Tracking Essay, Research Paper
The
pounding of my heart echoes in my ears as I glance around the classroom.
Adrenaline and fear mix in my veins as I look at them. These are my competitors;
just like those that I face on the basketball court or on the track. I have to
beat them all. John stole my highest grade, Suzie beat me on the research paper,
and Casey aced the math test. Not today though, today is my day. No one will be
able to beat me and I will show them who is truly king of the hill. I life my
pencil and begin the test? The competition many students feel academically is
hard and furious. Some students do not have the desire to compete and wish to
merely go with the flow at school. For example, I once drifted through
everything. I switched from drifting and now seek the hardest classes I can; to
the puzzlement of my parents. However, if my school would have been tracked,
this would not have been possible. Tracking siphons students into predetermined
roles and never allows for change. The effects of tracking in school creates
insurmountable boundaries for minority and disadvantaged students. The
oppression of tracking never relents and traps all those forced to be lower
tracks into a life of menial labor with no hope for tomorrow. Tracking destroys
both ability and dreams for those that are less fortunate. As D. McVicar shows
?Researchers from UCLA to John Hopkins University were finding that grouping
together students of different abilities helped the least capable students
dramatically, while the brightest children fared just as well when tracked.?
Therefore, it appears tracking does not impair higher students learning ability
and shows marked improvements for those that are ?slower? or
?problematic? Educators seem to have forgotten that the student, perform
better in an environment that continually challenges and seeks to expands their
minds. Without the presence of challenge or pressure to motivate students, those
unfortunate ones that we tracked into lower expectations are bereft and are
trapped like a fly in molasses without being able to pull themselves out. The
ability of a student cannot truly be measured by an educator and should not be
by arbitrary tracking standards. The school system should allow students to
track themselves by taking honor or AP courses. If student choose not to take
them, so be it, but denying the chance of students to ever at least attempt
challenging coursework is even more foolish because of socio-economic reasons.
In America, we often have to make snap judgments without enough support of our
theories. In the school system that is especially true; teacher often gravitate
towards appearance in deciding students likes and dislikes. As also noted to us
by D. McViar, ?That the low tracks were almost entirely populated by children
of poverty and members of minority groups underscored, in researchers? eyes,
the inequity of tracking.? It certainly brings into a new light the
anti-discrimination posters found in our school. Of course, the usual argument
are that we are merely placing them at their proper ability level for them or
since their parents cannot afford college we are doing them a favor in the long
run. An easy salve to the collective conscience certainly and a justification
for any mind since the tracking is being done for their benefit. But as Patrick
Bassett of the Independent Schools Association of the Central States writes,
?Low tracks often emphasize good behavior and menial skills, while high tracks
offer preparation for college. These differences in learning environments
particularly depress the academic achievement of poor and minority students, who
are assigned disproportionately to low tracks.? An education equal to the best
of a students ability has often been the stated goal of many a high school. But
when such factors as race or poverty automatically put a strike against a group,
the policy must be changed. By our complicit and nonchalant attitude, we have
permitted classism and a sense of elitism for students. This is a detriment for
both lower and upper tracked students for as North Kingstown Supt. James Halley
writes, ?When they go out into the world, they need to interact with and hear
the voices of those not as intellectual. If they haven?t heard them in school,
that?s a handicap for them. It is more democratic and practical for kids not
to be separated from one another because of intellectual differences.? In all
reality after high school, in both college and life in general, you will not be
placed only with people of similar intelligence. You interact with a variety of
people. High school is about preparing for life in general and without a basis
or experience to work from interaction can be very difficult in later years.
Constant interaction at least ensures a basis from which to work in future
times. Without this experience people in the high tracks may fail in the crucial
aspects of working with others which does not bode well for the future. Tracking
does have its supporters. In their opinion, tracking betters students and does
not weigh down bright and innovative students with peers that are not as
intellectually gifted as them. As Therese Harvey, teacher from England who used
to teach tracked classes, remarked, ?The theory is wonderful , but in practice
it simply doesn?t work. You find yourself controlling the difficult student
rather than teaching any of them. I would feel embarrassed. The good students
would just look at me as if to say, ?Teach me something.?? Our children
are being held behind with those that have no desire to learn and only show an
inclination to fulfill their own selfish needs. The purpose of school is going
their to learn. The administration accomplishes this goal by trying to stream
line students and provide an access to school to help fulfill their needs. As
Lynda Tisdell, an English teacher and supporter of tracking remarks, ?The side
effect of tracking nobody wants to talk about is that not only does it do a
disservice to honors kids, but it makes the kid who has gaps and comprehension
difficulties incredibly stupid.? Thomas Jefferson was wrong; we are not all
created equal. It is time to realize that in our school systems. The schools
recognize that not all people enjoy the same physical activities and seeks to
provide niches in athletics and clubs to follow differences. This is the
approach that is needed with tracking. We need to provide more accelerated
course work for those that truly want and need them and not hide behind a quaint
and out-dated notion of equality. The bigotry that envelops any school system
has been pointed out as being more then apparent in tracked schools. However
this is not the case as few cases of racial discrimination have been found. As
Tom Loveless, a professor from Harvard remarks, ? With more then 700 studies
of tracking in existence, no convincing evidence suggest that tracking has a
special, adverse effect on the achievement of African America, Latino, or
disadvantaged students. Nor does research show that these students achieve at
higher levels in untracked setting.? Any so called racial disparity does not
exist at all with minority students. In fact as Mr. Loveless further expands his
position by saying, ?Gamoran and Mare conducted another analysis of national
data showing that the probability of being assigned to a high track is 10
percent greater for black students than for white students. If true, then black
achievement may actually suffer from tracking?s abolition.? This is quite a
turn around from students being discriminated because of their race. A ten
percent greater chance of being higher tracked if you are an African American is
nothing to scoff at. Many people do not realize that tracking actually promotes
minority groups. Any racial disparity found in tracking is simply there because
people are looking for it and not because of any basis in reality. The realty
is, that many students do not have the same desire, ability, or drive to take
the same kind of courses. We do a disservice to both advanced students and those
that are not advanced by putting them into the pressure cooker together. As
Ralph Scott, a staff writer, stated ?As someone who attempted to effectively
teach in the same classroom students whose abilities extended from the 3rd grade
level through the second year of college, it is difficult for me to fault the
viewpoint that encourages tracking.? I believe that if I am a more advanced
student and want to learn at a faster rate, what justification does the school
system have for placing me in a group that does not desire to learn The
environment in which we are raised influences us later in life and I think I
speak for most people that the environment that we want to be in is one that
helps us be a success. The solution for the bad rap that tracking has received
is education. People need to understand that being in a lower track does not
mean anything negative, but is simply the best place for that particular
student. These is nothing to be ashamed of in not being an academic prodigy, I
am sure half of the kids in their ivory towers do not have a fourth of the
necessary life skills they will require. In my opinion, only by allowing
tracking to have a fair and unbiased chance and ensuring the ability to move
from one track to the next, if the desire is there, can we have a truly fair
school system. I gaze down the track at my opponents. Last place again, Damn.
Ohh, well I guess I will always have the chance to beat them out, back in the
classroom. The strengths that become apparent whether in school, life, or
athletics must be nurtured for the individual person. By seeking to make carbon
copies at school, we only become a detriment to ourselves. My thesis is wrong,
tacking does not disadvantage students and only opens boundaries for minority
students.
Bassett, Patrick. Tracking and Ability Grouping. Chicago: The Riverside
Press, 1998. Loveless, Tom. ?Tracking.? Tracking Reform and its Value.
http://www.proquest.com.html1.2 (15 April. 1999). McVicar, Dr. Morgan. Teaching
Matters. Remax: The Providence Journal, 1998. Scott, Ralph. ?Untracking
advocates make incredible claims.? Educational Leadership, Oct. 1993 Pg.1-23