Tracking and Ability Grouping

1. ISTC 201C Group 5 Tracking and Ability Grouping

2. 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 Definitions (Slavin, 2006)‏

3. 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. What’s the difference? (Spadavecchio, 2007)‏

4. The idea of tracking originated around the 19th century. Since the late 1800’s 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. History

5. During this time, most students only received formal education through middle school. Less than 8% of teenagers during the late 1800’s 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. History (cont’d)‏ (Loveless, 1998)‏

6. “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. More History

7. “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). Ability Tracking and Grouping Today

8. 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. Why is Ability Tracking and Grouping under Scrutiny ?

9. 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. Why is Ability Tracking and Grouping under Scrutiny ? (Cont'd)‏ http://www.freedommuseum.us/assets/images/a7/a7_cr_slideshow1.jpg

10. 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. What is ability grouping’s importance toward the current condition of education?

11. 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) What is ability grouping’s importance toward the current condition of education? (Cont'd)‏

12. There are advantages and disadvantages to ability grouping and tracking. What does the research say?

13. 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) Advantages

14. 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) Disadvantages

15. 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 What do teachers and other educational professionals think?

16. 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 Teacher’s Opinions (Ansalone, 2004)

17. A Florida study reports that… Teachers, principals, and administrators thought tracking was more common in high schools Most educator’s 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 Teacher’s Opinions (cont’d) (George, 1992)

18. Teacher’s Opinions (cont’d) 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. 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 Our Recommendations

20. 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 Suggestions

21. 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 Suggestions (Cont'd)‏

22. 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?_ob=MImg&_imagekey=B6WMG-45R78MD-6-1&_cdi=6934&_user=961294&_orig=search&_coverDate=05%2F31%2F2002&_sk=999489996&view=c&wchp=dGLbVlb-zSkWz&_valck=1&md5=c560478cc8abb3c0204221fdb43da94a&ie=/sdarticle.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?doi=10.2307/2112346&Search=yes&item=1&returnArticleService=showArticle&ttl=3&searchUri=%2Faction%2FdoLocatorSearch%3FArticleTitle%3DInstructional%2Band%2BInstitutional%2BEffects%2Bof%2BAbility%2BGrouping%26Author%3D%26jo%3D%26ISSN%3D%26vo%3D%26no%3D%26StartPage%3D%26MonthSeason%3D%26Day%3D%26Year%3D%26Search%3DSearch George, P.S., & Rubin, K. (1992). Tracking and ability grouping in Florida: educator’s 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. References

23. References (cont’d) • 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.educationworld.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?id=127&pubsubid=802#802 • Slavin, R. E.  (2006).  Accommodating instruction to meet individual needs.  In EducationalPsychology: 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/1170761?seq=6 • 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