soc 463/663 (social psych of education) - tracking & ability grouping

WEEK 2: TRACKING & ABILITY GROUPING

Melanie Tannenbaum, M.A. Sociology 463/663

Spring 2015

This Week: Ability Grouping

• Origins

• Theoretical Perspectives

• Inputs

• Decisions

• Rationale

• Debate

The Origins of Tracking

• Response to the influx of immigrant children into America’s schools in the early 20th century.

• Newly diverse student population.

• School officials thought it “necessary” to sort children into different “tracks” based on ability or past performance.

The Origins of Tracking

“Our city schools will soon be forced to give up the exceedingly democratic idea that all are equal, and our society devoid of

classes…and to begin a specialization of educational effort along many lines.”

- Ellwood P. Cubberley, school reformer, 1909

Early Tracking

• Early: Junior High/HS students assigned to 1 of 3 tracks:

• Academic: Groomed for college

• General

• Vocational: Prepared to enter trades like plumbing or secretarial work.

Early Tracking

• Early: Junior High/HS students assigned to 1 of 3 tracks:

• Academic: Groomed for college

• General

• Vocational: Prepared to enter trades like plumbing or secretarial work.

Pretty rare today.

Transition

• Early 1970s: Policymakers & educators feared America was in danger of losing its competitive edge, began insisting all students have access to rigorous academics.

!

• States passed minimum graduation standards requiring courses in core subjects (English, math, social studies, science).

Modern Tracking

• Grouping students by ability within subjects.

• Advanced, regular, or basic based on past performance.

• Advanced: Pre-Calculus as juniors, Calculus as seniors.

• Basic: Algebra II as juniors, Geometry as seniors.

• Creation & growth of AP courses/tracks/programs.

Modern Tracking

Prevalence

• 1993 survey of 912 high schools

• 86% of high schools offered tracked courses.

• 2000 survey of all 174 public high schools in Maryland

• 66% of HS used tracking in the 4 core subject areas.

• 13% didn’t track students in any of the core subjects.

• All 31 of the low-poverty, low-minority schools used tracking, while only 36% of the 25 high-poverty, high-minority schools did.

Tracking Starts Young

Tracking: Organizational Mechanisms

• Curriculum

• Available Tracks/Programs

• Available Faculty

• Parental Involvement

• Academic & Career Counseling

Tracking: Questions

• What’s the reason for tracking?

• Why are tracking decisions important?

• What are the inputs and outputs?

• At the individual & organizational levels?

• What does the notion of “matching” mean?

THE TWO PERSPECTIVES ON TRACKING

Perspective #1: Human Capital Theory

• Functionalist

• Tracking prepares students for the “real world”

• Investing in education allows students to increase their own human capital, which translates into market value and status

• Objective assessments of talent & ability serve as important input into educational decisions

• Tracking is meritocratic — anyone can do well and earn a spot in the “higher” tracks!

Perspective #2: Conflict Theory

• Tracking reproduces the hierarchical social order

• Societal status (of parents) is an important part of tracking decisions

• Group Membership (Social Class)

• Cultural Capital

• Credentials

TRACKING: WHAT ARE THE INPUTS?

Input #1: Students

• Self-Confidence

• Career Plans (if any)

• Educational Ambition

• Social Conformity & Peer Pressure

• Parental Pressure (either way)

• Role Models

Input #2: Parents

• “Hopes and Dreams”

• Career plans for their children

• Involvement/“Active Management”

• Elizabeth Useem (1992)

• Interviewed mothers of middle school students about their input into & knowledge of their children’s math placements

Input #2: Parents

• Elizabeth Useem (1992)

• Interviewed mothers of middle school students about their input into/knowledge of math placements

Input #2: Parents

• Elizabeth Useem (1992)

• Interviewed mothers of middle school students about their input into/knowledge of math placements

Input #2: Parents

• Elizabeth Useem (1992)

• Interviewed mothers of middle school students about their input into/knowledge of math placements

Input #2: Parents

• Elizabeth Useem (1992)

• Interviewed mothers of middle school students about their input into/knowledge of math placements

Input #2: Parents

• Elizabeth Useem (1992)

• Interviewed mothers of middle school students about their input into/knowledge of math placements

Input #2: Parents

• Elizabeth Useem (1992)

• Interviewed mothers of middle school students about their input into/knowledge of math placements

Input #3: Counselors/Teachers

• Concern for Student

• Courses shouldn’t be too hard or too easy

• Course load should be realistic

• Naive/implicit theories of intelligence

• Expectations for Student

• Stereotypes

• Ethnic/Racial

• Gender

Input #4: School

• School Goals & Policy

• Available Resources

• Size & specialization of faculty

• Some tracks cost more money than others

• Vocational vs. Academic

• Size of Student Body

• Different courses can only be offered if there’s a critical mass

• Counseling

• Effectiveness, # of counselors

HOW ARE TRACKING DECISIONS MADE?

Oakes & Guiton (1995)

• It’s a mess.

• Influences of…

• Ability

• Ethnic/racial group membership (Stereotypes)

• Different offerings at the school/school structure

• “School culture”

• School goals/mission

Oakes & Guiton (1995)

Oakes & Guiton (1995)

Oakes & Guiton (1995)

Oakes & Guiton (1995)

TRACKING: RATIONALES & PROGRESS

What is the rationale?

• 1. Facilitate Instruction

• 2. Manage Student Behavior

• 3. Maximize Achievement

!

• Is #3 really happening?

Opinions

• Teachers say that it facilitates instruction by making it easier to gear lessons to the ability level of the whole class.

!

• Parents of high-performing students like tracking because students assigned to high-ability groups make greater gains in achievement.

Curriculum Differentiation• Tracking

• Follow defined sequence of courses that is deemed appropriate for the student’s ability level

• Attend courses with and without students in other tracks

• Ability Grouping

• Attend classes/courses only with students who are at the same achievement level as you are

• Receive instruction that is deemed appropriate for your ability level with regard to content and delivery

• Similar effects on achievement!

Hallinan & Kubitschek (1999)

• Examine difference in test scores between ability grouped and non-grouped students

• Make sure that differences between grouped and non-grouped students cannot be explained by…

• Prior achievement

• Other variables (race, SES…)

Hallinan & Kubitschek (1999)

• Higher tracks/ability groups have higher-achieving students before instruction even begins.

!

• Higher scores might be the result of selection effects, not the result of tracking or teaching methods.

Non-Ability Grouped Students

Let’s say this is the achievement distribution of students at the end of the 10th grade.

Mean

Non-Ability Grouped Students

Let’s say this is the achievement distribution of students at the end of the 10th grade.

Mean = Grand Mean

Ability Grouped Students

Let’s say this is the achievement distribution of students at the end of the 10th grade.

Mean Middle

Mean High

Mean Low

Ability Grouped Students

Let’s say this is the achievement distribution of students at the end of the 10th grade.

Mean Middle

= Grand Mean

Mean High

Mean Low

Mean Middle

Mean High

Mean Low

Mean

Non-Grouped

Grouped

Grand Mean

Grand Mean

Non-Grouped

Grouped

Grand Mean

Grand Mean

Only some students (those in the highest track) show better results with ability grouping than non-ability grouping.

Grand Mean

Grand Mean

On average, students in non-ability grouped systems typically outperform students in ability grouped systems.

Problems

• Students assigned to low-ability groups score lower on standardized tests than if they had been placed in mixed-ability or high-ability groups.

!

• Tracking creates greater learning opportunities for high-performing students at the expense of their lower-performing peers.

!

• Students in lower tracks have weaker teachers, unchallenging curriculums, few academic role models, and low social status.

Oakes (1985)

• Some schools promote internal segregation by disproportionately assigning minority students to lower tracks.

!

• Tracking is an elitist practice that perpetuates the status quo by giving students from privileged families greater access to elite colleges and high-income careers.

Why does tracking influence achievement?

• Instruction

• Quantity of material

• Quality of material

• Complexity

• Challenge Level

• Speed of delivery

• Quality & experience of teachers

Why does tracking influence achievement?

• Institution

• School culture

• Interpersonal

• Teacher expectations

• Availability of role models

• Peer influences

• Social comparison

• Classroom composition

Why?

• Teacher Investment

• Mutual Cooperation

• Students teaching students

• Opportunities for upward and downward comparisons

• What do students believe about the accuracies of their ability groupings?

Why is it still around?

• Easier to Teach

• It’s hard to “teach to the middle” in detracked classes.

• Logistics

• Would have to reallocate teachers/administrators, modify curriculums, and provide professional training.

• Very expensive in terms of $$ and time.

• Parents

• Parents of high-ability kids really like tracking.

• These are the parents with the most resources & influence.

Benbow & Stanley (1996)

• Extreme egalitarianism = Pitting equity against excellence

• De-tracking is unfair to the most talented students

• Individual differences do exist!

• Low levels of academic achievement in the US

• International comparisons

• Generation gap

• The present generation is less educated than previous generations

• “It only takes one Edison to invent the light bulb.”

Questions

• Is there an inequality in the types of teachers hired for each track? Do “advanced” classes get better/more qualified teachers because those classes are more desirable?

!

• Do you think it’s possible to divide students without them knowing if tracks aren’t publicly labeled? Or will students always figure it out?

!

• Do you think there is value in “tracking” students based on how they learn best?

Questions

• The Marsh reading discusses the effects of being in a “gifted” program on self-concept. What do you think is more important - academic achievement or high self-concept?

!

• We know that peers can “push” people in good (or bad) academic directions. Do you think that being in a lower track can “push” bad students to be even worse, if they’re surrounded by less academic peers?