Teachers’ classroom management strategies have been studied widely. Most of the research has been conducted in traditional one-teacher settings with quantitative methods (eg. Akin-Little, Little & Laniti 2007; Beaman & Wheldall, 2000; Clunies-Ross, Little & Kienhuis 2008). However, because of the current aim toward inclusive educational settings, classrooms are becoming more heterogeneous learning environments. This creates new challenges for primary school teachers, and classroom management in general. It also provides new contexts for research. One of the main features of inclusive education is flexible grouping. Teachers can organize their classrooms in several ways: pupils can get instruction in a whole class setting, in small groups, in pairs and one-to-one. Working in small groups aims at more effective learning and therefore, groups are often homogeneous on the basis of pupils’ academic skills (Chorzempa & Graham, 2006; Hallam, Ireson & Davies, 2004; Baines, Blatchford & Kutnick 2003). Pupil behaviour is seldom used as a grouping criterion within one classroom (Hallam, Ireson & Davies, 2004) although school has both academic and social aims. The pedagogic model examined in this study, however, is an exception. It rests upon the general assumption that by varying the grouping practises in a heterogeneous classroom, teachers can more effectively meet pupils’ diverse social and academic needs. The study was conducted in a heterogeneous primary school classroom with two teachers. Because the teachers administratively both had their own classes, this combined model provided more resources such as extra lessons of both classes and an assistant of the other class. The purpose of this study was to investigate how the teachers used these resources for more effective classroom management. The focus of this paper will be on the structural means and on preventing the problems rather than actual situational management strategies.

The research project is of “ethnographic nature” (Hargreaves 1986, 79) and it has several distinctive features of ethnographic approach, such as natural setting, only few cases to secure the depth of the data, and interpretive data analysis (Hammersley & Atkinson 2007, 3; Spradley 1980, 79). However, this study is not a traditional school ethnography but a case study of one classroom with an aim to examine in detail the practises teachers have for classroom management. Ethnographic data was collected in two phases by observing the teachers in authentic classroom situations. The first phase included 36 days on the field and two interviews, the second phase 35 days and four interviews. Field work resulted in total of 431 pages of field notes which were later typed and extended. The main data used for this paper were the transcripts from observations. Computer program Atlas-ti 5.0 was used for coding.

The results revealed that teachers had maximized the benefits of the available resources by careful planning. Teachers used various permanent and temporary groupings to individualise teaching in academic sense and according to pupils’ social behaviour. This gave more active pupils chance to move and talk while they studied, without the quiet ones being disturbed. On the other hand, in heterogeneous small groups and during whole-class lessons, referrals to homogeneous small groups were used as management method. Flexible grouping is one way to diminish classroom management problems in a heterogeneous classroom and to teach pupils social skills in different groups. Thus, it may increase the positive experiences of both teachers and pupils and decrease the need for segregated educational settings. However, although many problematic situations can be anticipated and prevented by creative solutions, schools need to have sufficient educational resources, such as classroom assistants, to meet the demands of inclusive education.