Collins 1

Kaitlyn Collins

Malcolm Campbell

UWRT 1103H

28 October 2019

Getting off Track: Does Academic Tracking Create an Automatic Bias?

Foundation

Walking through an American public school today, you’re likely to see what most people

associate with them: cliques in the cafeteria, classes waiting to hear the final bell to ring, and

teachers trying their best to keep students motivated until the final bell. However, if you

observed an Advanced Placement and a regular class in the same school, you would most likely

think they were being taught in completely different schools. Despite being educated in the same

building, students that are labeled as gifted or take more rigorous courses are more likely to be

given opportunities that will help them achieve success over the rest of their peers. An example

like this is an effect of academic tracking, defined by the ​National Education Association​ as “the

practice of grouping children together according to their talents in the classroom.” Tracking can

allow for specialized focus in classrooms so those who learn at different paces can effectively

understand instructions and curriculum from their teachers. Students are usually grouped as early

as elementary school and continue to be on the same “track” until they graduate from high

school; but how are they placed on these tracks? Are all students guaranteed the same education
 Collins 2

and opportunities when placed in different groups? What effects does this have on students’

futures?

Positives to Tracking

Academic tracking can receive a bad reputation. but some have found beneficial factors

to this grouping method. Some parents, educators, and more believe that placing students on

tracks is the best method to serve the differing educational needs of all children. If some students

struggle more than others, either more time will have to be used to explain concepts or they may

have to put more time and effort into their studies outside of the classroom. At the same time,

another group of students who are restricted by slower paced courses tend to become bored with

the material. This article published by ​The Washington Post e​ nds the opinion editorial with a

thought-provoking statement: “The message sent to high-achieving students is that they should

hit the pause button on their learning until other students catch up. In the 21st Century economy,

there is not time” (Strauss). This leads people to believe that students must compromise in their

education so their peers can succeed while they fall behind or finish assignments at a rapid

speed.

Another article from ​The Atlantic ​discusses new research from the Brookings Institute

who claims that without tracking beginning in eighth-grade math classes, students will not be

able to comprehend higher mathematics (qtd. in Barshay, “When Academic Tracking Benefits”).

Tom Loveless, the author of this study, said “We’re talking about a very rarefied group of

high-achieving kids who are taking the toughest courses and the toughest tests. My point is that

they don’t just get there out of thin air. You need to cultivate talent over time in mathematics.”

He found that states that had higher ratings of tracking correlated to the percentage of students
 Collins 3

passing Advanced Placement (AP) exams; in Utah, they tracked 89 percent of its students in

eighth-grade math, and 70 percent of AP test takers in Utah passed their exam with a 3 or higher.

If students are tracked starting right before high school, they could benefit in the long term by

gaining higher mathematical skills that can assist them through the exams offering college credit

in high school.

The other study discussed in this article comes from two economists, David Card and

Laura Giuliano, who in March 2016 claim that academic tracking can close achievement gaps

between high-IQ African American and Hispanic children compared to white children. These

minority students placed in gifted courses performed just as well at the best schools and

continued to do so at least until middle school (qtd. in Barshay, “When Academic Tracking

Benefits”). The researchers also found that placing these minority children in higher achieving

courses showed more growth than moving a white child to the accelerated course. “We show that

minority students have lower achievement scores than white students with the same cognitive

ability, and that placement in a “gifted” class effectively closes this minority underachievement

gap,” the researchers stated. If educators are challenging all of their students, achievement and

learning gaps would most likely shrink, or better yet, not exist at all. On the other hand, students

also have to show the same motivation and competition for the highest grade to succeed which is

usually seen in honors or gifted classes.

Despite some advantages of tracking, many factors can play into a student’s life and

whether or not he or she is allowed into accelerated courses. The goal of education is to provide

students with the same base knowledge, but can that be done if every student has different

interests and strengths? A students’ financial and familial background, mental ability, race,
 Collins 4

ethnicity, and standardized testing success are the main components in determining what course

of study they will be placed on. It is common to see educators using these descriptions as labels

on students, limiting potential change and growth based on predetermined factors they cannot

change.

Financial Barriers

Depending on where a student lives and how high or low property tax values are, schools

will have students whose families make lower salaries than others. The American Psychological

Association released research correlating socioeconomic status (SES) to a child’s education.

They found that children who come from lower-SES families are less likely to have access to

experiences that develop fundamental skills as well as information regarding higher education

options. On the other hand, students coming from families earning the highest incomes are more

likely to obtain a bachelor’s degree by 24. Also, they are more likely to succeed in their career

aspirations and are more prepared for their vocational futures due to resources in their schools

and families. If students whose families cannot make higher incomes cannot access educational

resources to help them grow, this could create generational patterns that become even harder to

break. If it were not for school, some students, especially those with lower SES, could not gain

and grow from an education. If you separate adolescents based on income, you may eliminate

opportunities and experiences for growth they would otherwise not receive if not in school, thus

limiting what students can learn and accomplish.

This epidemic is not only happening in the United States; in 2015, 33 countries that teach

content to kids differently based on family income account for one-third of the achievement gaps

in education worldwide (Barshay, “Schools Exacerbate Growing Achievement”). This report

 Collins 5

shows that the Netherlands has the biggest achievement gap between its students with 58 percent

of inequality contributed by unequal access to math courses. America was a little above average,

contributing to 37 percent of the income-based differences in curriculum. “In every society, we

want school to be the great equalizer, to help students overcome poverty. In effect, this study

says that schooling is making things worse,” said William H. Schmidt of Michigan State

University, the lead author of the study in which this data came from (qtd. in Barshay, “Schools

Exacerbate Growing Achievement”). Schmidt believes that all advanced students should dive

deeper into the curriculum instead of taking harder classes to decrease the achievement gap. The

struggle for equal education could be solved by international and educational professionals going

back to the drawing board and viewing students of all economic backgrounds with the same

approach.

Divides Outside of the Classroom (Social, Mental, etc.)

Many people think that academic tracking causes academic divides between groups of

people; not only can it do that, but it can also create social cliques and limit academic options for

some students more than others. In a 2015 study published in ​Remedial and Special Education,​

research showcased how academic tracking can create social divides in school between tracking

groups. Researchers took two high schools that used their system of academic tracking to

separate students based on mental capability and disability status and compared their social

networks​, ​. Social networks are defined as “tools providing direct benefits to someone… as one

utilizes these connections, they achieve desired outcomes and bring benefits to a community.” If

a student networks and gains connections with their fellow peers and community, they are more

likely to pursue higher education and achieve a better sense of health and well-being. When
 Collins 6

students have access to the same materials and get to collaborate with each other, they can

expand their social activity, and ultimately their social capital.

On the contrary, special education students are usually separated from the rest of their

peers in a more restrictive environment and aren’t given access to challenging curricula or social

settings. Separating students to cater to their needs is important, but are we catering to help with

their success once they walk through those school doors? The study suggests that students can

increase inclusivity while making the transition to high school in ninth grade while they are all

new students in a school with an opportunity to have a fresh academic start. If we increase the

social capital of teenagers with disabilities, they can learn about technology and opportunities

and not let a label hold them back in what they do.

Racial Ties

While researching the harms of tracking, one reason was the most prevalent: a student’s

race plays an extensive factor in deciding what track they are placed on. ​The Atlantic ​dubs this

issue as the “modern day segregation” and believes tracking creates a “school within a school” in

education due to the uneven proportion of students in gifted and talented education (GATE)

programs across the country filled with predominantly white children. In a 2014 report produced

by the Department of Education Office for Civil Rights, African American children make up 17

percent of the nation’s total school population, yet less than 10 percent are involved in GATE. In

contrast, if you look at remedial rates, a reported 53 percent of students were African American

(Pirtle). This dilemma is occurring all over the nation and is so intense that the American Civil

Liberties Union (ACLU) had to step into a case in California where 16.3 percent of the district’s

enrollment was African American but only 5.5 percent were in GATE programs.
 Collins 7

Due to the long and complicated history of segregation and treatment of African

Americans in the United States, some stipulations have stuck around in education that has

created this barrier between peers. Students who come from “privileged” families are most likely

more available to donate time and money to their child’s school, hire tutors to help their children,

and know how to advocate for their child. Pirtle begins the last paragraph with an impactful

sentence: “The education gap cannot be achieved without closing the racial empathy gap.” Until

we remove stereotypes and give all children access to the same courses or increase rigor in

non-GATE classes, students cannot gain​ing​ a more equal education.

In the article “Integrating Classrooms and Reducing Academic Tracking,” writer Halley

Potter evaluates the diversity in classrooms and comes up with multiple reasons to increase

equity in schools. She suggests schoolwide enrichment and open honors are some of the ways to

even the playing field. As nice as it is to have solutions for problems, these do not come with a

formula; each school is a different situation and has to figure out what would work best in their

districts.

The Schoolwide Enrichment Model (SEM) was developed by professors at the University

of Connecticut that identifies “gifted behaviors” rather than putting a label of “gifted” or “not

gifted” on a child. In the District of Columbia, schools have used this model to group, not

separate, students based on common interests instead of measurements of ability to collaborate

on projects. In lieu of pulling students out of the classroom for specialized learning, they can

work with peers of different abilities, backgrounds, and more. This study suggests a gradual

growth of enrichment, specified activities related to student’s interest, to allow everyone to

 Collins 8

understand and discuss how this system is important since it allows students to show genuine

interest in topics and could introduce potential hobbies and career options.

Another movement is the concept of “open honors’; this entails any student​s​ taking the

same course, but honors sections complete extra assignments and activities to earn honors credit.

For example, Harvest Collegiate High School in New York City requires all but AP courses to

offer an honors class that students can apply for, usually via a short statement of purpose.

Students can change their minds up to one month after school starts if need be, but about 25

percent of the total school population participates in this program. Students perform tasks outside

of school, such as tutoring a peer in English or researching events in history and can collaborate

on projects, events, and club-like meetings with each other. Giving teachers time to plan the

extra honors assignments and progressively build the program one department at a time should

help this program succeed in schools.

High Stakes Test Measurements

One of the main, and some might say the main factor in determining a student’s track is

how well they perform on standardized testing, also known as “high stakes testing.” Jason

Giersch, an assistant professor at the University of North Carolina at Charlotte, discusses how

these tests correlate to academic tracking and the danger it poses to schools. He states:

“Using statewide academic standards and uniform exams, states label stronger

and weaker performers at the student, teacher, and school levels and provide

incentives to raise test scores, especially for the lowest achieving students…

However, the push for consistency in achievement does not mean there is

consistency in instruction." (Giersch)

 Collins 9

The main purpose of K-12 education is to prepare students to face the reality of the “real world,”

whether that means college, the workforce, the armed forces, and more. The push for

standardized education and how to measure that followed after the 1983 publication of ​A Nation

At Risk​, a government issued warning to Americans that schools were underperforming and the

economic prospects were not looking good. After that, national legislation like “No Child Left

Behind” and “Race to the Top” that push for high standardized testing scores was passed, hoping

to increase the success of the American education system. Many believe that pushing for high

test scores limits what can be learned and increased retention and teacher shortage rates,

interfering with the true purpose and value of education. When teachers were asked about how

the tests affect their instruction, they emphasized that test procedures play very little role in how

they teach their kids, but they may hold different expectations for those in higher and lower

tracks.

The unsaid bias between tracks has proven to have consequences: students’ test scores in

lower track courses do a worse job at predicting college performance than their peers placed on

the higher track, and educators feel as if they need to emphasize more on letter grades than

mastering course material. Teachers who instruct honors students feel like they can let their

students be the guide and go in depth with material while with their regular kids they have to

lecture and lead more. This study shows that honors adolescents have higher grades in high

school and scores on standardized tests will do well in college while those in less rigorous tracks

should shoot for better overall grades for achievement in college. Giersch ends with the

conclusion that “Standardized tests are too narrow a measure for capturing the broad range of

goals that schools pursue.”

 Collins 10

Verdict

Academic tracking was created to help educators specialize in content for a particular

group of children so they could learn best. However, this system of learning has become more

constrained in the past few decades. Students have not been given the chance to decide what

track they want to follow; instead, it is decided on by predetermined factors and educators fear ​to

challenging themselves to give all students the same opportunities. If we don’t grow out of this

pattern, students who takes regular courses might feel as if their education isn’t as important as

honors or AP students. While educational professionals are agreeing this segregation is an issue,

the methods in solving it are few and far between. There cannot be a universal solution as every

classroom and school is different, but if we continue to limit students on a specific academic

track instead of opening up opportunities, the concept and fundamentals of education will break.

By allowing students to decide their educational path with educator guidance, there is a more

equal playing field and it could possibly limit stereotypes and preconceived notions that

previously have held some students back.

 Collins 11

Works Cited

Barshay, Jill. “Schools Exacerbate the Growing Achievement Gap between Rich and Poor, a

33-Country Study Finds.” ​The Hechinger Report,​ 24 June 2019,

https://hechingerreport.org/schools-exacerbate-the-growing-achievement-gap-between-ric

h-and-poor-a-33-country-study-finds/. Accessed 31 Oct. 2019

—-. “When Academic Tracking Benefits Students.” ​The Atlantic,​ Atlantic Media Company,

26 Apr. 2016,

https://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2016/03/the-upside-of-tracking/475956/.

Accessed 3 Nov. 2019

“Education and Socioeconomic Status.” ​American Psychological Association,​ American

Psychological Association, https://www.apa.org/pi/ses/resources/publications/education.

Accessed 31 Oct. 2019

Fisher, Kim W., and Karrie Shogren. “The Influence of Academic Tracking on Adolescent

Social Networks.” ​Remedial and Special Education​, Hammill Institute on Disabilities, vol.

37, no. 2, pp. 89-100, 4 Dec. 2015,

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/0741932515616758. Accessed 6 Oct. 2019

Giersch, Jason. “Academic Tracking, High-Stakes Tests, and Preparing Students for College:

How Inequality Persists Within Schools.” ​Educational Policy,​ SAGE Journals, vol. 32, pp.
 Collins 12

907-935, 1 Dec. 2016, https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/0895904816681526.

Accessed 3 Nov. 2019

Pirtle, Whitney. “The Other Segregation.” ​The Atlantic,​ Atlantic Media Company, 23 Apr.

2019,

https://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2019/04/gifted-and-talented-programs-sepa

rate-students-race/587614/. Accessed 2 Nov. 2019

Potter, Halley. “Integrating Classrooms and Reducing Academic Tracking.” ​The Century

Foundation,​ 10 May 2019,

https://tcf.org/content/report/integrating-classrooms-reducing-academic-tracking-strategies

-school-leaders-educators/?agreed=1. Accessed 2 Nov. 2019

“Research Spotlight on Academic Ability Grouping.” ​NEA​,

http://www.nea.org/tools/16899.htm. Accessed 31 Oct. 2019

Strauss, Valerie. “Why Grouping Students by Ability Makes Sense.” ​The Washington Post​,

WP Company, 7 June 2013,

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/answer-sheet/wp/2013/06/07/why-grouping-stude

nts-by-ability-makes-sense/?arc404=true. Accessed 3 Nov. 2019