Setting and within-class ability grouping

Abstract

Within the United Kingdom and internationally, the practice of separating pupils by ability endures as a characteristic feature of mathematics and science classrooms. Although there is extensive international research literature on ability grouping within classroom-based subjects, limited research exists in the context of physical education (PE). The purpose of this paper is to explore ability grouping in PE in North East of England schools. Specifically, the paper examined the prevalence of setting and within-class ability grouping in PE, the contexts of its use, how sets and within-class ability grouping were established, and the rationales used to justify decisions about setting and within-class ability grouping in the subject. Data were collected via a web-based survey. The electronic survey was sent to 194 PE Heads of Department from North East of England schools catering for pupils in Key Stage 3 (ages 11–14) and/or Key Stage 4 (ages 14–16). The results indicated that setting is embedded in the organisational and pedagogical practices of PE in many secondary schools. Ability also served as a basis upon which to organise pupils within mixed-ability and setted PE lessons. A variety of other factors, including friendship and behaviour, were also reported as factors influencing grouping of pupils in PE lessons. Our discussion directs attention to issues arising for policy and practice in PE and points to the merits of further exploration and analysis of between-class and within-class grouping practices in the subject.

Psychological Studies in the Teaching, Learning and Assessment of Mathematics

“…We know that in the "Optional Class System, " choosing courses according to interest and level can give more space to a group of students with strong autonomy and good learning foundation, but for other students, it might bring about confusion. This could lead to the strong becoming stronger and the weak becoming weaker (Schofield, 2010;Hamilton and O'Hara, 2011;Wilkinson et al, 2015;Smyth, 2016).…”

‘The participation group means that I'm low ability’: Students’ perspectives on the enactment of ‘mixed‐ability’ grouping in secondary school physical education

“…This study contrasted to much previous research by directing attention to mixed‐ability grouping in PE and by foregrounding student perspectives. Our focus on PE particularly acknowledged that, first, in many instances secondary school PE in England continues to feature gender‐differentiated curriculum provision and groupings, with girls and boys separated for core (non‐examined) PE (Wilkinson et al, 2016), and second, that conceptualisations of ability in PE frequently privilege discourses of sport performance that also have an inherent gendered dimension (Evans, 2004; Croston, 2014; Wilkinson & Penney, 2021a, 2021b). While gender‐differentiated PE has a long history in England (Fletcher, 1984; Kirk, 1992), the picture internationally is varied.…”

“…Furthermore, irrespective of the type of grouping used to determine class groups, teachers may use within‐class grouping to divide a class into smaller groups for specific activities and/or purposes. Within‐class groups are frequently based on ability and/or prior attainment but may also reflect students’ working relationships, behaviour and/or attitude to learning (Ireson & Hallam, 2001; Francis et al, 2020; Wilkinson et al, 2016). Pertinent to this research is the recognition that ability discourses and other factors prospectively shape how various students are positioned as learners in mixed‐ability teaching contexts.…”

“…Further, the limited research that has directly explored students’ perceptions and experiences of mixed‐ability grouping has invariably focused on mathematics and English in secondary schools (see, e.g., Venkatakrishnan & Wiliam, 2003; Tereshchenko et al, 2019; Francome & Hewitt, 2020). This is despite recognition that these are not the curriculum areas in which mixed‐ability grouping is most frequently utilised (Hallam et al, 2008; Office for Standards in Education [OFSTED], 2013; Taylor et al, 2020; Wilkinson et al, 2016). In a survey of 233 teachers from 45 secondary schools in England, for example, Hallam et al (2008) found that 92% of art, 86% of music, 80% of drama and 58% of PE lessons were taught in mixed‐ability groups.…”

“…In PE, research exploring grouping (and ability‐based grouping or setting particularly) has also brought to the fore equity issues pertaining to students’ access to and opportunities for learning and revealed the ways in which discourses of motor‐skill proficiency, sport performance and/or fitness are privileged in many applications of ability grouping (Evans, 2004; Croston, 2014; Wilkinson et al, 2016). Further, our previous research showed students in PE to be attuned to setting policies and how they may be positioned by them, but also by gender discourses coming into play in PE (Wilkinson & Penney, 2021a).…”