Critical Reflection and Teaching Inquiry

Over the course of my student internship experience I have been reflecting on student

grouping, specifically, student ability grouping, within my 5th grade inclusion classroom. My 5th

grade placement classroom is co-taught by a general educator and special educator in order to

best serve the special education students in an inclusive setting. The unique structure and mission

of my placement classroom at Goochland Elementary School sparked my interest to research the

effects of student grouping on their success in school, both academically and socially.

Throughout this semester, I have been reflecting on when and how our students are interacting

throughout the day.

Our class is comprised of a broad range of learners which has required us to be creative

in meeting the needs of each student. Our students MAP growth assessment scores encompass a

broad range with reading MAP scores between 184-234 and math MAP scores between 166-229.

At the beginning of the year, my mentor teachers and I met with our instructional coaches to

consider how best to structure our reading instruction. We used MAP and PALs scores plus

student personality and observed motivation to place students into instructional groups based on

their literacy zone of proximal development. We used similar methods to group students into

math instructional groups. We use rotations to deliver small group targeted instruction for math

and reading.

My mentor teachers have given me a lot of guidance in recognizing that homogenous

grouping for reading and math specifically is a necessary and okay practice. However, we also

believe that we are a unique and special classroom community where the strengths of all students

are celebrated. Thus, we believe that all students can learn from each other and there are benefits

to homogenous grouping in purposeful ways. We decided to implement number talks as a whole

group during math with purposeful heterogenous partnerships across our small groups. The
Critical Reflection and Teaching Inquiry

number talks have allowed students with a lower ZPD to access the curriculum via the

communication of their peers. Additionally, we focus on teaching metacognition and

communicating during number talks which is beneficial for all students.

During our Innovation Block each day, students work in heterogeneous groups using a

SCRUM Learn, Create, Share model. Student leaders pick group members based on their

strengths as required for the project at hand such as very creative, strong researcher, or strong

coder. These two purposeful heterogenous grouping opportunities have allowed me to consider

how our students interact and engage in academic conversations.

Key components of the success of student ability grouping include: a foundational belief

that each student has strengths and potential to grow, flexibility to move students and change

groupings and pairings, and a balance of both heterogeneous and homogenous groupings based

on the purpose of instructional activities. We have implemented these stated components of

successful grouping throughout the semester in my classroom. My ongoing research and our

flexibility have allowed us to take risks for the benefit of our students.

The class discussion following my presentation was very helpful in my continuous

reflection process. One perspective I had not considered before the discussion is how I will

implement homogenous math small group instruction in my future classroom next year when I

can expect to only have myself as a teacher in the room. One student asked in the discussion,

“what are the other students doing independently when the teacher is providing instruction to a

small group?” This question helped me consider the importance of strong management to deliver

specialized instruction and expect the rest of the class to complete independent activities.
Critical Reflection and Teaching Inquiry

My unique placement this semester as well as the rich discussion following my

presentation have sparked my interest to continue researching and adapting my practices to

student grouping. Future steps will include continuing to be flexible in our reading and math

grouping through the end of the year in 5th grade at GES and researching and preparing routines

and systems for instruction for my class next year over the summer. I hope this teaching inquiry

project will continue to challenge me to find the best balance of heterogeneous and homogenous

groupings for my students to achieve growth and success.

Critical Reflection and Teaching Inquiry

References

Datnow, A., Park, V. (2016). Ability Grouping and Differentiated Instruction in an Era of Data

Driven Decision Making. American Journal of Education, 123, 281-306.

Finsterwald, M., Neber, H., Urban, N. (2001). Cooperative Learning with Gifted and High-

achieving Students. High Ability Studies, 12 (2), 199-214.

Gamoran, A. (1992, October). Untracking for Equity. Educational Leadership, 50, 11-17.

Matthewsa, M. S., McBeec, M. T., Ritchotteb, J. A. (2013). Effects of schoolwide cluster

grouping and within-class ability grouping on elementary school students’ academic

achievement growth. High Ability Studies, 24 (2) 81-97.

https://doi.org/10.1080/13598139.2013.846251

O’Connor, J. L. (2016). Great Instruction Great Achievement for Students with Disabilities.

Warner Robins, GA: Council of Administrators of Special Education.

Saleh, M., Lazonder, A. W., Jong, T. D. (2005). Effects of within-class ability grouping on social

interaction, achievement, and motivation. Instructional Science, 33, 105-119.

Slavin, R. E., (1987). Grouping for Instruction in the Elementary School. Educational

Psychologist, 22(2), 109-127.