Remember Me
Or use your Academic/Social account:


Or use your Academic/Social account:


You have just completed your registration at OpenAire.

Before you can login to the site, you will need to activate your account. An e-mail will be sent to you with the proper instructions.


Please note that this site is currently undergoing Beta testing.
Any new content you create is not guaranteed to be present to the final version of the site upon release.

Thank you for your patience,
OpenAire Dev Team.

Close This Message


Verify Password:
Verify E-mail:
*All Fields Are Required.
Please Verify You Are Human:
fbtwitterlinkedinvimeoflicker grey 14rssslideshare1
Pay, Bradley (2016)
Publisher: Teacher Education Advancement Network (TEAN), University of Cumbria
Languages: English
Types: Article
Subjects: Z484
For many years, groupings and progress have been two key buzz words in education and Physical Education, however vast research focuses solely on mixed and similar ability setting and not mixed and similar groupings within-class sets, particularly in Physical Education. Using the Physical SelfDescription Questionnaire (PSDQ), on a top-set, male, Physical Education class, pupils were grouped according to their own perceived level in Physical Education and completed a unit of PE teaching which focused on various aspects of the subject in one specific sport. On completion of the teaching unit, pupils who perceived themselves as ‘more able’ were asked to recomplete the PDSQ and were interviewed to discuss their levels of progress in various aspects of Physical Education. Research findings demonstrated that mixed ability within class groupings worked best in social situations with pupils demonstrating improved progress in the coaching domain; although opportunities to progress in technical based activities and umpiring were hindered due to the lack of ‘stretch and challenge’ opportunities. However, such findings demonstrate teachers must start to become more flexible with their groupings within-class to maximise pupils’ opportunities to progress.
  • The results below are discovered through our pilot algorithms. Let us know how we are doing!

    • Barriball, L. & While, A. (1994). Collecting data using a semi-structured interview: a discussion paper. Journal of Advanced Nursing. 19. 328 - 335.
    • Bejai, “. . What outs as suess? Hieahial disouses i a gils opehesie school. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education 24(1): 105-118.
    • BERA (2011). Ethical guidelines for educational research. London: British Educational Research Association.
    • Berg, B. L. (2007). Qualitative research methods for the social sciences (6th ed).
    • Boaler, J. (1997). When even the winners are losers: evaluating the experiences of top set students. Journal of Curriculum Studies. 29(2). 165 - 182.
    • Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2001). Research Methods in Education (4th ed.). London: Routledge Falmer.
    • Bryan, H., Carpenter, C. & Hoult, S., 2010. Learning and teaching at a level: a guide for student teachers. London: Sage publications Ltd.
    • Department for Education and Employment (DfEE). (1997). Excellence in Schools The White Paper.
    • Dunne, M. & Gazeley, L. (2008). Teachers, social class and underachievement. British Journal of Sociology of Education. 29(5): 451-463.
    • Goetz, T., & Frenzel, A. C. (2006). Phenomenology of boredom at school. Zeitschrift fur Entwicklungspsychologie und Pedagogische Psychologie. 38. 149 153.
    • Goodwin, S. (2007). The benefits of homogenous grouping in physical education. Journal of Physical Education. 20(1). 124-150.
    • Hallam, S. & Deathe, K. (2002). Ability grouping: year group differences in self-concept and attitudes of secondary school pupils. International Journal of Research and Method in Education. 33(5). 464 - 480.
    • Hallam, S., Rogers, L., Ireson, J. (2008). Ability grouping in the secondary school: attitudes of teachers of practical based subjects. Research Papers in Education. 20(1). 3 - 24.
    • Haynes, J., Fletcher, T. & Miller, J. (2008). Does Grouping By Perceived Ability Sustain Student Attitudes Towards Physical Education? Research Quarterly. 14(3). 4 - 16.
    • Her Majesties Inspection (HMI): Ofsted. (2012). The Westlands School. Available: https://www.westlands.org.uk/Files/Information/Ofsted-Report-2012-FULL.pdf. Last accessed 23/05/2016
    • Ireson, J. (2000). Innovative Grouping Practices In Secondary Schools: DfEE. Available: http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20130401151715/http://www.education.gov.uk/p ublications/eOrderingDownload/RR166.pdf. Last accessed 19/05/2016.
    • Ireson, J., Hallam, S. & Hurley, C. (2005). What are the effects of ability grouping on GCSE attainment? British Educational Research Journal. 31(4): 443-458.
    • Kihi, G. . A High “killed Pupils Epeie es ith “pot Eduatio. The ACHPER Healthy Lifestyles Journal. 48(3). 5-9.
    • Koller, O. (2004). Effects of ability grouping. Minster: Waxmann. 110 - 129.
    • Kulick, J. (2003). Grouping and Tracking. In: Colangelo, N. & Davis, G Handbook of Gifted Education. 3rd ed. London: Needham Heights. 265 - 281.
    • Kvale, S. (1996). Interviews: An introduction to qualitative research interviewing.
    • Lloyd, L. (1999). Multi-age classes and high ability students. Review of Educational Research, 69(2), 187-212.
    • Marsh, H. W. (1984). Self-concept, social comparison, and ability grouping: A reply to Kulik and Kulik. American Educational Research Journal. 21(4), 799-806.
    • Marsh, H. W. (1999). Physical Self Description Questionnaire I. SELF Research Centre Bankstown: University of Western Sydney.
    • Marsh, H. W., Marco, I. T., & Asci, F. H. (2002). Multitrait-multimethod analyses of two physical selfconcept instruments: A cross-cultural perspective. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology. 24. 99-119.
    • Marsh, H. W., Richards, G., Johnson, S., Roche, L., & Tremayne, P. (1994). Physical self description questionnaire: Psychometric properties and a multitrait-multimethod analysis of relations to existing instruments. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology. 16. 270-305.
    • Morgan, L. (2013). Advantages of a Group Interviews Over an Individual Interviews. Available: http://work.chron.com/advantages-group-interviews-over-individual-interviews-10405.html. Last accessed 25/05/2016.
    • Moser, C. & Kalton, G. (1986). Surveying Methods in Social Investigation. Gower. Aldershot, Hampshire.
    • Neihart, M. (2007). The socio-affective impact of acceleration and ability grouping.
    • Gifted Child Quarterly 51(4), 330-341.
    • Ofsted (2001) Annual epot of He Majesty's Chief Inspecto of Schoo ls, Standads and uality in education. London: HMSO.
    • Penney, D. & Evans, J. (1997). Naming the Game. Discourse and domination in physical education and sport in England and Wales. European Physical Education Review 3(1): 21-32.
    • Penney, D. & Houlihan, B. (2003). Specialist colleges national monitoring and evaluation research project: first national survey report. Loughborough University: Institute of Youth Sport, School of Sport and Exercise Sciences.
    • Pierce, R., Cassidy, J., Adams, C., Neumeister, K., Dixon, F. & Cross, T. (2011). The effects of clustering ad uiulu o the deelopet of gifted leaes ath ahieeet. Journal of the Education of the Gifted. 34. 569 - 594.
    • Plucker, A. & McIntire, J. (1996). Academic survivability in high potential, middle school students. Gifted Child Quarterly. 40, 7-14.
    • Robertson, C., Cowell, B. & Ollsen, J. (1988). A case study of integration and de-streaming: teachers and students in an Ontarian secondary school. Journal of Curriculum Study. 30(6). 691 - 717.
    • Silverman, S., Tyson, L. & Krampitz, J. (1992). Teacher feedback and achievement in physical education: Interaction with student practice. Teaching and Teacher Education. 8 (4), 333-344.
    • Slavin, R. (1987). Ability Grouping and Student Achievement in Elementary Schools: A Best-Evidence Synthesis. Review of Educational Research. 57(3). 293 - 336.
    • Slavin, R. (1990). Achievement effects of ability grouping in secondary schools: A best evidence synthesis. Review of Educational Research 60(3): 471-490.
    • Stobart, G. (2008). Testing Times: The Uses and Abuses of Assessment. London: Routledge.
    • Wilkinson, S., Penney, D. & Allin, L. (2015). Setting and within-class ability groupings. European Physical Education Review. 11(1). 1 - 19.
  • No related research data.
  • No similar publications.

Share - Bookmark

Cite this article