With the introduction of tiered papers at GCSE level and differentiated national curriculum tests, there is a growing tendency to use homogeneous grouping arrangements in the hope of making teaching more manageable and learning more efficient. In subjects considered 'linear', such as mathematics, modern foreign languages and to some extent science, setting or within-class grouping are often thought to aid teaching and learning. Although evidence of enhanced performance overall is difficult to distil from research, it appears that higher achievers may benefit marginally in terms of examination performance, as long as other factors such as the quality of teaching and learning are strong.

However, in an inclusive context, schools need to consider the effects of grouping by ability on the pupil/student population as a whole. Much will depend on the institution's ethos, the staff's views, parental opinions and pupil/student relationships.

When deciding how to group learners, schools and colleges need to be clear about what they are trying to achieve and use the different forms -- setting, within-class grouping and mixed-ability grouping -- selectively and flexibly.

Top of page

Setting

Setting has taken over from streaming as a way to 'rationalise' the range of ability in a teaching group. Variations on setting include temporary setting (eg during revision sessions), part-time setting (eg two or three lessons per week), and having a setting in which there is a top set, but mixed ability for other groups..

In principle, setting is flexible enough for children and young people to be able to move between sets. However, the reality for many is that movement between sets is rare and difficult, particularly when the curriculum taught in adjacent sets has been modified or accelerated. There is a need to anticipate movement between sets well in advance and manage carefully the adjustment to working in a new set. This has implications for the way teachers plan the curriculum in a given area -- if staff are going to anticipate needs, they need to communicate and collaborate.

Even where grouping is used to narrow down the range of ability, there will still be a wide range of abilities and learning styles in a set. Studies show that there is a tendency to:

• limit the scope of differentiation in a set, on the assumption that the group is homogeneous;
• use whole-class teaching with a more uniform approach and a fixed pace;
• place greater emphasis on curriculum coverage at the expense of depth of knowledge and understanding (with higher sets). For example, investigations and open-ended enquiries that give pupils an opportunity to develop higher order cognitive skills may not always be given an appropriate amount of time or attention.

Schools and colleges also need to give careful thought to the allocation of staff to specific sets. Experienced or highly-qualified staff should not automatically be equated with top-set teaching. All staff should gain the full range of experience and share expertise in planning and assessment for the subject as a whole. This will help them to be sensitive to the progress and potential of individual students, and to support children and young people moving between sets. Teachers' professional development and learners' entitlement to high-quality teaching and learning will need to be addressed through policy and practice.

The advantages of setting are that it:

• allows resources and tasks to be targeted and matched to needs;
• can make planning easier;
• operates internally to a given subject, and need not affect grouping arrangements elsewhere;
• permits greater homogeneity of teaching groups;
• means that the pace of learning can be increased to suit the group;
• increases motivation by providing appropriate challenge and competition;
• brings like-minded learners together.

However:

• others might miss out on able learners' contributions (and vice versa);
• there is a risk that male learners are clustered in the lower sets;
• learners may seem to be of similar ability, but their pace and preferred learning styles may be very different;
• the underachieving or covert gifted and talented may be missed. Setting can become a self-fulfilling prophecy, with pupils performing to the level of the set they are in and encountering a ceiling to their potential performance;
• sets are often based on narrow criteria, such as capability in writing or mathematics;
• some learners feel uncomfortable in top sets, either because of perceived expectations, competitive ethos and/or inappropriate pace or styles of learning. A recent study of the effects of setting in mathematics showed that a significant number of girls felt ill at ease in the top set and wanted to move down a set;
• any changes made for one group will affect others -- institutions need to attend to the needs of all learners;
• if setting is across two years, care must be taken to ensure that work is not a repeat of the previous year.

Top of page

Within-class grouping

Within-class grouping (ie learners working in groups established by the teacher) is a feature of many primary schools' practice, and is now increasingly common in secondary schools that use group work (particularly for literacy and numeracy).

Within-class grouping is often ability related, based on previous performance. However, it can also serve a purpose when groups are heterogeneous, for example, when learners are pursuing an enquiry or evaluating a documentary or film sequence. Much of the research into the effects of within-class grouping on learners of different ability levels suggests that, in comparison with other systems, it has a positive impact on the achievement of all learners.

The advantages of within-class grouping are that it:

• enables the teacher to meet the needs of groups by modifying learning objectives and pace;
• encourages peer support, allowing the teacher to focus attention as needed;
• allows close learner-teacher interaction in small groups;
• may increase levels of motivation for all learners through an emphasis on cooperative learning;
• encourages learners to develop social and communication skills through the use of explanation, debate and discussion.

However:

• ability-based groups may not be the most appropriate groups for learning;
• the balance of gender, ethnicity and social class represented in different groups needs to be monitored;
• groups will still contain a range of abilities and learning styles;
• the amount of time available for whole-class teaching will be reduced;
• teachers need to beware of creating the impression that the interests of one group are more important than the others.

Top of page

Mixed-ability grouping

When it operates well, mixed-ability grouping can support all learners appropriately. Many subject and class teachers manage it successfully by using a wide range of teaching strategies, differentiated teaching materials and assessment.

However, mixed-ability grouping is both challenging and demanding for teachers. Where it is inadequately resourced or practised, it can depress the achievement of some learners (often the most and least able).

The advantages of mixed-ability grouping are that it:

• gives all pupils access to a common curriculum, teachers and resources;
• encourages cooperative behaviour and better social integration;
• allows matching to individual needs and encourages assessment of learners in relation to their own potential;
• aids transition and continuity of learning styles between institutions;
• reduces competition and labelling;
• allows individuals to learn at their own pace;
• allows learners to be stimulated by others and/or their needs. For example, high attainers can act as models for others by setting standards and can strengthen their own learning by explaining or discussing their work.

However:

• mixed-ability grouping makes significant demands on the teacher, both inside and outside the classroom;
• planning, preparing and organising resources takes time and effort;
• teachers have to spend considerable time responding to individual learners. This can have a detrimental effect on classroom management;
• there is a danger that excessive whole-class teaching or uniform worksheets can play too large a role;
• poor implementation can result in failure to meet the needs of any learners, particularly the most and least able.

Top of page