Combination class is hard work
Combination groups put the quality of education under pressure. How do you still benefit from a composite group?
Picture: Type tank
For many teachers, running a combination group is a matter of keeping all the balls in the air and then feeling unsatisfied after school. Often resulting in burnout complaints. That is the opinion of Anne van Bijnen of BCO Education Advice, who herself previously worked as a teacher in various combination groups.
“In a combination group, everything goes according to a strict schedule. Teachers are looking for ways to make the best use of instruction time while only having two hands. And then they also want to be able to give students a pat on the head if they see that they need it. But they actually don't have time for a child who really wants to tell something. Not even for an incident during the break or a cup of milk that goes through. In a combination group, the teacher works under a lot of pressure. ”
In addition to the teachers, the quality of education in combined groups is also under pressure, according to researchers
The fact that a combination group relies heavily on teachers, confirms research that the Education Inspectorate released earlier this year. According to The state of education 2018 teaching in combination groups makes above-average demands on didactic skills. This mainly concerns the organization and coordination of education.
In addition to the teachers, the quality of education in combined groups is also under pressure, according to the researchers. According to the Inspectorate, the quality of the explanation, the task-oriented working atmosphere and the involvement of the students in combination groups is significantly less often sufficient than in single groups.
In addition, the coordination of the instruction and the processing substance are more often assessed as unsatisfactory. Teachers of combination groups must, in the same amount of teaching time, tailor their education to greater differences between students than colleagues in a single group. 'Apparently some of the teachers do not yet know how to organize the lessons in such a way that, within the available teaching time, the coordination of the instruction and processing has the expected quality,' the researchers write.
Their findings are in line with those of educationalist Marijke Kral. Kral, now a lecturer at the Hogeschool van Arnhem and Nijmegen, already concluded in her 1997 thesis that working in a combination class is in most cases a matter of alternating between one year group and another.
“Teachers do their utmost in that model to serve each group equally well,” says Kral. "They succeed in this when it comes to the learning achievements of children." Her research shows no systematic differences between combination classes or single classes in learning gains in reading, language and arithmetic. Teachers can divide their attention wonderfully. But that is taxing. And little is done with the differences within groups. Differentiation across year groups or through collaborative learning across year groups does not happen much.
Three-group model
In all those years since Kral's PhD research, little seems to have changed. "Interesting in the inspection by the inspectorate is the observation that differentiation remains difficult." The researchers argue that the three-group model is not satisfactory. This model is based on a basic, minimum and an extra group. "For combination classes, the three-group model means that if the year groups are kept separate for instruction and processing, instruction must be given twice to three groups and perhaps three times to three groups in combination groups."
The year class system puts imaginary walls between year groups. With combination groups you can remove those barriers by thinking in terms of learning pathways.
According to Kral, this touches on a crucial issue that occupies many schools. "It is about the question: how can we better do justice to differences in talents and development needs between students, which grouping forms are appropriate and how can we organize this?"
This does not have to be a bigger challenge in combination groups, says Van Bijnen of BCO Education Advice. In fact, that is where opportunities lie in her opinion. “The year class system puts imaginary walls between year groups. Children who slow down or go faster run into those walls. With combination groups you can remove those barriers by thinking in terms of learning pathways. For example, by looking at which children you can bring together based on educational needs. "
Together with educational advice organization Cedin, Van Bijnen and her colleagues developed 'Promising combination groups', a professionalization process for schools that want to create more peace and time for teachers in combination groups and a better connection with the development and educational needs of children. Her organization has now assisted some seventy schools in that process.
Pillars are a reduction in the number of instructions, an improvement in the quality of the instruction and social and interactive learning. “Children can learn a lot from each other,” says Van Bijnen. “You can make use of that. For example, by having students look ahead to the task they are dealing with independently and have them cross it if they do not understand it. As a teacher you can then connect children who do understand a task to students who need help. That is the vehicle: connection. ”
jenaplan
At jenaplan schools, where children from three year groups are together in a so-called tribal group, connecting children is common practice. “Not the teacher, as in regular schools, but the child is central,” explains former jenaplan teacher Hubert Winters.
This is different at regular schools, he believes, and that is why he denounces combination groups. “By sticking to year groups, you assume that children of the same age can learn the same. The average child will manage with that. But if you serve each year group separately, then many children are waiting for you as a teacher to finish with the other groups, ”says Winters, owner of the Jas consultancy.
It's about what you need to do to help a child learn rather than what the child needs to do to follow you
Boredom is common, he has seen during school visits. “In the base group, the question is what you have to do to help a child to learn instead of what the child has to do to be able to follow you. You have masters of every subject in your group, students who master a certain part of the material. As a teacher you make that expertise useful for the group. ” This helps both the teacher and the child. "A child can follow the thinking patterns of other children more easily than an adult, so he often explains faster and better than the teacher."
A model in which year groups are abandoned and curricula and educational needs are leading, also facilitates appropriate education, thinks Van Bijnen. “In that model you meet the specific educational needs of children much more. Well-considered choices are made for good quality instructions. The instructions throughout the year groups in which children are clustered on the learning line are promising. As a result, they are in varying groups for the different disciplines. "
Implementing such a way of working takes time. “It is not an easy task. I am very realistic about that. But if you ask what needs to be done to improve the quality of education in combination groups and single groups, then this is the answer. ”
In the Education Magazine of October 2018 you can read more about the results and findings of combination classes and how they do it.
