sh.sePublications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • harvard-anglia-ruskin-university
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Nivågruppering i Engelska: En fallstudie på en gymnasieskola i en Stockholmsförort
Södertörn University College, Lärarutbildningen.
2007 (Swedish)Independent thesis Basic level (degree of Bachelor), 10 points / 15 hpStudent thesis
Abstract [en]

The purpose of this degree thesis is to investigate what the English teachers in an upper sec-ondary school, think about teaching students in ability grouped classrooms. The questions that I have set out to investigate include what the teachers think about ability grouping in English, the school’s current organisation of ability groups, the pros and cons of ability grouping in English, differentiation in teaching and if students get more individualized teaching with abil-ity groups, how the teachers cooperate and what would be the optimal teaching situation in an English learning classroom.

I did a lot of theoretical research on the subject and studied old essays on similar subjects. I also did some classroom observations to use as background information for my interviews. I interviewed five teachers of different sex, age, and teaching experience. The teachers clearly had different views on the pros and cons of ability grouping and how to deal with the stu-dents’ different levels of English. They all agreed on the advantages it creates for the teachers, the main advantages being the small groups and the students being on almost the same level. They also agreed on the difficulty of individualised teaching, even with ability groups. Most of them also agreed that the main problem with ability grouping is how to deal with the weak-est or most basic level. It’s important that they have good pedagogical teachers who want to teach them and know how to. It also leads to problems amongst the teachers, in deciding who should or wants to teach which group and how to teach on a certain level. The teachers all had different ideas on how to improve the organisation of English teaching, from small mixed groups or only two ability levels, to a rotation of teachers between the groups and the different areas of English. In conclusion, upper secondary students are used to different groups, since they have chosen not only schools, but programs and individual courses. If the goal is small groups in English, maybe ability grouping is a possible solution. But above all, it has to be a possibility for the students, not the teachers.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2007. , p. 36
Keywords [en]
Ability Grouping, Differentiation, Individualisation, inclusion, exclusion, English language acquisition
Keywords [sv]
individanpassning, nivågruppering, engelska,
National Category
Pedagogy
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:sh:diva-1287OAI: oai:DiVA.org:sh-1287DiVA, id: diva2:15351
Uppsok
samhälle/juridik
Supervisors
Examiners
Available from: 2007-07-04 Created: 2007-07-04

Open Access in DiVA

fulltext(217 kB)861 downloads
File information
File name FULLTEXT01.pdfFile size 217 kBChecksum MD5
c6f94934f3cf899ee0845fc15c904908bd1801595eba76f19b46600a41a693636c20559b
Type fulltextMimetype application/pdf

By organisation
Lärarutbildningen
Pedagogy

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar
Total: 861 downloads
The number of downloads is the sum of all downloads of full texts. It may include eg previous versions that are now no longer available

urn-nbn

Altmetric score

urn-nbn
Total: 460 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • harvard-anglia-ruskin-university
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf