DQ1

Why it is appropriate to provide the theoretical foundation for your problem statement? How does a theoretical foundation specifically link to the problem statement for the study? What are two of the theories or models that comprise the theoretical foundations for your study? Why do you believe these are relevant to the study?

DQ2

How do the results of research studies advance or impede theories or models? Give examples using the two theories or models you identified in the previous discussion question in this Topic. How do you expect that the results of your dissertation study may advance knowledge of this theory or model? Explain.

DQ 3

The essentiality of the theoretical foundation supports the interrelationships between the issue presented for the study and established theories that provide a ground base for the main concept of focus. Bradley (2016) stated that the theoretical framework allows the researcher base knowledge to be used for structuring the research. Every concept is built on a foundation, and the theoretical framework becomes the study's foundation. Additionally, Bradley (2016) identified the theoretical framework as a tool to communicate the linked components of the study and their connectivity, best presented to create both a theoretical framework and a conceptual framework. Moreover, the theoretical foundation allows the researcher to select and focus on laws, models, theories, and concepts related to the problem statement (Bradley, 2016).

The problem statement to my selected topic says that it is not known whether ability grouping or heterogeneous grouping help fifth grade students enhance their reading comprehension skills.

There are contradictory views related to the topic of student grouping. According the Brown Center Report (2013) ability grouping is an elementary method used to help students learn concepts at their given pace, but it should be used up to the first grade; intermediate grades need to take into account students' performances and use varied types of grouping. Blackwell-Coleman (2016) stated that findings by Collins and Gan concluded middle school students who were segregated by math ability showed gains when compared to classrooms with multi mixed abilities; on the other hand, less gains were found for students' reading scores, but overall, ability grouping appears to assist students in being more successful when classes are sorted homogeneously.

Yet, for elementary school settings, Matthews, Ritchotte, and McBee (2013) discussed that cluster ability grouping did not show any identified gains in academic achievement for math or reading. Furthermore, Olszewski-Kubilius (2013) said that ability grouping for elementary students is viewed as ineffective and linked to the negativity of tracking. Burris and Garrity (2008) said that tracking is an old grouping methods that separated students based on ability, and it designed a learning path based on IQ; but, this method of student grouping was eliminated in the 1990s and replaced by de-tracking to provide students more opportunities for excellence. Ability grouping tends to limit students' academic experiences and interactions with others.

Hermann (2014) recognized the benefits of grouping students for collaboration on project work, cooperative learning, and to have small group opportunities to discuss varied concepts. Homogeneous or ability grouping sets low expectations for students who are already struggling; yet, educators argue that this method groups students with common needs and targets their learning more efficiently (Hermann, 2014). On the contrary, setting low expectations for students can set them back as their motivation decreases and their confidence in being able to accomplish higher achievements diminishes with time. Strategic grouping heterogeneously provides students chances to enrich their ideas and support one another in a cooperative learning environment.

According to Education law, a court trial in the ruling of Hobson v. Hansen (1967) allowed for questioning on ability grouping but did not prove it to be ineffective nor did it make it to the Supreme Court. Similarly, Education Law stated that nine years after that the Washington v. Davis (1976) had a difficult time proving that tracking and ability grouping are isolating the middle and low ability students, eliminating them from equality in opportunity learning. Additionally, Vacca (2005) viewed the legality and policy issues on ability grouping and stated that No Child Left Behind (2002) mandated schools to identify students who lave low academic performance, disaggregate student test data, and provide extensive remedial programs for underachieving students.

Assigning students to special programs remains controversial since Vacca (2005) added that Russo in (2004) discussed the fact that student segregation by ability contradicts various civil rights identified federally and by states that assignment of students to specialized programs, classes, and schools does not show proportionate effect on race, disability, or gender. To support higher level learning in a globally educational competitive world, the 2012 Obama Administration signed the Race to the Top policy, allowing all school without exclusion of low-income students to have opportunities to develop more rigorous standards and assessments, adopt more informative data systems about student progress, support teacher effectiveness, and increase emphasis on rigorous interventions.

The current policies of the United States are supporting the concepts that all students, regardless of race, background, or socioeconomic status, have the ability to learn at a rigorous level if provided the appropriate opportunities. This notion stands in contrast with the concept of ability grouping which segregates students and limits their ability to learn at a high level of achievement. Theorists such as Piaget support heterogeneous grouping as it shows that children's language development strengthens when they interact with each other, and cognitive development reaches higher level by social interaction (Fisher, 1980). The latest strategies used in a classroom are based on student discourse and discussion.

Bloom (1956) structured a pyramid for learning levels and showed that the highest level of learning takes place when a student creates, designs, assembles, develops, and investigates a topic (Armstrong, 1984). According to Bloom's Taxonomy designed for higher learning in 1956 and Depth of Knowledge which specified areas of Bloom's Taxonomy, these theories state that the highest level of learning takes place when students work collaboratively to elaborate on knowledge, comprehension, and application of concepts. In ability grouping, teachers will not provide students the opportunity to learn with high expectations, leaving a high number of students without the chance to explore learning at its highest level.

The methodologists, U.S. laws, and various concepts on the topic of grouping support heterogeneous grouping more than ability grouping, which provides all students an equal opportunity for learning. Education is not limited to data and test scores; it is a field of exploration for all students to have prospective ways to reach their highest potential. Teachers' effectiveness in reaching all students' needs while providing high learning expectations plays an essential role in children's academic development.

Armstrong, P. (1984). Bloom's Taxonomy. Center for Teaching, 1984. Retrieved from

https://cft.vanderbilt.edu/guides-sub-pages/blooms-taxonomy/

Blackwell Coleman, M.R. (2016). Commentary-Sorting it out: Thoughts on "Does sorting students improve scores?

An analysis of class composition. Journal of Advanced Academics, 27(2), 117-123. Retrieved from

http://eds.b.ebscohost.com.lopes.idm.oclc.org/eds/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=0d270acc-64bc-4a70-9931-4156e020c5e5%40sessionmgr107&vid=2&hid=111