in reading and language as soon as the school year begins, thereby providing immediate supplementary assistance in meeting district grade level standards. Provide appropriate materials, such as the Hampton-Brown Into English series, for English language development. Provide additional instruction and practice in order that students are able to progress more rapidly in developing oral language fluency in English.
2. Identify students who are not progressing at a rate that meets district grade level reading standards early in the school year. Require these students to attend a program that meets at least two days per week in order to receive additional instruction and practice in reading. Leveled reading books should be available in sufficient quantity to allow students a variety of reading experiences at their individual reading levels. Students should also have access to a technology- based reading evaluation program such as Accelerated Reader so that they may receive frequent and consistent feedback that reflects their progress toward achieving grade level proficiency in reading.
3. Identify students who are not progressing at a rate that meets district grade level writing standards early in the school year. Require these students to attend a program that meets at least two days per week in order to receive additional instruction and practice in writing. Students should receive instruction designed to help them improve their ability to meet writing requirements. Students should be given sufficient time to practice the skills required.
4. Establish a tutoring center at the beginning of the school year wherein students may receive assistance with homework. Students are often handicapped by the unavailability of assistance in the home, either because both parents are working outside the home or because the assigned work is beyond the parents’ educational level.

In addition to providing these foundational intervention programs, the site supervisor will need to monitor progress of the students. In partnership with the teachers, establish the criteria that will be used to track progress toward achieving grade level proficiencies. Collection of data should occur at least each quarter. Data to track the progress of students in intervention programs should be recorded on record sheets created using a spreadsheet program, then compared to the progress of students who are not receiving additional instruction and practice. This accomplishes several things. The site supervisor can demonstrate that interventions are in fact in place while tracking of program effectiveness.

Indeed, the expectations for educators are higher than ever. The challenges of supervising the education of the most diverse student population ever at times appear to be insurmountable. However, careful, methodical planning to target the basic areas of reading, writing, and arithmetic will direct efforts productively. Interventions geared toward meeting these needs will provide results.

Bibliography

California Educator. (May, 1998). Failure is a learning experience. Available: http://www.cta.org/cal_educator/features/v2i8_failure.html.

California Educator. (May, 1998). No more passing the buck. Available: http://www.cta.org/cal_educator/features/v2i8_no.html.

Davis, G. (1999). State of the State Address. Available: http//www.csba.org. Communications/Archives/address.htm.

DeRuiter, L. (1999, March). Purposes of the Running Record. Presentation conducted for staff development session for Dinuba Unified School District.

Educational Research Service. (1998). Retention in grade: Research and practice. Information for School Leaders.

May, D. C., Kundert, D. K., and Brent, D. (1995, September). Does delayed school entry reduce later grade retentions and use of special education services? Remedial and Special Education, 16, (5), 288-294.

O’Connor, C. R. (1996, October). A case study of the implementation of a non-graded multiage continuous progress primary program. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 407 165).

Ritter, J. (August 27, 1997). American journal: Schools abandon ‘social promotion.’ A Available: http://detnews.com/1997/nation/9708/27/08270064.htm.

Teisinger, E. (1996). Reading Assessment Running Records.

Walker, N. W. (1984). Elementary school grade retention: Avoiding abuses through systematic decision-making. Journal of Research and Development in Education, 18, (1), 1-5.

Walters, D. M., and Borgers, S. B. (1995, March). Student retention: Is it effective. The School Counselor, 300-310.