By Estephanie Ramírez
My last couple of months of 8th grade had everything to do with getting prepared for one test that was going to determine my entire high school career. If I tested lower I would permanently stay in the lower tracks. If I tested higher I would then enter a world full of competition and jealousy, and I would stop taking risks.
In public high schools nationwide, intentionally or not, students are grouped together based on ability. I propose we untrack ability groups and make heterogeneous ability groups instead. This will not only allow kids to work at their own pace, but it will help raise engagement and academic excellence. In Boston Public Schools, students are usually tracked based on their math levels and their eighth grade test scores. Some schools like mine tell students what the test will determine, but other schools don’t. Students enter high school with no idea that they’re being tracked, and when they do find out, it’s often too late.
Tracking is not an effective way of categorizing students because it doesn’t help raise academic achievement. In a recent study on elementary schools, education psychologist Robert Slavin found ¨no discernible positive effects¨ to tracking.[1] Students start to compete with each other and their self-esteem recedes. If we can’t prove its effectiveness, why is it still being implemented in our schools? Tracking doesn’t allow for kids in the lower tracks to advance and grow as learners. If we eliminate ability tracking and have heterogeneous groups, we can finally get lower track students out of that hole and have the same expectations for all kids.
Some people say that eliminating tracking serves as a disadvantage to hardworking, advanced students. In reality, those students can benefit from tutoring others because it helps deepen their understanding of certain topics. According to Ellen Shell in her article “Off the Track” advanced students are ¨forced to articulate¨ and therefore ¨justify, their thinking processes¨ and the best way to ¨cement one’s own understanding¨ of an idea is to describe it to someone else.[2] Advanced students become models for other students and at the same time grow as learners.
The only way I can see a place for homogeneous grouping is if we group by interest. All kids will work to reach this level because it will be something they are excited to try. Some people might have a problem with homogeneous groups by interest and might ask, “How will we meet everyone’s interests?” If the school doesn’t offer the course, we can connect them with colleges that have the courses. Students can take dual enrollment classes at local community colleges. That way we would still be meeting everyone’s interests without having to implement so many classes.
If we group by interest we can also take it a step further and undo age groups, meaning grade levels. If a ninth grade student wants to advance in their studies and take an eleventh grade course then he or she should be able to. If students want to take a class specifically on computer science, then all ages interested should be able to. We shouldn’t limit the classes students take based on their age.
Is it even possible to implement this in our schools? Yes, we can undo age groups because it has been done at both the college and elementary level. In 1995, the Michigan Department of Education found that ¨one in five districts implemented the multiage settings.¨ Years later, many districts ¨began or expanded upon their multiage models.¨[3] Multiage groups are becoming a phenomenon in every classroom except at the high school level. So why stop there? It’s both reasonable and cost-effective and would allow for a growing movement of efficient learners.
Forming multiage and homogeneous groups by interest will help organize kids more purposefully by using their strengths to unite them and help them move forward. Just think, if we implement this in our schools, our kids will be better prepared for college and have a better understanding of what they’re truly capable of. We’ll see freshmen working together with seniors to better themselves and their school.
- Ellen Shell Ruppel, “Off the Track,” Technology Review, October 1994, 62. ↑
- Ruppel, “Off the Track,” 62. ↑
- Ruiting Song, Terry E. Spradlin, and Jonathan A. Plucker, “The Advantages and Disadvantages of Multiage Classrooms in the Era of NCLB Accountability,” Center for Evaluation and Education Policy 7, no. 1 (2009). ↑
You must be logged in to post a comment.