|
0 members (),
193
guests, and
8
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
S |
M |
T |
W |
T |
F |
S |
|
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
|
7
|
8
|
9
|
10
|
11
|
12
|
13
|
|
14
|
15
|
16
|
17
|
18
|
19
|
20
|
|
21
|
22
|
23
|
24
|
25
|
26
|
27
|
|
28
|
29
|
30
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 2,640
Member
|
OP
Member
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 2,640 |
DoE seeks equality in AP, gifted classesby Joanne Jacobs November 19, 2014 Tracking students by academic performance creates a separate and unequal school system, according to the U.S. Education Department, reports Sonali Kohli in The Atlantic. “Black students to be afforded equal access to advanced, higher-level learning opportunities,” the DoE’s Office of Civil Rights proclaimed in announcing an agreement with a New Jersey school district, South Orange Maplewood. Proponents of tracking and of ability-grouping (a milder version that separates students within the same classroom based on ability) say that the practices allow students to learn at their own levels and prevent a difficult situation for teachers: large classes where children with a wide range of different needs and skill levels are mixed together. In many districts, the higher-level instruction in “gifted and talented” or advanced placement (AP) classes is what keeps wealthier families from entirely abandoning the public school system.
But . . . many education researchers have argued that tracking perpetuates class inequality, and is partially to blame for the stubborn achievement gap in the US educational system. Schools should be allowed to place students based on academic achievement, regardless of the resulting demographics in various classes.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2012
Posts: 2,035
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Dec 2012
Posts: 2,035 |
DoE seeks equality in AP, gifted classesby Joanne Jacobs November 19, 2014 Tracking students by academic performance creates a separate and unequal school system, according to the U.S. Education Department, reports Sonali Kohli in The Atlantic. “Black students to be afforded equal access to advanced, higher-level learning opportunities,” the DoE’s Office of Civil Rights proclaimed in announcing an agreement with a New Jersey school district, South Orange Maplewood. Proponents of tracking and of ability-grouping (a milder version that separates students within the same classroom based on ability) say that the practices allow students to learn at their own levels and prevent a difficult situation for teachers: large classes where children with a wide range of different needs and skill levels are mixed together. In many districts, the higher-level instruction in “gifted and talented” or advanced placement (AP) classes is what keeps wealthier families from entirely abandoning the public school system.
But . . . many education researchers have argued that tracking perpetuates class inequality, and is partially to blame for the stubborn achievement gap in the US educational system. Schools should be allowed to place students based on academic achievement, regardless of the resulting demographics in various classes. There are two seperate issues. If there is an issue with performance in certain groups that should be worked on but not just by putting people in classes they don't qualify for. Of course IQ and achievement are not the same thing so maybe better idemtification and support earlier would help.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2014
Posts: 71
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Feb 2014
Posts: 71 |
Just a few off the cuff comments...
The middle schooler who was not able to get into the class she wanted was left out due to a teacher not giving her a recommendation. Her grades were fine. This is not a product of tracking, more of a discrimination. Much like many of us have been on the receiving end of when we wanted our kids to get some accommodations. Perhaps there was a set number of kids per class and they had to draw the line somewhere. To assume it was racially motivated is a disservice.
Secondly, this: “But,” he writes, “schools serving more students of color are less likely to offer advanced courses and gifted and talented programs than schools serving mostly white populations, and students of color are less likely than their white peers to be enrolled in those courses and programs within schools that have those offerings.”
Well, of course! I live in a poor district and let me tell you money is the biggest factor on what can be offered. That and high stakes testing takes resources away from everyone because you have to have the good test scores or else. Poorer districts can be disproportionately minorities. Our school district looks to me (via eyeballing a classroom) to be about evenly split between whites and minorities. In my case, our district is extremely small and extremely poor. My state and locality aren't fond of funding appropriately (not the kids' fault).
Third, if the schools would let kids take the classes they may want instead of saying no, the kids would be forced to sink or swim. You never know until you try. Assuming a child is not up to the task is a disservice to all. Sometimes you have to work hard to pass a class. Sometimes you take a class and say, "hey, this isn't for me." You really don't get that option to drop a class until college level. They won't do this because (circling back to high stakes testing) having a risk of a higher failure rating is not good for being able to have good test scores overall for your school.
Finally (I realize this is so long!!!) if there were resources to truly and adequately address different learning styles/paces for each individual, this would be much less of a problem. My kids are math whizzes. That doesn't mean they should be frustratingly held back to stay with the herd. Conversely, a child who learns things more slowly and needs more repetition should be able to have that too.
I don't have a problem with ability grouping so long as a student or a parent can intervene to get put in a different track.
As an aside, my 8th grader told me before that her and her friends are so anxious about college because they were constantly told to think about careers, taking tests to determine abilities/interests, etc. My state requires this type of thing as part of the curriculum. While I agree that one should ponder the great what if -- what do I want to do with my life? -- one should not be 13 and freaking out that you don't know what you want to be. I told her not to stress -- a large number of college students change their major in the first year or two. Obviously they didn't know for sure what they wanted to do either!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,428
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,428 |
This article from the Atlantic is worth reading to understand this: http://www.theatlantic.com/educatio...ay-segregation-in-public-schools/382846/The article mentions one type of remedy I've long advocated: "There are also other ways to open up higher level classes to all students without completely ending tracking, says Daugherty, of the South Orange Maplewood School District. One is to standardize the system for testing into advanced tracks, rather than leave it to students and their parents. A few years ago, the district required all freshmen to take the AP English qualifying exam—and then followed up with the students who did well but did not enroll. Instead of making the test optional, favoring students and parents who are assertive and knowledgeable about the system, this system can help identify innate talent, the theory goes."
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2011
Posts: 2,856
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Oct 2011
Posts: 2,856 |
The middle schooler who was not able to get into the class she wanted was left out due to a teacher not giving her a recommendation. Her grades were fine. This is not a product of tracking, more of a discrimination. Indeed, that's the major problem. As long as subjective review is part of the process, then bias, either conscious or otherwise, will play a major role in that process. Of course, if you're a member of the privileged group, and you want to exploit it, then it's not a "problem," per se. As an aside, my 8th grader told me before that her and her friends are so anxious about college because they were constantly told to think about careers, taking tests to determine abilities/interests, etc. My state requires this type of thing as part of the curriculum. While I agree that one should ponder the great what if -- what do I want to do with my life? -- one should not be 13 and freaking out that you don't know what you want to be. I told her not to stress -- a large number of college students change their major in the first year or two. Obviously they didn't know for sure what they wanted to do either! We met DD's principal when she first took on the job during DD's first grade year, and in that meeting, she said that, in order to be successful, kids today need to know what their careers will be before they finish xth grade (can't recall exactly, but I think x=4 or 5). Said principal had already introduced herself as someone new to the education field, from a marketing background. That's how I know cognitive dissonance is a thing, because her head didn't explode.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2014
Posts: 602
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jul 2014
Posts: 602 |
Well, if you'd pointed out the cognitive dissonance to her, she'd tell you that that is of course the newest thinking in the brand new land of market driven education and that all of your prior experiences as people who managed to get an education and to be adequately successful, thank you very much, without locking into a career mindset at age 9 have of course no clue what they are talking about.
Last edited by Tigerle; 11/19/14 02:45 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2012
Posts: 2,513
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Nov 2012
Posts: 2,513 |
We met DD's principal when she first took on the job during DD's first grade year, and in that meeting, she said that, in order to be successful, kids today need to know what their careers will be before they finish xth grade (can't recall exactly, but I think x=4 or 5). Said principal had already introduced herself as someone new to the education field, from a marketing background. Pshaw! All the good-plated principals know that the really successful kiddies are interning in their summers at 6 in their chosen field! Child labour is the way of the future. 
What is to give light must endure burning.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2014
Posts: 602
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jul 2014
Posts: 602 |
And on topic, I'd like to point out, as usual, that the composition of gifted classes that actually serve the gifted has no bearing on the experiences of 98% of the student population and is thus completely negligible for the purposes of discussing whether tracking or unequal access to higher level classes within any one school disenfranchise the non gifted low SES kids among the 98%, who may make up between 40 or 50 % of that population and up to 100% of a high poverty school.
Last edited by Tigerle; 11/19/14 02:45 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 5,181
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 5,181 |
The middle schooler who was not able to get into the class she wanted was left out due to a teacher not giving her a recommendation. Her grades were fine. This is not a product of tracking, more of a discrimination. Indeed, that's the major problem. As long as subjective review is part of the process, then bias, either conscious or otherwise, will play a major role in that process. Of course, if you're a member of the privileged group, and you want to exploit it, then it's not a "problem," per se. As an aside, my 8th grader told me before that her and her friends are so anxious about college because they were constantly told to think about careers, taking tests to determine abilities/interests, etc. My state requires this type of thing as part of the curriculum. While I agree that one should ponder the great what if -- what do I want to do with my life? -- one should not be 13 and freaking out that you don't know what you want to be. I told her not to stress -- a large number of college students change their major in the first year or two. Obviously they didn't know for sure what they wanted to do either! We met DD's principal when she first took on the job during DD's first grade year, and in that meeting, she said that, in order to be successful, kids today need to know what their careers will be before they finish xth grade (can't recall exactly, but I think x=4 or 5). Said principal had already introduced herself as someone new to the education field, from a marketing background. That's how I know cognitive dissonance is a thing, because her head didn't explode. Whoah-- indeed. I will also say that WE have felt like salmon swimming up a swift stream when we tell our DD (3+y accelerated, and in that 'upper' track achievement-wise) that NOOOOOOO, she does not need to have it all "planned out" for herself at 15 years of age, and certainly didn't need to at 8 or 9. In spite of what the world seemed determined to tell her. 
Schrödinger's cat walks into a bar. And doesn't.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 2,640
Member
|
|
OP
Member
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 2,640 |
Chester Finn "is a former professor of education, an educational policy analyst, and a former United States Assistant Secretary of Education." (Wikipedia) Punishing Achievement in Our Schools:Advanced students suffer from the “disparate impact” of witch hunts by the Office for Civil Rights. by Chester Finn National Review November 25, 2014 Five points deserve attention.
First, in going after practices that separate kids on the basis of achievement, OCR will confound and cripple every educator’s favorite reform du jour, “differentiated instruction.” Because in the real world of middle schools with 200 sixth-graders, differentiation doesn’t mean true individualization. It means various forms of ability grouping.
Second, the U.S. is already having huge trouble paying attention to high achievers (some say “gifted and talented”) when we’re preoccupied with low achievers and dire schools. Anything that discourages such attention is bad for American economic growth and competitiveness, not to mention unfair to kids who are ready, willing, and able to soar but have trouble getting the teacher’s attention. (Disparate impact at the expense of high achievers and smart kids is apparently just fine with OCR.)
Third, some forms of “tracking” are good for poor kids, minority kids, and low achievers seeking a path to upward mobility. If anything, we need more of it in high-poverty schools. As Tom Loveless of the Brookings Institution has shown, those are the schools least likely to give their high achievers (who are also poor and minority kids) chances to accelerate and to learn with other high achievers.
At the high-school level, “voc ed” has a bad name, and old-style tracking led to a lot of dead ends. But what about high-quality career and technical education for young people who want a good job but don’t necessarily want to go to a conventional college — or who haven’t been educated well enough in the early and middle grades to thrive in an AP classroom? Aren’t they going to get further if they have access to classes designed for them? At the very least, the choice of such classes?
|
|
|
|
|
