“All in This Together”: Improving Access to Accelerated Learning Through Embedding Honors in Heterogeneously Grouped Classes

Abstract

Background: For the last century, the dominant practice in U.S. high schools has involved sorting students by perceived ability level, yet 40 years of research has yielded consistent evidence that these practices harm the learning of students placed in lower-level classes; evidence is inconsistent about benefits for students in classes designated as higher-level, depending often on the actual pedagogy involved. Sufficient evidence exists to encourage schools to take on the challenge of implementing effective differentiated pedagogy within heterogeneous classrooms. Ideally, such pedagogy would avoid the well-established negative effects of separate-class ability grouping while preserving opportunities for all students to access stimulating and challenging learning opportunities that are both suited to their present readiness level and geared toward pushing them to advance to higher levels of academic capability. Focus of Study: Despite all that is known about the harms of tracking, most studies have focused on the contrast between classes that are tracked by ability level vs. heterogeneously grouped classes. There has been little research on the opportunity to embed an “honors” option within a heterogeneously grouped class. In theory, embedded honors may prove an antidote to some of the challenges presented by separated ability-grouped classes while avoiding the pitfalls of non-differentiated heterogeneous environments. This study examined one school’s change in student placement policy to test whether within-class leveling (within heterogeneously grouped classes) correlated with an increase in the participation of students, particularly from marginalized groups, signing up for “honors” level learning opportunities, as well as with an increase in learning and performance among any populations of students. The study also attempted to examine how students experienced learning in within-class leveling in heterogeneously grouped classes vs. separately grouped, leveled courses, in terms of the various areas identified in the literature. Research Design: This is a multi-methods study combining analysis of existing quantitative and qualitative data, as well as analysis of additional follow-up surveys and qualitative interviews. This case study examines one suburban Massachusetts high school’s experiment with converting seven separated “ability-leveled” courses in English, history, science, and math into heterogeneously grouped courses, in which students could elect whether or not to take the class for “honors” credit while still learning alongside the full spectrum of their peers. The authors examine data collected by the district ( n = 6,995 student data points), as well as from surveys and interviews ( n = 709) to analyze the resulting changes to enrollment and achievement, in the context of existing theory and research around grouping practices. Conclusions: Statistically significant correlational results included: (1) increased participation in Honors 1 coursework, particularly among students from traditionally marginalized groups; (2) lower barriers to enrollment in Honors classes among students who had previously enrolled in non-Honors classes; and (3) statistically significant increased academic performance for all students enrolled in Honors options, including those who had previously enrolled in non-Honors. In addition, students reported (4) decreased stigma for those enrolled in the non-Honors option, (5) more diverse classrooms, and (6) perception of greater academic challenge among students who selected non-Honors within heterogeneously grouped classes, but diminished challenge among students who selected Honors. Cautions include that this experiment was conducted during the pandemic-induced remote learning period of 2020–21; thus, many other factors may influence these results. Teachers in the study also appear to have been inconsistent in their use of effective pedagogy for differentiating instruction. Authors offer discussion of what schools elsewhere might be able to learn about improving leveling and equity efforts from this case study.