... tracking rules being such efficient gatekeepers. ... prepare kids for middle school and facilitate tracking choices (they work the kids hard, and those who are left behind will not make the GPA for higher tracks, it's cruel but effective as a sorting mechanism.
What makes the tracking cruel? Do higher tracks tend to consist of "gifted" kids? Do higher tracks consist predominantly of one or more ethnicities, or on the other hand do one or more ethnicities seem to be underrepresented? Are there different socio-economic demographics among the tracks? Do kids with learning disabilities receive scaffolding or supports to aid in their achievement? Can kids move up a track if their achievement and performance improve? Do kids move down a track if their achievement or performance lags? Do parents and students have input into choosing a track, or is this determined by others, through examining the grades? Are there quotas and/or lotteries, or do all students who meet qualifications get to study in the top track? Do families "red shirt" kids to raise the chances that a child may be in an upper track? Does the assigned track indicate a child's further education and/or job prospects? If a family moved would the child automatically be assigned to the same track at the receiving school, or would it depend upon the mix of students at the receiving school?
All these factors may only impact the OP in the near term if/when the OP's area ushers in the similar type of tracking/sorting used in your country, but as we all partake in the global economy, thinking long-term it may be helpful to be aware of the educational experiences of other children who will one day compete for the same jobs.
