Refer to this paper as: Süleyman Gelener.

(2009) Status and role of multigrade teaching in

the educational systems and an analysis of North Cyprus practice. [Unpublished essay]
University of Birmingham.

Introduction

In most education systems of countries around the world, there is a standardization of

monograde schooling in all levels. Monograde refers to any class that comprises of learners
of same age and same grade, which is basically named as ‘normal’ schooling in many
educational systems. Little (2006:4) claims that “normal schooling forms the dominant and
visible elements of all national systems of education around the world.”

Multigrade teaching, on the other hand, is not a new practice in education. This practice has
long been used in many educational systems worldwide. Multigrade teaching involves the
teaching of children from two or more grade levels in one classroom, with a single teacher. In
the literature reviewed, some synonym terms are used by academics in order to refer
multigrade such as; ‘combination class’, ‘composite class’, ‘family class’, ‘multilevel’,
‘multiple class’, ‘unitary schools’, ‘vertical group’. Multigrade classes must be distinguished
from ‘multi-age’ classes which are mixed age classes and “formed out of a choice based on
perceived educational benefits” (Little, 2001:483). Multigrade classes are mostly formed out
of necessity.

Little (2006:4) points out the ignorance of multigrade teaching as “multigrade schools operate
at the margins of the national education systems and are largely invisible to those who plan,
manage and fund education systems. Yet they persist.”The issue has grown in importance in
light of recent struggle of developing countries in order to reach Education for All (EFA), and
also for developed countries which are trying to increase the quality of the education. Many
countries are now taking a fresh look at multigrade teaching, which this work is also
interested in.

This essay critically analyses the multigrade teaching from an international perspective, with
an emphasis on its status and role in the educational systems of the countries, as well as
making comparisons with normal schooling in all aspects. The first section of this paper will
examine the prevalence of multigrade teaching in countries worldwide and briefly talk about
the common reasons behind. The second section examines the role of the teacher education in
multigrade practices and after that it will go on to problems faced in the application of

1
multigrade teaching in countries. Next, curricula and timetabling in multigrade schools would
be examined. Furthermore, the essay will talk about the potential advantages of multigrade
practice and last but not least analyse the multigrade teaching practices taking place in North
Cyprus.

Multigrade teaching as an international issue

Multigrade teaching is often associated with the ‘developing countries’ which refers to the
“...poorer, primarily agricultural countries of the southern hemisphere” (Harber, 2000).
Multigrade teaching is seen as a problem and a necessity in education rather than being seen a
part and fact of it in many platforms. Little (1996:434) discusses the position of multigrade
teaching as “...barely addressed in national policies of education, almost non-existent in the
content of teacher education courses and mostly ignored by national curriculum developers”.
Despite all, multigrade teaching is implemented almost in all educational systems of
countries around the world. Table 1 below shows the examples of the prevalence of
multigrade teaching around the world, especially in the countries that are named ‘developed’.
I have compiled the data from the studies of some researchers like Veenman (1995), Little
(2006) and Mulryan-Kyne (2007) and revised the table by adding some more countries,
including the both sides of Cyprus.

Table 1

Examples of the prevalence of multigrade teaching

2
Prevalence of multigrade teaching in countries reveals the reality about the equal education
chances of people. In her major study, Little (2006:7) identifies that “a conservative estimate
of 30% of children currently in multigrade classes in all countries yields a world total of
192.45 million”. The UN Convention on the Rights of the Child states in Article 28 that
“...the right of child to education, and with a view to achieving this right progressively and on
the basis of equal opportunity.” One question that needs to be asked is how much do the countries
party to this Convention exercise it. In many countries, multigrade teaching is the one and only
way of bringing education to students. However, those who plan, manage and fund education
systems are not showing necessary interest in this issue. Moreover, it is almost ignored. This
creates a problem with regards to equal opportunity within countries. Under these
circumstances, the students and multigrade teachers suffers the most.

However, practices of this kind make it inevitable to discuss the role of education in the
context of key theories. Correspondence theory argues that students from different social
backgrounds are provided with different education to fit the future role they will play in the
workforce (Harber, 2000). Multigrade teaching is the education commonly given to students
living in their little own communities in under populated areas which are far from the city
centre, and who are mainly the children of working class or farmers. This shows that the
education students receive correspond to their social background. The children of working
class or farmers are expected to have the same ‘role’ with their parents in the future.
Multigrade schools mostly do not have superior buildings and resources. It is reasonable to
suggest that the learning and teaching environment is also corresponding to their social
background.

The standing and importance of multigrade teaching should not be different than the standing
and importance of ‘normal schooling’ because considerable amount of students are taking
this educational practice in many developed and developing countries. Difficulties arise,
however, when attempts are being made to apply multigrade teaching. The contexts of
stringencies and the reasons behind the application of multigrade schooling are follows;

Demographic Context

a) Under populated areas and areas where population is growing slowly or not growing at all
for various reasons. In these under populated settlements, there is not enough number of
students for each grade to form a classroom.

3
b) Areas where there is rapid population growth for various reasons. There are a large and
unstable number of students in schools in these overpopulated areas. Number of classrooms
or teachers in schools might not meet the demand.

Resource Context

a) Shortage of teachers. In some countries, there is not enough number of teachers for
applying ‘monograde’ teaching in every school in the country.

b) Ministries of Education in most countries have set an official limit of students per
classroom. Two different grades can be combined due to the limit excess in schools.

Cultural Context

Cultural factors within the country. Lifestyles and traditions might differ between rural and
urban areas in some countries. People living in rural areas prefer to keep their children in
their environment and educate them within this environment.

Economic Context

a) Transportation problems from villages to city centres such as security, amount of money,
amount of time and so forth.

b) In many countries there is a small amount of money available for education and lack of
financial resources.

Health Context

HIV/AIDS affects teachers, children and parents which is directly capable of affecting
teacher-student ratio within country.

Teacher education and multigrade teaching

A key factor in the determination of the success in education is the ‘teacher’. All of the
studies in the reviewed literature for the purposes of this paper so far about multigrade
teaching show that ‘teacher’ is a significant factor in the determination of ‘success’ in
multigrade schools. Teachers working in multigrade schools are expected to have the same
educational background with the teachers teaching in normal schools, as well as the special

4
skills for multigrade teaching, in theory. Practice is not as bright as the theory. In some
countries teaching is not preferred as a profession because of its status, salary et cetera. This
creates a need for the qualified teachers. Limited number of qualified teachers prefers to
teach at ‘normal’ schools which have better conditions than multigrade schools. This also
creates a bad image against multigrade schools and new graduates form teacher training
institutions do not prefer teaching in these schools. Therefore, teacher gap in multigrade
schools is attempted to be filled with the university graduates who do not have any
pedagogical background (Erden, 1996).

Educational systems in many countries, rarely include ‘multigrade teaching’ in the content of
the teacher education courses and many researchers point out that it is almost non-existent in
many countries (e.g. Little (1996), Dursun (2006), Mulryan-Kyne (2007), Aksoy (2008)).
Perhaps the most serious disadvantage of this deficiency is failing to raise awareness of
multigrade teaching for teacher training students. Students, living the areas where there is
multigrade schooling, are the ones who suffer from lack of this awareness, because almost all
of the new teacher training graduates do not want to teach in multigrade schools as they do
not have any idea about it. One criticism with this issue is the right of children to get equal
opportunity in education. Teachers teaching in multigrade schools are expected to have
‘highly specialized’ teaching skills, knowledge about teaching in multigrade schools and
knowledge of the culture in those remote areas. Furthermore, they are expected to have
‘highly specific’ local knowledge, local language and local culture (Birch and Lally, 1995).
The key problem with this is that how those who plan and control education systems are
going to meet the expectations from multigrade teachers, without giving them the necessary
education.

Educational systems in Europe do have the same ‘deficiency’ in teacher training institutions
like other countries or continents. However, some projects were taking place in order to draw
attention to and raise awareness of multigrade teaching. For example, the MUSE (MUltigrade
School Education) project which took place in Finland, Greece, Spain and UK between years
2002 and 2004 was aiming at the development of a new model of teachers' training that
assists teaching in multigrade schools. Koulouris and Sotiriou (2006:141) stated that “the
main outcome of that project was a realisation of the need of multigrade teachers in Europe
for training in innovative teaching and learning approaches that are well-suited to the
multigrade school environment”.

5
It can be said that teaching in a multigrade class requires more ‘specialized’ skills, abilities,
knowledge, experience and effort than teaching in ‘normal’ schools. However, the content of
teacher education courses does not meet the need and causes a deficit.

Problems faced in the application of multigrade teaching

There are problems faced in the application of multigrade teaching in many countries. The
problems might be similar with the ‘normal’ schools in rural areas, but it will not be wrong to
dedicate them to multigrade schools. This paper tries to categorize these problems generally
with an international perspective.

Attitudes of people and the community. The standardization of monograde schooling, which is
called ‘normal’ schooling today, has created negative attitudes towards multigrade teaching
(Veenman, 1995). People adopted an attitude as ‘only and best’ way of schooling is
monograde teaching. This brings the idea that teaching is not effective in multigrade schools.
Some parents might not be involved in their children’s learning in the areas where multigrade
teaching takes place because of these reasons.

Curriculum. Multigrade schools are expected to cover the same syllabus with all other public
schools. As already being mentioned, multigrade teaching is mostly ignored by national
curriculum developers. Contents of the lessons and activities that take place in curricula or
text books are all designed for ‘normal’ schooling. Multigrade schools would have to
redevelop the contents and activities in order to make them suitable for multigrade teaching.

Inadequacy of instructional materials. Appropriate teaching and learning materials need to be

used in order to increase the quality of teaching and learning both in ‘normal’ and
‘multigrade’ schooling. These materials have a significant role especially in multigrade
teaching where teacher does not always teach each group actively and students study by
themselves most of the time. In order to use the time effectively in multigrade classrooms, it
is important to provide these materials to the students when they study by themselves.
However, multigrade schools are deprived of these sources.

Polyvalence roles of teachers. Teachers working in multigrade schools are responsible for the
administration of school apart from teaching. Birch and Lally (1995) list the functions which
multigrade teachers must carry out as follows: Teacher, Facilitator, Community

6
Liaison/Resource Person, Social Worker/Counsellor, Planner, Evaluator, Materials Designer,
Para-professional Trainer, Government Extension Worker, Action Researcher, Quality
Controller, Surrogate Parent, Financial Manager and the Representative of Cultural,
Religious or Political Values. They are responsible for carrying out all administrative and
managerial responsibilities such as attending meetings, writing reports, financial accounts et
cetera. Additionally, teachers are responsible for the canteen, cleaning and heating of
classrooms and preparing and providing materials (Aksoy, 2008).

Teacher problem. As abovementioned, teacher training institutions do not offer adequate, or

some does not offer at all, ‘multigrade education’ in their courses. In addition to this, the
polyvalence roles of teachers in those schools double the work load of the teacher. When the
recent teacher training graduates start to teach in a multigrade school, they feel ‘stressed,
underachieving, disappointed and unhappy’. This certainly affects the teaching and learning
environment inside the classroom. Also, it affects the teacher–student relations. Moreover,
teachers do not want to teach in multigrade schools and want to move from those areas as
soon as possible because of the abovementioned reasons.

Curriculum and timetabling in multigrade schools

In many countries, both multigrade schools and normal schools are expected to cover the
same syllabus. However, national curricula in most countries are developed for normal
schools. Each set of grade level timetables, materials and activities are written and indicated
step by step in the national curricula. Also, there are guidelines about lesson planning,
timetabling for lessons, use of materials and activities in the lessons. But, there is not any
guidance for multigrade teachers. It is not been identified how multigrade teachers are
supposed carry out the same curriculum in their classrooms. Little (2004:13) draws our
attention to these unreasonable demands from multigrade teachers: “Multigrade teachers
should not be expected to adapt the general system to their specific multigrade circumstance,
alone. In most education systems monograde teachers are not expected to exercise such levels
of adaptive professional autonomy (and indeed are often discouraged from doing so). Why
should so much more be expected from the multigrade teacher?”

In a recent study, Pridmore (2007) has done research in multigrade schools in several
countries. There were both developed and developing countries in the research sample.

7
Pridmore (2007) identified four empirical models of multigrade practice that are being used
in those countries. These models have an ‘international’ characteristic as they are the
combination of models used in both developed and developing countries. The following is the
brief summary of these models.

Model 1: Quasi-monograde

In this model, teacher treats the students from each grade as a group. For example, if the
classroom is depending on two grades, grade one and grade two, then grade one is treated as
group A and the grade two is treated as group B. When the teacher is actively teaching group
A, group B is studying themselves and vice versa. This practice model uses the relevant
monograde curriculum for each grade. Each group learns the curriculum which they are
engaged. This model is similar to monograde teaching. The difference is that the teachers are
responsible for transmitting two curricula into two grades but at the same time and in one
classroom.

Model 2: Differentiated curricula

This practice model is similar to the quasi-monograde model. The difference between two
models is the way of teaching. In this model, grades are treated as groups as well. But,
teacher teaches both groups at the same time in the lessons which has the same general topic
or theme. Multigrade teachers using this practice model facilitates learning within age groups
and grade boundaries at the same time (Pridmore, 2007). This model also includes the
curriculum for each group, but the teacher redevelops the curriculum according to the
subjects which have the same general topics and themes. Teacher is actively teaching to all
students at the same time on these subjects.

Model 3: Multiple-year curriculum cycles (also known as rolling programmes)

Pridmore (2007:563) defines this model as “...students in two or more consecutive grades
work through common topics and activities together but start and finish the curriculum cycle
at different times”. In other words, the curricula are redeveloped for the multigrade
classrooms. This redeveloped curriculum is the combination of curricula of the number of
grades in each classroom. For example, if there are two grades in a classroom, it means that
the curriculum will last two years to complete. If a student is studying in the same classroom
for two years, they will get a different syllabus each year. In other words the curriculum for
each classroom is rolling in years as the number of grades.

8
Model 4: Learner and materials-centred

This multigrade practice model is based on the self study of the students and supports
individual learning. Pridmore (2007:564) states that: “In this model students work through
interactive, self-study learning materials. The teacher may stimulate and check on learning,
but students rely mostly on the materials”. In this model, curriculum is very flexible and
depends on students. Each student makes progress depending on their learning rates and
learning abilities. This means different subjects can be taught to different students at the same
time. Teacher is not always actively teaching to the students, but the students are self learning
most of the time using the materials. Teachers are guiding them. Promotion flexibility comes
along with curriculum flexibility in this model, which extinguishes the repetition and lowers
the drop-out rate.

There might be more multigrade practices used in countries around the world apart from the
ones mentioned above. There might be some practices which use a combination of these
methods mentioned above. But, the key factor in the applications of the curricula and
timetables in multigrade schools is the ‘flexibility’. Curriculum reform in multigrade schools
would have a significant role in making these schools more effective (Berry, 2000).

Benefits of the multigrade teaching

Multigrade teaching has negative impacts most of the time because of various reasons being
talked throughout the essay. Multigrade schooling has always been compared to normal
schooling and disadvantages of multigrade teaching are taken into consideration mostly.
However, there are important pedagogical benefits of multigrade teaching as well as practical
and economical benefits. Here are some of those advantages:

 Building a multigrade school consisting of one or a few classrooms costs much more
cheaper than an ideal primary school. Therefore more schools can be built in under
populated areas where there are not any schools. This is important to reach out to the
areas without formal education.
 Instead of various numbers of teachers teaching different grades, single teacher teaches
in a multigrade classroom and therefore teachers can be sent to the other places where
there is a lack of teachers.

9
 Multigrade classrooms are formed by the students of different age, experience and
knowledge. This is an important opportunity for students to interact with each other,
learn from each other and help each other. Students can transfer information and skills to
each other much effectively “...because the students’ cognitive schema and their thinking
processes are very similar to each other” (Erden, 1996:86).
 In multigrade classrooms, student studies by himself most of the time. This brings
students important intellectual skills such as doing research, self studying and self
learning.
 Cooperation, familiar environment and other forms of prosocial behaviour in multigrade
classrooms appears to minimize the competitive pressure and the need for discipline
inside the classroom (Veenman, 1995).
 Students in multigrade classrooms remain with the same teacher for at least two years.
This makes teacher–student relationship more secured and cordial. As long as the
teaching is carried out effectively, it becomes possible for the teacher to assist students
which remains with them for a long time progress in the areas where they have ability
and talent.
 Schooling does not only aim to educate children ‘academically’. Schooling is also aims
socialisation of children. In this context, multigrade teaching is a more realistic practice.

Multigrade teaching practice in North Cyprus

North Cyprus is a very small state, and there are not very long distances between the villages
and the cities. However, the small villages tend to be self-contained and resistant to
administrative changes because of significant social effects of the political and cultural
movements of the 1970s (Crellin, 1981). Village schools with one or two teachers are widely
used in 1970s. People refused to send their children to another village or city to get education.
Crellin (1981) indicates the main reasons for this attitude as sense of village loyalty and
traditional caution. Moreover, Crellin (1981:327) claims that the key reasons was “...the fear
of losing sight of children – with the memory of the intercommunal fighting.” In this sense, it
can be said that violence context used to be a stringency of multigrade schooling in North
Cyprus.

10
Multigrade teaching is only used in primary schools today and the number of multigrade
schools is reducing. There are only eight multigrade schools out of eighty-six primary
schools. These eight schools belong to the villages which people still have the old village
loyalty and traditional caution. However, the student number in those schools is reducing
also, because most of the ‘new’ parents prefer to send their children to the central schools
which are monograde schools. Common opinion about multigrade teaching is that this
practice is not academically successful. Moreover, ‘centralization’ of primary schools and
monograde teaching is addressed as ‘modernization’.

Primary education in North Cyprus is under the control of Ministry of Education, and it is
compulsory. There are five grades in primary schools, starting with one to five. Primary
education is for the children aged between seven and eleven. National curricula in North
Cyprus are developed for monograde teaching, which is negative for multigrade teaching
practices. But there is a compulsory module in the content of teacher education courses,
which is positive for multigrade practices. Government includes ‘multigrade education’
courses in teacher training but ignores multigrade schools while developing the curriculum,
which is a dilemma.

In North Cyprus, mostly combination of quasi-monograde and differentiated curricula

models of Pridmore (2007) is used in multigrade practices. In my limited experience of two
schools I have observed teachers using these models. Also, in order to make the teacher feel
more comfortable, teachers are allowed to be flexible within certain limits. According to this,
teachers can add or remove topics from the curriculum.

In addition, multigrade schools in North Cyprus do have a strong village loyalty and tradition.
However, hierarchical structure, management, democracy and socialisation in these
traditional schools were more ‘superior’ when compared to ‘normal’ schools. Also, in my
limited experience I have observed an effective teacher-student and student-student
interactions within these two schools. As teachers were both responsible for the
administration of school and teaching, students did not have the ‘fear’ of the authority and
discipline within school because they were able to talk everything with their teachers.
Students were not expected to obey the ‘strict’ rules, on the contrary they were expected to
participate and contribute when deciding rules. Therefore, students take on responsibility on
their behaviours and protecting the rules. Moreover, older students in the classroom were

11
helping and guiding the younger students both academically and socially. All these positive
features provided a teaching and learning motivation for both teachers and students.

Conclusion

This essay has investigated the status of multigrade teaching compared to normal schooling
internationally. In this investigation, the aim was to assess the role of multigrade teaching in
countries worldwide. This study has found that generally multigrade teaching is ignored by
the authorities of education who plan, manage and fund education systems. The major
reasons behind this ignorance are politic and economic. In general, therefore, it seems that
both developed and developing countries are taking a fresh look at multigrade teaching.
However, there are a number of important changes which need to be made. Firstly, teacher
education institutions need to include multigrade teaching in their content of teacher
education courses. Secondly, multigrade teaching needs to be included and addressed more in
national policies of education. It is necessary not only to address multigrade teaching in
national policies but also control and inspect the practice. Finally, national curricula
developers need to take into account the multigrade schools and multigrade teachers.
Moreover, equal education opportunity should be made available to all children.

12
References

AKSOY, N. (2008). Multigrade Schooling in Turkey: An overview: International Journal of

Educational Development, 28; (), pp.218-228.

BERRY, C. (2000). Multigrade Teaching: A Discussion Document. [Online]. Available from

http://www.ioe.ac.uk/multigrade/fulltext/fulltextBerry.pdf. [Accessed 31 December 2008].

BIRCH, I. and LALLY, M. (1995). Multigrade Teaching in Primary Schools. Bangkok:

UNESCO Principal Regional Office for Asia and the Pacific.

CRELLIN, C. T. (1981). Turkish Education in Cyprus since 1974. An Outline of Some of the
Changes in Curriculum Organisation and the Professional Standing of Teachers:
International Review of Education, 27; (3), pp. 315-330.

DURSUN, F. (2006). Birlestirilmis Siniflarda Egitim Sorunlari ve Cozum Onerileri: Sosyal

Bilimler Arastirmalari Dergisi; 2; (), pp. 33-57.

ERDEN, M. (1996). Multigraded Classes in Turkey: Improving the Quality of Instruction:

Journal of Education, 12; (), pp. 85-88.

HARBER, C. Education and Theories of Development. In: E.LEMMER ed. (2000).

Contemporary Education: Global Issues and Trends. Johannesburg: Heinemann. Ch. 3.

KOULOURIS, P. and SOTIRIOU, S. (2006). Building Lifelong Learning Networks of

Teachers for the Development of Competence in Teaching in Small Rural Schools . In: 1st
European Conference on Technology Enhanced Learning. Proceedings of the Joint
International Workshop on Professional Learning, Competence Development and Knowledge
Management - LOKMOL and L3NCD. Crete, October 2.

LITTLE, A. (1996). Globalisation and Educational Research: Whose Context Counts?;

International Journal of Educational Development, 26; (4), pp. 427-438.

LITTLE, A. (2001). Multigrade teaching: towards an international research and policy

agenda: International Journal of Educational Department, 21; (), pp. 481-497.

LITTLE, A. (2004). Learning and teaching in multigrade settings. Paper commissioned for
the EFA Global Monitoring Report 2005, The Quality Imperative. UNESCO.

13
LITTLE, A. (2006). Education for All and Multigrade Teaching: Challenges and
Opportunities, Dordrecht: Springer.

MAVIS, B. (2008). Education Statistics of 2007-2008. [Online]. Available from

http://www.ktos.org/tr/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=204&Itemid=1.
[Accessed 31 December 2008].

MULRYAN-KYNE, C. (2007). The preparation of teachers for multigrade teaching:

Teaching and Teacher Education, 23; (), pp. 501-514.

PASHIARDIS, P. (2005). Cyprus National Report on Multigrade Education. [Online].

Available from http://www.ea.gr/ep/nemed/index.asp?lang=en&Cat_ID=576. [Accessed 31
December 2008].

PRIDMORE, P. (2007). Adapting the primary-school curriculum for multigrade classes in

developing countries: a five-step plan and an agenda for change: Journal of Curriculum
Studies, 39; (5), pp. 559-576.

The UN Convention on the Rights of the Child. [Online]. Available from

http://www2.ohchr.org/english/law/pdf/crc.pdf. [Accessed 31 December 2008].

VEENMAN, S. (1995). Cognitive and noncognitive effects of multigrade and multi-age

classes: A best-evidence synthesis: Review of Educational Research, 65; (4), pp. 319-369.

14