ABILITY GROUPING AND POSSIBLE ALTERNATIVES
Grouping is important in learning:Itallows a teacher to ensure that peer learning and peer teaching are going on. Moreover, grouping can reduce the size of the group so as to help the teacher individualise teaching by learning and meeting the needs of every student (Hallam et al., 2004b). In addition, grouping can also be beneficial to the instructor, who will have the liberty to give more complex or authentic problems to the learners with the knowledge that they can brainstorm within groups untilthey come up with solutions. There are many strategies that are employed in putting learners into groups. This paper discusses grouping based on ability as discussed by Dr. Rebecca Adderley, the lessons I have picked out from the presentation, and the relevance of ability grouping to contemporary education.
In her introduction, Dr. Adderley recognises the fact that there are no laws governing grouping of learners in the UK. The method of grouping is determined by the school administration and the preferences of individual teachers. She also acknowledges that understanding of pedagogy and various practical constraints affects the method of grouping that is selected. Grouping in various academic disciplines varies depending on the curriculum demands of the discipline, the expertise of individual teachers, and the success or failure of the grouping strategies in previous attempts.
Dr. Adderley references Hallam et al. (2004a) for the objectives of grouping in schools. Grouping is meant to reduce cases of poor behaviour among students, promote gender equality, promote good work habits, encourage cultural mixing among students, and enhance communication and collaboration among learners. Ultimately, grouping is aimed at enhancing learning and learner satisfaction, hence the importance of learner input in selecting a grouping strategy.
Grouping based on ability was first recommended as a policy by the Labour government in the late twentiethcentury and early this century. The current government also encourages grouping by ability; Dr. Adderley includes a 2006 quote by Cameron in her presentation. Dr. Adderley identifies four methods of streaming based on ability. These are streaming, setting, banding, and within-class grouping. For efficiency, other methods of grouping are usually integrated into the grouping process. These methods include gender, mixed-ability, random, and vertical grouping methods.
In the UK, tests are used to determine the ability levels for grouping learners. Dr. Adderley identifies several advantages of the ability grouping system. These include better learning achievements and better preparation for national exams, necessary materials being availed at the level they are most needed, accelerated progress for top groups,focused attention for bottom groups, and enhancement of the learners’ self-esteem (Ireson and Hallam, 2002). She also acknowledges the disadvantages of the system, including:stigmatisation and low self-esteem for learners in bottom groups;pressure to perform on students; separation of friends in the process of grouping; inaccessibility to academic role models for students in bottom groups; assumption that the group is homogeneousby teachers, hence less attention to individual needs; effect on how teachers for the various groups are selected; and limitation of life chances.
Finally, Dr. Adderley includes the opinions of selected teachers and learners in her presentation. Generally, the teachers do not wish to teach bottom groups. The learners have mixed opinions, with some in the bottom groups unsatisfied with their position while others hail the positive influence that the system has had on their class performance. Dr. Adderley argues that attachment of more meaning to the grouping has a negative influence on the children and that a more flexible grouping method would have better results.
I have learned much about ability grouping in the current education system as brought out by Dr. Adderley. The lessons I have learned will surely go on to help me become a better educator. The first main lesson that I learned is that the ability grouping method cannot be used in isolation. For effectiveness, I will always strive to group learners based on ability, but in combination with other factors. Gender is one of the factors that need to be considered. If care is not taken, girls are likely to occupy the top groups while boys will be left in the bottom groups, as recent trendsin performance in the UK have shown (Universities UK, 2011). In addition, socioeconomic status has been shown to be a chief determinant in academic performance in the UK, and grouping strategies should look to bridge this divide. However, I would not advocate for the integration of learner discipline in determining their group, as I feel this can place some learners of higher academic ability who have discipline issues in lower groups, hence hampering rather than enhancing their progress.
I also appreciate the importance of flexibility in whatever grouping method a school may choose. Grouping by ability should not be permanent; it should be possible for the students to be shifted from one group to another based on the most recent performances. This will deter learners from becoming complacent. Gallagher et al. (2011) conclude that permanent ability grouping schemes are more detrimental than helpful to the learners. Moreover, it will enhance the self-esteem of learners, who will feel rewarded by being moved towards top groups. On this, I also propose a selective ability grouping strategy rather than a strategy such as streaming. Learners should be grouped based on their performance per subject. It is possible for a learner to be good in language but poor in mathematics, and sending such a learner to a bottom stream will only harm their progress.
The comments of the learners show that the system does not work for all students. For this reason, it is important that the teaching process is individualised (Iresonand Hallam, 2001 pp.206). One of the key limitations of the system as identified by Dr. Adderley is the assumption by teachers that the groups are homeogeneous. It is important for the teacher to look to fulfil the needs of every student rather than a group. Moreover, I think that integration of co-curricular activities in the group activities can help teachers to identify non-academic abilities and talents that could turn fortunes, especially for those students in the bottom groups. Lastly, as Dr. Adderley correctly identifies, it is important to get the views of the learners before grouping.
Indeed, as discussed by Dr. Adderley,ability grouping is relevant to the basic principles of modern education. Current systems of education are steered towards ensuring that the individual needs of each learner are met. Ability grouping is essential to ensuring this, especially as it ensures proper distribution of resources. Moreover, the ability grouping method appreciates the importance of learner autonomy, which is a key feature of the learner-directed/teacher-led method of teaching that is becoming increasingly important in modern times.
Bibliography
Gallagher, S., Smith, S.R. and Merrotsy, P., 2011. Teachers’ perceptions of the socioemotional development of intellectually gifted primary aged students and their attitudes towards ability grouping and acceleration. Gifted and Talented International, 26(1-2), pp.11-24.
Hallam, S., Ireson, J. and Davies, J., (2004a). Primary pupils’ experiences of different types of grouping in school. British Educational Research Journal, 30(4), pp.515-533.
