https://www.ero.govt.nz/assets/Uploads/ERO-17763-Teaching-Strategies-that-work-Mathematics-v7.pdf
There was a section here on the dangers of grouping according to ability. The chief danger is that this sort of streaming (across and within classes) tends to see little improvement for low ability students.
I also realised that the students tend to not get a very broad curriculum coverage and this is not interesting (read: engaging) for them, amplifying the barrier to success. The reasoning is usually that students need these basic maths skills at least, but then they tend to hate drilling the same stuff over and over and seeing the same unsuccessful attempts... this is very discouraging.
I tend to see streaming as a way to improve the top and middle students, which may or may not be the case. However, there is a tendency to apply capitalist vs socialist economics to approaches to education. I'm currently pondering whether these should apply, in which case I would tend to support a more capitalist approach, being politically conservative (and somewhat libertarian). This is an interesting side-track, but back to the action...
I would like to try giving my lowest ability students some more varied (and interesting) content. I would also like to promote them working with higher ability students occasionally. It is impractical, especially with the different assessment goals of my cohort, to shift to a fully differentiated model that might work better in primary school.
Other articles that support moving away from grouping according to ability:
https://www.cerme.nz/research
https://nzcurriculum.tki.org.nz/Curriculum-resources/NZC-Online-blog/Raising-the-bar-with-flexible-grouping
