Many contemporary education experts are currently proposing a form of classroom restructuring that allows teachers to maintain a stronger influence on students' educational development through successive years of involvement and curriculum implementation (Arhar, Johnston, & Markle, p.24-27; Rasmussen, p.2-4; Wynn & Walberg, p.527-530; Zahorik & Dichanz, p.75-77). The idea of looping, defined as a core group of students and a single teacher remaining together for multiple years, or family grouping, is not a new concept in America's educational history. Looping--which is sometimes called multiyear teaching or multiyear placement--occurs when a teacher is promoted with his or her students to the next grade level and stays with the same group of children for 2 or 3 years.

When parents are approached today with the idea of looping, conflicting views emerge. Some can recall with fondness their desire to remain with a favorite teacher for more than one school year, or sigh in relief that they were not committed to stay with a disliked teacher beyond a year's time (Little & Dacus, p.42-45; Simel, p.330-337; Grant, Johnson & Richardson, p.211-232). Although the risk of being "stuck" with an undesirable teacher exists, research does indicate some noteworthy contributions attributed to looping classroom environments.

The research literature indicates that stability, persistence, and intimacy are the fundamental characteristics of looping groups (Rasmussen, p.2-4; Wynne & Walberg, p.527-530). Presumably, one reason that schools generally have less influence on student development than families and peers is the low level of stability and persistence that often exists in school organization. Changing teachers and class peers from year to year can make it difficult to develop healthy cohesion and in-depth adult-student engagement. In an effort to generate student intimacy, other practices such as reducing class size or using cooperative learning in brief, transitory groups may be insufficient in generating maximum cohesion (Liu, p.156-157; Lee, Bryk & Smith, p.171; Mazzuchi & Brooks, p.60-62). Cohesion might be obtained through continuity in teacher-student, teacher-parent, and student-student relationships developed through years of interaction.

In some Asian countries, elementary teachers stay with their classes for 2 or more years, and classes also remain together for this period (Liu, p.156-157; Wynne & Walberg, p.527-530). For example, high school teachers remain with a class throughout its 4 years in the same subject area. The same group of students may have the same instructor for algebra, geometry, and other advanced mathematics courses. In the Japanese educational philosophy, the relationship between student and teacher is more important for placement decisions than the specialization of the teacher in one grade or topic. Zahorik and Dichanz (p.75-77) also observed in their study of German elementary schools that multiyear grouping helped students in several ways: Teachers developed a firm grasp of students' prior school knowledge because they had been involved in its development. There was no need to assess students' prior knowledge every year. It also reduced the risk of replicating information that may have already been taught the previous year (Hanson, p.42-43). In addition, teachers who interacted with students over several years came to know the students' preferred ways of learning, behavior patterns, interests, emotional stability, and social skills.
Arhar et al., (p.24-27) found that the staff at one looping school felt that low levels of conflict allowed them to help students cultivate their self-control and social responsibility. "By modeling cooperative behavior [in a long-term relationship], teachers felt that they were encouraging similar behavior on the part of their students" (Arhar et al, p. 25). The school can more appropriately guide a wayward child in positive directions through continuity in the environment and with the concern of a "significant adult in the child's life, one the student can always count on" (Michaud, p. 61). In a Florida middle school, Arhar and her colleagues (p.24-27) also found that long-term teacher-student relationships resulted in improved student discipline. Teachers were more willing to attempt behavior management alternatives when conventional techniques failed. The long-term arrangement prevented teachers from "writing off" students who were difficult to teach. Because teachers knew they would be working with students for more than one year, "they were less willing to abandon efforts to reach a difficult child knowing that they would be finished with him or her at the end of the year" (Arhar et al p. 24).

Students in multiyear grouping have more positive attitudes about learning (Arhar et al., p.24-27; Little & Dacus, p.42-45; Zahorik & Dichanz, p.75-77) and exhibit greater academic achievement gains than nonlooping students (Liu, p.156-157), "Long term relationships result in an emotional and intellectual climate that encourages thinking, risk-taking, and involvement" (Zahorik & Dichanz, p. 75). Jacoby (p.58-59) described how looping into a second year with the same students allowed her to offer more constructive criticism on academic work without damaging the student-teacher relationship. She also observed that shy, quiet students grew increasingly comfortable by the second year and participated more in classroom activities and discussions.

Uhrmacher (p.87-104) discussed the idea of a "curriculum thread" that carried over to the next year from a foundation developed in previous years. The process in which subject areas were introduced, integrated, and reapplied in various topics formed a thread that wove in and out of the different curricula. The instructor is no longer a specialist of subject matter or grade level, but a director of "whole" individuals who are in his or her charge for 2 or more years (Reinsmith, p.79-91). This long-term relationship facilitates a deeper investment in children's development (Liu, p.156-157).

The continuing class teacher also has the opportunity to form a closer relationship with the children's parents over the years (Rasmussen, p.2-4). The link between school and parents is strengthened so that when problems arise, the "child/teacher/parent bond helps all involved work things through instead of handing the problem on to someone else". The trusting relationship developed between parent and teacher makes it possible for both to reflect on growth and change over a greater time period and to discuss and direct long-range goals for their children. With the stability in a long-term classroom setting, Jacoby (p.58-59) discussed how children's social, cognitive, and emotional ups and downs can be charted and shared with parents. When significant adults are working together for their child's benefit, the assumption can be made that looping or multiyear grouping would only enrich their efforts. In addition, "When parents are familiar with a school, they tend to rate the school higher" (Pawlas, p. 22). The familial structure of looping or persistent grouping provides an avenue by which parents, along with their children, can feel a sense of belonging or community.

The results of the exploration of the impact of looping classrooms on parent attitudes are encouraging. A student's simply remaining with the same teacher and cohort group for multiple years may have several positive outcomes, including more positive attitudes toward the school and the teacher. In addition, involvement in multiyear looping environments was found to be a significant predictor of positive parent perceptions of student motivation and attitude toward the school environment.
If the looping classroom provides for a greater sense of family or community, as other researchers have suggested (Simel, p.330-337), then it might also be a positive experience for students from single-parent homes. Although the results of many studies did not specifically address the issue of the "community" or "family" school environment, no significant differences between single-parent responses of nonloopers/first-year and multiyear loopers were found. Similarly, there were no significant differences observed between responses of married and single parents based upon looping background. The increased focus on curriculum with less repetition, increased parent contacts, and meeting the needs of students on a personal level, which some would suggest are benefits of looping educational environments (Rasmussen, p.2-4), might well be a welcome respite to parents in search of a stable and intimate setting that promotes a longitudinal resource of educational support for their child. Although anecdotal comments from looping parents throughout this project suggested the positive potential for a sense of community in looping classrooms, this possible community impact could not be explored sufficiently with the current instrument and warrants additional exploration in the near future.
Although the results of many studies suggest positive outcomes of looping environments from the parent perspective in the areas of perceptions of the school environment and student motivation, future research should continue to examine the longitudinal influence of looping on student achievement and behavior and its impact on teacher attitudes. Limited quantitative research exists in support of looping educational environments, with the majority of support generated from anecdotal comments from students, teachers, and parents. In light of this limitation, one strength of many studies is that they provide preliminary quantitative support for looping environments. Looping classroom environments might suggest student academic achievement gains despite the lack of formal investigations in this area. Arhar and others (Nichols & Nichols, p.274-279) suggested that teacher confidence in a looping student's abilities tended to increase throughout the student-teacher relationship, leading to higher expectations and greater student productivity in academic classes. Teaching the "whole" student through multiple years of progression may encourage and enhance, the implication is that achievement may encourage and enhance achievement.

Despite the potential positive outcomes of classroom looping environments, several limitations to the study of looping should be noted. First, parents who agree to have their son or daughter participate in a looping classroom may initially have greater confidence in the school and the looping teacher compared with other parents. In effect, for a student to be a looper, they must have remained in the same school for at least 2 years. The parents of these students are therefore more likely to be more stable than those who are more transient. Therefore, in the future, it might be best to compare parents of children in looping schools versus nonlooping schools if confounding factors such as prior achievement and economic class could be controlled for. This limitation also suggests that in the future, preloop and postloop analysis of parent attitudes within school sites should be explored to determine the specific impact of looping practices. The same argument could also be suggested for students, in that baseline data or preloop academic achievement data should be gathered, followed by postloop analysis to determine the clear academic effect size of the looping experience for students.
Finally, if looping teachers have volunteered for this experience, they clearly support or at least are open to the potential positive outcomes that may occur. In this case, not only does the looping experience become a factor to support positive student and parent attitudes, but the expectations and personality of the teacher potentially may become a significant positive influence (Simel, p.330-337). To address the issue of which may have the greater impact on students--looping practices or individual teacher characteristics--additional research is clearly warranted.
"Waldorf" Philosophy of Education

Waldorf theory and practice are based on the work of Rudolf Steiner, an Austrian philosopher, scientist, and educator who lived at the turn of the last century (1861-1924). Steiner said his purpose was to create a new impulse in education that would enable children from diverse backgrounds to develop the capacities necessary to cope with the demands and challenges of a post-industrial world.

Steiner's thesis was that as cultures become more technologically advanced, human beings need to become more conscious of their capacity to become fully human, if they are to resist competing pressures toward dehumanization. Waldorf education resonates with increasing numbers of educators and parents today because it provides a framework that informs and inspires educators to think about ways to create a learning community that nurtures children's capacity to become whole human beings in a world that is becoming increasingly mechanized.

Basic to Waldorf's philosophy is a complex image of the child as a threefold human being-body, soul, and spirit. Each of these three dimensions is related to four senses, thus expanding our customary view of five human senses to twelve (Soesman, p.87-95). The arts play a significant role in developing the capacities of each child to perceive both one's inner and outer world. When we actively contemplate, practice, or create artistic work, we become more aware of our sensations, feelings, and thoughts.
The aim of the Waldorf model is to educate the child toward a holistic thinking that integrates knowledge gained from thinking, feeling, and doing. Holistic thinking within this framework also refers to the integration of knowledge that is derived from considering beauty, goodness, and truth as complementary ways of more fully understanding reality.

Waldorf educators share a comprehensive theory of child development that shapes its educational practices. Waldorf educators view the child's trifold capacities as unfolding in 7-year rhythms from birth to age 21. They view each individual as being born with a unique inner self that is capable of evolving toward freedom, responsibility, and maturity if appropriate stimulation and nourishment are provided at each developmental stage: the preschool years (0-7), the elementary school years (714), and the adolescent years (14-21).