The Great Streaming Debate: What the Latest Research Means for Australian Schools
The question of whether to “stream” students – organising them into different classes based on academic performance – has been a persistent point of contention among educators for years. Should students learn alongside peers of similar academic ability, or is a mixed-ability environment more beneficial? In Australia, the practice of streaming is widespread, particularly in high schools and often for subjects like mathematics, though it can also begin in primary years. Recent research emerging from the United Kingdom has added a new layer to this ongoing discussion, suggesting that streaming might indeed benefit some students. This raises pertinent questions about its implications for Australian educational institutions.
Decades of Concern: The Unease Surrounding Streaming
Education researchers have voiced concerns about streaming for several decades. A significant line of argument posits that seemingly objective notions of “ability” can, in practice, unintentionally favour students from white, privileged backgrounds. This perspective suggests that students from minority racial groups and disadvantaged socioeconomic backgrounds are disproportionately represented in the lower academic streams. Furthermore, a growing body of research indicates that a student’s innate “ability” might play a less significant role in their academic success than factors such as their socioeconomic background, motivation, and their individual approach to learning.
The Downside of Lower Streams
When students are placed in “lower” academic streams, the curriculum often adapts to a less challenging level. This can mean these students miss out on the crucial opportunities needed to develop more advanced skills. While the intention behind simplifying the work might be to shield these students from repeated experiences of failure, research suggests this approach can inadvertently trap them in a detrimental cycle of low achievement. With fewer opportunities to push their boundaries and extend themselves, their performance may stagnate, leading to a continued lack of challenging academic engagement.
Beyond academic performance, streaming can also have a considerable impact on students’ self-confidence. Studies have linked placement in lower-ability classes with feelings of shame and a diminished enjoyment of school. Consequently, streaming has the potential to exacerbate existing achievement gaps that are already closely tied to social class and race. These concerns have fuelled “de-streaming” movements in places like New Zealand and Ontario, Canada. While some Australian schools have moved away from streaming in an effort to foster greater inclusivity, it remains the prevailing norm across the country.
A New UK Study Offers a Different Perspective
Despite the long-standing concerns, a recent study conducted in the United Kingdom, co-authored by Becky Taylor, has yielded findings that challenge some of these established assumptions. This research specifically examined the mathematics results and self-belief of students in Years 7 and 8. The study employed a comparative approach, analysing data from schools that were carefully matched for background and demographic factors. This comparison involved 28 schools that utilised mixed-ability grouping and 69 schools that implemented streaming.
The findings indicated that streaming Year 7 and 8 students in mathematics proved beneficial for higher-achieving students. Specifically, these students demonstrated approximately three months’ more progress in mathematics in streamed schools compared to their peers in non-streamed settings. Crucially, the study also found that this streaming approach did not negatively impact the academic results or self-belief of students from disadvantaged backgrounds.
Perhaps most surprisingly, the research revealed that students in mixed-ability classes experienced only a marginal difference in progress – just one month less overall – compared to those in streamed classes after two years. Students from disadvantaged backgrounds and those with lower prior academic achievement showed comparable progress irrespective of their grouping method.
These results are significant as they appear to contradict previous assertions that streaming can harm some students without offering benefits to others. The study has been interpreted by some as evidence that streaming can indeed benefit certain student groups while causing no discernible harm to others.
However, it is important to acknowledge that the findings also reinforce earlier research highlighting the potential for streaming to be inequitable and to widen achievement gaps. The new study did observe that high-achieving students made considerably more progress than low-achieving students when streaming was in place.
What Can Australia Learn from These Findings?
Australian educators often look to the UK for guidance on educational policy and evidence-based practices. Consequently, the latest UK study might be perceived as an endorsement for implementing streaming in Australian schools. However, a degree of caution is warranted.
One critical consideration is that the teaching methodologies observed in many of the mixed-ability classes within the UK study more closely resembled low-stream instruction than high-stream approaches, with a notable lack of opportunities for advanced learning. This suggests that the study’s findings might not be directly generalisable to mixed-ability classes that incorporate challenging and stimulating work for all students. Effective mixed-ability mathematics teaching, as evidenced in other research, typically involves providing all students with access to rigorous tasks and adopting a “teach to the top” philosophy.
The researchers also noted a common teaching structure across most Year 7 and 8 mathematics classes in the study. This structure generally comprised teacher-led instruction, student practice, and brief feedback at the end. There was a significant absence of small-group work and very limited differentiation – the practice of tailoring teaching methods to meet the diverse needs of individual students. Existing research strongly indicates that both small-group work and differentiation are vital for helping students achieve their full potential.
Furthermore, the Australian educational landscape presents distinct challenges. Many UK schools involved in the study were large institutions. In contrast, Australia has a significant number of small rural and remote schools where implementing streaming might be logistically unfeasible.
Finally, the study’s conclusions are confined to mathematics. The impact of streaming on other subjects, which may have different pedagogical demands, could vary significantly and warrants further investigation.
Moving Forward: A Call for Prudent Approaches
In light of these complexities, we urge schools and policymakers to continue approaching the issue of streaming with a thoughtful and cautious mindset. Current research continues to suggest that both streaming and mixed-ability groupings can be implemented effectively or ineffectively. The success of either approach ultimately hinges on the quality of teaching and the school’s ongoing commitment to evaluating how the diverse needs of all students are being met.
