Search

Despite extensive research on attainment grouping, the impact of attainment grouping on pupil attainment remains poorly understood and contested. This paper presents evidence from a study conducted with 2944 12–13 year olds, from 76 schools in England, who were allocated to between‐class attainment groups ('setting') in English and mathematics over the first 2 years of secondary schooling. After controlling for prior attainment, pupils in the top set performed significantly better than pupils in the middle and bottom sets in both English and mathematics. The findings indicate a widening gap in attainment, especially in the case of English. Findings, especially in the case of mathematics, provide more evidence of a relative benefit for pupils placed in top sets than a relative detriment for those in bottom sets. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper explores the practices of division in operation in primary schools in England in response to the pressures of high stakes tests at age 10/11, known as SATs. Using data from interviews with 20 primary headteachers and information from a survey of nearly 300 primary heads, we argue that the organisation of pupils in preparation for SATs involves 1) the use of grouping by 'ability' in sets, despite the increasing evidence of the disadvantages; 2) forms of educational triage, where borderline or 'cusp' children are prioritised, and more complex forms of 'double triage'; and 3) the growth of 'intervention culture' where some children are withdrawn from normal lessons to resolve 'gaps' in their learning. In this article these practices are understood through a Foucauldian lens as micropractices of power which label and categorise pupils within an accountability system that seeks to classify pupils on a norm/Other binary. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Attainment grouping is a prevalent yet controversial practice, used in most English schools and on the rise internationally, despite evidence that it is detrimental to the majority of pupils. In England, no data is routinely recorded regarding these practices, and most research on student outcomes depends on a simplistic dichotomy between pupils grouped and ungrouped by attainment. We present the findings of a survey of attainment grouping practices in English secondary schools, providing an updated picture of the profile of attainment grouping in English and mathematics for students aged 11–16. Grouping in sets is dominant for mathematics and, while variants on mixed attainment grouping are frequently used for students aged 11–14 in English, the frequency of setting increases as students progress through secondary school. Schools with disadvantaged intakes are more likely to group by attainment. We also find that grouping practices are much more complex and dynamic in enactment than is implied by much of the literature and that teachers report that many schools adapt grouping strategies to meet the perceived needs of different cohorts. We provide an updated conceptualisation of grouping practices as a continuum and discuss its implications for current and future research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]