Tracking and Ability Grouping

1
Tracking and Ability Grouping

• ISTC 201C
• Group 5

2
Definitions

• Between-Class Ability Grouping  students are
  assigned to different classes appropriate to each
  student's ability level
• Tracks a sequences of courses based on different
  ability levels
• Tracking  students, according to ability, are
  placed on different tracks (e.g. advanced,
  honors, regular, low)?
• Detracking (or Untracking)  Teaching students of
  all ability levels and keeping high standards for
  all, every student gets the same options for
  courses
• Heterogeneous mixed ability groups
• Homogenous same ability groups

(Slavin, 2006)?
3
Whats the difference?

• There is a small difference between grouping and
  tracking.
• The term grouping is used more in elementary
  schools, where students may change classes based
  on their abilities for a few classes.
• The term tracking is found more in middle and
  high schools, where students take different
  courses with specific curriculum based on levels
  of learning.

(Spadavecchio, 2007)?
4
History

• The idea of tracking originated around the 19th
  century.
• Since the late 1800s the education system was
  undergoing transformation. Schooling was
  beginning to become more systematic.
• Schools were beginning to separate students based
  on their ages to make teaching and learning more
  manageable.

5
History (contd)?

• During this time, most students only received
  formal education through middle school.
• Less than 8 of teenagers during the late 1800s
  received any type of secondary schooling.
• Students who went on to high school needed to
  pass entrance exams to get in. This pushed
  education towards a system based on curriculum
  and standards.
• In high school, students were tested annually if
  they were to move on to the next grade.

(Loveless, 1998)?
6
More History

• From 1850 on, age-grading gained in popularity,
  linking grade levels to students' ages
  (Loveless, 1998)?
• Yet any grade of the high school had students of
  all different ages.
• It was at this point in time that students were
  allowed to move on so long as they had mastered
  the content of the previous grade, usually
  through testing. Matching students and
  curriculum appeared to unfold naturally because
  each grade level represented an ability group
  (Loveless, 1998)
• Students either ended up passing, repeating, or
  dropping out based on how many times they
  repeated a grade.
• Grouping was in full-effect by the 20th century.

7
Ability Tracking and Grouping Today

• Modern education promised something for
  everyone. Sporting a curricular menu packed with
  academic, quasi-academic, and non-academic
  electives, by mid-century the high school had
  become so fragmented that it resembled, in one
  group of researchers memorable metaphor, the
  modern shopping mall (Loveless, 1998).
• Some form of grouping and/or tracking is used in
  most schools today
• Tracking is practiced in 60 percent of all
  primary and 80 percent of all secondary schools
  in the United States" (Ansalone, 2003).

8
Why is Ability Tracking and Grouping under
Scrutiny ?

• It is not benefiting students
• It is wrongly creating unequal opportunities for
  academic achievement, particularly for students
  who are on the low track.
• In low tracks, teachers concentrate on good
  behaviour and basic skills and cover less
  information while in high tracks, the teachers
  concentrate on preparation for college.
• Tracking causes labelling where students on the
  low track are considered slow, but if students on
  high tracks are considered to be smart,
  intelligent or a fast learner.

9
Why is Ability Tracking and Grouping under
Scrutiny ? (Cont'd)?

• Ability grouping causes segregation among
  students because minority students are on the low
  track more often than the high track.
• Ability grouping is under scrutiny because it
  creates classes/groups of low achievers who are
  deprived of the example and motivation, which
  high achievers receive.
• Also lower expectations come about
• when labelling students according
• to their ability and assigning them
• to low achievement groups.

http//www.freedommuseum.us/assets/images/a7/a7_cr
_slideshow1.jpg
10
What is ability groupings importance toward the
current condition of education?

• It increases the pace and the level of
  instruction for high achievers.
• For low achievers, it provides more individual or
  one-on-one attention, repetition and review.

11
What is ability groupings importance toward the
current condition of education? (Cont'd)?

• Ability tracking allows students with similar
  learning abilities to be able to learn better.
• Students who are on a low track are able develop
  a positive attitude toward themselves and the
  school.
• Tracking makes educating students easier for
  teachers, because the students are much easier to
  teach and manage in smaller more homogenous
  groups. (Broussard Alfred 1998)

12
What does the research say?

• There are advantages
• and disadvantages
• to ability grouping and tracking.

13
Advantages

• 1. Allows students to make progress appropriate
  with their abilities
• 2. Ability grouping reduces failures
• 3. Helps to maintain interest of all students
• (bright students would not be bored or held
  behind by other less able students)?
• 4. Slower students participate more when not
  intimidated by their bright peers
• 5. Teachers can adapt to the needs of the group
  of students needs and abilities
• 6. Students who are placed in the top tracks
  experience a gain in academic achievement
• (Slavin, 1990) and (Figlio, 2001)

14
Disadvantages

• 1. Slower students need their more able peers to
  encourage and stimulate them
• 2. Ability grouping discriminates against
  minorities and lower-class students
• 3. Students in the lower tracks receive lower
  pace and lower quality of instruction than do
  students of the higher tracks
• 4. Students in the lower tracks are more likely
  to experience delinquency, drop out and other
  social problems due to the demoralization, low
  expectations and poor behavioral problems of the
  lower tracking programs
• 5. Students who are placed in the lower tracks
  experience a reduction in academic achievement
• (Hanushek, 2006)

15
What do teachers and other educational
professionals think?

• Teachers, principals, and other educational
  professionals share mixed emotions as to whether
  ability grouping is beneficial or not.
• Many teachers find it more rewarding to work with
  the gifted and talented children that are tracked
  into more advanced subjects.
• Overall, teachers think homogenous ability
  grouping benefits students with higher abilities

16
Teachers Opinions

• In a recent study based in NY middle schools
• 70 of the faculty was for tracking
• 40.6 said that while they were for tracking,
  some changes should be made
• Almost every faculty member feels the most
  valuable aspect of tracking was how it made the
  classroom easier to manage
• Teachers realized gifted students work best with
  other gifted students, and that slower students
  benefit from working with more studious partners
  as well

(Ansalone, 2004)
17
Teachers Opinions (contd)

• A Florida study reports that
• Teachers, principals, and administrators thought
  tracking was more common in high schools
• Most educators supported heterogeneous grouping
  until high school, and then a move towards
  ability grouping
• Less teachers saw the benefits of same-ability
  grouping than principals and other educational
  officials

(George, 1992)
18
Teachers Opinions (contd)

• Teachers in a British study
• Perceived that same-ability grouping improves the
  learning environment for gifted students
• Do not think mixed-ability grouping damages the
  learning environment for gifted students

(Hallam, 2003)
19
Our Recommendations

• We think ability grouping/tracking does have
  important advantages in education
• Homogenous groups allow teachers to give more
  individual attention to students
• Homogenous groups allow students to work at their
  own pace
• Primary and secondary schools should practice
  ability grouping and/or tracking

20
Suggestions

• Groups should be combined for some activities
• For example, in Montessori, schools older or more
  advanced students are paired with younger or less
  advanced students for partnered activities
• The higher ability children benefit from
  teaching the lower ability students
• Lower ability students benefit from learning from
  their peers and gain confidence from working with
  someone in the higher ability group
• This would decrease segregation of the tracks

21
Suggestions (Cont'd)?

• Tracks should be more flexible
• Students in lower tracks should have the ability
  to pass into higher ability groups if they are
  improving
• Students should not get stuck in one track
  throughout their education

22
References

• Ansalone, G., Biafora, F. (2004). Elementary
  school teachers perceptions and attitudes to the
  educational structure of tracking. Education,
  125(2), 249-258. Retrieved April 16, 2008 from
  EBSCO Academic Search Premier.
• Ansalone, George.  (2003).  Poverty, tracking,
  and the social construction of failure
  international perspectives on tracking.  Journal
  of Children Poverty, 9, 3-20.
• Figlio, D.N. (2001). School choice and the
  distributional effects of ability does
  separation increase inequality?. Journal of
  Urban Economics, 51, Retrieved April 15, 2008,
  from http//www.sciencedirect.com/
  science?_obMImg_imagekeyB6WMG-45R78MD-6-1_cdi
  6934_user961294_origsearch_coverDate052F31
  2F2002_sk999489996viewcwchpdGLbVlb-zSkWz_va
  lck1md5c560478cc8abb3c0204221fdb43da94aie/sda
  rticle.pdf
• Gamoran, A. (1986). Instructional and
  institutional effects of ability grouping.
  Sociology of Education, 59, Retrieved April
  15,2008, from http//www.jstor.org/action/
  showArticle?doi10.2307/2112346Searchyesitem1
  returnArticleServiceshowArticlettl3searchUri
  2Faction2FdoLocatorSearch3FArticleTitle3DInstru
  ctional2Band2BInstitutional2BEffects2Bof2BAbi
  lity2BGrouping26Author3D26jo3D26ISSN3D26vo
  3D26no3D26StartPage3D26MonthSeason3D26Day
  3D26Year3D26Search3DSearch
• George, P.S., Rubin, K. (1992). Tracking and
  ability grouping in Florida educators
  perceptions. Florida Educational Research
  Bulletin, 23(3-4). Retrieved on April 17, 2008
  from EBSCO Academic Search Premier.
• Hallam, S., Ireson, J. (2003). Secondary
  school teachers' attitudes towards and beliefs
  about ability grouping. British Journal of
  Educational Psychology, 73(3), 343-356.
  Retrieved April 16, 2008, from EBSCO Academic
  Search Premier.

23
References (contd)

• Hanushek, E.A., W ößmann , L. (2006). Does
  educational tracking affect performance and
  inequality. The Economic Journal, 116, Retrieved
  April 15, 2008, from http//www.blackwell-synergy.
  com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1468-0297.2006.01076.x.
• Hollifield, John.,(1987) Ability Grouping in
  elementary schools. Eric Identifier ed290542,
  1-3 Retrieved 4-4-08 from http//www.educationworl
  d.com/ aadmin/ admin/admin/009.shtml.
• Loveless, T. (1998). The tracking and ability
  grouping debate. Retrieved April 15, 2008, from
  http//www.edexcellence.net/foundation/publication
  / publication.cfm?id127pubsubid802802
• Slavin, R. E.  (2006).  Accommodating instruction
  to meet individual needs.  In Educational
  Psychology Theory and Practice (pp. 275- 313). 
  Boston Pearson Press
• Slavin, R.E. (1900). Achievement effects of
  ability grouping in secondary schools a
  best-evidence synthesis. American Educational
  Research Association, 60, Retrieved April 15,
  2008, from http//www.jstor.org/stable/view/117076
  1?seq6
• Spadavecchio, E. (2007) Ability tracking a view
  from all perspectives. Retrieved April 15, 2008,
  from http//sitemaker.umich.edu/356.spadavecchio/
  ability_tracking__a_view_from_all_perspectives