Tracking in the U.S. Public Schools Essay

Howard (2010) quickly changes gears in Chapter two, Changing Demographics, to look at the differences in language, ethnicity, race issues, culture and classism when regarded and compared to those who achieve on level and those who fall in the achievement gap. Howard examines the quickly changing face of America with the increase in Latino populations across the nation. Positing that teachers must adapt to understand and connect to students of diverse populations or there will be a great disconnect and divide that could be disastrous for the growing number of students that are part of the achievement gap, as well as the negative ramifications that could come from not evaluating the needs of those in the achievement gap. Howard (2010) also speculates the long term negative aspects that could come to the United States, especially in global market, if we as a country do

The United States of America has a long and complicated history of segregation and inequality. Though the country has fought fiercely to redeem itself by eradicating the practice of inequality in many areas, there are still some concerns that remain. These concerns are present in the public education system, and relate to the time-honored practice of educators to group and educate students by their ability level. This paper will discuss how students historically have been classified based on ability tracking and grouping, the legal issues created by this classification, and what the Constitution requires in order to maintain equal protection rights for all citizens.

While reading the text, Lives on the Boundary I was deeply moved by the exposure of the American educational system’s failure to treat all students equally despite economic and racial backgrounds. The book opens with the author highlighting his personal experience with educational tracking, which is the implementation schools use to place students into different educational paths whether that be the advanced, general or remedial path. Rose (1989) states how tracking affected his education from early on in his life,

The achievement gap is defined as the disparity between the performance groups of students, especially groups defined by gender, race/ethnicity, ability and socio-economic status. The achievement gap can be observed through a variety of measures including standardized test scores, grade point averages, drop out rates, college enrollment and completion rates. The Black-White achievement gap is a critical issue in modern society’s education system. Although data surrounding the issue clearly indicates that the racial performance gap exists in areas of standardized tests, graduation rates, dropout rates, and enrollment in continuing education, the causative reasons for the gap are ambiguous—therefore presenting a significant challenge in

The “achievement gap” in education refers to the disparity in academic performance between groups of students. The achievement gap is shown in grades, standardized-test scores, course selection, dropout rates, among other success measures. It’s most often used to describe the troubling performance gaps between African-American and latino students, towards the lower end of the performance scale, compared to their white peers, and the similar academic differences between students from low-income families and those who are privileged. In the past decade, scholars and policy makers began focusing their attention on other achievement gaps, such as those based on sex, English language and learning disabilities.

Tracking can lead to segregation based on race. For Example, according to the article “Modern Day Segregation in Public schools” by Sonali Kohli, ¨Black and Latino students represented 16 percent and 21 percent of high school enrollment nationwide, respectively. But they were only 8 percent

Walter Fields, a New Jersey parent seek to enroll his daughter into an upper-level math class. Being African American, that proved to be a challenge, when his daughter was denied and placed into a lower-level course. She didn’t get the required recommendation from a teacher to enroll in the class. This sparked fire into Mr. Fields along with his wife, that led to a petition with the school’s principal to grant their daughter access to an upper-level class. By what is called “tracking” in the South Orange Maplewood School District, is a system created to hold many African American and Latino students behind from more advanced courses, even if they receive the grades

From the day you started school you were tracked. All your work was monitored, your intelligence “measured”, your behavior categorized. This sounds like something out of a dystopian novel, however it is done in almost every school across the U.S. This process of classifying students by ability into a caste-like system is called tracking. It deals with people being taught with those of decided like ability. Though this may seem proficient on the surface, its roots are much different. Racism plays a major role in track placement, it creates a superiority complex, it can perpetrate ableism, and perhaps the most astounding reason, there is no evidence it works. Because of these and several other reasons, I am against tracking. Ability is

Tracking began in the early 1900’s when social and economic impacts influenced schooling to be less focused on all students’ academic capability and more focused on the schools role as preparation for the workforce. This social and economic turn was pushed by a population increase between 1880 and 1918 that increased student enrollment by 700% across the United States. (Oakes, 1985) During that time junior high and high school students were assigned to academic, general, or vocational tracks. The students deemed high achieving and capable were being groomed for college to become the doctors and engineers, while the others were being prepared to enter trades or apprenticeships in things such as

This paper will dive into four common unwarranted assumptions made from ability grouping (student tracking) and attempt to debunk the ideas. Ability grouping is the common educational practice of separating students based on actual or purported ability in the same grade into different instructional groups with differing levels of aptitude or achievement (Ainsworth 2013). The four assumptions that will follow were researched by the former presidential professor in equity in the graduate school of education and information studies at UCLA, Jeannie Oakes. Ability grouping or student tracking is in fact illegal in the state of California but, institutions still find alternative ways to implement the method.

79) These “tracks” were perfect for the 50’s. The top preforming students would go on to college and the rest would go onto careers or vocational work. Now this system is obsolete. The whole student body needs to be prepared for college, because one needs a degree in order to obtain a career. The education system has responded by replacing the tracking categories with course levels. In most secondary schools the courses are now considered advanced, regular, or remedial courses. Which in all honesty, really has changed nothing. Tracking only thoroughly prepares the above-average students, which is around 20% - 30% of the student body. The average level students are slightly prepared, but most will end up taking remedial courses in college. The lower tracked students’ self esteem in their academic ability by the time they graduate is completely shot. “Students are likely to view their assignments to low tracks as evidence that teachers have a low regard for their academic abilities and as an indication that the cannot be successful in school and should not aspire to go to college.” (Hallinan pp.82) Students that have been in a lower track all throughout their education and especially high school, have little drive to succeed because they haven’t been challenged

America current practices and not having any standard policy in place has had the disadvantageous impact on many students and their ability because of the achievement tracking.

Slavin states that the arguments of education tracking supporters mostly develop around “effectiveness”, while opponents focus on “equality”. Supporters argue that differentiation is a rational practice that can be observed in all complex organizations (cited in Veselý 2012:218-221). For instance, Gamoran et al., (1995:688) ascertain that by segregating highly heterogeneous body of students into homogeneous groups, can enable schools to fulfill its educational goals more effectively, just as large organizations set up different departments or other structures dealing with specific kinds of work.

Debates about ability grouping and tracking often focus on the conflict between if they both help the majority and not the just the high-achieving students. Ability grouping and tracking in high school have many positive and negative effects on society. Education is an important field in sociology and it has a big impact on how a society develops. Many researchers and politicians believe that the educational system should be improved. Some believe that ability grouping and tracking only benefit a select number of students instead of the majority, while those who oppose argue that it is the most effective way to teach students. The type and quality of education a student receives can often determine

Today a majority of people believe that success in education and equality is congruent to teacher and parental influences, as well as the students themselves. It is less popular to acknowledge that educational success is closely related to socioeconomic status, curriculum, state legislature, and community sources even more so than teachers, parents, or students (Eng, N). All these factors play a role in educational success and equality; however, socioeconomic status and family backgrounds are factors that play even larger roles. A study of 4,000 schools and 645,000 students was done in the United States about fifty years ago (Eng, N). This study, the Coleman Report, concluded that socioeconomics and family characteristics influenced academic success more than school faculty and school programs. The Coleman Report advocated for reform that went beyond school curriculum and programs. Other studies and research have supported the ideas of the Coleman Report; however, many policies do not acknowledge these findings and continue to ignore this research due to the popular belief that schools, faculty,