An organizational analysis of the effects of ability grouping

Ability groping appears to be a logical means of organizing a student body with diverse academic skills. Many observers contend, however, that the practice favors students in high-ability groups at the expense of students in lower groups. An organizational conception of ability grouping clarifies the tationale for ability grouping but also illuminates its shortcomings: Grouping students leads to segregation on nonacademic as well as academic criteria, and differentiated instruction may lead to unequal results for students assigned to different groups. These issues are explored with data from 92 honors, regular, and remedial English classes in eigth and ninth grade. We examine the characteristics of students placed in different groups, similarities and differences in the quality of instruction across groups, and the links between instruction and achievement. The data show that rates of student participation and discussion are higher in bonors classes, contributing to the learning gaps beween groups. Rates of openended questions are similar across classes, but honors students benefit more from such discourse because it occurs more often in the context of sustained study of literature. (DIPF/Absrtact übernommen.)