Tracking... argue with me people, I like it.

NAME OF AUTHOR and TEXT 

JEANNIE OAKES and TRACKING: WHY SCHOOLS NEED TO TAKE ANOTHER ROUTE

AUTHOR’S ARGUMENT 

Oakes believes that dividing students up based on ability hurts the education of all those except the students with the greater ability. That the tracking education system has no place in the school systems, and that it widens the gap between higher ability students between lower ability students.

BEFORE I START.. I DO NOT THINK TRACKING IS NECESSARILY THE PROBLEM... MOTIVATION IS A HUGE PART OF THE PROBLEM IN OUR EDUCATION SYSTEMS, FROM THE STUDENTS TO THE TEACHERS TO PARENTS AND THE  ADMINISTRATION!

QUOTES

“the nature of these differences suggests that students who are placed in high-ability groups have access to far richer schooling experiences than other students. This finding helps explain, at least in part, why it is that tracking sometimes seems to "work" for high ability students and not for others.”

- Here oakes states that students in higher ability groupings have greater resources and therefore better schooling experiences.

“In classrooms where the curriculum consists of a sequence of topics and skills that require prerequisite knowledge and skill mastery, mixing students who have different skills is difficult.”

- I would think that mixing students in subjects such as math and most history would be difficult with the emphasis on math. Math is one of those subjects where each objective needs to be mastered in short amounts of time, quickly moving to another topic with almost no room for errors.

“When curriculum is organized around the central themes of a subject area rather than around disconnected topics and skills, all students stand the greatest chance of enhancing their intellectual development. Students need not be held back from ideas because of skill differences; rather they can acquire skills as they become ready. Moreover, classroom knowledge that remains connected to its larger context is much easier for students to understand and use. Finally, when students grapple with complex problems, solutions have to be compatible with so many ideas that two people rarely come up with identical solutions. While right answers certainly have their place, with a concept-based curriculum there are opportunities for multiple right answers and multiple 

routes to success.”

- I generally have problems with statements like these... “rather they can acquire skills as they become ready.” Unfortunately, the education system here in America, and many other countries do not work like this. There are set expectations of each particular grade in each subject, and students who do not meet these requirements do not pass on to the next grade. If I decide that I am not ready to learn certain skills, how can I expect that I will reach the 8th grade? The term I will learn when I am ready is not a choice that I have, so why would I want a teacher who presents a theme and then says to me, oh you’ll learn the skills to matter critical thinking of this piece of literature when I’m ready. That sounds like a crutch to me. This is my education resting on learning what I need to know NOW. This is not just me not ready to be potty trained. Sound familiar? teach me the rules I need to know to make it in this world. America has not given way to a liberal minded path of learning. I have certain skills I need to acquire by a certain timeline. No one cares if I am ready for it.

“These changes also require fundamental changes in the structure of schooling and teachers' work.”

- I would say these changes would be hard to make in schools unless we have done away with standardized testing. The testing requires factual memorization in many school subjects, with no room for critical thinking, problem solving and creativity. In order for our teachers to be granted room for changes in the educational system to allow a more fluid learning style for all students regardless of abilities.

QUESTIONS/COMMENTS/POINTS TO SHARE

I have several problems with this article. Personally, in my lifetime, I have always been subject to grouping in school. I have seen firsthand the differences of the grouping. When I was in high school, and a rebel, I was put in what we called level 2, (level 1 was the worst). These students had no desire to put forth any effort into their education, and was obvious. Held true to what the article said, expectations were super low, homework was minimal and thinking for oneself checked itself out when you walked in the door. The students told the teacher how much time we felt we should spend on homework, and basically ran the class. I got my butt switched out after I refuse to attend class. The class was a joke. The new class I ended up in, everyone cared about passing, most students were highly motivated, and class went rather smooth. I got an A. That year was the last year we had five different levels of classes. The following year, they combined all of the level one, two and three classes into one, and then had an honors (level 4, 5) class. We went from five levels to two. Now, I’m in all these classes with kids who don’t care about their education, do not care about their grades. I am now in classes where too much time is spent on discipline. And now, somehow kids like me (disabilities) get grouped with others who could careless because our teachers group us within the classroom regardless. I preferred the five levels. The article calls for mixing all the ability students. It lists all the positive outcomes but let’s look at the issue from the flip side. Do students who feel as though they as not as smart as others feel intimated if they are in classes with “higher ability” students? Are they really getting a better education if they are less inclined to participate because of fear of not being able to compete with other students? Are higher ability students better off as well? my entire elementary and middle school years were spent working with the one or two other kids in my class on the side, because I was labeled as higher ability, and was blowing through the subjects while other students needed more time. They’re not going to put kids who  weren’t ready for certain skills in algebra two if they haven’t mastered the basics of algebra 1. If we say oh, he wasn’t ready to learn those skills, then we haven’t done them justice. Now in english, we could probably mix the students as so they article says, mostly because english is more subjective than objective. Critical reading skills need to be mastered but it can be taught through literature, and like the article says there is more room for the variety of right answers. Math doesn’t wait for you to master a skill. You gotta run with it.

I feel like I jumped around a lot in here, in fact I know I did. I will probably come back to this and fix it up. All I know is my experiences. When I’m surrounded by similar “abilities”, I work harder, I am more competitive, motivated. You’ll notice I quoted the abilities. It’s mostly because I feel like the article missed out on one thing. Intrinsic Motivation in the students. I noticed when I was grouped in with many different attitudes about education, I’ll say because I do not necessarily believe that the students in level two were not capable of being in level 4 or five, but more or less their motivation and desire to do well in school inhibited their potential success. I believe especially by high school, most of us are more than capable of meeting the requirements of “higher abilties” and that all students in the lower grades can if taught well be in relatively the same level of their peers. This article I feel left out a HUGE part. Quite honestly, personal motivation is a huge impact on the level students. You can have a mixed group of students, with a great teacher who motivates and does amazing things  that helps all the students learn from each other and still have students who are not doing so well because of things that have nothing to do with school. I think we need an article, if we want to help decrease the so called gap, increase learning abilities for ALL abilities and help ALL students learn and master the skills they need, called “How to Keep Our students MOTIVATED to LEARN” That is what I think it is. It’s not that I’m smarter than the next kid, or that the average kid is average, it is my motivation to do well that helps me master my skills. I’ve come to this conclusions after many years in school listening to the dorks like me say I want to get an A to the kids who say if I get a 65 I can pass and not do much. I think if we can figure out how to motivate our students to expand PAST their potential, this education gap we have will fix it self. I know the kids in level two weren’t there because they were idiots (they definitely weren’t) but because they didn’t care. They wanted out, they were done and they had other goals in life. keep in mind people, this is just My opinion. Agree with me or disagree, seriously... I wanna know what you think.