Enrichment activities in mixed ability classrooms

If ever there was a need for clarity in education, it is around the issue of setting or streaming according to ability. Whether syphoning bright children off to top sets or to grammar schools, what is actually best for our children? Without a doubt, opinion is split, and research continues.

According to a blog published by the Sutton Trust (founded in 1997 to improve social mobility through education) in 2014, Lee Elliot Major explains that on reviewing the research available on whether to group by ability, the message is nuanced. He says that: “When I had the privilege of meeting Adam Gamoran, one of the leading US academics in this field, this was his view. ‘Given poor instruction, neither heterogeneous nor homogenous grouping can be effective; with excellent instruction, either may succeed.’”  In other words, Elliot Major says, perhaps we should follow the Bananarama principle: it’s not what you do, but how you do it that counts.

Diversity in the Classroom

What isn’t in doubt is that diversity in ability exists in every group whether mixed ability in name or not. And if, as the Sutton Trust blog highlights, the “damage done to poorer pupils whose progress is stunted by languishing in the bottom sets outweighs the academic gains seen for more able learners flourishing in the top sets”, we clearly have to be extremely careful about ensuring that the best possible progress is made by all despite the nature of the group they are in.

So we cannot move on in our questioning of ability groupings without exploring the need for enrichment activities for all, regardless of ability. And there is little point in exploring enrichment activities unless we are crystal clear about what we are seeking to achieve: faster learning, or deeper learning?

Enrichment Ideas

It’s far from the intentions of this blog to presume to tell teachers how to enrich the learning their pupils achieve, but it is worth reminding ourselves about a few core principles of enrichment. Some ideas as food for thought:

– Diversity exists in any group. And it’s possible for children to be disadvantaged by their placement in any group (for example, too much pressure and too fast a pace of learning for some in the top groups and low expectations in the bottom groups). We don’t teach groups, we teach groups of individuals. Enrichment activities would need to keep this in mind.

– Relating learning to life – why is this important to know? – can enrich school life for all. When time permits, offering the opportunity to manipulate learning, to apply it to real life problems, and to practise what is learned, can greatly enrich school experience.

– Think about how you might extend the curriculum for all students, for specific students and for especially talented

– Consider the skills as well as subject knowledge that might be extended.

One of our greatest assets in the classroom will always be the quality of teaching and instruction. Offering teachers high-quality professional learning throughout their careers on how best to stretch all their pupils would be a useful priority, regardless of whatever the current trend – setting, streaming or mixed ability – may be.

Find out more…

Teaching Matters More Than Setting blog by Lee Elliot Major

– Adam Gamoran’s article, Synthesis of Research / Is Ability Grouping Equitable, can be found here

Setting by ability: what is the evidence? 

The Most Able Students: an update on progress since June 2013

11 Things You May Have Missed in Ofsted’s “Most Able Students” Report

2 thoughts on “Enrichment activities in mixed ability classrooms

  1. I am suspicious of the Sutton Trust being used as evidence for mixed ability teaching, as they have an objective of “improving social mobility”. Clearly, separation by ability would not fit in with this view. Major says the evidence on mixed ability v. setting is “nuanced”. This seems to be a weasel word. I am sure if the balance of opinion was in his favour he would say so. He is right to state that the quality of teaching is very important for either type of group to succeed but it does not, therefore, follow that it does not matter whether schools set or do not set their classes.

    What I do know is that schools have moved increasingly since the Seventies to set more of their classes. This is surely based on experience and reflects a belief that setting is effective. However, timetable constraints limit the extent that this can be implemented.

    Setting divides students into those who are better and those who are worse. Separation by ability happens throughout life – in school sports teams, in university selection, in music and at work. Most of those who are less able than their peers have the option of working harder to improve themselves, although there will be some students who may not be able to do this because of specific learning disabilities. This is where parents and a culture of aspiration in a school can make a difference.

    One point that does worry me is that better teachers are likely to be teaching the top sets and less effective teachers the bottom sets but this is, arguably, a matter for head teachers, Governors and, perhaps, performance criteria to resolve.

    One thing I think we should be very clear about is that we do not want “trends” in education, which has suffered too much from these. We need evidence based research to decide how we run our schools.

  2. I find your concept on the point that ” we should be teaching to individuals not to groups” where everybody is in, but with deep differences in knowledge, backgrounds and capacities and rarely
    all this mixture of needs are taken into account as they should. And this happens for many reasons and teachers, often left alone, can do little….

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>