Looping, also known as multi-year grouping or teacher-student progression is a process whereby a single teacher stays with the same group of students for two or more consecutive years. Looping is not a new concept to the world of education, but has, just recently, picked up momentum as a practiced way to teach in the United States. Historically, in 1913, the US Department of the Interior labeled looping as one of the most important issues facing urban schools. The government was curious if it would be beneficial for teacher’s to stay with the same set of children through three, four or possibly five years. They believed that the teacher’s would come to know the student’s better and that they could build the studies of latter years on that of earlier years (Grant, Forsten, Richardson, 2000).

The concept of looping has deep historical roots and is practiced today, widely in Europe and Germany and is exhibiting increasing popularity in countries such as Japan and Israel. Minimal quantitative research has been done in the United States in regards to the success of the program, but a vast amount of qualitative research has bee

Teacher limitations come from the fact that teachers bring instructional strengths and weaknesses to each classroom. In a traditional one year system students go from a teacher who does a great job at teaching one subject to a teacher who is strong in another subject. It has been implied that children that were subject to looping were forced to spend two years with a teacher who may not teach an important curriculum area as well as other grade level teachers. Forsten and colleagues stated (1997) that a teacher’s strengths and weaknesses are magnified over a 2 year period. Caution must be taken not to turn a teacher’s weakness into a student’s weakness (Bogart, 2002). This causes concern for the parents as they do not want heir children spending two years with a teacher that may not bring out the full potential of their child. However, it is never impossible to request and get a new teacher.

Looping is a very rewarding process for everyone involved, notably the teacher, student and parents. The potential benefits such as fulfilling, stable and routine relationships between students and teachers, increased instructional time and a more individualized curriculum for the students by far outweigh the negative aspects of the practice. Although it is not known, exactly, today how many teachers practice looping in the United States, preliminary studies have noted an increase of this tried practice in the past few years. The increase has prompted much research to be done on the process of looping and its potential benefits (Grant et al., 2000) Lastly, a study, conducted over a seven year period, in an Attleboro, Massachusetts school, where they loop all students in first through eighth grade reported findings that student attendance in grades 2 through 8 increased from 92% average daily attendance to 97%; retention rates decreased by more than 43% in those same grades; discipline and suspensions, especially at the middle schools, declined significantly; special education referrals decreased by more than 55% and lastly; staff attendance improved markedly from an average of seven days absent per staff member per year to fewer than three (Grant et al, 2000).

If the student is returning to a looped classroom then the transition back into the new school year becomes less stressful. A healthy relationship between teacher/student, student/student, and teacher/parent is already built. The parents also become more involved because they are familiar with the routine and teaching style of the teacher. The parent ultimately ends up feeling more confident and secure with the teacher and often begins to become more involved in classroom activities (Bogart, 2003). The past academic year that was spent between the teacher’s students and parents has proven to be of great value.

The gift of time has been a huge benefit for looping students and teachers. Not only is there a

Some topics in this essay:
Yale University, Chirichello Chirichello, Richardson Forsten, Attleboro Massachusetts, Israel Minimal, Peterborough NH, Department Interior, Looping Looping, Brown University, Mumford Bond, bogart 2002, negative aspects, benefits looping, students teachers, teacher student, practice looping, potential benefits, aspects looping, negative aspects looping, traditional school, et al, grant et al, et al 2000, negative aspects practice, outweigh negative aspects,