Effective Pupil Grouping in the Primary School

A Practical Guide

Susan Hallam, Judy Ireson, Jane Davies

• Publisher: David Fulton Publishers
• Year: 2013
• ISBN:
  9781134143177
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Education
• Subtopic: Education General

This book draws on new research exploring the practical experiences of schools and teachers who have used different kinds of grouping. Setting out the issues and discussing the strengths and weaknesses of different types of grouping, this book will help teachers decide which methods are most appropriate for their pupils.

The authors offer step-by-step guidance to all aspects of grouping, including setting; streaming; within-class ability grouping; within-class mixed ability grouping; cross-age grouping; assessing and monitoring group placement; and how to implement different types of grouping.

The book also discusses children's perceptions of the purposes of groups; moving between groups; and how to liaise with parents about their child moving groups.

The book will be welcomed by trainees and teachers alike.

Chapter 1

Ability grouping in primary schools

Ability grouping practices in primary schools: the historical context

There is a long tradition of ability grouping in primary schools in the UK. The practice of allocating pupils to classes based on ability (streaming) was widespread in larger primary schools throughout the 1940s and 1950s as pupils were prepared for selection at age 11. During the 1960s, with the move towards comprehensive education, the demise of the 11-plus examination, and an increasing emphasis on equal opportunities, streaming began to decline, further encouraged by the Plowden Report (1967), which advocated a more child-centred approach to primary education. This trend was supported by research indicating that ability grouping had no significant effect on overall attainment, and had negative personal and social consequences for pupils in the lower streams (Jackson 1964; Barker Lunn 1970, 1984). By the 1970s, of those schools that were large enough to stream, only about 20 per cent chose to do so (Bealing 1972; DES 1978). By the 1990s this had declined further to less than 3 per cent (Lee & Croll 1995). Streaming had almost disappeared.

Following the Education Reform Act (1988), the 1990s saw the implementation of the National Curriculum and an emphasis on raising standards. Ability grouping in the form of setting (pupils ability grouped across classes for particular subjects) was perceived as a way to raise attainment and all primary schools were encouraged to introduce it (DfE 1993). This was reinforced by the White Paper Excellence in schools, which suggested that setting could be beneficial in raising standards and that ‘setting should be the norm in secondary schools. In some cases, it is worth considering in primary schools’ (DfEE 1997: 38). More recently, secondary schools have been exhorted to consider express sets, fast-tracking, early entry to GCSE and advanced qualifications for gifted and talented pupils (DfEE 2001a, 2001b). The impact of the DfEE guidance on grouping practices in the primary school will be considered in Chapter 2.

How should we judge the effectiveness of different types of ability grouping?

Whether alternative forms of grouping are seen as effective or not depends on how we define effectiveness and what criteria we use to measure it. Traditionally, primary education in England has had broad educational aims relating to children's academic, personal and social development. Teachers endorse the following five aims. All children should:

• develop their full potential;

• be happy and well balanced;

• have their interest in learning aroused;

• develop self-confidence; and

• be kind and considerate.

(Pollard et al. 1994: 109)

Although the Education Reform Act established a statutory obligation on teachers to meet the academic objectives set out in the National Curriculum, teachers did not abandon their non-academic aims. They simply increased their list of objectives. The aims outlined above are broadly in line with those stated in the most recent version of the National Curriculum. This sets out the values and purposes underpinning education in the UK as follows:

Education influences and reflects the values of society, and the kind of society we want to be. It is important, therefore, to recognise a broad set of common values and purposes that underpin the school curriculum and the work of schools. Foremost is a belief in education, at home and at school, as a route to the spiritual, moral, social, cultural, physical and mental development, and thus the well-being, of the individual. Education is also a route to equality of opportunity for all, a healthy and just democracy, a productive economy, and sustainable development. Education should reflect the enduring values that contribute to these ends. These include valuing ourselves, our families and other relationships, the wider groups to which we belong, the diversity in our society and the environment in which we live. Education should also re-affirm our commitment to the virtues of truth, justice, honesty, trust and a sense of duty.

At the same time, education must enable us to respond positively to the opportunities and challenges of the rapidly changing world in which we live and work. In particular, we need to be prepared to engage as individuals, parents, workers and citizens with economic, social and cultural change, including the continued globalisation of the economy and society, with new work and leisure patterns and with the rapid expansion of communication technologies.

(DfEE/QCA 1999: 10)

From this, two very specific aims are set out:

• to provide opportunities for all pupils to learn and achieve; and

• to promote pupils' spiritual, moral, social and cultural development and prepare all pupils for the opportunities, responsibilities and experiences of life.

These broad aims, encompassing academic, personal and social educational outcomes for pupils, provide a clear framework against which we may assess the effectiveness of different types of ability grouping in the UK.

Types of grouping in primary schools

Primary schools use a range of structured grouping practices and teachers group pupils within the classroom in a variety of ways. Table 1.1 provides a list of the main types of ability grouping used in schools.

Streaming is the most rigid form of ability grouping. Pupils are placed into a class on the basis of a measure of their overall ability and remain in that class for most subjects. It is based on the assumption that individuals have a certain level of general intelligence, which predicts their performance across all subjects and can be measured by objective tests. Banding is a broader form of streaming, which offers greater flexibility as each band contains several classes, providing scope for regrouping within a band. Setting can occur within bands.

Mixed-ability classes are those where pupils are randomly placed in classes which may then be grouped in other ways, for instance through

Table 1.1 Types of ability grouping

Streaming (tracking)	Pupils are placed in classes on the basis of a test of their general ability. They remain in their streamed class for most subjects.
Banding	Pupils are placed in two, three or four bands on the basis of a test of their general ability. Each band contains a number of classes and pupils may be regrouped within the band for some subjects.
Mixed ability (heterogeneous grouping	There is no attempt to group together pupils of similar ability or attainment.
Setting (regrouping)	Pupils are grouped according to their attainment in a particular subject. Setting may be imposed across a whole year group, across timetable halves, within a band or across mixed-age classes.
Within-class grouping	Pupils are grouped within the class on the basis of ability or in mixed-ability groups. They may be regrouped within the class for different subjects.
Cross-age or vertical grouping (Cross-grade grouping)	Pupils in two or more year groups are placed in the same class, for all or part of the curriculum. They may be regrouped by setting or within-class grouping or taught as a mixed-ability class.

setting or within-class grouping. This is the most common form of class allocation in primary schools in the UK. Setting offers a more flexible way of grouping pupils on the basis of their attainment in particular curriculum subjects. Schools may use setting for some or all academic subjects and setting may be introduced in different years. As with streaming, the aim of setting is to enable teachers to match their teaching to pupils' needs. Within-class grouping is the most common form of grouping in primary schools. Groups may be formed on the basis of ability, attainment in particular subjects, friendships or working relationships.

In cross-age grouping, pupils in different year groups are taught together, for all or part of the day. Mixed-age or vertically grouped classes are often necessary in small schools, where there are insufficient numbers to form whole classes each year. Mixed-age classes may also be used for teaching specific parts of the curriculum, with children from several years working together.

What can research tell us about the effects of ability grouping on pupils?

Ability grouping has been the subject of research since the early twentieth century. Since then hundreds of studies have been undertaken and there have been many literature reviews and syntheses of research findings (for recent UK reviews see Sukhnandan & Lee 1998; Ireson & Hallam 1999; Hallam 2002). Much of this effort has attempted to estab-Jish whether ability grouping enhances pupils' academic attainment. Researchers have also examined whether ability grouping has any effect on non-academic outcomes, such as pupils' self-esteem, motivation, alienation and attitudes towards school.

Methodological issues in research on ability grouping

When undertaking research on ability grouping researchers face a number of difficulties. First, as indicated above, pupils can be grouped by ability in many different ways, through selective schooling, streaming, banding, setting or within the classroom. Often different types of grouping are in place for children of different ages within the same school. For example, in a primary school, pupils may be in mixed-ability classes for the whole day during Key Stage 1, yet in sets for certain subjects in Key Stage 2. Even when pupils are in mixed-ability classes, individual teachers may group by ability in their classroom for all or part of the curriculum. This makes it difficult for researchers to obtain accurate information about the exact nature and extent of ability grouping within a school and to make comparisons between the effects of each.

Second, a wide range of outcome measures have been adopted to assess effectiveness. These have related to academic, social and personal development. Few projects have taken account of all of them. In addition, researchers use different measures for similar outcomes, making it difficult to compare results from different studies. Academic outcomes have been assessed by performance on commercially standardised tests (especially in reading and mathematics), national tests (e.g. key stage tests), examination performance and course completion. Personal and social outcomes have been assessed using different measures of self-esteem, motivation, attitudes and alienation, or by employing interview techniques. Drawing conclusions across studies is therefore problematic. Generally, a narrow range of learning outcomes has been researched (often reading and mathematics) with little concern for critical thinking, level of understanding, creativity and metacog-nitive and transferable skills.

A third difficulty is that even within a single school the academic and affective outcomes of grouping are not consistent in size, over time, in different curriculum subjects or with different teachers (Ireson & Hallam 2001). Schools and classrooms are dynamic environments, with many factors affecting learning outcomes. There are complex interactions between grouping strategies, teaching methods, teacher attitudes, curriculum subject, the pacing of lessons and the ethos of the school (Ireson & Hallam 2001). The grouping of pupils is only one of several factors affecting the learning environment of the classroom. The quality of instruction and the curriculum may both mediate the effects of pupil grouping (Creemers 1994). Teachers themselves — through the way they interact with pupils — can be crucial in mediating the effects of grouping (Barker Lunn 1970). These contextual issues have largely been ignored, in particular those relating to the way that grouping is embedded in the ethos of a school and the wider school community. Each school is unique and has its own characteristics relating to its location, pupil intake, size, resources and most importantly the quality of its staff (Mortimore et al. 1988). For this reason, the effects of the same system of pupil grouping may not be consistent between schools, nor even within the same school, as the system is implemented differently by individual teachers.

A final problem is that the effects of grouping are not consistent across groups of pupils. There may be differences relating to ability, ethnicity, age, gender, socio-economic background and other factors. The issue is therefore not whether ability grouping is effective, but for whom and in what ways it is effective and whether anyone suffers as a result of it (Slavin 1987).

School effectiveness research

The evidence from school effectiveness research has demonstrated that there are differences between schools in the extent to which they are successful in promoting the academic and non-academic aspects of children's development. While some schools are effective in promoting academic, social and personal development in children, others are effective only in relation to academic or social and personal development. There is not necessarily a strong association between the effects of school on attainment and other outcomes for pupils. The two dimensions can be largely independent of each other (Mortimore et al. 1988).

In a review of the literature on school effectiveness commissioned by Ofsted, 11 factors were identified as key characteristics of effective schools (Sammons et al. 1995). Pupil grouping was not included, although there are potential links between most of the factors identified and grouping. Shared aims and goals, which contribute to defining the ethos of a school, are particularly important. How these are related to ability grouping will be considered in Chapter 2. Other key factors included the learning environment, concentration on teaching and learning, purposeful teaching, high expectations, positive reinforcement and monitoring progress, pupil rights and responsibilities and home-school partnerships, all of which may impinge on or be affected by ability grouping.

What are ...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Table of Contents
• Preface
• 1 Ability grouping in primary schools
• 2 Making decisions about grouping practices
• 3 Pupils' experiences of different kinds of grouping
• 4 Streaming and setting
• 5 Mixed-ability and within-class groupings
• 6 The management of ability and mixed-ability groups in schools
• 7 Overview and conclusions
• References
• Index