Ability Grouping

As a middle school art teacher, there is no such thing as ability grouping in an art classroom. Although I do try to group students with other students that are close to the same ability level and thinking level, it is still hard to group students together based on ability. According to the district, we are required to teach each and every child, from the highly gifted (both academically and artistically) to the severely autistic self-contained student. I also teach ESOL, Special Education, and Resource students. This must all be done at the same time due to the inclusion of these students with others so they get the “socialization” aspect. My thoughts on ability grouping are that it is a great concept. Although for exploratory teachers, like myself, it is hard to construct a constructive learning environment to meet all needs of students.

            According to the classroom textbook, ability grouping has been going in ancient cultures for centuries. I found that it was very interesting how these cultures divided “normal” people from “gifted” people. Ancient Sparta defined giftedness in military terms. Athenian boys attended private schools and the Romans had all boys and girls attend first level schools but higher education was for boys only. In Renaissance Europe, they rewarded gifted artists, architects, and writers with wealth and honor. China’s 7^th century Tang dynasty brought child prodigies to the imperial court. They accepted a multiple-talent concept of giftedness, recognized that talents must be natured and believed children should be educated according to their abilities. What stands out to me is the regulations for the Renaissance European era. Most famous artwork was created during this time period. It was also a major stepping stone to art in the future. As an artist and art educator, I find myself regularly referencing this time period for art. The Europeans new how to teach the gifted, although, like other ancient cultures, wealth and honor took a major play. In today’s time, we still branch off the gifted students but wealth and honor are not a contributing factor any more. This has provided ample students with opportunities to learn, create, and grow further than just simply being in a classroom with peers. Society benefited from helping gifted students become professionals in the past and now.

            It also seems that more interest has come in spikes according to current events for that time period. The textbook mentions that the launching of Sputnik in 1957 triggered an American effort to improve education, particularly in science for gifted students. Now, we are pushing gifted students to think like engineers so they can develop further advancements in Engineering. I wonder how long this fad will last like the push during the 1950’s-1960. I feel that ability grouping is a great thing but only if education is still pushed in the future and not a fad that comes and goes.

Ability grouping

Analyzing research is a good place to start when determining the best methods of educating students. As educators, we have an obligation to our students to employ practices that are aimed to maximize their potential for growth.  When it comes to the controversy on ability grouping, the research seems like a good place to start. This chapter contends that ability grouping for gifted students is linked to “substantial gains in academic achievement, creativity, and other thinking skills”(Davis and Rimm p.13). It seems to me that if research asserts that grouping gifted and talented student is of substantial benefit to them, then that is the method that we should be using until, other research can prove that assertion no longer valid, or until we find a method for educating gifted and talented students that is even more effective.  

There are advantages and disadvantages associated with ability grouping for gifted and talented learners. One advantage is that gifted and talented learners tend to demonstrate willingness to learn when grouped with other gifted and motivated learners (Davis and Rimm p.13). A disadvantage is that according to the stigma theory, when grouped homogeneously, gifted learners tend to have a slightly lower self-concept. In my personal opinion, because the data supports the practice of ability grouping for gifted students (Davis and Rimm p.13), I maintain that we should continue to do it.

Ability Grouping

I’ve always had mixed feelings on ability vs. non-ability groupings.  After reading chapter 1, I still remain mixed about the pros/cons of each.  This chapter makes several good points about both.

Homogeneous grouping is the type of educational experience that I had while I was in middle and high school in the core academic areas and I always felt that was a benefit for my actual education.  There was competition, which was a positive influence to study and learn more, there was a higher order of thinking present in these classes, and most importantly I got to work with students who were performing around the same level.  When taking AP classes, all of these factors were very important to assist in achievement which would impact my college career. 

This chapter expresses all of those things as positives, but I also understand the negative aspect of that.  Oakes states that students in the lower level classes, sometimes the students refer to themselves as ‘dummies’ and that their self-esteem is negatively influenced because they are not in the higher classes.  The chapter then goes on to talk about the ‘blossoming effect’ that it can have on students when they realize they are not in the higher group; it can provide that push that students may need to put forth all of their effort into learning.

Heterogeneous grouping is stated as the big push within schools currently.  Having mixed ability groups is a more adequate representation of the ‘real world’ and I completely agree.  Giving students real-world experiences is something that is getting a lot of attention recently, specifically in our district. 

Unfortunately, I actually see the opposite of heterogeneous grouping, beginning at the middle school level.  Our ELA classes are grouped by reading levels, each grade level having 2 very low/low classes, and then go up from there; same with our math classes.  We separate students based on abilities (honors/AP level/CP level) beginning in middle school also.  The lack of access to some of the information presented in those classes can be viewed as unfair to those lower-achieving students. Once students reach high school, proportionate heterogeneous grouping is almost impossible.  The highest level of students are already prepping to take college courses (if they are not already), which not all students are going to be able to take.

Ability Grouping--Melissa Wilkins

As an elementary art teacher, there is no such thing as ability grouping in an art classroom.  We are required to teach each and every child, from the highly gifted (both academically and artistically) to the severely autistic self-contained student.  And this must be done simultaneously, as the self-contained students are being "mainstreamed" in my classroom.  I have noticed several things with this model of educating students in art.  Most of the self-contained students I teach are able to come to class and get along fairly well with the other students, some even create more amazing artwork than the regular-ed students.  I have a few that are barely able (or willing) to sit at the table and write their names on their paper.  While I am an advocate for mainstreaming these children, sometimes, I do not think it is fair to the rest of the students in the classroom.  They can be disruptive to the other students, and to me as I am working to instruct the entire class.  I have had to implement my own ability grouping methods in some cases with certain students, who are completely unable to follow along.  I have to instruct the class as a whole, and then when independent work begins, I look around at the students who are completely lost and do not know where to begin.  It is at this time, that I bring them to an empty table to the side of the class, and work with them in small group or a one-on-one setting to get them started on a project.  This is the only way I know how to keep the entire class afloat, but it is difficult to monitor the progress of everyone else, while I am working one-on-one with one particular student.  I have worked at other schools, in which an entire self-contained class comes to art with their teachers/aides, in an art class entirely to themselves.  This seems to work better for them and for the teacher, because they are used to being with those students, and the art teacher gets some help from the aides that bring them.  It is a difficult issue and a sensitive balance is needed.  It is hard to know which system is best for every child.  I have found that in certain instances and with certain children, I do have to implement my own system of ability grouping in order to get anything done.  I am just one person, and it is hard to make it all work sometimes, but it is what I have to do...so I will continue as I am able.

My thoughts on Ability Grouping

As a Middle School math teacher, ability grouping is the only way!  The pace in which I move is significantly effected by the abilities of my students.  Thankfully, the higher level students (gifted) in math are placed together in an honor's class.  However, the college prep (CP) students are all grouped heterogeneously, meaning if the student is not gifted, they are placed in this group.  Students range in ability of exceeding all the way down to in need of support, according to ACT aspire scores.  This makes the pace a little more challenging, but workable.  I understand the concept of not having ability grouping, but for language arts and math, I think it's a must.  The textbook says it best on page 12.  "Gifted Education and gifted students are in deep trouble without grouping practices..."

Advantages to ability grouping as I see it are that students can work at a pace that is challenging, yet comfortable for them.  I believe students work better in a team setting when their abilities are matched equally or close to that of their peers.  I also believe that grouping would limit the fear of feeling less than another peer, which is very important for self worth.  As I said before, gifted students can be challenged and can progress through the curriculum quickly.  Gifted students don't have to slow down or lose their momentum so that other students can catch up, and visa versa.  Other students don't feel like they have to play catch up to those gifted students.

However, the disadvantages are the flip to the advantages.  Lower functioning students may feel inferior to the brighter students because they are in a lower group.  They may feel stuck in the lower group, which may cause them to give up.  Students in the lower groups may not be challenged to their potential, especially those who don't fit in the higher functioning groups, but are higher than the group they are in.  Gifted students would be held back, so that the average student's needs could be met. Gifted students may feel they are being used as mini professors, which may lead to frustration and anger.   Gifted students would not be challenged to their maximum potential if they were not homogeneously grouped.

Ability Grouping, Sheryl Elliott

Ability grouping has advantages.  One advantage to grouping gifted and talented students together is they can work together to meet their potential.  The teacher can provide instruction that can challenge them and help gifted and talented students grow. The material taught can be much more rigorous. Projects can be completed that will allow the gifted student to be ready for middle school, high school, and college. This also provides an advantage for those non-gifted and talented students.  They will be able to move at an appropriate pace without feeling frustrated.  Just like a 4A football team should not compete against a 1A football team, non-gifted students should not feel the pressure of being in class with a gifted and talented student. 

     Ability grouping also has disadvantages.  Too man “chiefs” in one room can be bad for both the teacher and the student.  Gifted and talented students usually have strong personalities and like to be leaders.  This has the potential to cause conflict when working in groups.  Another disadvantage to ability grouping is it does not allow gifted students the chance to be work with everyone.  They are surrounded by peers who are very similar to themselves.  The real world is not like that.  Gifted and talented students need to be able to function in a society where they are surrounded by all academic abilities.  

Ability Grouping- Anna Smith

Ability grouping is the systemic organization of students according to ability levels. I was surprised to read that there is a considerable amount of of opposition to this practice, considering the many benefits and the long history of different appearances of ability grouping throughout time. While the chapter does recognize some drawbacks to ability grouping that have been researched, most of these theories seemed to be discounted.

Of the downsides to ability grouping discussed, Oakes contributed two. The first is that it is simply ineffective, although the chapter doesn't share any of the the data to prove this. Secondly, she alleges that it is discriminatory. My initial response to that, is that it would be discriminatory to deny a group of students' right to be challenged and fully meet their potential. If ability grouping for GT students is discriminatory, then special education and resource classes would also be considered discriminatory, yet I can't imagine denying the latter students these classes and opportunities to build the skills they need and deserve.

The many benefits of ability grouping were apparent to me throughout the chapter, both for GT students as well as non-gifted. I've worried and dealt with the dilemma of having my more advanced students have to 'wait' for their peers to understand a concept, or sit through a lesson that I'm reteaching to them, or simply learn a less complicated concept because their classmates aren't as likely to be able to master it, for example. To provide them with a group of co-learners who are similarly able and motivated would lessen that issue. Especially when it comes to group work, GT students were disadvantaged. They often do the bulk of the work and/or their partners "get away" with doing less; this leaves the GT student feeling slighted, taken advantage of, or frustrating which of course, is not conducive to their best learning. 

Likewise, cooperative learning groups (of mixed ability) are not beneficial to gifted students. They may like to work alone, or they end up "teaching" their group and not learning anything new. I am guilty of doing this, and have been taught that this is a beneficial way to facilitate a lesson. Even when I was being taught, I asked myself "what does the gifted student end up learning though?" and "how do you organize the groups so that everyone is paired with someone of the right ability?"

The chapter seemed to support to me the benefits of grouping students together by their ability. It says that non-gifted students do better in this environment too. This year, my ELA classes are grouped by reading level and there are very obvious differences between my classes. To be able to take certain activities to my higher or lower classes rather than try to reach all levels inside one class period is a precious opportunity that I am enjoying! I also like that they spoke about Gardner's multiple intelligences, although I try to incorporate the variety of those different learning styles in all of my classes, not just my higher level students. I think they are important and valid for all learners.

Ability Grouping - Brittany Daly

Ability grouping has been and continues to be a frequently debated topic in regard to gifted education. While some have moved to abolish ability grouping altogether, others see the benefits that ability grouping can have. Ability grouping can take different forms. A grade level can be divided into classes based on student ability. This form of ability grouping is often referred to as tracking.  Another form of ability grouping can occur within the classroom for small-group instruction or cooperative learning activities. When making an argument for or against ability grouping, one must take into account which of these forms of ability grouping is being discussed.

When grade levels are grouped by ability, it is the gifted children who are most likely to benefit.  Often times, they will have the smaller class size and the more enthusiastic teacher. According to James Gallagher, they will most likely benefit from a richer curriculum and more individualization within their classroom. When gifted students are grouped homogeneously, teachers may be able to challenge students to reach a deeper level of understanding.  Students grouped into a gifted class will likely be further challenged by their peers.  Research has shown that gifted students in a homogeneously grouped class have scored higher than their peers in mixed-ability class.

Jeanie Oaks argues that tracking is discriminatory because many minority children are often grouped together in a slower track. She also argues that tracking is unfair to those in the slower tracks because they are less likely to get a rich education, and they may not have as many opportunities to delve deeper into academics. When students are grouped heterogeneously, all students are more likely to be presented with the same learning opportunities.  In a heterogeneously grouped class, students can interact with peers of all ability levels.  Higher achieving students may have the opportunity to teach or help another student.  A student who is struggling can turn to a peer for assistance.  In a heterogeneously grouped class, teachers can use cooperative learning activities to further group students.  Depending on the activity or assignment, the teacher may use heterogeneous grouping when grouping his/her students. However, the teacher has the option to group his/her students based on ability. This may allow gifted students to delve into a higher depth of knowledge, and it may allow the teacher to work more closely with a group that may need a little more assistance.

Both of these arguments have valid points.  It is important for gifted students to have the opportunity to work alongside other gifted students so they can challenge each other; however, shouldn’t we want this very same thing for all students?  Our district’s use of a weekly pull-out program for gifted students provides these students with a more challenging curriculum while still allowing them to interact with students of all ability levels. 

Ability Grouping-Melody Johnson

There are many advantages and disadvantages to ability grouping all students, particularly the gifted students. 

As a middle school self-contained teacher, I have seen first hand the advantages of ability grouping students.  My students receive instruction on their level and complete assignments and activities that they are comfortable with and are successfully able to do.  Not only does this help assist the student to be successful at their level but also provides a level of confidence for them.  I believe that for gifted students, ability grouping can catapult them to new academic heights because they too will be working at their level.  Through this they will feel confident in their abilities to solve higher level thinking skills and may move through concepts quicker than another classes.  I also see gifted students being challenged by other gifted students in the same classroom, whereas that may not be the case in a heterogeneous classroom.

However, I also see the disadvantages of ability grouping for all students.  Again, as a teacher of self-contained students, I have had students successfully mainstreamed into regular education classrooms and pushed academically.  The regular classroom was more difficult for them, but they were exposed to grade level standards and expectations and their scores usually improved.  I believe that the same could be said of gifted students.  Even though they are academically or artistically gifted, exposure to other students would have its advantages.  I can see this benefiting the gifted students more so socially. Many gifted students would benefit from socialization with nongifted peers as opposed to homogeneously grouping. Many gifted students would also benefit from being in a leadership role in the heterogeneous classroom. Some of these students would shine in the regular education classroom, whereas in the "gifted" classroom they are just an average students.

All of these are valid points to consider when discussing ability grouping gifted students.