The purpose of this study was to investigate teachers' perceptions about the effectiveness of heterogeneous grouping on improving student achievement for students historically identified as either lower—achieving or higher-achieving, as well as for students in general. Ten teachers completed and returned a researcher constructed survey and eight teachers participated in individual interviews. In an effort to learn more about the effectiveness of heterogeneous grouping on improving student achievement, this research study identified and evaluated data spanning the period of time from the study site's initial implementation of heterogeneous grouping to the current time period.

The findings of this study indicated that heterogeneous grouping increased the academic achievement and social and emotional growth of students; however, results were mixed regarding the value of heterogeneous grouping on improving equity. Specifically, teachers believed that equity increased for lower-achieving students as a result of heterogeneous grouping but not necessarily for higher-achieving students. Interestingly, some teachers described the removal of homogeneous classes where students were afforded exclusive access to curricula, resources and instruction with similarly capable peers as evidence to support their view of resulting inequities for higher-achieving students. Some teachers provided a different perspective stating that heterogeneous grouping and open access were models for educational equity because they were founded in the belief that all students should have the same access to curricula, resources, and instruction.

The results of this study documented that teachers believed that all students should have access to a rigorous curriculum. Teachers also reported having high expectations for students. However, teachers admitted they were less likely to encourage lower-achieving students to challenge International Baccalaureate (IB) courses than they would their higher-achieving counterparts. This discrepancy raised some questions regarding the value of open access as a detracking tool. Several teachers specifically noted that despite the efforts to detrack through the use of heterogeneous grouping in grades nine and ten, the reliance on open access as a detracking tool and the continued existence of the Regents-level pathway constituted a return to a two track system. They noted that the only difference was that the students were tracking themselves versus being tracked based on perceived ability levels.