Ability grouping helps top students, and doesn't hurt weak students

[PeteS in CA]

Ability grouping helps top students, and doesn't hurt weak students

https://www.joannejacobs.com/post/ability-grouping-helps-top-students-and-doesn-t-hurt-weak-students

Placing all students in the same class is supposed to help low achievers aim higher without hurting high achievers, in theory Teachers are told to "differentiate" instruction to meet the needs of students at very different levels.

But does it actually work that way?

Strong students learn less math in mixed classes, concludes a new Education Endowment Foundation study of English middle schools, reports Richard Adams in The Guardian. Weaker students, as judged by prior math achievement, do about the same whether they're in mixed classes or lower-track classes, University College London (UCL) researchers found. Furthermore, students placed in lower-track classes were more confident of their math abilities than those in mixed classes.
...
Teaching mixed classrooms is increasingly difficult, write Scott J. Peters and Jonathan Plucker. "The typical American classroom includes students that span three to seven grade levels of achievement mastery."

My emphasis. Clearly, one size cannot fit all. No matter what ability level(s) on which a teacher in such a mixed class focuses, many students will be unchallenged and/or left behind.

In 7th Grade I was in a mid-level Math class for some reason ("Y" out of "X", "Y", and "Z"). It was less than challenging, and courtesy of the teacher having extra credit questions on tests I got a slightly cringe-worthy "A+". The following year I was in "X", high-level, Math, and it was a much better fit ... and more engaging.

[Wingnut]

It the same principle as with the rich.  Just because your neighbor is rich, it doesn't make you poor.

[Smokin Joe]

When I was in Junior High and High School, the results of the Iowa Tests of Basic Skills were used to place students in 'sections', with 7-1 being the most gifted, and with the second digit increasing until you got to the 'special' students.
Working and learning with students of similar ability meant the class could progress faster, and do more challenging material without leaving anyone behind.
I was in the accelerated math class, and in the High School I graduated from, graduated with credit for a year of college English as well. (That High School was different in that most of the 96 students in my graduating class were well above the regional averages).

But in order to evaluate which students belong in which sections, you need objective evaluation parameters that do away with all the checkboxes for things like race, sexual orientation, gender identification, and the like, because those are likely used (or can be) to influence decisions about who ends up where.

But those tests have been deemed "racist"...

[berdie]

Two of my nieces are teachers. Since the abolishment of what we used to call "special ed" they tell me it is incredibly hard to teach all students in the same classroom. And actually unfair to all.

[rustynail]

"From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs"..

[Smokin Joe]

The system is designed to hold back those of the unwashed masses who are actually smart, in favor of those whose parents can put their children in more prestigious schools. (Of course, those schools have the ability to take someone not especially bright and bring them up to acceptably above average, too).

It was "No child left behind.", but there's nothing in that about not holding some back.