When I think of ability grouping in schools the first thought that comes to mind is the seperation at an elementary level. Everyone probably remembers you had a special table that you sat at in the classroom, you may have even had a name. (I was a red bird ) But I doubt that any of us came to the conclusion that we were sitting there because the other kids at our table were at the same level as we were. I personally don't agree with ability grouping, because I feel like a student that is doing poorly needs to be pushed by someone who is a little better. It's like the sports saying that you'll only get better if you play against someone better than you. I'm not saying that I think they should be doing the same worksheet at exactly the same time. I'm just saying that I think it challenges a student's mind to be around other students who may be one step ahead of them. I'm curious to hear some other people's point of view, and how the secondary teachers feel about the subject.

I definitely agree with Jessica. When I read the Ollie Taylor story, it made me so sad for that child, and any other child, who has figured out their group. I mean, obviously that child was smart enough to figure out that he had been labeled for the rest of his educational career, and to know the expectations of such a label.

I must say, however, that I know for sure ability grouping went on in my school experience. I think I was actually more surprised to read the encouragement to stay away from it than i was to read about it happening! But i've definitely made up my mind not to use that in my classroom. It makes perfect sense to group students from all different levels together! Of course they'll learn from each other! And there will be times when each student gets to be the one who knows best! I can't wait to be in a classroom and see those moments happen!!

I agree that ability grouping can be a bad idea. However, I do think that children are smarter than we think they are, and they are aware of the fact that they are in either a low ability group or a high ability group. I think that grouping is a bad idea because once kids are in a low group and they are aware of that then they are not going to try as hard. They know what is expected of them, which isn't much if they are in the low group and knowing this could discourage them. This is just what I think. It is kind of like being on a sports team and being on the second string or being a "benchwarmer". I don't think that people would try as hard if they already had the feeling that they 'weren't as good" as everyone else. Unless, there is a teacher or coach that is very encouraging then I don't think that the students or players would do as well as they could. I can see how ability grouping can help teachers because they can teach all of the students according to their levels, but at the same time it can cause self-esteem problems, so I guess I would say that ability grouping is overall a bad idea.

I agree with all of you, but how do you put the children all together and challenge them all at the same time? Don't you think giving out different worksheets would be just as obvious as putting them at a seperate table? Maybe because i was always on the better side of things, maybe i'm a little hesitant to say that it's BAD ALTOGETHER. I don't think it's the best approach, but i think it's the easiest for administration... and the lack the drive or time to try something new. So that leaves it in the hands of us, and i'm curious on how we will deal with it...

Like Jessica, I now realize that my elementary teachers grouped me by ability (my group was the "Monkeys") and like Janelle, I am weighing the pros and cons.

One analogous counter-example to ability grouping is IEP. An IEP is usually given to students with disabilities (instead of abilities), but consider developing an individual education plan for every student. From talking to a few teachers, having just a few students with IEP's is an administrative nightmare. They talk about writing separate lesson plans, meeting with each student's parents, his other teachers, and a disability specialist more frequently than a teacher would normaly schedule such conferences. So Janelle makes a good point about the practicality of individualized schooling. Perhaps there is a better method for teachers to cultivate each students' abilities but I have yet to hear one.

In high school I was fairly aware of being tracked as a pre-collegiate student, but by looking back, it seems my teachers also grouped me by ability within their classroom. I remember my teachers assigning students to groups for projects, labs and other things instead of letting the students pick their friends, so perhaps the assignments were mixing students of different abilities. I have a hunch that this is exactly what my high school teachers were doing because I (and most my classmates) were aware of the "high" and "low" performing students in my classes and the "high" students were never assigned into one group, nor the "low" performers. If these groups were indeed mixed, then the only difference between a heterogenous classroom and ability grouping is scale -- a group with mixed abilities is simply a smaller version of a class with mixed abilities.

As a prospective high school teacher, I haven't made a decision eitherway because I would like to hear more alternatives to tracking, ability grouping and individualized schooling.

I believe grouping can have its pros and cons. What I found interesting from another class was that reading abillity groups can work out to the students advantage. Only if the ability groups are well planned and thought out. Our book describes to advantages to grouping with first graders. Grouping within classroom and grouping with several classrooms. In the classroom they take time in the morning as a class to do a reading. Then the students work individually as the teacher circulates. After about a half hour of that they join their groups. Their groups are based on ability and have been put together carefully. Each group does a different activity. One activity consist of working with the teacher. The groups switch activities after 25mins. The teacher is showing the same amount of attention to each group. After this the teacher gives a choice of reading a book independently or with a partner. While this is going on the teacher goes around instructed the students that he/she feels needs help.

Students are smart and may know that they are being grouped in groups related to ability, but by doing this the individual is getting more one on one instruction from the teacher and is able to hopefully progress faster. Now after reading the article we had to reflect and ask questions. One of my questions was would grouping one higher level student with the lower ability students help the lower ability students? I beleive that it would, but would it hold back the higher ability student?

What does everyone think about this ability grouping approach?

When Kelly said:



I wondered what we mean by "higher" and "lower" ability. If "higher ability" students are more intelligent, then is intelligence based on IQ or other tests? If able students are more creative or more social, then do teachers measure these qualitative abilities via artwork or leadership within the group? A very terse meaning for "more abled student" would be one without any handicaps, but this relies on students' physical abilities and could be measured by success in competative team sports. So I'm wondering what the standard definitions of "higher" and "lower" ability means versus what advocates of ability grouping -- like me (perhaps) -- mean by abilities ...