ABSTRACTTitle of dissertation: INSTRUCTION PROVIDED TO STUDENTS OF DIFFERENT ABILITIES IN A WITHIN-CLASS SETTINGBarbara L. ChorzempaDissertation directed by: Professor Steve GrahamDepartment of Special EducationThis study was designed to examine primary grade teachers’ use of within-class ability grouping, including if the operation and dynamics of ability grouping differ for above-average, average, and below-average readers. Characteristics of the teacher, school, and classroom were also examined to determine if these variables predict teachers’ use of ability grouping. 600 randomly selected primary (i.e., first, second, and third) grade teachers from throughout the United States were asked to complete a questionnaire; 222 elected to participate, 272 declined participation and 106 were eliminated from the study for a variety of reasons (e.g., retired, maternity leave, no longer a primary grade teacher or employee); thus yielding a response rate of 45%. In addition to demographicinformation about the teachers, their students, and the schools, participants responded toa series of questions designed to assess teacher efficacy in reading, beliefs about reading instruction, and beliefs about ability grouping. Teachers who use ability grouping were further asked to answer a series of questions about how ability groups operate for above-average, average, and below-average readers in their class. Results showed that 63% of the teachers questioned either reported (55%) or were identified (7%) as using ability grouping through open-ended questions. Statistically significant results were noted when comparing the instruction provided to and materials used with students of varying ability. Furthermore, three variables (i.e., beliefs about ability grouping, years teaching, and location) were also found to contribute to the prediction of teachers’ use of ability grouping. Future research and limitations are also addressed.INSTRUCTION PROVIDED TO STUDENTS OF DIFFERENT ABILITIES IN A WITHIN-CLASS SETTINGbyBarbara L. ChorzempaDissertation submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate School of the University of Maryland, College Park in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree ofDoctor of Philosophy2004Advisory Committee:Professor Steve Graham, ChairProfessor Peter AfflerbachDr. Lisa Pericola CaseProfessor Karen HarrisProfessor Joan Lieber© Copyright byBarbara L Chorzempa2004iiDEDICATIONFirst, I would like to acknowledge my advisor, Dr. Steve Graham. For ten years, he provided me with the advice I needed to succeed as a master’s student and then a doctoral student. Through his guidance and support, I have achieved what I set out to do many years ago. A simple thank you will never seem adequate.Second, I would like to thank my family for everything they did to help me complete my doctoral degree. For watching my son Bryan when I needed time to writeand all the countless things they did for me, I dedicate this to them as well.Finally, I dedicate this to my husband, Kevin. The semester I began my doctoral studies was the semester I met my husband. As many sacrifices as I made, he made as well, and I am sure he knows how much I appreciate all his love and support.iiiACKNOWLEDGEMENTSI would like to thank Dr. Douglas Maynard, State University of New York at New Paltz, for his assistance with the logistic regression analysis.I would also like to thank Dr. James Baumann, University of Georgia, Athens, for his permission to modify survey items for their use in my questionnaire.ivTABLE OF CONTENTSList of Tables vChapter 1: Introduction 1Grouping Formats2Homogeneous Ability Groups 2Between-class Groupings 3Within-class Groupings 3Heterogeneous Ability Groups 6Whole-Class Instruction 8Individualized Instruction 9Existing Research on Within-Class Ability Groups 9Philosophical Reading Orientation 13 Purpose 16 Research Questions 20Chapter II: Review of Literature 21 Search Strategy 23 The Origins of Ability Grouping 23 Two Surveys of Reading Instruction: 1960 to 2000 24 Philosophy and Goals 26Instructional Time and Materials 26Accommodating Struggling Readers 27Organizing for Instruction 29Within-Class Ability Reading Groups 31 Type of Reading Done by Students 32Focus of Instruction 33Materials Used 34Group Membership Mobility 36Average Number of Students in Reading Groups 37Formation of Reading Groups 38Questioning 44Praise 45Teacher Criticism 46Duration of Group Meetings 47Amount of Reading 51Response Time 52Interruptions 53Opportunities for Learning 54The Instruction of Good and Poor Readers in Other Settings 55 Amount and Type of Reading 55Materials Used 58vQuestioning 58Praise, Criticism, and Assistance 59Effects of Ability Grouping on Student Achievement 61Instruction of Students with Special Needs in the Regular Education Setting 63 Reading Instruction 64Perceptions 67Orientations 69Teacher Efficacy 71Classroom Discourse 76Conclusion77Chapter III: Method 78Participant Selection 78Participant Description 80Survey Instrument 83Section One 84Section Two 85Section Three 86Section Four 88Section Five 89Field Test 91Procedures 92Conducting the Survey 92Analysis 92Research Question 1 92Characteristics of the Teachers 92Characteristics of the SchoolsAnd Students 95Characteristics of the Teachers’Reading Programs 96Research Question 2 97Research Question 3 98Research Question 4 99Method Description 100Data Analysis 101Chapter IV: Results 103Research Question 1 103Characteristics of Teachers 104Characteristics of Schools 104Characteristics of Students 106Characteristics of Reading Programs 106Other Reading Grouping Formats 112Team Teaching for Reading 113viReasons Students Did Not Receive ReadingInstruction from Respondents 114Information Used to Place Students inAbility Groups 114Research Question 2 116Reasons for Using Ability Grouping 116Reasons for Not Using Ability Grouping 120Research Question 3 125Assignment to New Reading Group 128Estimated Time Teaching Reading Skills 128Estimated Time Spent Using Three Typeof Reading 134Estimated Time Spent Engaged in InstructionalReading Activities 137Estimated Time Spent Involved in ActivitiesThat Support Reading Instruction 139Estimated Time Spent on Non-Reading Tasks 141Estimated Frequency of Types of ReadingMaterials Employed 143Research Question 4 147Chapter V: Discussion 158Purposes 158Summary 159Organizational Structures 159Traditional Versus Current Use of Ability Grouping 159Balanced