I have a question for teachers and anyone else who wants to contribute. Do we need to do more ability grouping in school, or do we need to keep mixing vast differences in intelligence together?
Now that’s random.
I’m for mixing, at least during early school years. I was in a mixed class including pupils with severe mental and/or physical handicaps.
Growing up with them teaches you that they are not helpless and pitiful. People always treat them like they’re fragile, whereas they should be treated like anyone else.
Fkb, your question is very broad.
I, for one, think that elementary school ought to be more mixed, but separation ought to increase through middle school, high school, and college. Everyone gets an equal opportunity for achievement from the beginning, but is able to fulfill their potential as they discover where their strengths lie.
It’s like a race. It’s fair to make everyone start together, but unfair to make everyone finish together.
Forcing older students (such as high school) into mixed classes is just forcing mediocrity on everyone, which is a disservice to both the brighter and dimmer students.
So I guess my answer is both; more mixed when young, with increased ability grouping as they get older.
Mixed ability classrooms offer the opportunity for stronger students to support those students who may have difficulty in achieving the curricular goals. If I remember my terminology correctly in California it is called scaffolding. It allows many wonderful opportunities in the classroom.
Small group lessons can be formed where the more advanced learners can mentor those students who would otherwise be left behind during classroom instruction. It builds confidence in the stronger student and a sense of respect within the classroom community. It also can free up time for the instructor to proceed with other activities that do not require whole class participation. Also, if the more advanced student also happens to be socially, physically, or mentally challenged, it can provide that extra boost they need to succeed in both school and social activities.
Just my two cents. I hope it helps.
Kamikaze has learned a valuable lesson, that too few of us have been exposed to. Just because a person has one sort of disability or another, doesn’t make them less of a person. I deal with this as part of my work (with adults that have developmental disabilities).
Based on that, and my own schooling, I would say there should always be a mix. Not all the time, but some situations should be focused, while there should always be some mixing as well. That’s how society works in general, so it might be good to emulate this from a young age as well.
So now can you tell us more about why you’re asking?
Well…I teach elementary music and I like having them mixed K-2, but by the time they are in 3rd grade, many of my kids are reading music and ready to sing in parts while my other kids are still able to only sing single line melodies. We ability grouped them(I have two sections for each grade) and it worked great. ALL the kids liked it like this. They were singing music on their level of ability and sometimes we combined both sections for particular shows. This was going fine until a few control freak classroom teachers complained about having to line kids up differently. In other words the petty whims of a few teachers was more important than something that was educationally beneficial to the kids.
This is how it is supposed to work in theory. In my own experience, the stronger students usually just completed all the work, mostly ignoring the weaker students, and chatted while other groups finished up. If thought of from the stronger students’ perspective, this is only prudent; why risk getting a lower grade by having a weaker student complete the task? Furthermore, stronger students aren’t fulfilling their academic potential if they are playing tutor so that the teacher doesn’t have to grade student work at home. Granted, I’m mainly referring to high school, where students are pushed to excel (to get into college), even at the expense of other students. I think this approach is very advantageous for younger children.
This is why educational theory ought not be dogmatized. Some teachers (and even student-teachers) get a holier-than-thou attitude, as if there were ONE BEST way to organize a class…individual teachers need to be given leeway in deciding what works or doesn’t in a particular class. Music in particular ought to be grouped by ability level…there is nothing more demotivating than being forced to play music with students who do not practice and attended only because mom and/or dad want them to. Competition among rivals procures excellence.
And that’s how many schools work. I take it you are not trying to influence the way these people teach reading and math? Let your program be judged on its performance. I know how much teaching unions like that idea… 
Hello fkb,
That kind of stuff could make you want to go back to being the high school band director, I imagine. Sounds to me like the administrators (principal?) should have been on your side. What you were doing was obviously working. Politics again?! Bummer!
One of the things that I have enjoyed most (in the past!) about teaching is that I had authority over my classroom and could run it the way it worked best for the students and for myself. When someone starts messing that up, the whole experience is frustrating rather than gratifying.
You had a system that was working, then a few people who didn’t know what they were talking about came along and messed it up for their own convenience!
I think I can empathize with you.
I leave math and reading alone! There are others who are paid to do that. As far as my program, I manage to hold it together despite what my administration does. I’m running out of room for trophies!
I probably will go back to band directing after this school year. My school is going down the tubes. The kids are great, but I’m tired of dealing with administrators that are clueless. These teachers have their little clicks…just like a bunch of JH kids. Some of them should be IN school rather than teaching school.
I can identify with THAT!!!
Read my last few posts on the “What do you teach?” thread, which has evolved into much more than what the title suggests.
I wish I didn’t have to stick it out for another two years!
I have 5 more years and I will disappear from there like a hubcap in the 9th ward.
Hey, maybe we should form a Southeast TX/Southwest LA Future Retired Teachers Unicycle Club!
Albert Einstein was a ‘below average’ student at school. He was weak in Math.
Suppose they put him in the slow group?
Other famed people with learning disabilities were Alexander Graham Bell and Thomas Edison Leonardo Da Vinci, Sylvester Stallone, Cher, Tom Cruise, Mozart and Robin Williams, Lewis Carroll, George Bernard Shaw is reported to have had an Attention deficit disorder. Suzanne Somers, Phillip Manuel, a famous jazz vocalist Napoleon Bonaparte had to struggle with dyslexia. Winston Churchill suffered from speech impediment during his childhood. Woodrow Wilson did not learn the alphabet until an age of nine and was unable to read until an age of twelve. Jackie Stewart has dyslexia. Bruce Jenner, the world’s greatest athlete , had learning disabilities. Business Entrepreneurs like Richard Branson, David Neeleman and Charles Schwab were dyslexics. Donald Winkler
In band, there are 1st, 2nd and 3rd clarinets, flutes, etc. All ability levels play together in band, from what I see.
Suppose? Billy, we are talking about Einstein. He was in the slow group – by definition. 
Actually, the slow group never gets past very basic algebra. Some slow groups don’t get past addition and subtraction.
Are you saying Albert Einstein was by definition because he was a ‘below average’ student at school, and he was initially weak in Math?
You’re like MLK’s dissertation, Billy, fun to research on your own. It’s always interesting to find the source from which you cut and paste.
Multiple bands. Though, with a range of ability levels in each.