Ability Grouping Ability Grouping

According to Winn and Wilson, ability grouping was common in the early 1920s, and its popularity increased with the development of standardized tests of achievement (1983, p. 119). For a period of time in the 1940s and 1950s, ability grouping practices declined, and by 1968 a National Education Association survey revealed that only 18.4 percent of the teachers questioned favored ability grouping as an educational process (Winn & Wilson, 1983, p. 119).

One of the first controlled studies of ability grouping was done in 1929 by T. Luther Purdom. He did not find that ability grouping actually improved children's achievement (Winn & Wilson, 1983, p. 119), and he deplored the fact that grouping decisions were often based on mere teacher impression, a fact that sometimes remains true decades later (Slavin, 1988, p. 68).

Research on grouping practices in the 1920s was partly stimulated by

. . .
s as follows: Students of all levels do better when there are high-ability students in the group. Ability grouping for specific subjects may be beneficial, but class assignment according to ability level has no positive effect. Ability grouped classes do not learn positive attitudes toward themselves or their school. Students in the lowest groups narrow their aspirations. Ability grouping has negative implications for educationally handicapped children (Dawson, 1987, p. 350). Robert Slavin found that earlier research did not distinguish between different types of grouping plans. When such distinctions became clear he noted several trends--cooperative learning can increase student achievement in the elementary grades; research does not support mastery learning; acceleration programs may benefit gifted students; and the Joplin Plan (grouping with complete disregard of grade level) and nongraded regrouping plans can be effective (Slavin, 1988, p. 72). The types of groupings present in elementary schools today generally fall into three types--simple programs in which all the ability groups are taught with similar materials and similar methods; programs in which methods and materials are adjusted to meet the needs of a specif
. . .

Some common words found in the essay are:
Oakes Lipton, Joplin Plan, Winn Wilson, Slavin Allan, Robert Slavin, Jeannie Oakes, Kulik Kulik, Margaret Dawson, Alexander George, Madden Slavin, slavin 1988, oakes lipton, lipton 1990, oakes lipton 1990, winn wilson, wilson 1983, winn wilson 1983, 1983 119, educational leadership, wilson 1983 119, 1990 165, kulik kulik, school level, lipton 1990 165, educational leadership 48,
Approximate Word count = 2456
Approximate Pages = 10 (250 words per page)