Attainment Grouping as self-fulfilling prophesy? A mixed methods exploration of self confidence and set level among Year 7 students

Abstract

Within-school segregation of pupils by attainment remains prevalent, despite evidence that these practices detrimentally impact outcomes for those in low attainment groups. This article explores the hypothesis that 'ability grouping' by setting impacts pupil self-confidence, precipitating a selffulfilling prophecy. Survey data from 11,546 11/12 year old pupils in 'ability sets', and individual interviews and focus groups with 66 pupils, are drawn upon to explore this hypothesis. We find a significant correlation between perceived set placement and self-confidence in the set subject. More importantly, we also find a correlation between set placement and general self-confidence in learning. Pupils' qualitative responses illustrate how setting can promote self-fulfilling prophecy, and worrying evidence of internalisation of 'ability' labels among pupils.

The misallocation of students to academic sets in maths: A study of secondary schools in England

“…Given that students from low socioeconomic backgrounds are over-represented in low sets, any inequality of resources or pedagogy will disproportionately impact this group of students, with implications for the reproduction of social inequality (see e.g. Francis et al, 2017b;Mazenod et al, 2019).…”

Students’ university aspirations and attainment grouping in secondary schools

“…Setting, whereby students are allocated to a group (a set) depending on their prior attainment is a prevalent practice in English secondary schools, especially for mathematics (OECD, 2013). This is despite research continuing to document the potentially negative aspects of setting on the outcomes of students in low attainment groups (Francis et al, 2017a;Oakes, 2005;Parsons and Hallam, 2014), and particularly on their assessment of themselves as successful learners (Francis et al, 2017b;Gillborn and Youdell, 2000;Hart et al, 2004). Alternative grouping practices, such as grouping students into mixed attainment classes are less common for subjects such as mathematics (Taylor et al, 2016).…”

“…The day-to-day practices and experiences of tracking or setting in themselves can also be seen to impact on students' aspirations through students' internalisation of their track or set position (Berends, 1995;Lehmann, 2009). This can be understood as a kind of habitus construction, the learned dispositions that shape students' understanding of the possibilities for their future (Ball et al, 2002), wherein a self-fulfilling prophesy may impact students' self-perception and confidence in learning (Francis et al, 2017b;Lehmann, 2009). The differential aspirations associated with the different pathways may go unchallenged and indeed be indirectly encouraged by teachers (Furlong, 2005).…”

“…Using the measures developed and adapted for our present study, we have controlled for a measure of student general self-confidence in learning and a measure of student liking for school (for full discussion of the self-confidence measure see Francis et al, 2017b;Mazenod et al (forthcoming) for student liking for school). It should be noted that our conceptualisation of self-confidence and the measure of student general self-confidence (as distinct from subjectspecific self-confidence) differs from, for example the approach used in Gorard, See and Davies' (2012) extensive review of research that found no evidence of a causal relationship between student self-concept or self-esteem and participation in post-compulsory education.…”

Nurturing learning or encouraging dependency? Teacher constructions of students in lower attainment groups in English secondary schools

“…Grouping students by their prior attainment or 'ability' in specific subjects is a common practice in English secondary schools with OECD (2013) figures suggesting that 95% of students are taught mathematics in attainment groups. Such grouping practices have been challenged for their detrimental impact on student outcomes, potentially lowering educational attainment and self-confidence amongst students in lower attainment groups (Boaler et al, 2000;Francis et al, 2017a;Oakes, 2005;Slavin, 1990). Despite the wealth of research evidence casting doubts on its benefits, attainment grouping continues to prevail in English secondary schools, and has often been constructed as the preferential approach in government policy (see e.g.…”