Introduction

Since the beginnings of state-sponsored public education in America within the one-room schoolhouse, educators have been captivated by the methods in which students can best learn. Today, Horace Mann would likely see our school system today and marvel at what methods have changed over the last 165 years as well as what has completely stagnated. One of the main consistencies in this time has been the overarching and formulaic cycle of planning, teaching, assessment, and repeat with new content. Educators and administrators alike are looking toward alternative methods for teaching and learning, especially in the aftermath of the worldwide COVID-19 pandemic. One of these methods that is rising in popularity is the concept of “Mastery Learning” in order to support student development in a time where they may need it most. Mastery learning serves to break down this formulaic method of teaching that has primarily dominated the educational sphere for over a century in America. While being an educator in a public high school for the last 4 years, my district has actively moved toward this philosophy of learning. Throughout this time, there have been many challenges, and a lot of professional development to get teachers adjusted. Without a more nuanced understanding of mastery learning, educational leaders would be left in an environment that could be rife with misinformation about the topic, and even hamper how the policy is implemented within the everyday classroom.

History & Definition

As time progressed beyond the one room schoolhouse and into more traditional places for education that is familiar today, educational psychology and methodology progressed as well. In 1968, educational psychologist Benjamin Bloom developed the revolutionary concept of “Mastery learning”. Traditional grading styles hitherto that point, Bloom asserts, create a self fulfilling prophecy by establishing a criteria for how many students will likely get what grades, and students effectively being assigned those grades. This is effectively what we understand to be the old school system of the bell curve. These grading expectations are ultimately flawed in that they lead to decreased motivation and competency for a given subject area. Thus, “Mastery learning” (as he coins) is the ability to structure schooling so that all can succeed through a structure of teaching, assessing, reteaching, and reassessing in order for students to have the opportunity to achieve “mastery” in a given area. Through the use of diverse learning methods and mediums, the delivery of quality instruction, a students ability to persevere, and allowing for more or less time to an individual student as they are achieving or have already achieved a given goal. This dynamic style is what truly distinguishes mastery learning from most other curriculum and grading models. Here, teachers have the time built into their schedules to more thoughtfully differentiate learning and assessing for their students. At the time, Blooms idea served as a novel theory, but more radical research was needed in order to determine the actual outcomes of this form of learning. 

The conversation behind mastery learning in the last 5 years has been grown an incredible amount, likely due to the introduction of this model from popular educational platform, Khan Academy. Addressed in a video from 2018, they see mastery learning describes how a learner can obtain “gaps” in their knowledge by simply not understanding a concept in the first place, which in turn leads to significantly decreased competency in a given area. By being able to progress at an individualized pace, and being given individualized learning activities, students can theoretically thrive in a subject that they previously thought was not possible. The core of this methodology here is the necessity to provide students with multiple opportunities to be assessed, and the ability to gain feedback and grow in between assessments. Similar to that of a video game, their philosophy relies on near instantaneous feedback given to students to help them improve just as quickly.

The visual above from Otus, a popular EdTech platform for educational data, presents a more modern framework for how this type of learning is structured in schools today beyond the conceptions of 1968. Beginning with pre-assessment, it is first essential for teachers to know what knowledge students are coming in with in order to start the differentiation process. After instruction takes place, formative assessments are used to gauge student knowledge of the instruction that was given. Depending on how students perform on these more minor check-in assessments, they will obtain opportunities to be re-taught the material or enrich themselves in the material further. This step is absolutely critical when comparing these steps back to the original framework for mastery learning, because it supplies students with a differentiated opportunity to master and succeed in the content instruction. Hence, this chart supplies a method to visualize the theories of mastery learning into actual practice in a classroom. With all of this in mind, the research below will put this theory into practice and see if mastery learning actually helps student development in both the physical and online classroom. 

Mastery Learning within the Classroom

To demonstrate these ideas in action, the video above shows an example of mastery learning from a secondary classroom. A student gives a phenomenal testimony on how mastery learning has benefitted his experience as a student by stating that their learning benefits greatly by being self-paced and creating their own deadlines for assignments or exams. This flexibility provides students with the ability to achieve mastery at a pace that best fits them. This presents an incredibly differentiated environment, and one that raises students' understanding and competencies. Through their program “Connect”, students ultimately set their own goals and work at their own pace for those that would like to graduate early. Through the use of flexibility and meaningful goals, students are able to challenge themselves in a significant way. In this way, success for students will beget greater success in the future as they build up their competencies to mastery level. It obvious that in order to achieve mastery, students must already have bought-in to learning and the classroom.

At an elementary level too, teachers can utilize a “Grid” method to achieve master learning at the 3rd, 4th, and 5th grade levels in a gifted classroom. The Grid Method has the teacher break down a greater topic into 5 separate levels ranging from simply explaining and defining a concept all the way to creating and constructing an end-product using that knowledge. Students work up a ladder of Bloom's taxonomy in order to achieve mastery of the subject. Tiffany Ott describes the success that she had with her students, stating that they are able to effectively take responsibility for their day to day tasks, and she works as a facilitator. The bulk of the work for teaching, Ott, comes at the beginning of every unit, planning out what students are going to achieve and how they are going to achieve it. From the teacher’s perspective, mastery learning can allow teachers more time to provide targeted students who are struggling with more one-on-one attention. Of course one major trickle-down effect of this is that teachers are able to more intentionally build relationships with students.

The Research

In the 5 decades that have passed since it's introduction, there has been Perhaps the most efficient method to interpret the effectiveness of mastery learning practices is through the work of Kulik et al. (1990) and their meta-analysis of mastery learning studies. Personalized System of Instruction (PSI), the authors state, is a program characterized by the use of student-paced lessons, regular assessments, and students who fail formative assessments are sent back to restudy the material and take additional assessments until mastery is obtained. In particular, the authors describe Bloom’s “Sigma 2” study, in which a student who is experiencing one-on-one instruction utilizing mastery learning methodology can perform significantly better than students in a traditional classroom. Out of the 108 studies of mastery programs studied, 96 studies reported significant positive effects using these practices. In terms of student attitudes toward a mastery learning program, students were overwhelmingly positive, although no specific comments were cited about why students like this program. With this said, this certainly lines up with the classroom videos that are seen above, in that both students and teachers alike reacted positively toward this method of learning. Thus, an incredible foundation is laid out to support mastery learning within the classroom environment.

More recent research demonstrates that mastery learning can be for vocational learning, which has become increasingly popular over the last decade. McGaghie et al. (2014), examines the use of simulation-based mastery learning (SBML) specifically in medical education. The researchers were able to determine that SBML, which uses the same key pillars of mastery learning including little variation in outcome and amount of time to master is varied, is a profoundly effective way for students to practice clinical experiences. Utilizing SBML can also lead to improved patient care practices, better patient outcomes, and greater cost savings for the school with greater learner retention of material. From an administrational standpoint, this part is particularly appealing. The study demonstrates the realistic potential of this type of learning when applied to active simulations for a given vocation, and makes a compelling argument for both tangible and intangible rewards for implementing this type of practice.

To get more specific on this effectiveness, it is important to zone in on how mastery learning synergizes with the main principles of social cognitivism. By analyzing mastery learning using group-based practices, Guskey and Pigott (1988) are able to fill an important gap in literature. Guskey and Pigott (1988) create a firm meta-analysis of group-based mastery learning mastery learning studies. In a synthesis of 46 studies that research the effectiveness of mastery learning, the authors establish diverse criteria to create a fascinating conclusion:

• student outcomes
• student achievement
• retention of material
• engagement in learning activities
• student affect

Overall across all of these domains, consistently positive effects were had. With this being said, the positive impact on student achievement, the meta-analysis found, had varied effects across the board. In terms of how teachers relate to mastery learning, the research shows that it likely only takes 3 weeks to fully adapt to mastery learning, that teachers using mastery learning take greater responsibility for their students learning, and overall feel much more positive about their roles as teachers. By seeing such positive outcomes of group-based mastery learning from a birds-eye-view, it helps develop a greater understanding of how both teachers and students alike benefit. In this way, the benefits of both mastery learning and collective intelligence are combined to theoretically create a classroom atmosphere that is much greater than the sum of its parts.

Limitations & Conclusions

With all of these potential benefits of mastery learning in and out of the classroom, it is clear that the study of this particular topic, nor its implementation is incredibly exhaustive. The largest limitations stem from the restrictions placed on the traditional American school system, and the infrastructure created based upon decades of legislation to support this system. Arlin (1984) states it best when discussing “time-achievement-equal” dilemma. This dilemma correctly identifies time as a finite resource within the public school system, and that mastery learning necessitates that every student needs different amounts of time to master certain material. By giving students equality of time, a clear argument can be made that educators are presenting students with inequality of achievement. This dilemma is perhaps the first thought coming to an educational leader's mind when researching mastery learning, and quite clearly these thoughts are confirmed. The current American school system inhibits true mastery learning from taking place, given that a pillar of this method is giving students ultimate flexibility in the time that they have to learn. Assigning separate grade levels in and of itself is at odds with mastery learning. Thus, in order to reach toward mastery learning with much higher fidelity, the concept of time needs to be much more thoroughly examined in order to see if it can be further adapted to fit the American school system or if the American school system needs to ultimately change. Food for thought.

In the end, it stands to reason that there is a significant benefit to utilizing mastery learning to promote student development both inside and outside of the classroom. Mastery learning can potentially serve as a valuable method to raise student competencies in a meaningful manner, which realistically prepares them for learning outside of the classroom. As we continue to march down this path within the classroom that I teach in, it is also requisite for an educational leader to keep in mind the significant limitations that this method can have without a more considerable reconstruction of how the typical high school functions within America. The time given, assessment needs, and all-encompassing goals set up by historical and contemporary lawmakers alike, certainly stands at odds with the core principles of these practices. But by keeping expectations in check, working within the confines of these boundaries, and supplying all teachers with the proper resources to make mastery possible, the impact that can be had on student development certainly makes this implementation a worthwhile endeavor. Possessing this newfound understanding regarding how mastery learning can be implemented within the contemporary physical and online classroom, I hope you too can influence a greater change within our educational institutions. The more improvement we collectively demonstrate with this form of learning, the more likely the system will slowly adapt to the research.

Thanks for reading! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work.