ERIC Documents Database Citations & Abstracts for
Instructions for ERIC Documents Access
Search Strategy:
Ability Grouping (as an ERIC Descriptor with heavily weighted status)
AND
Review Literature OR Literature Reviews (as an ERIC Document type or ERIC Descriptor, respectively) OR Authors = ([surnames] Kulik OR Slavin OR Wheelock)
AND
Elementary Secondary Education OR Elementary Education or Secondary Education
ED426129 UD032667
What Research Says about Ability Grouping and Academic Achievement.
Nicholson, James A.
1998
9p.
Document Type: REVIEW LITERATURE (070)
Ability grouping and the tracking of students have become
traditional in the U.S. education system. In 1893 the National
Education Association (NEA) demanded that every subject taught in
secondary school be taught in the same way; but by 1918, the NEA
supported academic tracks for some students and vocational tracks for
others. Since then, the debate over tracking and ability grouping
has continued, and arguments on both sides of the debate have
remained essentially the same. Rosa Lee Weaver, in a 1990 report,
summarized the argument of proponents of ability grouping that
grouping is necessary to individualize instruction and accommodate
the diverse needs of students. Advocates of ability grouping have
been particularly concerned about the negative effects that
heterogeneous classes might have on high achievers who would benefit
from ability-grouped situations. On the other hand, opponents of
ability grouping have been concerned about the negative effects of
the practice on low achievers (low self-esteem, lower aspirations,
and negative attitudes toward school) who might be denied access to
high quality instruction. The pro-grouping argument has been
primarily concerned with the issue of effectiveness, while opponents
to grouping have been concerned with equity. Research on effective
schools has identified high teacher expectations and students'
expectations of themselves as essential for academic achievement.
How students view themselves does affect their academic achievement.
(Contains 22 references.) (SLD)
Descriptors: *Ability Grouping; *Academic Achievement; Elementary
Secondary Education; *Equal Education; High Achievement; Low
Achievement; *Self Esteem; Teacher Expectations of Students; *Track
System (Education); Vocational Education
ED422454 UD032514
The Tracking and Ability Grouping Debate. Volume 2, Number 8.
Loveless, Tom
Thomas B. Fordham Foundation, Washington, DC. 1998
37p.; Foreword by Chester E. Finn, Jr.
Available From: Thomas B. Fordham Foundation, 1015 18th Street
N.W., Suite 300, Washington, DC 20036; toll free telephone: 1-888-TBF-
7474; World Wide Web: http://www.edexcellence.net (single copies free).
Document Type: REVIEW LITERATURE (070)
Tracking and ability grouping are common practices that are often
harshly criticized. Both practices group students of similar
achievement levels for instruction, but they differ in how this task
is accomplished. Elementary schools typically use ability grouping
in reading instruction, with instruction targeted to the reading
level of each group. Middle and high schools use tracking to group
students between classes, offering courses in academic subjects that
reflect differences in students' prior learning. Critics charge that
tracking not only fails to benefit any students, but that it also
channels poor and minority students into low tracks and dooms them to
an inferior education. Research has indicated that when students are
grouped into separate classes and given an identical curriculum,
there is no appreciable effect on achievement. However, when the
curriculum is adjusted to correspond to ability level, it appears
that student achievement is boosted, especially for high ability
students receiving an accelerated curriculum. Heterogeneous grouping
has not been adopted by enough middle schools and high schools to
conclude whether detracking produces achievement gains for anyone,
and research to date cannot conclusively demonstrate that one or the
other is the better way to organize students. The charge of
unfairness more accurately depicts tracking's past than its present.
In the past, tracking was rigid and deterministic, but today, schools
assign students to tracks for particular subject areas based on
proficiency. Most schools assign students based on their choices
once prerequisites have been met, and transcript studies show that
students may move independently up or down in each subject's
hierarchy of courses depending on their performance. One criticism
still appears valid. Low tracks often emphasize good behavior and
menial skills, while high tracks offer preparation for college.
These differences in learning environments particularly depress the
academic achievement of poor and minority students. In contrast,
Catholic high schools appear to provide low track students with a
quality education, and they are remarkably similar in boosting low
track students to higher levels. Some principles for future policies
are outlined. An appendix compares two meta-analyses of the track
system. (Contains 7 tables.) (SLD)
Descriptors: *Ability Grouping; *Academic Achievement;
Disadvantaged Youth; Educational Research; Elementary Secondary
Education; *Equal Education; Instructional Program Divisions;
Minority Groups; Poverty; *Student Placement; Tables (Data); *Track
System (Education)
ED408085 PS025487
Setting and Streaming: A Research Review.
Harlen, Wynne; Malcolm, Heather
Scottish Council for Research in Education, Edinburgh.
1997
58p.; Series editors: Wynne Harlen and Rosemary Wake.
ISBN: 1-86003-033-5
Available From: Scottish Council for Research in Education, 15 St.
John Street, Edinburgh EH8 8JR, Scotland, United Kingdom; phone: 0131-
557-2944; fax: 01310556-9454; e-mail: SCRE#064;ed.ac.uk; www:
http://www.scre.ac.uk (SCRE Publication No. 137).
Document Type: REVIEW LITERATURE (070)
The findings of a review of research into setting and streaming
(ways of grouping pupils according to ability) in primary and
secondary schools in Scotland are presented. The review was
conducted according to the best evidence synthesis model, as set out
by Slavin (1986). The review relied on findings of Slavin's meta-
analyses, as well as adding studies which have been carried out since
his reviews and studies that have incorporated qualitative findings.
The review found that in primary schools, the strongest evidence for
the effect of ability grouping was in mathematics. Pupils of all
abilities gained from within-class ability grouping compared to whole-
class mixed-ability teaching. In secondary school, where ability
grouping is formed by setting (pupils are placed in ability classes
for certain subjects only) or streaming (pupils remain in ability-
based classes for all subjects), the social disadvantages of these
forms of organization made ability grouping hard to defend. Yet
mixed-ability grouping had its own drawbacks. Mixed-ability classes
are hard to manage and teach. There was evidence that teachers aim
lessons at the middle of the ability range, sometimes treating mixed-
ability groups as though they were low-ability streams. Research
showed that even teachers with substantial experience working with
mixed-ability classes frequently use whole-class teaching methods
which are inappropriate for mixed-ability groups. Overall, what goes
on in classrooms seems likely to have more impact on achievement than
how students are grouped. (Contains 133 references.) (WJC)
Descriptors: *Ability Grouping; Academic Ability; *Academic
Achievement; *Educational Research; Elementary Secondary Education;
Foreign Countries; Grouping (Instructional Purposes); *Heterogeneous
Grouping; *Homogeneous Grouping; Literature Reviews; Mathematics
Instruction
Identifiers: Scotland
EJ542075 TM520005
Within-Class Grouping: A Meta-Analysis.
Lou, Yiping; And Others
Review of Educational Research, v66 n4 p423-58 Win
1996
Research supported by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research
Council of Canada and the Fonds pour la formation de chercheurs et
l'aide a la recherche of the Quebec (Canada) government. Portions of
this paper presented at the Annual Meetings of the American
Educational Research Association (San Francisco, CA, April 1995 and
New York, NY, April 1996).
ISSN: 0034-6543
Document Type: REVIEW LITERATURE (070); CONFERENCE PAPER (150);
JOURNAL ARTICLE (080)
The effects of within-class grouping on student achievement and
other outcomes were quantitatively integrated using one set of 145
effect sizes exploring grouping versus no grouping and a set of 20
effect sizes related to homogeneous versus heterogeneous ability
grouping. Overall, results favored homogeneous grouping. (SLD)
Descriptors: *Ability Grouping; *Academic Achievement; *Effect Size;
Elementary Secondary Education; Meta Analysis; Nongraded
Instructional Grouping; *Outcomes of Education; *Track System
(Education)
EJ535201 CE530118
Sustained Inquiry in Education: Lessons from Skill Grouping and
Class Size.
Mosteller, Frederick; And Others
Harvard Educational Review, v66 n4 p797-842 Win 1996
ISSN: 0017-8055
Document Type: REVIEW LITERATURE (070); JOURNAL ARTICLE (080)
Review of tracking research reveals a small number of well-designed
studies with equivocal results. The Tennessee Class Size Study
demonstrates convincingly that student achievement is better in
smaller K-3 classes and the effect continues later in regular-sized
classes. More randomized, controlled field trials such as this are
needed. (SK)
Descriptors: *Ability Grouping; Academic Achievement; *Class Size;
Elementary Education; Longitudinal Studies; Research Needs; *Teacher
Student Ratio; *Track System (Education)
Identifiers: Tennessee
EJ514722 EA531325
Detracking and Its Detractors: Flawed Evidence, Flawed Values.
Slavin, Robert E.
Phi Delta Kappan, v77 n3 p220-21 Nov 1995
ISSN: 0031-7217
Document Type: EVALUATIVE REPORT (142); REVIEW LITERATURE (070);
JOURNAL ARTICLE (080)
High-track/low-track studies almost invariably conclude that
students gain from being in high-ability groups and lose from being
in low-ability groups. Track/no-track studies find achievement
effects approaching zero for high, average, and low achievers.
Brewer, Rees, and Argys's own data provide little evidence for
maintaining ability grouping. (MLH)
Descriptors: *Ability Grouping; *Academic Achievement; *Academic
Aptitude; Elementary Secondary Education; *Research Problems; *Track
System (Education)
ED384643 TM023845
Review of the Literature on Tracking and Ability Grouping. Second
Draft.
Lindle, Jane Clark
1994
38p.
Document Type: REVIEW LITERATURE (070)
This review of the research literature on ability grouping and
tracking draws on professional and scholarly research journals and
electronic databases. Five assumptions have been used to support the
recurring practices of tracking and ability grouping, but none of
these assumptions has withstood close examination in 70 years of
research. They are: (1) student potential can be determined by past
scores on achievement or IQ tests; (2) prerequisites for achievement
are obvious, simple, and easily identifiable and absolutely
necessary; (3) student self-esteem is served by separating the "less
able" and the "smarter" students; (4) student diversity can be
accommodated through differentiated curricula; and (5) teacher work
is more efficient if students are grouped homogeneously. The
literature clearly shows the inadequacy of tracking and ability
grouping. Research has consistently shown positive effects of the
practice only for the highest ability groups, who were also given
enriched curriculum and stimulating instruction. Ability grouping
has been associated with discriminatory practices within the schools.
A firm recommendation is made that the Fayette County (Kentucky)
public schools discontinue tracking and ability grouping. (Contains
261 references.) (SLD)
Descriptors: *Ability Grouping; Academic Achievement; Achievement
Tests; Curriculum; Educationally Disadvantaged; *Educational
Practices; Educational Research; Elementary Secondary Education;
Equal Education; Intelligence Tests; Literature Reviews; Public
Schools; Self Esteem; *Student Placement; *Test Results; *Track
System (Education)
Identifiers: Fayette County Public Schools KY
EJ464542 PS520431
Ability Grouping in the Middle Grades: Achievement Effects and
Alternatives.
Slavin, Robert E.
Elementary School Journal, v93 n5 p535-52 May 1993
Thematic Issues: Middle Grades Research and Reform.
ISSN: 0013-5984
Document Type: REVIEW LITERATURE (070); JOURNAL ARTICLE (080)
Reviews research on the effects of ability grouping on the
achievement of middle school students. Found no or few effects of
ability grouping for high, average, and low achievers in 27 studies.
Alternatives to between-class ability grouping, including cooperative
learning and within-class grouping, are discussed. (PAM)
Descriptors: *Ability Grouping; *Academic Achievement; Adolescents;
Case Studies; Cooperative Learning; Elementary Education; *Grouping
(Instructional Purposes); *Heterogeneous Grouping; *Middle Schools;
Preadolescents; Track System (Education)
Identifiers: *Block Scheduling
ED367095 EC302797
An Analysis of the Research on Ability Grouping.
Kulik, James A.
National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented, Storrs, CT.
NRC/GT Newsletter, p8-9 Spr 1993 1993
3p.; For a related document, see ED 350 777.
Sponsoring Agency: Office of Educational Research and Improvement
(ED), Washington, DC.
Document Type: REVIEW LITERATURE (070); JOURNAL ARTICLE (080)
This research review summarizes two major sets of meta-analyses on
five kinds of ability grouping programs: (1) XYZ classes (high,
middle, and low classes); (2) cross-grade grouping; (3) within-class
grouping; (4) accelerated classes; and (5) enriched classes. One
group of meta analyses concluded that the strongest benefits from
grouping were found in programs in which there was a great deal of
adjustment of curriculum for highly talented learners. The other
meta-analysis did not find any strong positive benefits of grouping,
but did not examine grouping programs designed for highly talented
students. Re-analysis of all studies included in both sets of meta-
analyses confirmed that higher aptitude students usually benefit
academically from ability grouping. Benefits are in proportion to
the amount of curriculum adjustment, with programs entailing
acceleration of instruction resulting in the most gain on
standardized tests. Grouping was found to have less influence on the
academic achievement of middle and lower aptitude students. Analysis
of noncognitive outcomes suggests that the effects of grouping on
self-esteem measures measures for all ability groups are small and
may even be rather positive. Results are contrasted with the
conclusions of J. Oakes ("Keeping Track: How Schools Structure
Inequality" (1985). The review concludes that American education
would be harmed by the wholesale elimination of programs that group
learners for instruction by ability. (DB)
Descriptors: *Ability Grouping; Academic Ability; Academic
Achievement; Curriculum; Educational Philosophy; Elementary Secondary
Education; *Equal Education; *Gifted; Grouping (Instructional
Purposes); *Homogeneous Grouping; Meta Analysis; Research and
Development; Self Esteem; *Talent; Theory Practice Relationship
EJ478718 UD517770
Students Differ: So What?
Slavin, Robert E.
Educational Researcher, v22 n9 p13-14 Dec 1993
Responds to "Lake Wobegon Revisited: On Diversity and Education" by
Andrew Biemiller, "Educational Researcher," v22 n9 p7-12. For related
documents, see UD 517 769 and UD 517 771.
ISSN: 0013-189X
Document Type: POSITION PAPER (120); EVALUATIVE REPORT (142);
JOURNAL ARTICLE (080)
The relevant debate is not whether students differ but what schools
should do about student achievement differences. Some forms of
ability grouping may be justifiable, but those who would group
students should have the burden of proving its effectiveness, because
the negative consequences can be serious. (SLD)
Descriptors: *Ability Grouping; *Academic Achievement;
Disadvantaged Youth; Elementary Secondary Education; Grouping
(Instructional Purposes); Heterogeneous Grouping; *Individual
Differences; *Instructional Effectiveness; Track System (Education)
Identifiers: Lake Wobegon Phenomenon
EJ460667 UD517117
From Tracking to Untracking in the Middle Grades.
Wheelock, Anne
Equity and Choice, v9 n2 p44-50 Win 1993
Theme issue with title "The Community Connection."
ISSN: 0882-3863
Document Type: JOURNAL ARTICLE (080); EVALUATIVE REPORT (142)
Describes the switch taking place in many schools, especially
middle schools, from grouping students by ability (tracking) to mixed-
ability classrooms (untracking). Discusses components of untracking,
student and teacher responses, and tracking as a public policy issue.
(SLD)
Descriptors: *Ability Grouping; Academic Achievement; Access to
Education; *Adolescents; Child Development; *Educational Change;
Equal Education; Junior High Schools; Junior High School Students;
*Middle Schools; Minority Group Children; Nondiscriminatory Education;
Public Policy; *Student Placement; Teaching Methods; *Track System
(Education)
Identifiers: *Reform Efforts
ED353220 SP034193
What Next? Promoting Alternatives to Ability Grouping.
Wheelock, Anne; Hawley, Willis D.
Sep 1992
15p.; Paper presented at the Common Destiny Conference (September 9-
11, 1992).
Document Type: CONFERENCE PAPER (150); POSITION PAPER (120)
With new knowledge and tools at their disposal, educators at all
levels are exploring alternatives to ability grouping in order to
improve schooling for all students. Bringing about positive results
requires the development and utilization of knowledge about how
ability grouping affects schools, exploration of beliefs that support
grouping, and identification of the educational tools and techniques
that make alternative practices possible. Implementation of
alternatives to ability grouping include more than the regrouping of
students from homogeneous to heterogeneous groups. Rather, what is
needed is whole-school reform, requiring educators to investigate and
adapt a variety of new approaches to curriculum and instruction in
the classroom. Curriculum and instruction resources developed
expressly for heterogeneous groups emphasize thinking skills,
cultural perspectives, and high expectations for all students.
Successful school reform depends on demonstrating to different
interest groups that children will not be harmed and will indeed
benefit from alternatives to ability grouping without diluting the
curriculum. Professional development for teachers and leadership
pulling together the necessary knowledge and tools make implementing
alternatives to ability grouping possible. (Contains 9 references.)
(LL)
Descriptors: *Ability Grouping; Academic Achievement; Class
Organization; Educational Change; *Educational Status Comparison;
Elementary Secondary Education; *Equal Education; Faculty Development;
Group Structure; *Heterogeneous Grouping; *Homogeneous Grouping;
Labeling (of Persons); Multicultural Education; Outcomes of Education;
*Student Placement; Teacher Expectations of Students; Track System
(Education)
Identifiers: *Alternative Conceptions; Reform Efforts
EJ451469 EA527198
Is Ability Grouping Equitable?
Gamoran, Adam
Educational Leadership, v50 n2 p11-17 Oct 1992
ISSN: 0013-1784
Document Type: JOURNAL ARTICLE (080); EVALUATIVE REPORT (142);
REVIEW LITERATURE (070)
Recent research suggests that ability grouping and tracking do not
increase overall achievement in schools but promote inequality. High-
track teachers are more enthusiastic and spend more time preparing
lessons, whereas low-track teachers spend more time on behavior
management and less on instruction. A sidebar by Cloyd Hastings
demands abolition of ability grouping on moral and democratic grounds.
(28 references) (MLH)
Descriptors: *Ability Grouping; *Academic Achievement; Elementary
Secondary Education; *Equal Education; *Track System (Education)
EJ450979 UD516781
Finding the Optimal Match: Another Look at Ability Grouping and
Cooperative Learning.
Mills, Carol J.; Tangherlini, Arne E.
Equity and Excellence, v25 n2-4 p205-08 Win 1992
ISSN: 0894-0681
Document Type: JOURNAL ARTICLE (080); REVIEW LITERATURE (070);
POSITION PAPER (120)
Examines the literature on ability grouping and cooperative
learning. Solid research evidence supports both. Ability grouping
and cooperative learning should be used to address particular student
needs. Selecting a variety of educational options to match the needs
of each student would be the best way to serve all students. (SLD)
Descriptors: *Ability Grouping; *Cooperative Learning; Educational
Improvement; *Educational Practices; Elementary Secondary Education;
Grouping (Instructional Purposes); *Instructional Effectiveness;
Literature Reviews; Research Utilization; *Student Needs; Teaching
Methods
EJ448066 UD516631
Can Tracking Research Inform Practice? Technical, Normative, and
Political Considerations.
Oakes, Jeannie
Educational Researcher, v21 n4 p12-21 May 1992
ISSN: 0013-189X
Document Type: JOURNAL ARTICLE (080); REVIEW LITERATURE (070)
Argues that tracking students for instruction is usually neither
equitable nor effective. Reviews what has been learned about
tracking, considers impacts of these findings, and suggests new
research to target needs of reformers more directly. Understanding
and changing the norms and policies that buttress tracking is
essential to reform. (SLD)
Descriptors: *Ability Grouping; Academic Achievement; Educational
Change; *Educational Practices; Educational Research; Elementary
Secondary Education; *Equal Education; *Grouping (Instructional
Purposes); Literature Reviews; Political Influences; Racial
Differences; Research Needs; Social Class; *Student Placement; *Track
System (Education)
ED355296 UD029044
Why Ability Grouping Must End: Achieving Excellence and Equity in
American Education.
Braddock, Jomills Henry, II; Slavin, Robert E.
Center for Research on Effective Schooling for Disadvantaged
Students, Baltimore, MD. Sep 1992
24p.; Paper presented at the Common Destiny Conference at Johns
Hopkins University (Baltimore, MD, September 9-11, 1992).
Document Type: REVIEW LITERATURE (070); CONFERENCE PAPER (150)
This review of research focuses on policies and practices that
result in placing students in groups that are more or less
homogeneous with respect to academic performance. Recent analysis of
data from the National Education Longitudinal Study of 1988 provides
the largest and best-controlled multi-year study of ability grouping
ever conducted (Braddock and Slavin). The outcomes of scores of
studies have been similar, and these outcomes are discussed in the
following categories: (1) opportunities to learn; (2) ability
grouping and achievement; (3) ability grouping and segregation; (4)
ability grouping and intergroup relations; (5) ability grouping, self-
esteem, and feelings of inferiority; (6) ability grouping,
delinquency, and dropouts; and (7) alternatives to ability grouping.
Ability grouping must end because it is ineffective, harmful to many
students, and damaging to interracial relations and democratic
society. Effective and practical alternatives exist. Public schools
must provide more equitable access to learning opportunities that
develop reasoning, inference, and critical thinking skills. Major
school restructuring will be necessary to develop the needed
alternatives. A 71-item list of references is included. (SLD)
Descriptors: *Ability Grouping; *Academic Achievement; Access to
Education; Delinquency; Educational Discrimination; Elementary
Secondary Education; *Equal Education; Longitudinal Studies;
*Minority Groups; National Surveys; Nondiscriminatory Education;
School Desegregation; Self Esteem; *Student Placement; Thinking
Skills; *Track System (Education)
Identifiers: National Education Longitudinal Study 1988; Reform
Efforts
ED353279 TM018992
Alternative Instructional Grouping Practices.
McGurk, Erin K.; Pimentle, Jodi A.
Apr 1992
26p.
Document Type: REVIEW LITERATURE (070); EVALUATIVE REPORT (142)
Alternatives to the current system of graded classes and ability
grouping are examined that would allow teachers to balance individual
student needs with practical considerations in instructional delivery.
In addition to reviewing the alternatives, the research that has
examined these approaches is reviewed and synthesized. The three
alternative grading practices reviewed are: (1) non-graded schools;
(2) multigraded classrooms; and (3) the Joplin Plan, developed in
Joplin (Missouri), as a system of instructional grouping within a
graded school in which students are regrouped for instruction in a
specific skill by ability without regard to grade level or age.
Overall, research reviewed for this paper provides inconsistent
support for the use of non-graded and multigraded classes over
traditional practices. In contrast, the use of the Joplin Plan is
well-supported by research. Although findings are inconclusive, no
detrimental effects were attributed to any of the alternative plans.
Suggestions for further research are given. There is a 28-item list
of references. (SLD)
Descriptors: *Ability Grouping; Class Organization; Comparative
Analysis; Educational Practices; Elementary Secondary Education;
Flexible Scheduling; *Grouping (Instructional Purposes);
*Instructional Program Divisions; *Multigraded Classes; *Nongraded
Instructional Grouping; *Nontraditional Education; Teaching Methods
Identifiers: *Joplin Plan
ED350777 EC301588
An Analysis of the Research on Ability Grouping: Historical and
Contemporary Perspectives. Research-Based Decision Making Series.
Kulik, James A.
National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented, Storrs, CT.
Feb 1992
77p.
Sponsoring Agency: Office of Educational Research and Improvement
(ED), Washington, DC.
Available From: National Research Center on the Gifted and
Talented, The University of Connecticut, 362 Fairfield Rd, U-7,
Storrs, CT 06269-2007.
Document Type: REVIEW LITERATURE (070)
Meta-analytic reviews have shown that the effects of grouping
programs depend on their features. Programs that entail only minor
adjustment of course content for ability groups usually have little
or no effect on student achievement. In some grouping programs, for
example, school administrators group students by test scores and
school records and then expect all groups to follow the same basic
curriculum. Under this approach, pupils in middle and lower programs
learn the same amount as equivalent students do in mixed classes,
while students in the top classes outperform equivalent pupils from
mixed classes by about 1 month on a grade-equivalent scale. Self-
esteem of lower aptitude students rises slightly and self-esteem of
higher aptitude students drops slightly. Grouping programs that
entail more substantial adjustment of curriculum to ability have
clear positive effects on children. In cross-grade and within-class
programs that provide both grouping and curricular adjustment, pupils
outperform equivalent control students from mixed-ability classes by
2 to 3 months on a grade-equivalent scale. Programs of enrichment
and acceleration, which usually involve the greatest amount of
curricular adjustment, have the largest effects on student learning,
with talented students from accelerated classes outperforming
nonaccelerates of the same age and intelligence quotient by almost 1
full year on achievement tests. Talented students from enriched
classes outperform initially equivalent students from conventional
classes by 4 to 5 months on grade equivalent scales. (Contains over
200 references.) (Author/JDD)
Descriptors: *Ability Grouping; Academic Achievement; Acceleration
(Education); Curriculum; Educational Practices; Elementary Secondary
Education; Enrichment Activities; *Grouping (Instructional Purposes);
*Homogeneous Grouping; *Instructional Effectiveness; Meta Analysis;
Outcomes of Treatment
ED346194 UD028680
Maintaining Inequality: A Background Packet on Tracking and Ability
Grouping.
National Coalition of Education Activists, Rosendale, NY.
Jan 1992
40p.
Available From: National Coalition of Education Activists, P.O. Box
405, Rosendale, NY 12472 ($3.00).
Document Type: COLLECTION (020); REVIEW LITERATURE (070)
Target Audience: Practitioners
This document includes a selection of materials from the National
Coalition of Education Activists (NCEA) on tracking and ability
grouping designed to be a tool for teachers who wish to organize
their school or district against tracking. The packet contains a
cover letter, a response/feedback form, and reproductions of the
following articles: (1) "What is Tracking?" (NCEA); (2) "Tracking:
Maintaining Inequality" (NCEA); (3) "Selma High Student Speaks Out"
(an interview with M. Sanders); (4) "My Tracking Experience" (C.
Richard); (5) "The Pigs" (M. Schwabe); (6) "What's Wrong with
Tracking" (S. Karp); and (7) "Tracking: An Old Solution Creates New
Problems (a chapter from "Making the Best of Schools" by J. Oakes and
M. Lipton). Also included is a list of 11 resources on tracking. (JB)
Descriptors: *Ability Grouping; *Affirmative Action; *Disadvantaged
Youth; *Educational Discrimination; Educational Improvement;
Educationally Disadvantaged; Elementary Secondary Education; Minority
Group Children; Parent Participation; *Politics of Education; Racial
Discrimination; Student Placement; *Track System (Education)
ED322565 EA021836
Achievement Effects of Ability Grouping in Secondary Schools: A
Best-Evidence Synthesis.
Slavin, Robert E.
National Center on Effective Secondary Schools, Madison, WI.
1990
37p.
Sponsoring Agency: Office of Educational Research and Improvement
(ED), Washington, DC.
Available From: Document Service, National Center on Effective
Secondary Schools, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Wisconsin Center
for Education Research, 1025 W. Johnson Street, Madison, WI 53706
($7.00 prepaid).
Document Type: RESEARCH REPORT (143)
A "best evidence" review synthesis, which incorporates features of
meta-analytic and traditional literature reviews, is used in this
review of studies on the effects of ability grouping on secondary
school students' achievement. The focus was on 29 studies that
compared between-class ability grouping to heterogeneous placements.
Effect sizes were used to characterize study results. Findings
indicate that comprehensive between-class ability grouping plans,
different forms of ability grouping, and ability grouping by subject
(except in social studies) had no effect on student achievement. The
finding of zero effects of grouping for all ability levels
contradicts earlier conclusions that demonstrated benefits of ability
grouping for high-level students and detriments for low-level
students. Explanations for this discrepancy are discussed. An
implication is that policy decisions about ability grouping must be
based on criteria other than effect on academic achievement. A
recommendation is made for reduction of between class ability
grouping practices and consideration of cooperative learning methods.
An extensive bibliography and statistical tables are included. (LMI)
Descriptors: *Ability Grouping; *Academic Achievement; *Effect Size;
Literature Reviews; Meta Analysis; Secondary Education; *Secondary
School Students; *Student Evaluation; Student Placement; *Track
System (Education)
EJ417571 TM515417
Achievement Effects of Ability Grouping in Secondary Schools: A
Best-Evidence Synthesis.
Slavin, Robert E.
Review of Educational Research, v60 n3 p471-99 Fall
1990
For related documents see TM 515 418-419.
Document Type: JOURNAL ARTICLE (080); REVIEW LITERATURE (070);
RESEARCH REPORT (143)
Best-evidence synthesis was used to review 29 research papers
published in English that evaluate the effects of ability grouping on
student achievement in secondary schools. Six randomized
experiments, 9 matched experiments, and 14 correlational studies were
reviewed. Findings do not indicate beneficial effects of ability
grouping on achievement. (SLD)
Descriptors: *Ability Grouping; *Academic Achievement; Comparative
Testing; Foreign Countries; Literature Reviews; Meta Analysis;
Secondary Education; *Secondary Schools; Standardized Tests; Track
System (Education)
Identifiers: *Best Evidence Synthesis; Great Britain; United States
ED315501 UD027291
Structuring Schools for Student Success: A Focus on Ability
Grouping.
French, Dan; Rothman, Sheldon
Massachusetts State Dept. of Education, Quincy. Bureau of Research,
Planning, and Evaluation. Jan 1990
35p.
Document Type: REVIEW LITERATURE (070); EVALUATIVE REPORT (142)
Target Audience: Practitioners
This paper presents a research summary on ability grouping and
tracking, and makes recommendations to school practitioners on
successful alternative strategies to educate children from diverse
backgrounds. The research reveals little evidence that ability
grouping improves academic achievement, while overwhelming evidence
exists that it retards the academic progress of students in low- and
middle-ability groupings. The effect of ability grouping is to widen
the achievement and knowledge gap between groups of students, due to
differing instructional practices and teacher expectations. Ability
grouping serves as a form of segregation by race, socioeconomic
background, gender, language, and special education status.
Furthermore, this segregation brings into question whether
discriminatory procedures are used to determine ability levels. It
is unclear whether ability grouping eases the task of teaching for
all ability level classes, but the evidence clearly indicates that it
is an ineffective means of addressing individual differences. The
research indicates that schools should implement alternatives to the
use of ability grouping and tracking practices. Recommendations are
presented for the following topics: (1) assessment and planning; (2)
grouping of students; (3) curriculum and instruction; (4) staff
development; and (5) student and family support. Nine examples of
schools that have made the transition from homogeneous to
heterogeneous grouping are included. A brief list of terms and their
definitions is included. Also appended are 59 footnotes and a 10-
item bibliography. (JS)
Descriptors: *Ability Grouping; Ability Identification; Academic
Ability; *Academic Achievement; *Change Strategies; Educationally
Disadvantaged; Educational Quality; Elementary Secondary Education;
*Heterogeneous Grouping; *Low Achievement; Student Improvement;
Teacher Expectations of Students; *Track System (Education)
Identifiers: Massachusetts
EJ398546 UD514617
Tracking: A National Perspective.
Schneider, Jeffrey M.
Equity and Choice, v6 n1 p11-17 Fall 1989
Document Type: JOURNAL ARTICLE (080); REVIEW LITERATURE (070)
Target Audience: Policymakers
Outlines the negative effects of tracking on minority group
students, the characteristics of beneficial systems, and alternatives
to tracking. Concludes that tracking is common practice in American
public education and that rigid tracking creates problems of student
isolation by socioeconomic status and ethnicity. Suggests criteria
for evaluating alternatives. (FMW)
Descriptors: *Ability Grouping; Elementary Secondary Education;
*Equal Education; Literature Reviews; *Minority Group Children;
*Program Evaluation; *Student Placement; *Track System (Education)
EJ390487 EA523363
Tracking Students by Their Supposed Abilities Can Derail Learning.
Peterson, John M.
American School Board Journal, v176 n5 p38 May 1989
Document Type: JOURNAL ARTICLE (080); REVIEW LITERATURE (070);
POSITION PAPER (120)
Research findings indicate that ability grouping does not help
remedial students. Cites research studies in mathematics achievement
that consistently imply that ability grouping in mathematics harms
low-ability and average students. Urges schools to cease grouping
students by their supposed abilities. (MLF)
Descriptors: *Ability Grouping; Elementary Secondary Education;
*Mathematics Anxiety; *Remedial Mathematics; *School Policy
ED318125 EA021818
Instructional Organization and Educational Equity.
Gamoran, Adam
National Center on Effective Secondary Schools, Madison, WI.
[1989
34p.
Sponsoring Agency: Office of Educational Research and Improvement
(ED), Washington, DC.
Document Type: REVIEW LITERATURE (070); POSITION PAPER (120)
Target Audience: Practitioners
Research on school effects has shown that differences within
schools have more influence on educational outcomes than do
differences between schools. This chapter explores the implications
for educational equity of ability grouping. Concerns about equity
are organized by placing them in the context of the meaning of
educational equity that implies equality of results across population
subgroups, and equality of access with respect to the population as a
whole. Research on the effects of grouping and tracking reveals that
ability grouping in particular seems to affect equity. At the
elementary school level, it leads to greater inequality of results,
but may occur in concert with higher achievement at all ranks. In
secondary schools ability grouping seems to have the most severe
consequences for inequality. Future research might evaluate the
likelihood of effective instruction in low-track classes along with
the prospects for maintaining high achievement for the strongest
students with the use of cooperative learning in heterogeneous
classes. (73 references) (MLF)
Descriptors: *Ability Grouping; *Access to Education; College Bound
Students; Cooperative Learning; Educational Objectives; Elementary
Secondary Education; *Equal Education; Individualized Instruction;
*Instructional Effectiveness; Instructional Improvement;
*Instructional Program Divisions; Low Achievement; Outcomes of
Education; *Track System (Education); Values
ED302326 PS017690
Grouping Students by Ability: A Review of the Literature.
Spencer, Carol; Allen, Michael G.
1988
19p.
Document Type: REVIEW LITERATURE (070); POSITION PAPER (120)
Grouping students homogeneously by ability level is a common
practice in public middle and secondary schools. This practice
persists despite research evidence that it actively hinders students'
learning. To change grouping practices, however, concurrent changes
must be made in the design of schedules, curriculum, and instruction.
Such changes can be made in ways compatible with many effective
teaching and learning practices that characterize the middle school.
In fact, there are many small, concrete, and mechanical things that
middle-level educators can do to create an environment that
communicates to students the idea that learning is the most important
thing in the school setting. Of numerous research findings and
practical considerations related to heterogeneous grouping, none is
more important than the fact that all students learn best in classes
where the ability level is average or higher. This is the starting
point for changing attitudes and practices. The time has come to
close the door on homogeneous grouping at the middle level. (RH)
Descriptors: *Ability Grouping; *Educational Change; Educational
History; Educational Practices; *Grouping (Instructional Purposes);
Guidelines; *Heterogeneous Grouping; *Homogeneous Grouping;
Literature Reviews; *Middle Schools; Secondary Schools; Teacher Role;
Track System (Education)
EJ366906 TM513011
Ability Grouping and Student Achievement in Elementary Schools: A
Best-Evidence Synthesis.
Slavin, Robert E.
Review of Educational Research, v57 n3 p293-336 Fall
1987
For related articles, see TM 513 012-014.
Document Type: JOURNAL ARTICLE (080); REVIEW LITERATURE (070);
EVALUATIVE REPORT (142)
Review of research of between-class and within-class ability
grouping on the achievement of elementary students. Ability grouping
appears most effective for specific subjects with students remaining
in heterogeneous classes most of the day. Cross-grade assignment for
selected subjects can increase achievement. (SLD)
Descriptors: *Ability Grouping; *Academic Achievement; Elementary
Education; Elementary School Students; Mathematics Achievement; Meta
Analysis; Reading Ability; *Student Placement; Track System
(Education)
Identifiers: *Cross Level Grouping; *Joplin Plan
EJ361951 UD513271
Grouping for Instruction: Equity and Effectiveness.
Slavin, Robert E.
Equity and Excellence, v23 n1-2 p31-6 Spr 1987
Special issue on Ethnic and Ability Grouping.
Document Type: JOURNAL ARTICLE (080); REVIEW LITERATURE (070)
Reviews briefly the research on achievement effects of the
following: (1) ability-grouped class assignment; and (2) student
grouping alternatives that would accommodate learning differences
among students. Discusses instructional effectiveness of those
alternatives and their potential impact on segregation. (PS)
Descriptors: *Ability Grouping; *Academic Achievement; *Elementary
Secondary Education; Grouping (Instructional Purposes);
*Instructional Effectiveness; Student Placement; *Track System
(Education)
Identifiers: *Diversity (Student)
EJ357572 TM512072
Beyond Ability Grouping: A Review of the Effectiveness of Ability
Grouping and Its Alternatives.
Dawson, Margaret M.
School Psychology Review, v16 n3 p348-69 1987
Document Type: JOURNAL ARTICLE (080); REVIEW LITERATURE (070)
This paper discusses negative consequences for students placed in
low ability classes and presents some alternative grouping and
instructional practices which have been proven effective in
heterogeneous classrooms. (LMO)
Descriptors: *Ability Grouping; *Academic Achievement; *Class
Organization; Classroom Environment; Elementary Secondary Education;
*Grouping (Instructional Purposes); *Literature Reviews; Low
Achievement; Self Concept; Special Education; Student Attitudes
Identifiers: Teacher Expectations
ED348174 PS020898
Ability Grouping and Student Achievement in Elementary Schools: A
Best-Evidence Synthesis. Report No. 1.
Slavin, Robert E.
Center for Research on Elementary and Middle Schools, Baltimore,
MD. Jun 1986
127p.
Sponsoring Agency: Office of Educational Research and Improvement
(ED), Washington, D.C.
Document Type: REVIEW LITERATURE (070)
This report reviews research on the effects of between- and within-
class ability grouping on the achievement of elementary school
students. The review technique, known as "best-evidence synthesis,"
combines features of meta-analytic and narrative reviews. Overall,
evidence does not support assignment of students to self-contained
classes according to ability, but grouping plans involving cross-
grade assignment for selected subjects can increase student
achievement. Research particularly supports the Joplin Plan, cross-
grade ability grouping for reading only, and forms of nongraded
programs involving multiple groupings for different subjects. Within-
class ability grouping in mathematics is also found to be
instructionally effective. Ability grouping is held to be maximally
effective: (1) when it is done only for one or two subjects, with
students remaining in heterogeneous classes most of the day; (2) when
it greatly reduces student heterogeneity in a specific skill; (3)
when group assignments are frequently reassessed; and (4) when
teachers vary the level and pace of instruction according to
students' needs. (An 18-page reference list is appended).
(Author/RH)
Descriptors: *Ability Grouping; *Academic Achievement; *Educational
Practices; Elementary Education; *Elementary School Students;
Literature Reviews; Mathematics Instruction; Meta Analysis; Reading
Instruction
Identifiers: Best Evidence Synthesis
EJ283314 SP513044
Tracking and Ability Grouping in American Schools: Some
Constitutional Questions.
Oakes, Jeannie
Teachers College Record, v84 n4 p801-19 Sum 1983
Available From: Reprint: UMI
Document Type: JOURNAL ARTICLE (080); LEGAL MATERIAL (090);
REVIEW LITERATURE (070)
Constitutional bases for challenging ability grouping practices in
the schools using the track system are presented. Research findings
on ability grouping, law review journal articles, and texts of court
cases are analyzed to determine possible grounds for such suits. (PP)
Descriptors: *Ability Grouping; *Access to Education; *Court
Litigation; *Educational Malpractice; Elementary Secondary Education;
*Equal Education; Minority Group Children; School Law; Student Rights;
Student School Relationship; *Track System (Education)
EJ275516 TM507714
Effects of Ability Grouping on Secondary School Students: A Meta-
Analysis of Evaluation Findings.
Kulik, Chen-Lin C.; Kulik, James A.
American Educational Research Journal, v19 n3 p415-28 Fall
1982
Document Type: JOURNAL ARTICLE (080); RESEARCH REPORT (143);
REVIEW LITERATURE (070)
Results from a meta-analysis of findings from 52 studies of ability
grouping carried out in secondary schools are reported. This meta-
analysis provided precise, quantitative estimates of the size of
grouping effects. (Author/PN)
Descriptors: *Ability Grouping; *Academic Achievement; Aptitude
Treatment Interaction; High Achievement; *Secondary Education;
*Student Attitudes
Identifiers: Meta Analysis
ED232293 EA015908
Highlights from "Research on Ability Grouping."
Kulik, Chen-Lin C.; Kulik, James A.
Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, Alexandria,
Va.
Educational Leadership, v39 n8 p620 May 1982 May 1982
2p.
Sponsoring Agency: National Science Foundation, Washington, D.C.
Document Type: REVIEW LITERATURE (070); JOURNAL ARTICLE (080)
Target Audience: Practitioners
THE FOLLOWING IS THE FULL TEXT OF THIS DOCUMENT: Except for high-
ability students in honors classes, ability grouping has little
significant effect on learning outcomes, student attitudes toward
subject matter and school, and self-concept. The differences that
are found in grouped classes are all positive, however slight, and
there is no evidence that homogeneous grouping is harmful. LEARNING
OUTCOMES. In general, students who are grouped in classes according
to academic ability outperform nongrouped students only slightly.
However, students in gifted and talented programs perform better than
they would in heterogeneous classes. In contrast, students in
classes for the academically deficient perform neither better nor
worse than they would in a mixed-ability class. The effects in multi-
tract, as opposed to mixed, classrooms are also negligible.
ATTITUDES. Students who are ability-grouped for a particular
subject, such as mathematics or English, have a better attitude
toward the subject. There is very little difference between grouped
and ungrouped students in their attitudes toward school. SELF
CONCEPT. The effects of grouping on self-concept are positive but
minor. ASCD's Research Information Service will help ASCD members
locate sources of information on topics related to curriculum,
supervision, and instruction. Send your specific question in writing
to Research Information Service, ASCD, 225 N. Washington St.,
Alexandria, VA 22314. (Author)
Descriptors: *Ability Grouping; Academic Achievement; Classroom
Research; Elementary Secondary Education; Literature Reviews; Self
Concept; Student Attitudes
Identifiers: PF Project
Return to the Index of FAQs
|
