Fri. Jun 14th, 2024
Noorani Abdul Rehman

In educational contexts, there has long been discussion about how to allot groups to ninth-grade students. According to one point of view, grouping students according to their grade point averages (i.e., marks) is the most equitable strategy, whereas others contend that letting students select their professions in accordance with their interests fosters fairness. In order to provide a thorough assessment of this subject, we will examine the advantages of both strategies in this article, drawing on scholarly research and professional experience as a teacher.

Some people argue that classifying students according to their grades is a just and impartial procedure. They firmly believe that assigning students to fields based on their grade point averages is a fair technique. It makes sure that the children are grouped with other students who have comparable academic skills, promoting a positive learning environment. Slavin and Madden’s (2001) study found that because of the rigorous curriculum and chance for more specialized instruction, children in high-ability groups typically outperform their peers in the classroom.

Additionally, according to Johnson and Johnson (1998), achievement gaps are lessened when children are classified homogenously according to their academic prowess since high-achieving students are not hindered by their friends’ inferior talents. Since the students are surrounded by classmates who have similar learning capacities, this strategy may help increase children’s drive and motivation to excel academically.

On the other side, those who favor letting students choose their field of study based on interest claim that doing so promotes motivation and engagement. According to researchers Eccles and Wigfield (2002), students are more likely to be involved in the learning process and acquire a passion for the subject matter when given the chance to select subjects that are in line with their interests. Increased academic achievement and knowledge retention over time may result from this engagement.

This viewpoint is supported by a study done by Hidi and Renninger (2006), which found that interest-driven learning increases students’ intrinsic motivation and promotes self-directed learning. Early exposure to students’ interests can help them make better decisions about their academic and career trajectories.

While both approaches have validity, in my opinion as an educator an integrated approach that incorporates both grades and interest can be the best choice for students. A mixture of grouping strategies, according to researcher Tomlinson (2001), may mitigate the drawbacks of each method. Academic achievement and student interests can be taken into account by teachers and instructional leaders to develop diverse groups which stimulate students intellectually while allowing them to pursue their passions.

According to research by Slavin (1986), kids benefit from collaborative learning and healthy interdependence when they are in mixed-ability groups. Higher-achieving students assist their peers as a result of this strategy, which promotes peer-to-peer learning and raises academic accomplishment for the entire group. The institution where I am employed has a strategy known as the learning support program that places a particular emphasis on integrated approach through its mentor model and buddy program, where students with high capabilities help peers who are having trouble.

In conclusion, there are plenty of implications for educational practices in the argument over whether to categorize learners based on grades or interests. While grouping children according to grades may be advantageous academically, it carries the risk of ignoring each student’s unique interests and passions. On the other hand, letting students choose their field of study based on interests can increase motivation and involvement while potentially ignoring crucial academic factors.

I believe as an educational teacher, we can create a balanced learning environment that promotes collaboration, engagement, and personalized learning experiences for students by combining different grouping tactics. I am hopeful!


– Eccles, J. S., & Wigfield, A. (2002). Motivational beliefs, values, and goals. Annual Review of Psychology, 53, 109-132.

– Hidi, S., & Renninger, K. A. (2006). The four-phase model of interest development. Educational Psychologist, 41(2), 111-127.

– Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1998). Cooperative learning and social interdependence theory. Theory and Research on Small Groups, 211-244.

– Slavin, R. E. (1986). Using student team learning in the classroom. Educational Leadership, 43(1), 12-17.

– Slavin, R. E., & Madden, N. A. (2001). Effects of ability grouping on elementary school students’ achievement motivation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93(2), 239-248.

– Tomlinson, C. A. (2001). How to differentiate instruction in mixed-ability classrooms. ASCD.

By Noorani Abdul Rehman

Ms Noorani is working as a senior English language teacher at SMS-Aga Khan school. I have graduated from AKU-IED in teacher Education English as a subject specialization in the year 2020. Teaching is my passion. I love to write, as I believe it gives freedom to express my thoughts in terms of words.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *