In our school, for English and Math, we have accelerated/advanced classes, regular classes, and lower classes. In all cases, students are expected to cover and "master" the material. We tend to be a high performing school, so I wonder why it works for us.
As a student, I was tracked as "college prep" from seemingly day one. I turned out okay, but I often wonder how things would be different if I had been exposed to vocational school as well. It seems as thought the tracking may have limited my options, while better preparing me for a more likely future. With future generations needing a college degree for basically any job, won't they all be "college prep?"
Tracking is a murky issue. Any thoughts?
I can see the value in mixed groups--but only if it's done correctly. If you're going to blend all levels in one classroom, administrators need to provide adequate planning time and training time in differentiated instruction. If not, chances are the "one-size-fits-all" approach will only reach a few students.
ReplyDeleteTracking is still a hugely controversial issue and always has been, particularly at the middle level. But, many more schools (probably the vast majority) have some sort of tracking now...as opposed to the'80s and '90s when schools were more likely to "detrack".
ReplyDeleteNot a lot of support for tracking because of the negative influences it has on students...and is really a civil rights issue of equal access to the best curriculum and instruction...which kids in the lowest group DO NOT get.