1. Effective Teaching and Learning for Pupils in Low Attaining Groups Máiréad Dunne, Sara Humphreys and Judy Sebba University of Sussex Alan Dyson, Frances Gallannaugh and Daniel Muijs University of Manchester ‘Social class is a significant predictor of set placement. Pupils from lower socioeconomic backgrounds have a higher probability of being placed in lower sets irrespective of prior attainment.’

2. ‘Approximately one-third of the students taught in The highest ability groups were disadvantaged by their placement in these groups because of high expectations, fast-paced lessons and pressure to succeed. This particularly affected the most able girls.’ Students’ experiences of ability grouping - disaffection, polarisation and the construction of failure. (Jo Boaler, Dylan Williams & Margaret Brown.) (Report on a four year longitudinal study monitoring the mathematical learning of students in six UK schools.)

3. The Education Endowment Foundation Toolkit summarises research into the 30 best ways of spending the pupil premium to raise the attainment of disadvantaged pupils. ‘Of the 30 approaches, attainment grouping is one of only two to have a negative effect on students’ attainment, exceeded only by requiring students to repeat a year.’

4. ‘International surveys like PISA show, the more countries group by attainment, the lower their students’ performance overall; for example, Finland, which is one of the most successful countries educationally, abandoned attainment grouping in 1985.’ Sahlberg, P (2011) – Finnish Lessons (New York: Teachers College Press, Columbia University

5. ‘Students assessed as lower-attainment often underestimate their ability and resort to “learned helplessness.” They develop a negative view of their ability which limits their willingness to work and can cause poor behaviour.’ Hattie, J A C (2011) – Visible Learning for Teachers : Maximising Impact on Learning (London: Routledge)

6. ‘It appears likely that routine setting or streaming arrangements undermine low attainers’ confidence and discourage the belief that attainment can be improved through effort.’ The Education Endowment Foundation Toolkit

7. ‘Students are sometimes misallocated to attainment groups for reasons such as poor performance in tests, erratic motivation or untidy written work, but once allocated to an attainment group movement from it is unusual.’ Francis, B & Wong, B (2013) – What is preventing social mobility? A review of the evidence – Association of School and College Leaders (ASCL)

8. ‘Teachers’ expectations are lower with groups of lower-attainment students; they naturally provide them with less challenging work and this is reflected in poorer results.’ Francis, B & Wong, B (2013) – What is preventing social mobility? A review of the evidence – Association of School and College Leaders (ASCL)

9. ‘A significant finding in this study was that students seemed to perceive mathematics as a demanding subject, in which only exceptionally intelligent people can actually succeed. Lack of success in mathematics tended to be interpreted by the students as being due to lack of intelligence on their part, which led to overwhelmingly negative feelings about their own mathematical ability.’ (The study involved mathematics teachers and Y9 pupils in middle ability sets. ) Attitude and Achievement of the Disengaged Pupil in the mathematics Classroom Nardi, E. and Steward, S. University ESRC final report R000223451

10. ‘The research reported here suggests that, in terms of mathematics attainment, it doesn’t really matter very much which school you go to. However, it matters very much which set you get put into..….Of course, as we know from studies of school choice …setting is valued by middle-class parents who presumably assume that their children will be in the top sets, but given the disadvantages that setting produces for those who are not placed in the higher sets, we should question whether the parents of higher- attaining children should be allowed to secure advantages for their (already advantaged) children in this way.’ British Educational Research Journal - Volume 30, Issue 2, 2004 It’s not which school but which set you’re in that matters: the influence of ability grouping practices on student progress in mathematics. Dylan William & Hannah Bartholomew

11. Grouping Pupils by ability in schools Ed Baines In Bad Education – Debunking Myths in Education Adey and Dillon ‘Of particular importance to this discussion is the compelling research finding that students placed in sets above their assessed level of achievement made more progress than students of equivalent ability that are in ability groups at approximately the right level. On the other hand, placing students in groups below their level of ability tends to reduce their progress, irrespective of their attainment level. There may be multiple explanations for these effects including teacher expectations but also the student’s own expectations, motivation and self-concept.’

12. Grouping Pupils by ability in schools Ed Baines In Bad Education – Debunking Myths in Education Adey and Dillon ‘In considering alternatives to ability grouping, there is a need for an approach that is flexible, that does not create conditions that hamper or limit pupil progress, but that is sensitive to, and supportive of, the changing learning needs of all pupils.’