Education Endowment Foundation:Best Practice in Mixed Attainment Grouping

Best Practice in Mixed Attainment Grouping

UCL Institute of Education
Implementation cost 
Evidence strengthNot given for this trial
Impact (months)Not given for this trial
0
Project info

Independent Evaluator

NFER logo
NFER
Best practice in mixed attainment grouping
Pupils: 2107 Schools: 13 Grant: £20,134
Key Stage: 3 Duration: 4 year(s) 1 month(s) Type of Trial: Pilot Study
Completed September 2018

The Best Practice in Mixed Attainment intervention provided training for schools to improve the effectiveness of teaching in mixed ability classes

How to group pupils is a key decision that every school has to make, and schools leaders need evidence on the impact of setting, streaming and mixed ability classes. We funded this pilot to see whether it is feasible to run a randomised controlled trial of mixed attainment grouping in maths and English classes.

The pilot struggled to recruit schools: any future trial would need to pay particular attention to the perceived risks and teacher workload associated with the transition to mixed ability teaching

The teachers who did take part in the pilot found some of the mixed ability teaching practices challenging, but were positive about the perceived impacts, particularly on low attaining pupils. The outcome data collected did not show any overall improvement, but the pilot trial was small and not designed to measure the impact of the intervention

This pilot – alongside another EEF trial on grouping practices – demonstrates the challenge of testing changes to grouping practices using a randomised controlled trial design. The EEF is exploring other methods that can be used to assess which grouping practices are most effective and why.

  1. It was challenging to recruit and retain schools to the pilot trial. Despite directly contacting 158 schools and widely advertising the opportunity to another 330, only 18 agreed to be randomly allocated to either receive the training in mixed attainment grouping or to be a control group.
  2. Staff had mixed experiences of the intervention; some enjoyed it, whereas others struggled, particularly with differentiation in mixed attainment groups. Schools that continued with the intervention generally adhered to the programme: allocating pupils to mixed attainment classes, applying differentiation techniques in the classroom, and communicating high expectations for all pupils.
  3. Most interviewees felt that the intervention had a positive effect on pupil outcomes and that those with low prior attainment particularly benefitted.
  4. The pilot RCT was small and designed to test whether a trial was possible rather than to measure the impact of the intervention. The outcome data that was collected did not show a difference in overall maths and English scores between intervention and control schools.
  5. Should a future efficacy trial be considered, particular attention must be paid to eligibility criteria, clarity of expectations at recruitment and the teacher workload associated with implementing mixed attainment teaching.
Question
Finding
Comment

Is there evidence to support the theory of change?

N/A

This pilot was designed to test the feasibility of a future trial, rather than to find evidence to support the theory of change.

Was the approach feasible?

Mixed.

Recruiting schools to the trial was challenging. However, participating schools did teach pupils in mixed ability classes and apply the differentiation and growth mindset techniques suggested during training.

Is the approach ready to be evaluated in a trial?

Mixed.

Should a future efficacy trial be considered, particular attention must be paid to eligibility criteria, clarity of expectations at recruitment and the teacher workload associated with implementing mixed attainment teaching.