Grouping according to ability

Today’s classes include a wide variety of students of varying experiences, skills, and needs. Teachers are compelled to seek out suitable policies and services that ensure support for all of their pupils. To counter the diverse world and needs, educators are implementing policies such as talent grouping. The aim of this paper is to discuss the skill grouping method and its implications for teaching and learning. According to Vogl and Preckel (2014), the use of skill grouping is becoming more common throughout the world, especially in American schools. The administrators promote the classroom strategy, and teachers have integrated it into their learning setting with the aim of meeting the needs of each student, improve their learning, and improve the test scores (Bolick & Rogowsky, 2016). However, there has been continuous opposition to the use of the strategy as some teachers, administrators, and education stakeholders question the significance of the approach. They argue that it has an adverse impact on the students’ achievement and their self-concept and they support the use of other teaching instructions. The ability grouping is not an efficient way to improve the learning and teaching in the modern classroom and to handle the differences in abilities of students.

Impact of Ability Grouping on Learning and Teaching

Neihart (2007) explains ability grouping as an educational approach that places learners based on their academic achievement with the aim of providing appropriate instruction for students and their individual needs. Neihart (2007) states that there exist different forms of the strategy with the most common being within a class setting or between classes ability grouping. The between-class alignments involve separating learners into different classrooms centered on their abilities in class or their past performance. On the other hand, within-class arrangements divide students in a class based on the interests of the learners, recent performance, or academic ability. Bolick and Rogowsky (2016) argue that the instructor mostly assigns these groups and can either be homogeneous or heterogeneous. Heterogeneous groups are established based on learners with mixed abilities while the homogeneous groupings include students with similar or the same skills (Vogl & Preckel, 2014).

The proponents of grouping students by their ability argue that teaching similar classroom achievers allows the educator to modify the pace of instruction according to the desires of the scholars. The teachers can instruct low-achieving students using a slow speed where they provide more repetition and reinforcement. Similarly, a group of high performers receives more opportunities to conduct independent research and hold helpful discussions (Vogl & Preckel, 2014). They are allowed to apply their skills and knowledge to solve problems. Therefore, the old style of teaching increases the achievement of students by enabling tutors to focus instructions where they are needed the most. Vogl and Preckel (2014) state that teachers engage in the classroom strategy to meet the individual needs of learners and improve their learning ability hence improved test scores.

Grouping students by their ability are not the best classroom organizational strategy as the beliefs and expectations of the teachers regarding the abilities of their learners influence the formational of these groups. According to Bolick and Rogowsky (2016), most of the ability groups are not flexible hence they do not allow students to quickly move in and out of groupings based on their achievements and needs. Vogl and Preckel (2014) report that ability groupings are mostly homogeneous which is associated with adverse impacts on the performance of student participants. These groups have no significant effect on the abilities of the learners and their academic achievements. Grouping them by their educational result has an impact on the psychological and social welfare.

According to Neihart (2007) ability grouping has a negative impact and damaging results for low-achieving students as their social and emotional outcomes are negatively impacted. In addition, there are peer group effects that affect the achievement of students. Bolick and Rogowsky (2016) argue that the performance of a learner depends on both their first ability and the average ability of the class. Therefore, it is essential to have high-achievers who are motivated in the class as the raises the level of achievement of the members. Moreover, grouping learners on their ability in class harm the lower ability students as they are separated from the high ability colleagues. Furthermore, the peer group effect has potential damage on the test scores of school children especially of the low-achievers due to lowered self-esteem and expectations. The classroom organizational strategy should not be applied as a general approach for all students as it is harmful to both their academic and psychological status.

Conclusion

In educational institutions, students are placed in groupings based on their classroom abilities, achievements, interests, or skills where they perform a collective assignment. The groups may either be within a single classroom setting or may involve more than one classroom and are established based on mixed abilities (heterogeneous) or include students with similar skills (homogeneous). The teaching and learning strategy are focused on helping the students particularly the low-achievers who receive modified instructions at a pace based on their needs and ability. However, the approach is not appropriate as the low-performing students experience lowered self-esteem and expectations. They also face the peer group effect that has a potential harm to their academic and social performance.

References

Bolick, K. N., & Rogowsky, B. A. (2016). Ability grouping is on the rise, but should it be? Journal of Education and Human Development, 5(2), 40-51.

Neihart, M. (January 01, 2007). The socioaffective impact of acceleration and ability grouping. Gifted Child Quarterly, 51(4), 330-341.

Vogl, K., & Preckel, F. (January 01, 2014). Full-time ability grouping of gifted students: Impacts on social self-concept and school-related attitudes. Gifted Child Quarterly, 58, 1, 51-68.