Ability grouping in the secondary school: attitudes of teachers of practically based subjects



Table 3: Subject teachers’ beliefs about the effects of ability grouping on able
pupils, personal and social educational outcomes, equal opportunities and
behaviour

Statements_____________________________________________

Art

Music

Drama

PE

Sig

Able pupils_________________________________________

Bright children are neglected or held back in mixed ability
classes______________________________________________________

1.82

(1.29)

2.14
(1.08)

2.03
(1.05)

2.14

(1.1)

"Ns

Setting ensures that brighter children make maximum
progress_______________________________________________

2.53
(.88)

2.72
(.91)

2.39

(1.25)

2.93
(.82)

.008

Setting prevents brighter children being inhibited by
negative peer pressure____________________________________

2.5
(1.03)

2.58
(.82)

2.12

(1.1)

2.48
(.99)

^^NS

Statements_____________________________________________

Art

Music

Drama

PE

Sig

Personal and social educational outcomes_____________

Setting has a damaging effect on the self-esteem of those
in lower sets______________________________________________

2.56
(1.04)

2.41
(.95)

(1.19)

2.15
(1.06)

.027

Setting children stigmatises those perceived as less able

2.51
(1.08)

2.79
(.91)

2.58

(1.3)

2.31
(1.07

^^NS

Less able children compare themselves unfavourably to
more able children in mixed ability classes________________

2
(1.06)

2.21
(1.0)

1.88
(1.08)

2.21
(.89)

"ns

Mixed ability grouping leads to better social adjustment
for the less able pupils______________________________________

2.74
(.85)

2.58
(.82)

2.91
(.93)

2.43
(.89)

.024

Mixed ability grouping leads to better social adjustment
of all pupils_________________________________________________

2.76
(.89)

2.55
(.74)

2.73

(1.1)

2.2
(.89)

.0001

Overall, motivation is higher when pupils are in mixed
ability classes_______________________________________________

2.01
(1.02)

2
(.87)

2.27
(.91)

1.67
(.89)

.006

Knowing they are in a low set leads to pupils giving up

2.44
(1.07)

2.22
(.99)

2.67
(1.08)

1.76
(1.02)

.0001

Statements_____________________________________________

Art

Music

Drama

PE

~Sig~~

Equal opportunities_________________________________

Setting benefits the more able pupils at the expense of the
less able_____________________________________________________

1.84

(1.24)

1.71

(1.11)

2.03

(1.24)

1.32
(1.08)

.005

Mixed ability grouping gives each child a fair chance

2.07
(.99)

1.86
(1.03)

2
(1.09)

1.67
(1.04)

^^NS

Mixed ability classes provide the less able pupils with
positive models of achievement_________________________

2.73
(.79)

2.58
(.82)

2.81
(.97)

2.73
(.79)

.007

Statements_____________________________________________

Art

Music

Drama

PE

Sig

Behaviour______________________________________

In general there are more discipline problems in mixed
ability classes_______________________________________________

1.67

(1.37)

1.79

(1.14)

1.61

(1.12)

2.09
(1.09)

^^NS

Where classes are set there are more discipline problems
in the lower ability classes__________________________________

2.63

(1.11)

2.54

(1.14)

2.76
(1.03)

2.27

1.19)

"ns

Attendance and exclusion__________________________

Art

Music

Drama

PE

Where classes are set there is more truancy from pupils in
the lower sets_____________________________________________

2.05
(.78)

2.06
(.64)

2
(.66)

1.71

(.97)

.036

Where classes are set there are more exclusions of pupils
in the lower sets

2.08
(.87)

2.18
(.73)

2.27
(.67)

1.91
.91)

^^NS

* Figures in brackets are standard deviations

24



More intriguing information

1. The name is absent
2. Feature type effects in semantic memory: An event related potentials study
3. Innovation Policy and the Economy, Volume 11
4. ISSUES IN NONMARKET VALUATION AND POLICY APPLICATION: A RETROSPECTIVE GLANCE
5. The name is absent
6. Fortschritte bei der Exportorientierung von Dienstleistungsunternehmen
7. Peer Reviewed, Open Access, Free
8. The name is absent
9. Why unwinding preferences is not the same as liberalisation: the case of sugar
10. The technological mediation of mathematics and its learning