Narrative Continued: Tracking Outcomes

Tracking, while supposedly designed to address student needs, seems in many cases to correlate with a gap between African-American and White students. Oakes (1990) states, “Assessments of academic ability, placement in different tracks or ability-grouped classes, and the reduced educational opportunities that characterize low-track classes often parallel race and social class differences” (vi). According to Hall, Davis, Bolen, and Chia (1999), after elementary school, African American students fall further and further behind each year.


Tracking seems to have differing outcomes which are dependent on the types of students being tracked and where they are placed. According to Powell and Berry (2007) the African-American male, middle school students they interviewed benefited from the tracking system because they were motivated by their advanced placement. One student was quoted as explaining that, “The smart kids make me work harder” (p. 172). Chambers (2009) interviews with male and female high school seniors and recent graduates revealed that all considered tracking a normal part of school culture. However, the authors note that as the students reflected on the entirety of their school experience, “Even at young school ages, these students began associating their ability placement with their intellect” (p. 423). That is high-tracked students considering themselves to be “smart” and low-tracked students considering themselves to be “dumb”.

Catsambis, Mulkey, and Crain (2001), whose study focused on the middle-school level, argue that the benefits of ability grouping may depend on a variety of factors, including the subject being taught and gender of the student. The correlation coefficients, outcomes of their research, “…indicate that students’ school-related attitudes and behaviors are affected by whether a school uses tracking or not. The effects, though, vary in relation to students gender and track level at which they are placed” (p. 98). Among students who tend to be tracked high or low, female students tend to have a stronger negative attitude towards mathematics than male students. In terms of self esteem and locus of control, tracking seems to be more impactful on males than females. Another outcome of the study indicated that female students in low tracking tended not to complete homework as much as their counterparts who were tracked at a high level. The authors (2001) theorize that this may be due to the fact that the low-tracked females feel that their track confirms their lack of confidence and give up. High-tracked female students complete more homework, maybe because they feel the need to work harder to keep up with their male peers, who, from their perspective, dominate the subject. Thus, it appears that the outcomes of tracking are dependent on the gender of the student and whether they are tracked as high or low.

In my personal experience as a math educator in an alternative setting, I have the opportunity with students who have struggled in mathematics. They enter my class at the beginning of the year full of fear, anxiety, or self-protective disinterest. The educational system as a whole, and sometimes educators in particular, have communicated to students that they are not capable of achievement in this area of study. Some have accepted this as truth. For these students my job as a teacher is to first find opportunities to students to feel empowered and capable in class. Traditionally, I have given these students tasks well below grade level so they can build up some belief in themselves as being able to succeed. After a period a time, students begin to say, “I got this!” or “This is easy!” To best meet their needs, it can be helpful to have them in class so we can work this process collectively. However, there is also the risk that in this “low-tracked” setting, they will continue to settle for the bare minimum of standards and never have a chance to see in their classmates how far they are capable of going.

I also have a more advanced class, where students are often exploring the same main concepts, but with slightly more challenging applications and faster pacing. I choose carefully those in this class, not just based on math capability, but their ability to persevere. These “higher-track” courses are not so much dependent on student capability, but confidence and willing to persevere. These students are not looking for the “easy” way out, but are willing to think through a problem, knowing they can reach a solution. Because tracking outcomes are dependent on the student and where they are tracked, it is important that, no matter how students are placed in class, they are given the opportunity to be successful and KNOW they are being successful. This self-confidence provides the foundation for a readiness to develop new understandings that reach beyond any predefined course expectations.


References


Catsambis, S., Mulkey, L. M., & Crain, R. L. (2001). For better or for worse? a nationwide study of the social psychological effects of gender and ability grouping in mathematics. Social Psychology of Education, 5(1), 83-115.

Chambers, T. (2009). The "Receivement Gap": School Tracking Policies and the Fallacy of the "Achievement Gap". Journal of Negro Education, 78(4), 417-431.

Hall, C., Davis, N., Bolen, L. & Chia, R. (1999). Gender and Racial Differences in Mathematical Performance. Journal of Social Psychology. 139(6), 677-689.

Oakes, R. (1990) Multiplying inequalities: The effects of race, social class, and tracking on opportunities to learn mathematics and science. RAND, Santa Monica CA.

Powell, A., & Berry III, R. Q. (2007). Chapter Eleven: Achieving Success. In , Still Not Equal (pp. 167-175). Peter Lang Publishing, Inc.