Ability Grouping Raises High‑Achievers’ Maths Progress Without Hurting Low Performers

Context

A University College London Institute of Education study, funded by the Education Endowment Foundation, compared secondary schools that teach maths in mixed‑ability classes with those that use ability sets. The analysis covered year‑7 and year‑8 pupils (ages 11‑13) in state schools across England.

Key Facts

- High‑achieving pupils in mixed‑ability classrooms progressed roughly two months less than peers in ability‑set schools. Overall school progress was one month lower in mixed settings. - The same research found no statistically significant drop in attainment for low‑prior‑attaining or socio‑economically disadvantaged students when taught in sets. - Teachers reported that ability grouping eases workload management, allowing more targeted instruction for each ability band. - Self‑confidence in maths declined in mixed‑ability schools, contradicting earlier claims that setting harms confidence of lower‑performing learners. - Experts such as John Jerrim, professor of education and social statistics at UCL, called the findings “big and important,” urging policymakers to reconsider the push for mixed‑ability maths classes. - Becky Francis, chief executive of the Education Endowment Foundation, highlighted that the study uniquely measured progress differences across ability groups, confirming that the gap between best and worst performers narrows in mixed schools mainly because top students fall behind, not because low performers surge ahead. - The study cautions schools to avoid assigning their most experienced teachers exclusively to top sets, a practice that could undermine equity.

What It Means

The evidence suggests that ability grouping can boost the pace of learning for mathematically strong pupils without penalising their peers. For school leaders, the decision to set or mix classes may now hinge less on equity concerns and more on practical factors such as teacher supply and the ability to deliver differentiated instruction. As recruitment of specialist maths teachers remains a chronic problem, schools will need to balance the benefits of setting with the risk of over‑relying on a limited pool of experts.

Looking Ahead

Future research will need to track long‑term outcomes, especially whether early gains for high‑achievers translate into higher qualifications and whether confidence gaps persist into later years. Policymakers and school leaders should watch for guidance on optimal teacher allocation within ability‑set systems.