Study

last updated:June 2009

What were the key findings from the study about supporting low attaining pupils?
The schools in the study demonstrated a range of ways in which low attaining groups of pupils could be successfully supported. Some of the practical ways that this was achieved and which are covered in greater detail later in the RoM were:

• keeping the curriculum varied and challenging for all, e.g. by including opportunities for vocational learning
• maintaining high levels of pupil motivation, participation and engagement, for example via a positive learning environment and high expectations
• identifying specific teaching strategies for low attaining groups, including: providing more scaffolding for learning topics; using varied examples and teaching styles; varying the pace of lessons
• giving additional support to low attaining pupils, often through: more small group and individual attention; additional resources, such as personal whiteboards or greater access to ICT; targeted support from teaching assistants (TAs) and others
• sustaining positive teacher-teacher relationships and pupil-pupil relationships, and
• maintaining strong discipline at the same time as making learning fun.

Looking at all the successful schools the researchers identified five principles on which these schools were basing their approaches to low attaining pupils.

• A broad curriculum – schools ensured pupils in low attaining groups had access to the full curriculum. This helped to raise expectations of pupils and teachers rather than lower them.
• Extra support – the schools in the study found ways of providing a higher quantity and quality of extra support for low attaining groups. Schools used extra teachers, teaching assistants, other adults and other pupils to provide this support.
• Involving pupils – many schools used the views of pupils about what they found helpful to improve teaching and learning in low attaining groups.
• Responding to what works – the case study schools were good at finding out how practices impacted on pupils, by measuring progress and attainment as well as by listening to pupils and teachers.
• Retaining flexibility – schools often put pupils in low attainment groups for parts of the curriculum, not for all lessons. Groups were reviewed regularly and pupils were transferred when appropriate.

How did schools organise groupings and which pupils were in lower groups?
The researchers analysed the survey data from the schools to find out how schools organised groups and how they decided which pupils were placed in lower attaining groups.

The themes in which the researchers picked out significant findings were:

• grouping at key stage 2
• grouping at key stages 3 and 4
• allocation of pupils to attainment groups, and
• characteristics of the low attaining pupils.

Grouping at key stage 2
A wide range of grouping systems was used in the primary schools. Some grouped for numeracy or literacy, depending on priorities. Some primary schools used setting from year 3 onwards, others delayed setting until later, often in preparation for national tests. In general schools tried to keep lower attaining groups smaller to maximise individual attention available to pupils. Grouping arrangements were highly variable, sometimes changing during the course of the school year. For example, one school had small groups of pupils who are attaining well below the average during the spring term only. The headteacher reported:

‘…the progress the children make in the spring term is amazing. It’s very, very focused on the needs of the small group…. it certainly suits the pupils who are attaining well below the average.’

Grouping at Key stages 3 and 4
Setting was used much more extensively in key stages 3 and 4, though there was still considerable variation. Setting and banding systems were often designed as a means to: aid timetabling; concentrate additional support (e.g. TAs) for pupils who needed support; and allow low attaining groups to follow a modified vocational curriculum for part of the week. On the whole teachers in successful schools tended to support the grouping strategy of their own department, whatever that strategy was. This indicated that the important factor was staff support for whichever grouping strategy is used rather than one strategy being better than another.

Timing of grouping was often delayed until key stage 4, though again there was wide variation. One school set pupils only in maths and only at key stage 4, while another school used streaming from key stage 3, with all classes in every subject using setting. Whatever grouping practice and timing was used, low attaining groups were again generally significantly smaller in secondary schools.

Allocation of pupils to attainment groups
The allocation of pupils to groups was most often decided by subject specialist senior teachers, in consultation with other teachers and pastoral support staff who knew the pupils.
The criteria which schools said they used to allocate pupils were fairly common, including prior attainment, teacher assessment (formal and informal), teacher judgements and pupil behaviour. Nearly half the schools in the research reported that they reviewed setting decisions every term and a quarter of the sample every half-term. This indicated flexibility in making adjustments when necessary.

Characteristics of pupils in low attaining groups
The researchers found some trends in the characteristics of pupils allocated to low attaining groups. Schools indicated that setting decisions were based mainly on prior attainment. The data confirmed this to an extent, although prior attainment did not predict all setting decisions by any means. For example, over half the pupils with low prior attainment in English ended up in middle or higher sets.

Social class was a significant predictor of set placement. Pupils from lower socio-economic status (SES) backgrounds were more likely to be assigned to lower sets, whatever their prior attainment.

Under the umbrella term ‘family background’, which several  school leaders and teachers cited as a factor in poor attainment, experiences such as  poverty, family breakdown, inappropriate parenting, poor diet, lack of sleep and a lack of learning culture at home were given as specific causes of under-attainment.

Special Educational Needs (SEN) was also a strong predictor of set placement. Pupils with SEN were concentrated in the low attainment sets.

 Ethnicity was a weaker but significant predictor of set placement. For example pupils of Bangladeshi and Pakistani origin were less likely to be selected for the higher sets.

Schools varied in their approach to setting based on behaviour. Some schools allocated pupils with behavioural challenges to higher sets, in order to provide positive role models for them, while others reported moving pupils to lower sets for ‘behavioural reasons’.

Pupils in lower sets were also reported as typically suffering from low self-esteem, lacking confidence, having less independence, poorer levels of concentration, and showing disaffection or lack of motivation.

What classroom strategies did teachers use to motivate and inspire low attaining pupils to learn?
Teachers from the project schools described the targeted strategies which they used to motivate and inspire pupils who are attaining well below the average. Generally these strategies centred around using more appropriate syllabi, using practical and interactive teaching, providing more scaffolding for pupil learning and finding ways to sustain motivation.

The researchers organised these strategies into four themed areas:

• differentiation
• engaging learners
• encouraging participation, and
• keeping expectations high.

Differentiation
Differentiation took various forms in low attaining groups. Where resources allowed, some pupils were withdrawn from class to receive different teaching, often using a lot of interactive ICT and games. Differentiation for lower attainers within class was achieved in various ways, including providing clearly structured activities, broken down into stages, and giving instructions more slowly. For example in one observed numeracy class the teacher put a number of sums on the board, which ranged in difficulty. She asked all pupils to start with the easier ones but then to choose for themselves which other sums they did. This avoided the danger of differentiated teaching restricting what pupils who are attaining well below the average might achieve and also avoided potential stigmatising by peers for being given an easier worksheet.

Engaging lower attainers
Teachers demonstrated a range of different ways to engage lower attaining pupils. There was general agreement that while pupils benefited from some repetition to reinforce learning, more often low attaining pupils benefited from a variety of materials and approaches to reinforce understanding of one topic. Teachers working successfully in lower attaining classes also gave significantly more examples, especially when introducing a new topic. For example in a lesson to introduce numerical division, the teacher presented one example in several different ways. These included using a bead line, drawing on the whiteboard and using a grid. Pupils were then encouraged to use the method they preferred.

Encouraging participation
The researchers found that teachers used more varied means to encourage participation of pupils who are attaining well below the average than they did for other pupils. Questioning and feed-back strategies were identified as particularly important. These strategies included: following up an incorrect pupil answer with an easier question, leaving more thinking time for pupils, a higher level of praise for correct answers, highlighting only one area of improvement per piece of work, and asking more closed questions to build up learning step by step. Practitioners may like to look at a previous RoM on effective talk in the primary classroom (click to RoM 34) which explores ways in which teachers encourage participation. In another school some of the lowest attaining year 8 pupils were encouraged to participate in learning by buddying with and helping younger pupils to read.

Keeping expectations high
Many teachers felt that low attaining pupils needed to be set work at varying levels of challenge, the easier work ensuring that they experienced a sense of achievement. Nonetheless, teachers and schools stressed the need to keep expectations high no matter what set they were teaching. Similarly teachers gave mixed ability groups the same writing tasks, giving greater scaffolding for lower attainers by providing writing frames, although recognising the danger of making them too dependent on this extra support.

The following pages of this RfT look in greater depth at three key practical areas  which the researchers identified as critical in delivering on the four themed areas above: namely, relationships, use of teaching assistants and classroom management.

How important were relationships in helping low attaining pupils to learn?
Teacher-pupil relationships
The study showed that teacher-pupil relationships were particularly important in teaching low attaining groups. Low attaining sets tended to contain fewer pupils which helped teachers to get to know their pupils better, focus teaching and learning at an appropriate level, provide greater individual and personal attention, control the class dynamics, behaviour and disaffection more easily, and develop positive relationships.

The teaching-learning process was generally more negotiated in low attaining groups and this was linked with pupils feeling more in control of the direction of teaching.

Some teachers gave low attaining pupils some additional responsibility for their learning, for example selecting certain tasks and choosing pupils who they were going to work with. This required careful teacher monitoring and relied upon good teacher knowledge of what their pupils know and can do already and of their characters.

Strong relationships between teachers and pupils also helped them to strike a balance between a more relaxed teaching environment involving humour and maintaining discipline in groups of pupils, many of whom typically had behavioural problems. Successful classroom relations were always based on mutual respect.

In one school, a pupil described a respected teacher in these words:

‘ ..she is not dead strict. She does have a bit of fun … but she keeps people in order.’ (pupil, year 8)

Practitioners may like to read a case study (click to case study 1) which explains the positive impact which ‘Assertive Mentoring’ of pupils by teachers had at one secondary school. Underlying this success was the teacher-pupil relationship.

Pupil-pupil relationships
Low attaining pupils were identified as often lacking in self-esteem and self-confidence. Teachers who were successful with such groups emphasised the need to value all contributions in class, encouraging pupils to make mistakes and not ridiculing each others’ wrong answers. In some schools pupils were encouraged to take this further, for example by applauding good work from other pupils.

Avoiding stigmatisation by peers was also a feature which recurred in successful low attaining groups. Feelings of stigmatisation generally disappeared once pupils were in class, so long as the atmosphere for learning was positive. In one school a teacher reported:

‘…They get me to close the door so they can’t be seen in the room [by other students] with students known to have specific learning difficulties…. However once the door is shut then there’s no problem with it.’ (head of department)

A number of schools made good use of cooperative learning techniques such as asking pupils to discuss topics in pairs, then in small teams before debating as a whole class. In one of the schools, which was conducting research into pupils’ views of grouping, there was strong emphasis on the importance of peer-peer classroom support. The head teacher explained:

‘Nearly all the children said that if we don’t understand something it’s better for the other children to explain it to us.’ (Headteacher)

Another successful strategy for low attaining pupils which helped to strengthen peer relationships was the use of peer marking. Peer marking took time to be accepted by pupils but once it became established it was appreciated, with pupils becoming much more positively critical of their own work as a result.

What role did teaching assistants play in supporting pupils in low attaining groups?
The use of teaching assistants (TAs) was identified by all of the schools involved in the research as central to supporting the learning of pupils who are attaining well below the average. It was the most frequently used additional resource to support these groups of students. The positive impacts were maximised when TA support was coordinated and well planned.

The most effective ways the researchers found TAs being used were:

• targeted work by TAs
• making TA support for individuals less obvious
• spreading TA time across a whole class, and
• sharing the teachers’ load – inside and outside the classroom.

We give some specific examples of each of these strategies below.

Targeted work
In one school a teacher took the lowest attaining pupils out of the bottom set class once a week for some specialist tuition. The concepts covered during this time were then followed up by three TAs in the classroom during the rest of the week. TAs themselves often also worked with individual pupils or small groups who had been withdrawn from low attaining sets. This worked best when it was carefully planned, with the teacher knowing exactly what work was going to be covered and which particular skills were going to be practised.

Making TA support for individuals less obvious
Several TAs reported that secondary pupils often felt particularly embarrassed about having a TA assisting them in class. This was successfully reduced by sensitive management, with the TA making it clear that s/he was available to help, but making it less obvious s/he was attached to a particular pupil.

Spreading TA time across a class
Some teachers were aware that if a TA was attached to a particular group all the time then this could be counter-productive, because this group could end up with less teacher time or attention and could become over-dependent on the TA. This was tackled in some schools by ensuring that the TA did not only work with the low attaining pupils. One teacher explained:

‘I don’t always want her to work with the [lowest-attaining] group – it’s not good for them or her and I also need to see how the children are doing.’ (Year 5 teacher)

A different teacher had developed a very practical way of avoiding over-dependence. The teacher introduced a topic before allocating TAs to particular tables. She reported that this noticeably increased pupil concentration at the start of a task because the pupils did not always know exactly when they would be receiving additional support.

Sharing the teacher’s load – inside and outside the classroom
The splitting of classroom management tasks was a particularly effective way of using TA time, especially where the teacher and TA were used to working together. For example in one low attaining class the teacher took the register while the TA organised children’s access to library books and then checked them off while the teacher did the introduction to the lesson. For lower attaining groups containing pupils with behavioural problems, classroom management issues were more pronounced. Coordinated TA support was used to reduce time spent on tasks other than teaching and learning. Practitioners may like to read a case study (click to case study 2) which identifies some good practice in using TAs with pupils who are attaining well below the average across one authority, particularly focusing on the teacher-TA relationship.

Several schools also reported that TAs acted as important links between teachers and parents/carers, especially as many TAs came from the local community and were therefore seen as more approachable.

How did low attaining pupils view TAs?
The low attaining pupils interviewed at both primary and secondary school were generally positive about the support offered by TAs (and learning mentors). Primary pupils commented that being withdrawn from class for individual support enabled them to concentrate more in smaller, quieter groups, and that they enjoyed the more practical activities which they felt helped them to improve. At secondary level a number of low attaining pupils noted that the support had helped them to improve their grades.

Regarding in-class support from TAs, pupils at primary level liked the fact that TAs could help them when they got stuck and could clarify the teacher’s instructions. Researchers observed several cases in which valuable learning time was lost when pupils had not understood the task and a TA or teacher was not available to clarify.

In one school research project, pupils judged one-to-one contact to be the most effective form of intervention. As a result of this the school management team was considering whether to make a change based on this feedback, to give pupils individual support once a week rather than small-group interventions five times a week.

How were classroom materials and arrangements used to support low attaining pupils?
The schools which were serving lower attaining pupils well (indicated by high value added scores) all customised the curriculum, assessment and teaching in order to suit the particular needs of these pupils.

Customised curriculum materials
Materials often focused on the same topics and assignments as those being taught in the higher sets, but they typically incorporated a range of demands to allow pupils to select the right level of challenge.

Many of the low attaining groups were given greater access to materials to support learning, such as individual whiteboards, calculators or specialist books.

Resourcing practical, creative and active approaches to learning
Teachers in effective settings for pupils who are attaining well below the average used a wider variety of practical, creative and interactive approaches in the classroom for lower attaining pupils than in other classes. These included examples such as teaching mathematical concepts through drama and making greater use of practical work in science. Teachers stressed the benefits of relating learning to pupils’ own life experiences. There is more detail about the strategy of incorporating pupils’ life experience into the classroom in a previous RfT on home school knowledge exchange.

Pupil interviews showed that lower attaining pupils enjoyed and learned more from lessons which were more activity-based. Practitioners may like to read a case study (click to case study 3) which describes how one teacher made a positive impact on GCSE results for some low attaining students, by organising PE lessons with a much greater degree of interaction, pupil involvement and pupil responsibility.

Several teachers however did point out the potentially fine line between interactive learning as stimulating fun and what might be viewed as childish and therefore unmotivating. For example, one science teacher recounted an incident when he had used a video which used puppets with different groups. The higher-attaining group had ‘loved it’ whereas the lower-attaining group had felt ‘insulted’.

Varying pupil groupings
Teachers generally used a range of in-class grouping arrangements, in order to promote pupil engagement with learning and to encourage participation. Groupings were often changed during the course of a lesson to help reinforce the same learning point. For example, the English department in one of the case study schools had a policy of using mixed attainment groups of six pupils for in class activities and changing the group membership for each activity, to ensure the learning experience for each pupil was varied.

What different approaches were used for low attaining pupils from different social groups?
The researchers’ survey found that certain groups of pupils were generally over-represented in lower attaining groups. These included pupils from ethnic minorities, boys and pupils from lower socio-economic groups. There were pointers from the research about ways that these groups of pupils could be best supported.

Ethnic background
Pupils’ ethnic background was hardly mentioned by teachers and other staff in interviews about low attaining groups. Where it was mentioned, in some of the city schools in the study, teachers said that although there was racial tension and segregation outside the school, they worked hard to ensure that pupils generally got on well with each other. Any reported conflict was confined to the playground rather than the classroom:

‘I think as a school we’re quite good at getting pupils to leave their problems outside school when they come in.’ (Teacher)

Language support was an area in which ethnicity was explicitly raised. One specialist teacher of a year 10 group with English as an additional language (EAL) felt that the groups were usually very responsive (backed up by researcher observation) because she was herself Bengali and therefore able to communicate in Bengali when necessary. A teacher from a different school observed that their English department greatly benefited from having several Bengali members of staff within their department. By contrast the mathematics department lacked this cultural and language support which he believed would have helped some of the ‘quiet Bengali girls’ who were often found in the bottom set mathematics classes.

Another area of language support was ‘Jolly Phonics’, used in a number of schools who reported that it was particularly effective with newly arrived EAL learners in lower sets. Pupils in two of the schools with high numbers of EAL learners also benefited from the oracy programme ‘Talking Partners’.

Gender
Gender was the most common characteristic referred to by teachers of low-attaining groups. Boys were reported as over-represented in low attaining groups, especially in secondary schools. Several teachers referred to the need to find ways to manage the ‘laddish’ behaviour that was typical in such groups. One solution several teachers reported was to maintain firm boundaries in low attaining groups, but also to encourage a more relaxed atmosphere in these classes. Also several teachers reported the need to have greater flexibility regarding the structure and content of lessons for pupils who are attaining well below the average – to be able to make changes depending on the response of pupils. Practitioners may wish to refer again to the case study (click to case study 1) which describes an ‘Assertive Mentoring’ initiative. One of the successes of this initiative was to reduce ‘laddish’ behaviour within low attaining groups.

Socio-economic background
Students from low SES areas were significantly over-represented in low attaining groups in the schools surveyed. A number of teachers also referred to the background of low attaining pupils, citing ‘family breakdown, poverty, inappropriate parenting, poor diet, lack of sleep or lack of learning culture’ as possible factors - especially for literacy difficulties.

Many schools saw literacy as the ‘key sticking point’ for pupils who are attaining well below the average from low SES backgrounds and made some specific efforts to counter this. One school, for example, adopted the Success For All (SFA) Literacy Programme which ‘aims to ensure that children born into low income or poorly educated families succeed at school’. In this programme pupils work with others at a similar level whatever their age and therefore are carefully matched in groups where every pupil makes similar progress at the same time.

What strategies did schools and departments as a whole use to support the learning of low attaining pupils?
The study found that the way that schools and departments as a whole were managed had a strong impact on the experiences of low attaining pupils. The researchers organised the key institutional and management strategies for supporting these pupils into five themes:

• management and development of teaching assistants
• curriculum arrangements at key stage 2
• curriculum arrangements at key stages 3 and 4
• school ethos, discipline/reward systems, and
• involving people outside of the school.

Management and development of teaching assistants
All of the case study schools invested in TAs, targeting this additional support towards lower attaining pupils. The management and coordination of this support was central to its effectiveness. For example in one secondary school, the pupils with designated support were all allocated to the same half of the year group. This ensured that all available TA support was concentrated on pupils who needed it. In a primary school, TAs were managed such that the teacher of the bottom set had the same three adults supporting her class every day. The researchers also stressed the need for TA deployment to be coordinated, finding evidence of excellent communication between school managers, teachers and TAs in some schools.

Another key ingredient was an investment in the training and professional development of TAs. For example in one school a TA had been trained to manage the newly installed computer database for tracking pupil progress. Another primary school had appointed a literacy advisory teacher, part of whose job was to train TAs to a ‘higher level’ and to ensure consistency of intervention across the school.

Curriculum arrangements at key stage 2
Primary schools which provided good teaching and learning for lower attaining pupils had developed a number of specific strategies, such as cooperative learning, peer marking and whole class (rather than individual) feed-back following tests.

A number of primary schools considered Assessment for Learning strategies as particularly effective with low attaining pupils, especially for example for helping lower attaining pupils to decide ‘what makes good work’. You can find out more in our earlier RoM about putting AfL strategies into practice. (click to RfT 19 AfL: Putting it into practice)

Curriculum arrangements at key stages 3 and 4
Lower attaining pupils in secondary schools were provided with enhanced teaching and learning experiences in a number of ways. The lower motivations or non-academic interests of many low attaining pupils were addressed by offering more vocational pathways at key stage 4. This often included off-site work in small groups, learning at local FE colleges, extended work experience, or through offering alternative accreditation through more flexible learning in school (e.g. the skills based ASDAN programmes which accredit personal and social development).

Collaboration with neighbouring schools was also observed in several cases. Vocational courses were followed for example through a ‘virtual college’, a coming together of three local schools, to maximise use of resources and reduce travel costs by sharing facilities.

Several teachers and managers also reported deliberately selecting programmes with a heavy coursework component and introducing Assessment for Learning strategies because they believed these favoured low-attaining pupils.

School ethos, discipline/rewards
To try to tackle the relatively low self-esteem and poor motivation of low attaining pupils, schools strove to create a strong and positive school ethos which emphasised the inclusion of all pupils.

One way of creating a positive school ethos was to take the views of pupils into consideration wherever possible, for example through action research on pupil grouping and how pupils learn best. Practitioners may like to read a case study (click to case study 4) of a school which set out to listen to and act upon low attaining pupils’ perceptions of their own learning and their classroom environment. Another positive strategy was to ensure that school rewards could be won by all pupils. This was ensured by the rewarding of effort, behaviour and attendance, as well as academic achievement.

Involving people outside school
The involvement of parents/carers to support learning was observed to have positive effects on the confidence and self esteem of low attaining pupils. This liaison worked best when coordinated with specialists, such as family liaison officers or attendance and welfare officers. A number of the schools were experimenting with novel ways to engage hard to reach parents of pupils who are attaining well below the average, especially to encourage greater involvement with homework. Strategies included classes for parents/carers (some joint with pupils) and a weekly ‘sharing assembly’ for parents to come and view work. Practitioners may find it helpful to read our earlier RoM about parental involvement. (click to RoM 29 on ‘parental involvement’)

Several inner-city schools had also established links with local businesses that encouraged employees to go in to school to work on particular projects with lower attaining groups, or act as mentors. Other successful mentoring of pupils who are attaining well below the average was being carried out by ex-pupils who had more ‘street cred’ with current pupils.

How was the evidence gathered and analysed?
The study aimed to investigate what constituted effective teaching of pupils in low attainment groups. It also looked at the characteristics of pupils in low attainment sets and the factors that determine the composition of these sets. The researchers also looked for examples of effective teaching of low attaining pupils who were not in sets.

The research was conducted by the Universities of Sussex and Manchester, on behalf of the Department for Children, Schools and Families (DCSF).

The researchers used two main methods in their research:

• a survey of schools in 12 Local Authorities (LAs) in England, and
• in-depth case studies from 13 schools in four of these LAs.

The survey was sent to 404 schools (302 primaries, 102 secondaries) of which 168 were completed (124 primary returns, 44 secondary). The survey collected data on Years 6, 7, 8 and 10. The completed questionnaires gathered data on individual pupils as well as data about how schools put pupils into sets and groups.

The thirteen schools selected as detailed case studies were from four of the LAs. Two of the LAs were shire counties and the other two metropolitan areas. The schools were selected using two criteria: firstly that they had high value added scores (they were making good progress with low attaining pupils) and secondly that there was a good spread of social class and minority ethnic intakes. The case study sample was more socio-economically disadvantaged than the national average and specific ethnic groups, such as Bangladeshi pupils, were over-represented at these schools compared to the national average.

The data collection in the case studies focused on Years 5, 8 and 10 in the specific subjects of English/literacy and mathematics/numeracy, and additionally science in Years 8 and 10. Data collection included: documentary evidence; individual and group interviews with a variety of staff; classroom observations of low attainment groups in the specified subjects/years; shadowing of selected low attaining pupils; and focus group interviews with these shadowed pupils. Some parents were also approached.

The data was analysed to answer two broad questions:
a) How are the advantages of attainment grouping for low attaining pupils maximised?
b) How are the disadvantages of attainment grouping for low attaining pupils minimised?

The research focused on the experiences of pupils in low attaining sets. Importantly the term ‘attainment’ was used in the research and report in preference to ‘ability’. Using ‘ability’ was seen as problematic, since there is no means of measuring ‘ability’. ‘Attainment’ in this research was measured by the proxy of National Curriculum Test results. This is a common predictor of allocation of pupils to groups.

What are the implications of the study?
Teachers might like to consider the following in making use of the findings of the study:

• The research identified several areas of good practice for teaching low attaining pupil groups. Some of the critical strategies involved striving to maintain motivation and participation by varying the pace, style and content of lessons. How could you alter the way you prepare and deliver lessons in order to better suit lower attaining pupil groups?
• The research concluded that good teacher-pupil relations is one of the critical factors in successful teaching and learning for low attaining pupils. How could you develop and improve your relationship with individual pupils?
• Interviews indicated that low attaining pupils themselves understand the need to strike a balance between making lessons fun, flexible and interesting and maintaining strong discipline. How do you need to alter your practice to better achieve this balance?

School leaders might like to consider the following implications:

• The research indicated that the use of TAs is central to the teaching and learning of low attaining pupils, and that a good deal of planning and coordination needs to go into their deployment. What does your school need to do in order to improve the coordination, deployment and professional development of TAs to maximise their benefit to low attaining pupils?
• The schools which worked successfully with low attaining pupils used a range of different setting/grouping arrangements. One common factor however was that teachers generally agreed with the policy on setting that their school or department employed. How can your school ensure that the whole staff team or departmental teams have input into setting/grouping practices?
• The research indicated that on average certain types of pupils are over-represented in low attaining groups, whatever their prior attainment (e.g. pupils from poorer backgrounds or from certain ethnic minorities). How does your school make decisions about setting and streaming? What information and criteria are used to make these decisions?

Gaps in the research
Gaps that are uncovered in a piece of research have a useful role in making sure that future research builds cumulatively on what is known. But research also needs to inform practice, so practitioners’ interpretation of the gaps and follow-up questions are crucial. We think the following kinds of studies would usefully supplement the findings of the review:

• case studies of approaches by teachers which have had a direct and significant positive impact on the learning of low attaining pupils
• studies which look at the ways which different kinds of pupils experience school and classes differently and how teachers approach teaching different attainment groups within the same subject, year and school context
• studies which look more closely at the significance of schools’ external relations with parents and other agencies in their dealings with low attaining pupils, and
• more research on the effectiveness of TAs and pupil withdrawal from class.

What is your experience?
Do you have any evidence regarding strategies for teaching low attaining students in your school? Do you have action research or enquiry based development programmes that are designed to explore for example, pupils’ views on grouping or ways of promoting parental involvement?  We would be interested to hear about examples of effective approaches, which we could perhaps feature in our case study section.

Your feedback
Have you found this study to be useful? Have you used any aspect of this research in your own classroom teaching practice? We would like to hear your feedback on this study, which we can share and use to inform our work.

• email: research@gtce.org.uk