IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/nierev/v169y1999ip109-110_12.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Within-classroom grouping: a rejoinder

Author

Listed:
  • Prais, S.J.

Abstract

Let us briefly remind ourselves of the current policy-context of this issue in Britain. The need to raise children's schooling attainments to a very substantial extent has become widely accepted in the past fifteen years following international comparisons (many based on research at this Institute) of workforce vocational qualifications and school-leaving standards. The consequences are expressed today in interventionist public policy in terms of a National Curriculum laid down for all school-ages (adopted ten years ago), together with more recent detailed syllabuses in the core subjects of language and mathematics embodied in the National Literacy and Numeracy Strategies for primary schools (adopted in the past two years). Much of the need for such reforms in Britain can be traced to worries as to whether teaching time was well spent, particularly in primary schools using ‘modern’ teaching methods which required children within each classroom to be divided into small groups, each group sitting around its own small table, many children not facing the wall-board (many classrooms even having their wall-board removed) so as to promote less ‘didactic’ teaching and more ‘discovery’ learning by pupils. The frequently ensuing difficulties of teachers in dividing their time effectively among those groups, the consequential frustration of those children who awaited the teacher's attention, the slower general pace of learning, and the particular disadvantages suffered by slower-developing children, need not be spelled out here; they have been closely examined in research involving timed classroom observation, such as the ‘Oracle’ project of Professor Maurice Galton and his colleagues.

Suggested Citation

  • Prais, S.J., 1999. "Within-classroom grouping: a rejoinder," National Institute Economic Review, National Institute of Economic and Social Research, vol. 169, pages 109-110, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:nierev:v:169:y:1999:i::p:109-110_12
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0027950100008139/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:nierev:v:169:y:1999:i::p:109-110_12. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/niesruk.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.