Content uploaded by Tichaona Mapolisa
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Tichaona Mapolisa on May 14, 2016
Content may be subject to copyright.
1
Nova Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences Vol 2(3), March 2014:1-9
Nova Explore Publications
Nova Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences
PII: S229279131400011-2
Vol 2(3), March 2014:1-9
www.novaexplore.com
Research Article
The Impact of Streaming Zimbabwean Secondary Schools – Learners
Attributes
Tichaona Mapolisa1, Thembinkosi Tshabalala1
1Educational Management, Faculty of Arts and Education, open university,Zimbabwe
Corresponding Author: Professor Tichaona Mapolisa, Associate Professor and National Programme Leader,
Educational Management, Faculty of Arts and Education, Open university,Zimbabwe,
Email Addresses: tichmap@gmail.com
Abstract
In Zimbabwe, there is no policy that promotes the phenomenon of mainstreaming in schools, and yet the practice is widespread in
most secondary schools. Mainstreaming is the act of grouping students by ability range that is those with high intelligence quotients
(IQs) are placed in the same classroom and those perceived to be slow learners also grouped on their own. This study investigated the
perceptions of pupils from three secondary schools in Bulawayo province of Zimbabwe. A qualitative methodology was followed in
conducting the study. The researchers conducted in-depth interviews with the purposively selected pupils. The major findings
revealed that those pupils in high performing classes felt that streaming should be an on-going exercise as it promotes cooperation,
hard-work and good results and yet those in the lower streams had negative attitudes towards streaming. Learners placed in low ability
classrooms believed that teachers and learners in high ability classes discriminated them. The study recommends that since streaming
is inevitable, the best and experienced teachers should be allocated to teach the lower stream classes so that they use their knowledge
and expertise to help the students improve their performance. There should also be counselling and guidance offered to pupils to
explain the positive aspects of streaming.
Key words: Streaming, Ability grouping, Secondary schools, Pupils/students, Grouping Province
Introduction
One of the major grievances of African Rhodesians was that secondary schooling was harshly restricted by a selection
process at Grade 7 (Robbins and Coulter 2012). Thus in 1976, when 70% of children were able to attend primary school,
only 23% of Grade 7 pupils could not proceed to secondary schools (Zvobgo 1986). The new government made an early
decision and in mid-year announced that from January 1981, every child who completed grade 7 could automatically
proceed to Form 1 regardless of examination results (Kanyenze et.al. 2011). Places would be available for all. From 22,
2
Nova Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences Vol 2(3), March 2014:1-9
201 in 1980, the Form 1 Intake nearly quadrupled in 1981 to 83491 (Chivore 1996). With this policy being continued
from year to year, by 1986 the secondary school population surged to over half a million pupils (Smith 1986).
Hordes of pupils enrolled at secondary schools, some of whom had not even written Grade 7. Some pupils who could
hardly read or write enrolled at secondary school because it was free to learn. The problem was that the influx was not
fully complemented by an increase in educational resources (Matavire, Mpofu and Maveneka 2013). Schools that wanted
to maintain their standards introduced a system of either tracks or streams where slow learners found themselves in low
ability classes doing subjects like music, physical education and some practical subjects (Muronda 1997).
According to Cooper (1996) quoted in Slavin (2010) the educational practice of ability grouping emerged around the turn
of the 20th Century as a way to prepare students for their appropriate place in the workforce. Students with high abilities
and skills were given intense, rigorous academic training while students with lower abilities were given a vocational
education (Chinyoka 2011). The two most common forms of ability grouping or streaming are within-class grouping and
between-class grouping (Chinyoka 2011). Between-class grouping, which is a schools’ practice of separating students
into different classes based on their academic achievement is the more common practice of streaming in Zimbabwean
secondary schools. Some schools stream Form One pupils using Grade 7 results and continue to stream pupils using
continuous assessment. It is an account of the above information that the study set out to explore the perceptions of pupils
who are affected by this phenomenon.
Literature Review
According to Chinyoka (2011) the controversy whether ability grouping facilitates efficiency in teaching and learning has
naturally stimulated research, but so far has been largely inconclusive. To many learners, ability grouping is considered a
sensible response to academic diversity which yields positive results, addresses the needs of individual children and
improves achievement of the higher and lower streams whilst to others, the practice has harmful, unintended
consequencies and should be abandoned (Kulik and Kulik, 2007, Oakes, 2005 and Chisaka and Vakalisa, 2003).
According to Fabien (2010) streaming is grouping students by ability range and students in the same range are grouped
together. For example, students in high streams study higher mathematics, more foreign languages and literature. On the
other hand, students in the less academic streams acquire vocational skills such as typing, fashion and fabrics, metal work
and building among others. Streaming is viewed as beneficial to both students and teachers as the teacher is able to set the
pace for the student and maintain behind. According to Argys, Rees and Brewer (1996) the class is challenged at a level
gauged to be appropriate for the entire class thus the teacher can move ahead at a brisk pace with a group of bright
students as they do not require much supervision.
Kulik and Kulik (2007) argue that the gifted students in streamed classes achieve more than similar ability students in
non-streamed classes because of competition among the students since they are self-motivated and focused. As Rogers
(1991) observe, high ability groups are often assigned special work that is more advanced than that of other students and
for the gifted students such advanced work contributes to their social and emotional satisfaction. George (2003) posits
that the major advantage of streaming is that it allows teachers to better direct lessons towards the specific ability level of
the students in each class and as a result of this, the content, teaching methods, time allocation and student activities differ
in each class. Streaming from this perspective helps the teacher to achieve objectives of the lessons and pupils understand
better the instruction given by the teacher.
3
Nova Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences Vol 2(3), March 2014:1-9
Other authorities, Fielder, Ellen, Richard and Lange (2002) also argue that since streaming separates students by ability,
student work is only comparable to that of similar ability peers, preventing a possible lowering of their self esteem.
Streaming therefore, helps teachers to understand better the performance of students since students are compared with
peers of same ability this is likely to promote healthy competition and hard work. Argys, Rees and Brewer (1996) also
discovered that low stream students achievement improved as well as their participation in class since streaming separates
them from the intimidation of the high ability students.
Contrary to the positive dimensions of streaming in schools, Chisaka and Vakalisa (2003) found that ability grouping
deprived learners of even the official contact time that was reflected on the schools time tables. This is because learners
in the low ability group received no special attention from teachers either in the form of additional assistance or remedial
teaching that is often alleged by supporters of ability grouping. An unexpected finding by Chisaka and Vakalisa was that
of the apparent neglect of the high ability learners as well as teachers who did not turn up in class for the lessons they
were supposed to give. Apparently, according to these teachers, it was a waste of time to teach the low ability classes
because learners in those classes were incapable of learning anything, and it was not necessary to teach the high ability
groups because they could learn on their own (Chisaka and Vakalisa 2003).
Fabien (2010) argues that lower ability students are easily demotivated in a streamed class and may react in a number of
ways such as withdrawal, rebellion, indiscipline and truancy. On the other hand, the National Council for Curriculum and
Assessment (NCCA) (2000) argues that streaming has a polarizing effect on students. Those in the top streams become
more engaged with learning and expect success in the examinations and they tend to get a better deal all the time. On the
other hand, students in lower stream classes become progressively more negative about school. This is probably a
reaction to the attitude exhibited by teachers towards them and they engage in indiscipline so that their presence may be
felt.
Banks (2006) argues that ability grouping creates a feeling of inferiority among the lower stream classes. When children
feel inferior, there is tension and negative attitudes towards learning, hence leading to some negative psychological
effects. As a result, most pupils in low streams perceive schooling as irrelevant, thus leading to withdrawal from active
participation in class (Banks 2006). Ability grouping therefore, frustrates the low stream pupils and tempts them to
develop an anti-school culture (Chinyoka, 2011). Haralambos and Herald (2010) cited in Chinyoka (2011) posit that
students labelled as troublemakers tend to seek out others’ company and within their group award high status to those who
break the rules. Thus disrupting lessons, being cheeky to teachers, failing to hand-in homework, cheating and playing
truant all bring prestige. In assigning a label to a pupil, the teacher may omit expectations that the pupil will behave in
accordance with the labels attached to him (Chinyoka 2011).
Oakes (2005) found that pupils in streamed classes believe that teachers channel the best resources to pupils in upper
streams and that the teachers tend to have a negative attitude towards pupils in low streams. In addition to all this, the
young, inexperienced teacher is given the lowest class in a streamed school. In the case of staff shortages, this will be the
class given to temporary teachers and negatively labeled teachers. Chisaka and Vakalisa (2003) also found that negatively
labeled teachers, temporary teachers and new teachers in the school are given the lowest classes in a streamed school.
Statement of the Problem
It seems that generally, most secondary schools practice streaming of their pupils according to their ability ranges. This
study sought to understand the feelings of those directly affected by this process, who are the students.
4
Nova Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences Vol 2(3), March 2014:1-9
Research Questions
The study was based on the ensuing sub-questions.
1. What do pupils think streaming is carried out far?
2. Do pupils believe that instruction from teachers is different for the ability groups?
3. What is the effect of ability grouping on the motivation of pupils?
4. How does streaming affect social relationships amongst pupils within the ability groups?
Significance of the Study
The importance of this study stems from the fact that if students’ feelings towards streaming are exposed, strategies for
mitigating the negative dimensions of streaming would be proffered and good things of the phenomenon strengthened so
that the process might benefit all students from the various ability ranges. Thus, in a way, the findings of the study would
be a deliberate drive towards inclusive education. The study informs school level policy-makers on the consequences of
streaming of learners in regard to their self-esteem, academic performance and social status.
Limitations of the Study
The study was limited to the perceptions of secondary school pupils towards streaming using a very small sample. The
study was thus no more than a snap shot of feelings of students towards streaming. Clearly, the findings cannot be
generalized but they alert one to the actual experiences of students who are streamed. It also has to be pointed out that
perceptions about an issue are essentially subjective and cannot be measured accurately. Moreover, since feelings may
vary in intensity, what might be interpreted positively by one individual may be interpreted differently by another. In
other words, attitudes have no universally recognized and accepted scales of measurement and measures used in this study
cannot be considered to be absolutely accurate.
Delimitation of the study
The study was confined to one province in Zimbabwe, which is Bulawayo one of two urban provinces out of the ten
administrative provinces in the country. It was concerned with perceptions of pupils from three secondary schools
towards streaming. Teachers’, heads’ and parents’ views towards this phenomenon were outside the purview of this
study. Attitudes of pupils regarding other aspects of their learning were also not part of this study.
Research Methodology
The study adopted the qualitative methodology and made use of a case study research design. This methodology was
chosen because qualitative research methods of collecting data such as interviews would give the researched individuals
opportunity to voice out their own views on the subject of ability grouping not restricted by the pre-stated formulations
based on researcher’s own frames of references often guided by theory studied by the latter. The sample consisted of
eighteen pupils from the three secondary schools. Purposive sampling was chosen because as Kumar (2008) observes, its
major advantage is that the researcher can use his/her research skill and prior knowledge to choose respondents.
Customary to the qualitative ethnographic research paradigm, the primary researcher himself was the instrument of data
collection (Chisaka and Vakalisa, 2003). The researchers employed the interviews for data collection.
5
Nova Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences Vol 2(3), March 2014:1-9
Data Collection and Analysis
Data were collected by means of semi-structured interviews lasting thirty minutes using an interview guide. The
interview was chosen as Cohen and Manion (2011) observe because it allows detailed information about personal
feelings, perceptions and opinions. Ambiguities can be clarified and incomplete answers followed and respondents own
words are recorded (Anderson 2011). However, the interview as Bell (2013) argues, has a weakness in that, different
interviewers may understand and transcribe interviews in different ways and interviews can be time consuming for
example in setting up, interviewing, transcribing, analyzing, feedback and reporting. In spite of the weaknesses
highlighted by Bell (2013) the researchers felt that their strengths far outweighed their weaknesses. All interviews were
audio-taped, transcribed and became the primary data source for analysis conducted by the researchers. The aim was to
understand experiences from the participants’ point of view, a transparent disclosure of the roles of the researchers and
their relationship with the participants, the ‘volunteering’ of participants and description of the pupils feelings towards
streaming was done to contextualize the research roles and participant selection on findings. The use of a small sample is
common in qualitative research, where the aim is depth and not breadth.
Findings and discussion
The study sought to investigate the feelings of students towards streaming. This section is presented in two parts; namely,
demographic data and actual findings.
Demographic Data
Table 1: Category of respondents (N = 18)
Category Frequency Percentage
Pupils from lower stream classes 9 50
Pupils from top stream classes 9 50
Totals
18
100
Table 1 above shows that there was an equal number of pupils from the top stream classes and the low stream classes. As
alluded to earlier on, this was a result of purposive sampling.
Table 2: Distribution of research participants by sex (N=18)
Sex Frequency Percentage
Male 8 44
Female 10 56
Total 18 100
6
Nova Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences Vol 2(3), March 2014:1-9
The data above shows that 56% of the respondents were female and 44% were male. The variance between the two sexes
is not very significant.
Actual Research Findings
One of the many challenges facing educators in Zimbabwe and the world over is the decision on how to allocate students
to classrooms, subjects and groups, since pupils differ in a number of aspects. Pupils throughout the world have acquired
different interests, personality traits, knowledge, aptitudes, skills, attitudes and motivations (Chinyoka 2011). They also
perceive and process information in very different ways. Fabien (2010) asserts that students in a class are different from
each other and no group has yet been found in which the individuals composing it possess equal amounts of intellectual
ability. The researchers feel that teachers ought to cater for the principle of individuality all the time during their teaching.
This inquiry suggests that there are mixed feelings about streaming by both groups of students. The study revealed that
pupils from the lower streams generally believed that being placed in lower streams made them feel that they were dull.
They indicated that teachers always taunted them calling them names like dunderheads. These are in tandem with
findings by Banks (2006) who asserts that ability grouping creates a feeling of inferiority among the lower stream classes
which leads to tension and negative attitudes towards learning, hence, leading to some negative psychological effects.
The study also revealed that some of the teachers assigned to teach the lower streams did not attend to lessons. Pupils
thought that these teachers felt that it would be a waste of their time teaching dull pupils who would not pass anyway.
The pupils also stated that they are always taught by new teachers and temporary teachers. Chisaka and Vakalisa (2003)
also found that negatively labelled teachers, temporary teachers and new teachers in the schools are given to the lowest
classes in a streamed school. The researchers feel that the preceding practice that Chisaka and Vakalisa (2003) observed is
tantamount to relegating learners to the academic dustbins where their academic prowess would be irredeemable. This is
because untrained teachers are unlicensed teachers to bank on teaching the weakest classes.
Findings from the study also indicate that pupils from the lower streams felt that teachers and the administration punished
them very hard even for minor offences or breaches of school rules compared to their counterparts in the top streams.
This, they felt forced them to break school rules because even if they did not they would still be harshly treated. This
confirms the assertion by Haralambos and Herald (2010) that students labelled as troublemakers tend to seek others’
company and within their group award high status to those who break the rules. From the these results, the researchers
contend that discriminating learners on the basis of performance when disciplining them is a passport to unethical
professional conduct that should never be entertained in any progressive school.
However, it was also established that some of the pupils in the lower streams were comfortable with ability grouping as
they stated that it was good to learn with equals who did not laugh at them when they gave wrong answers. They also
added that it was easy to help each other in class because they knew that all the teachers including the heads of schools
hated them and would not help them with their education. Others also indicated that through hard work some of their
colleagues did well in their public examinations. These findings are congruent with Argys, Rees and Brewer (1996’s)
findings that low stream students’ achievement improved as well as their participation in class since streaming separates
them from the intimidation of the high ability students. Equal treatment of pupils with homogeneous intellect and interests
is a postive step in boosting their self-esteem and academic performance.
From the perspective of top stream pupils the study revealed that the pupils felt that there was high competition to achieve
higher as a result of the high performance of their classmates. They indicated that teachers gave them challenging work
7
Nova Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences Vol 2(3), March 2014:1-9
and it helped them a great deal to complete the syllabus quickly. Kulik and Kulik (2007) observe that the gifted students
in streamed classes achieve more than similar ability students in non-streamed classes because of competition among the
students and they are self-motivated and focused.
Students from the top streams also stated that some of the teachers did not attend to lessons and left them to do the work
on their subjects without guidance from teachers. The pupils thought that because they were “intelligent” teachers did not
see any reason for assisting them. Instead, teachers spent their time with the lower streams because they needed the
teachers’ guidance more than the top stream pupils needed. Chisaka and Vakalisa (2003)’s unexpected finding was that of
the apparent neglect of the high ability learners by the teachers who did not turn up in class for the lessons they were
supposed to give.
The study also revealed that pupils from the top streams felt that streaming brought about antagonistic relations between
them and those in the lower streams. They indicated that pupils in the lower streams hated them because they thought that
teachers favoured them. Fights between pupils in the lower streams and top streams were the order of the day particularly
after school on their way home. The major causes of the fights were said to be caused by boys from the lower streams
who thought the boys in the top streams were snatching their girl friends, Fabien (2010) argues that lower ability students
are easily demotivated in a streamed class and may react in a number of ways such as withdrawal, rebellion, indiscipline
and truancy. The National Council for Curriculum and Assessment (NCCA) (2000) argues that streaming has a polarizing
effect on students.
Conclusions
Given the background of the above findings, the researchers make the following conclusions:
• Streaming promotes competition amongst pupils in both the top stream classes and the lower stream classes.
• Some teachers have negative attitudes towards lower stream classes.
• Classes in lower streams are assigned to temporary teachers and other teachers with negative labels like lazy
teachers and those who abuse alcohol.
• School rules are enforced differently between the lower and top stream pupils with pupils in the lower streams
always at the receiving end of highhandedness by prefects, teachers and heads of schools.
• Lower stream pupils felt it was easier to work with pupils with same ability range as they assisted each other and
did not rebuke each other when they made mistakes.
• Pupils from the top streams thought that streaming brought about positive competition amongst the learners which
helped them to work harder in their school work.
• Some teachers did not attend lessons in the top streams because they felt these learners needed little guidance
from them.
• The top stream pupils also felt that streaming promoted polarization between top stream and lower stream
learners.
8
Nova Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences Vol 2(3), March 2014:1-9
Recommendations
In light of the findings of this study, the researchers would like to make some recommendations.
• Streaming should be promoted in schools as it promotes competition amongst learners in both lower and top
streams.
• The negative attitude of teachers towards lower stream classes should change especially the practice of
labeling learners as dull and useless or hopeless.
• There should be proper ways of guiding and counseling from administrators and teachers about streaming to
lower stream pupils so that they may appreciate the positive reason for streaming
• The best and experienced teachers should be assigned to teach the lower stream classes so that they use
their experience and expertise to improve the performance of these learners. This is because the strength of
the teacher is measured from the weakest child in terms of academic performance.
• School heads and other school-based supervisors should supervise and monitor teachers in their schools so
that streaming is not used as an excuse for not effectively teaching learners in both the top streams and
lower streams.
References
Anderson C. Research in education, London: D.P. Publications, 2011.
Argys L M, Rees, D I, Brewer D J. “ Detracking American Schools. Equity at zero cost.” Journal of Policy Analysis and
Management, 15(4):623-645; 1996.
Banks C. Streaming in Secondary Schools. London: Sage Publishers; 2006.
Bell J. Doing your research methods. Buckingham: Open University; 2013.
Chinyoka K. Ability grouping and academic performance: Perceptions of secondary school pupils in Masvingo. Journal of
Language and Communication, 6(2):190-208; 2011.
Chisaka B S, Vakalisa N C G. Some effects of ability grouping in Harare Secondary Schools: A case study. South
African Journal of Education, 23 (3): 106 – 180; 2003.
Chivore B R S. Educational Administration and Management. A methodological handbook for primary school heads in
Zimbabwe. Harare: University of Zimbabwe; 1986.
Cohen L, Manion, L. Research Methods in Education. London: Routledge; 2011.
Cooper M, Streaming: Redefining the Probelem. London: Longman. In Slavin, R.E. (2010). Achievement effects of
ability grouping in secondary schools: a best evidence synthesis, Review of Educational Research, 60(3): 471-499; 1996.
9
Nova Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences Vol 2(3), March 2014:1-9
Fabien J. Streaming in schools: grouping students according to their abilities.http.www.huppages.com/hub/streaming in
schools; 2010.
Fielder S, Ellen D, Richard, B, Large, A. In search of reality, unraveling the myth about tracking: Ability groping and the
gifted. Reeper Review, 24(3):108-111; 2002.
George, D. Studying a child in the school. London: Bell and Howell; 2003.
Haralambos M, Herald B. Sociology. New York: Longman; 2010.
Kanyenze et.al, Beyond the enclave: Towards a pro-poor and inclusive development strategy for Zimbabwe. Harare:
University of Zimbabwe; 2010.
Kulik J A, Kulik A. Meta-analytic findings and grouping programme. Gifted Children Quarterly, 36 (2):73-77; 2007.
Kumar F S. Research in educational settings. London: University of London; 2008.
Matavire M, Mpofu V, Maveneka, A. Streaming practices and implications in the education system: A survey of Mazowe
District. Journal of social sciences for policy implications, 1: 60-70; 2013.
Maronda B. Streaming for success. Harare: ZPH; 1997.
National Council for Curriculum and Assessment. National Council for Curriculum and Assessment. In The Independent:
National News: Streaming isn’t the answer www.independent.e/....streaming isn’t the answer; 2000.
Oakes J. Tracking and ability grouping in American schools in Dandroof.com/images. Tracking.ppt; 2005.
Robbins S P, Coulter M. Management. New Delhi: Prentice Hall; 2012.
Rodgers K. The relationship of grouping practices to the education of gifted and talented learners in
http.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tracking Education; 1991.
Slavin R E. Achievement effects of ability grouping in secondary schools: a best evidence synthesis, Review of
Educational Research, 60(3): 471-499; 2010.
Smith D. Quality in the school: Whose concern is it? London: Routledge; 1986.
Zvobgo R. Transforming education: The Zimbabwean experience. Harare: College Press; 1986.
Word press (2011). Parents for inclusive education. Boston: Mifflin Company.