EDUCATIONAL TRACKING

1
EDUCATIONAL TRACKING

• EDAD 6300, Spring 2008
• Nancy Caukin
• March 24, 2008

2
Introduction

• The issue of tracking is controversial in
  education and has been for over a hundred years.
• Some say it improves student learning and others
  say it hinders student learning
• Conflicting research exists

3
Overview

• The following ideas will be covered in this
  presentation
• A definition of tracking
• The evolution of tracking
• What the proponents believe
• What the opponents believe

4
Overview

• What the research says
• Where the confusion lies
• Summary
• Personal opinion
• Annotated resources

5
Definition

• Tracking is defined as assigning students to
  instructional groups according to ability
• This can be tracked within a particular class, by
  subject, by school, by special education needs,
  by interest, or by a series of classes known as a
  path

6
Evolution of Tracking

• Population explosion in the U.S. due to
  immigration
• Between 1880 and 1918, student enrollment
  increased 700
• Americanization was needed for the immigrants
  and to stabilize our society

7
Evolution of Tracking

• 1892 Committee of Ten
• A need existed to standardize and align college
  preparatory curricula and college admission
  standards
• Four tracks were recommended with all being
  suitable for college preparation

8
Evolution of Tracking

• Students were grouped according to IQ, future
  social, economic, and occupational status
• The efficient Taylor System was employed in
  accordance with the industrial revolutions
  success with this model

9
Evolution of Tracking

• Ross Finney sociologist of education
• Promoted ability grouping believing it essential
  to preserve a democracy
• Students educated based on the needs of the
  society
• Belief that this results in a stable society of
  leaders and followers

10
Evolution of Tracking

• The practice of tracking continued through 20th
  century
• The launching of Sputnik fostered the idea that
  America needed scientists and engineers. Again
  ability grouping was promoted.

11
Evolution of Tracking

• In the 70s detracking reform started
• Today tracking is still exists in various forms

12
Proponents Believe

• Facilitates instruction
• Easier to teach students of similar ability
  because the curriculum can be tailored to meet
  needs
• Increases student learning
• Students learn better by being with students of
  similar ability

13
Proponents Believe

• Parents
• dont want their students in a heterogeneous
  environment for fear of a watered-down
  curriculum and experience.
• Students
• are thought to develop more positive attitudes
  when they are grouped according to ability

14
Opponents Believe

• Negatively affects student self-image and may
  give students an inaccurate view of themselves.
• Disproportionate number of minority and
  low-socioeconomic students are represented in
  low-track classes.

15
Opponents Believe

• Students in low-track classes tend not to move up
  to higher-track classes
• Breeds social inequality

16
Opponents Believe

• Results in lower teacher expectations, weaker
  curriculum, and inferior instructional materials.
• Does not improve student learning and increases
  the achievement gap

17
Opponents Believe

• Limits students access to a full array of
  academic experiences
• Fewer course offerings for low-track students
• Low track classes lack critical thinking skills
  and higher-order thinking
• more rote memorization, more worksheets, less
  hands-on experiences.

18
Opponents Believe

• Average and low ability students are negatively
  affected by homogeneous groups
• Negative behaviors and attitudes develop
• Less participation in extra-curricular activities
• Lower aspirations and higher drop-out rate

19
What Research Says.

• Schools required to segregat by race but not by
  social class
• Not uncommon for schools to serve predominately
  low-income, middle income, or high income
  students.
• Schools serving different social classes are
  different
• Resources, salary offerings, curriculum, and
  instruction differ

20
What Research Says.

• Segregation of African-American students has
  decreased while segregation of Hispanic students
  has increased (Sleeter Grant, 1998)
• Interferes with students learning English
• Higher drop-out rates
• Lowest achievement rates
• High teacher turn-over rate
• Problems with overcrowding and gangs

21
What Research Says.

• Staffing patterns in schools tend to reflect
  tracking patterns (Sleeter Grant, 1998)
• 95 of superintendents are white males
• 27 of principals are female with 34 being in
  elementary schools and only 12 in high schools
• 90 of teachers are white
• 80 of teachers are female

22
What Research Says.

• A meta-analysis in 1993 showed that
  ability-grouping is not good for the high-ability
  and bad for the low-ability students (Davenport)
• A 1982 study showed that students gained more
  from grouped classes than non-grouped students,
  especially high-ability students (Kulik Kulik)

23
What Research Says.

• A 1998 study showed that instead of reducing
  inequalities in education, ability-grouping
  increased it (Oakes).

24
Where the Confusion Lies

• How defined - is tracking the same as
  ability-grouping?
• Is it by subject, by school, by interest, by
  special education needs, or by group of classes
  (path), or within a given classroom
• How is learning measured? What outcomes are
  valued? Are they the same for each study?

25
Where the Confusion Lies

• Are groups truly homogeneous
• Assigned by proxy?
• How assigned?
• Formal or informal ability-grouping
• Lack of information on how tracked schools
  allocate resources
• To what extent teachers track within the classroom

26
Conclusion

• The issue of tracking students is certainly a
  controversial issue
• There is conflicting research on the topic of
  tracking.
• Both proponents and opponents have research to
  back up what they believe

27
Conclusion

• Detracking efforts have not had the desired
  effect so other options must be explored to help
  improve the equality in education.
• More research is needed with a clear definition
  of what constitutes tracking and what outcomes
  are of value

28
Personal Opinion

• All students deserve a rigorous, interesting,
  relevant, challenging education with
  well-qualified and caring teachers, appropriate
  instructional resources, and equal access to
  post-secondary education, military service, or
  work, as a student and his or her family chooses
• I am afraid this is easier said than accomplished

29
Resources

• Ansalone, G. (2004). Getting our schools on
  track is detracking really the answer? Retrieved
  February 18, 2008, from http//radicalpedagogy.ica
  ap.org/content/issue6_2/ansalone.html
• This article offers viewpoints from both
  proponents and opponents of tracking. It explains
  the various ways in which schools and teachers
  ability-group students. It also offers
  alternatives to tracking. A balanced presentation
  of tracking with helpful suggestions ideal for
  parents, teachers and administrators
• Betts, J., Shkolnik, J. (1999). Key difficulties
  in identifying the effects on ability grouping in
  student achievement. Electronic Version.
  Economics of Education Review, 19 (1), 21-26
• This article explains the major difficulties on
  identifying the effects of ability grouping on
  student achievement and gives empirical data on
  how the effects of tracking may have been
  overstated. It suggests that based on the
  evidence their may be no clear prescription
  regarding increasing student achievement and
  detracking. This article is useful for teachers
  and administrators

30
Resources

• Davenport, L.R. (1993). The effect of homogeneous
  grouping in mathematics. Retrieved on February 4,
  2008 from http//www.ericdigests.org/1993/grouping
  s.htm
• Article regarding the inequities of tracking in
  mathematics i.e. access to strong mathematics
  programs, access to well-qualified teachers, and
  access to classroom opportunities. Also in
  meta-analysis, student achievement effects of
  heterogeneous and homogeneous groups was zero.
  Interesting and helpful article with relevant
  information and research on tracking useful for
  educators.
• Hallinan,M. (1994). Tracking from theory to
  practice. Electronic Version. Sociology of
  Education, 67(2), 79-84.
• This article defines tracking, provides the aim
  for tracking, discusses the empirical research
  and effects of tracking, and offers that instead
  of replacing tracking, it should be improved. A
  relatively balanced look at tracking and offers
  reasons for controversy and offers suggestions.
  This article is useful for teachers and
  adminstrators.

31
Resources

• Haury, D., Milbourne, L. (1999). ED433127 Should
  students be tracked in math and science? ERIC
  Clearinghouse for Science, Mathematics and
  Environmental Education Columbus OH. Retrieved
  February 3, 2008 from http//www.eric.ed.gov/ERICD
  ocs/data/ericdocs2sql/content_storage_01/0000019b/
  80/15/d6/08.pdf
• This article discusses the controversy
  surrounding tracking. It also differentiates
  between tracking and ability-grouping.
  Ability-grouping is explained as an instructional
  management practice used by teachers to place
  students in flexible groups whereas tracking is
  assigning students to different courses or course
  sequences based on performance on an assessment
  or grades. Interested viewpoint of differences
  between tracking and ability grouping and
  discusses the problems of tracking. This article
  would be of interest to teachers and
  administrators

32
Resources

• Kulik, C., Kulik, J. (1982). Effects of tracking
  on secondary students a meta-analysis of
  findings. Electronic Version. American
  Educational Research Journal, 19(3), 415-428.
• Meta-analysis of 52 studies that involve
  tracking. Describes 4 different ways students
  were grouped. Results were given for the study
  that included that about 54 of grouped students
  had greater achievement than ungrouped students,
  however high-ability students scored higher in
  grouped classes. This article would be of
  interest to educators and researchers
• Lucas, S. (1999). Tracking inequality
  stratification and mobility in American high
  schools. Sociology of Education Series. New York
  Teachers College Press.
• This ebook has 8 chapters covering the inequality
  of tracking from placement, to structure, to
  curricular effects. It gives a good description
  of the history of American education and the
  roots of tracking in particular. This book would
  be of interest to those studying education

33
Resources

• Nieto, S, Bode, P (2008). Affirming diversity
  the sociopolitical context of multicultural
  education (5th ed) Boston Pearson.
• This textbook offers a full-array of
  multicultural issues with one section from one
  chapter being devoted to tracking. The authors
  are clearly against tracking they do concede it
  may help a few and that grouping per se is not
  always negative.
• Oakes, J (1985). Keeping track how schools
  structure inequality. New Haven, Yale University
  Press.
• This book covers extensively the inequalities of
  tracking based on the examination of 25 middle
  and high schools. The inequalities include less
  on-task time in instruction, lower educational
  expectations, and lower self-esteem. This book
  does not dispute homogeneous verses heterogeneous
  classrooms, but rather focuses on student
  experiences in tracked classes.

34
Resources

• Oakes, J., Wells, A., (1997). Detracking the
  social construction of ability, cultural
  politics, and resistance to reform. Electronic
  Version. Teachers College Record, 98(3),
  482-510.
• This article is the result of a 3-year
  longitudinal study of 10 racially and
  socioeconomically mixed secondary schools
  participating in detracking reform. It covers the
  obstacles administrators face when they detrack
  their school, for example deeply held beliefs
  regarding intelligence, privilege and status. The
  logistics of detracking are documented.
  Intelligence ideology is discussed both
  historically and currently as well as the
  cultural and political aspects of intelligence.
• Oakes, J. (1998). Tracking, inequality, and the
  rhetoric of reform why schools dont change. In
  Shapiro, H., Purpel, D. (Eds), Critical social
  issues in American education transformation in a
  postmodern world. 2nd ed. (pp. 127-147). Mahwah,
  New Jersey Lawrence, Erlbaum Associates.
• This chapter focuses on the differentiation of
  the schooling experiences based on the notion
  that some students deserve and can more readily
  achieve excellence. Social Darwinism,
  Americanization, scientific management, and
  meritocracy are addressed with their inherent
  problems. The notion of scarcity, trickle-down
  excellence and efforts of reform are explained.

35
Resources

• Sleeter, C., Grant, G. (1998). Illusions of
  progress business as usual. In Shapiro, H.,
  Purpel, D. (Eds), Critical social issues in
  American education transformation in a
  postmodern world. 2nd ed. (pp. 89-125). Mahwah,
  New Jersey Lawrence, Erlbaum Associates.
• This chapter focuses on how in education we are
  led to believe that changes are occurring,
  however they tend to be an illusion. This is
  attributed to contradictions in society as it
  relates to classism, sexism, racism, and bias
  against religions, disability, and sexual
  orientation. Schools reflect society. While in
  schools equal opportunity is promoted, it is not
  always practiced. Several studies are offered for
  the reader to compare what is stated and what is
  actually happening in our schools.
• Zimmer, R. (2003) A new twist in the educational
  tracking debate Electronic Version. Economics
  of Education Review, 22(3), 307 315.
• This article addresses the issue of educational
  tracking especially the loss of positive
  spillover effect (peer effect) when students are
  homogenously grouped. The peer effect was studied
  in tracked schools and found a diminished peer
  effect in those schools. This is a unique aspect
  of the effects of tracking