Author, Subjects, Keywords

Cited Author

 
 
   » By Author or Editor
 » Browse Author by Alphabet
 » By Journal
 » By Subjects
 » Malaysian Journals
 » By Type
 » By Year
 » By Latest Additions
 
 
   » By Author
 » Top 20 Authors
 » Top 20 Article
 » Top Journal Cited
 » Top Article Cited
 » Journal Citation Statistics
 » Usage Since Sept 2007


 
 
 

Login | Create Account

Ability Grouping and Academic Achievement

Palaniappan, Ananda Kumar, (2004) Ability Grouping and Academic Achievement. Masalah Pendidikan, 27 . pp. 109-118. ISSN 0126-5024

[img]
Preview
PDF - Requires a PDF viewer such as GSview, Xpdf or Adobe Acrobat Reader
45Kb

Affiliations

University of Malaya. Faculty of Education. Dept. of Educational Psychology and Counseling.

Abstract

Menangani masalah perbezaan dalam pencapaian akademik di kalangan pelajar merupakan satu perkara yang agak mencabar. Dalam proses pengajaran, terdapat pelajar yang lambat mengikuti pelajaran manakala ada yang menganggap pengajaran tertentu itu terlalu mudah. Ketidakserasian kadar pengajaran dengan kebolehan pelajar mungkin membangkitkan pelbagai masalah disiplin. Pengumpulan mengikut kebolehan dianggap sebagai satu penyelesaian untuk memenuhi keperluan pelajar yang berbeza. Kertas ini memaparkan isu-isu berkaitan dengan pengumpulan pelajar mengikut kebolehan untuk mengatasi masalah perbezaan pencapaian pelajar. Beberapa cadangan penyelesaian masalah ini juga dibincangkan.

Ability grouping is perceived to fulfilled the needs of students of various ability. The paper presents the issues surrounding ability grouping in overcoming problems of students with different level of achievements.

Item Type:Journal
Keywords:Ability grouping, Streaming, Achievement oriented groups.
Subjects:L Education
ID Code:5091

1. Allan, S. D. (1991). Ability-grouping research reviews: What do they say about grouping and the gifted? Educational Leadership, 48(6), 60-65.

2. Benedict, M. G. (1986). An annotated bibliography of the literature dealing with grouping pupils by ability in elementary classes. [Abstract. South Bend: Indiana University.

3. Boaler. J., William, D., & Brown, M. (2000). Students’ experiences of ability grouping — disaffection, polarization and the construction of failure. British Educational Research Journal, 26(5), 631-648.

4. Braddock, J.H.,II & Slavin, R. E. (1989). Tracking: Trends, effects and alternatives. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University, Project 1, Center for Research on Effective Schooling for Disadvantaged Students.

5. Department for Education and Employment (1997). Excellence in schools. London: The Stationery Office.

6. Feldhusen, J. F. (1989, March). Synthesis of research on gifted youth. Educational Leadership, 6-11.

7. Gamoran, A. (1987). Organization, instruction, and the effects of ability grouping: Comment on Slavin’s Best-Evidence Synthesis. Review of Educational Research, 57(3), 341-345.

8. Gary, B. (1995). Alternatives to ability grouping: Still unanswered questions. New York: ERIC Clearinghouse on Urban Education.

9. Glass, G. V. (2002). School reform proposals: The research evidence. Grouping students for instruction. [Summary], Tempe. AZ: Education Policy Studies Laboratory, Education Policy Research Unit, Arizona State University. Retrieved May 17, 2004, from http://www.asu.edu/educ/epsl/EPRU/documents/EPRU%202002-101/Summary-05.Glass.doc

10. Goldberg, M., Passow, A. H., & Justman, J. (1966). The effects of ability grouping. New York: Teachers College Press.

11. Good, T., & Marshall, S. (1984). Do students learn more in heterogeneous or homogeneous groups? In P. Peterson, L.C. Wilkinson, & M. Hallinan (Eds.), The social context of instruction: Group organization and group processes, pp.15-38. New York: Academic.

12. Hallam, S., & Ireson, J. (2005). Secondary school teachers’ pedagogic practices when teaching mixed and structured ability classes. Research Papers in Education, 20(1), 3-24.

13. Hallam, S., Ireson, J., & Davies, J. (2002). Effective pupil grouping in primary school — A practical guide. London: Fulton.

14. Hallam, S., Ireson, J., Lister, V, & Chaudhury, I. A. (2003). Ability grouping: Practices in the Primary School: A survey. Educational Studies, 29(1), 69-83.

15. Ireson, J., & Hallam, S. (2001). Ability grouping in education. London: Sage.

16. Kutnick, P., Blatchford, P., Clark, H., MacIntyre, H., & Baines, E. (2005). Teachers understandings of the relationship between within-class (pupil) grouping and learning in secondary schools. Educational Research. 47(1), 1-24.

17. Kulik, C. C., & Kulik, J. A. (1982). Highlights from research on ability grouping. [Abstract.] Washington, DC: National Science Foundation.

18. Kulik, C. C., & Kulik, J. A. (1984). Effects of ability grouping on elementary school pupils: A meta-analysis. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Psychological Association. Toronto, Ontario.

19. Oakes, J. (1985). Keeping track: How schools structure inequality. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

20. Oakes, J. (1987). Tracking in secondary schools: A contextual perspective. Educational Psychologist, 22, 129-153.

21. Raze, N. (1984). Overview of research on ability grouping. [Abstract.] Redwood City, CA: San Mateo County Office of Education.

22. Reid, M. E., Clunies, L. R., Goacher, B., & Vile, D. (1982). Mixed ability teaching: Problems and possibilities. Windsor: NFER-Nelson.

23. Slavin, R. E. (1987). Ability grouping and student achievement in elementary schools: A best-evidence synthesis. Review of Educational Research, 57(3), 293-336.

24. Slavin, R. E. (1990). Achievement effects of ability grouping in secondary schools: A best-evidence synthesis. Review of Educational Research, 60(3), 471-499.

25. Slavin, R. E. (1993). Ability grouping in the middle grades: Achievement effects and alternatives. Elementary School Journal, 93(5), 535-552.

26. Sorensen, A. B., & Hallinan, M. T. (1986). Effects of ability grouping on growth in achievement. American Educational Research Journal, 23(4), 519-542.

27. Thompson, G. W. (1973), The effects of ability grouping upon achievement in Eleventh Grade American History. Dissertation Abstracts International, 34(4), 1503A-1504A.

28. Veves, M. (1989, Fall). Beyond tracking: A teacher’s view. Equity and Choice, 6(1), 18-22.

29. Whitburn, J. (2001). Effective classroom organization in primary schools: Mathematics. Oxford Review of Education, 27(3). 411-428.

30. Zhenhui, R. (2001). Matching teaching styles with learning styles in East Asian Contexts. The Internet TESL Journal, VII (7). Retrieved July 3, 2004, from http://iteslj.org/Techniques/Zhenhui-TeachingStyles.html

Repository Staff Only: item control page
 
 
 
 
 
 
© Copyright 2007 MyAIS Faculty of Computer Science and Information Technology, University of Malaya – All Rights Reserved. Malaysian Abstracting and Indexing System is powered by EPrints 3 which is developed by the School of Electronics and Computer Science at the University of Southampton. More information and software credits.