Archived: The Educational System in the United States: Case Study Findings

Reactions to Tracking System
Reactions among respondents to tracking and ability grouping were mixed. Some
respondents believed that tracking is useful, while others said that tracking was
inappropriate for certain age groups or even harmful at any age. The beliefs were
strongly held and some of our most lively discussions centered on the appropriate-
ness of tracking. Among teachers and administrators, there was a clear demarca-
tion between those who supported tracking and those who did not, and some
respondents noted this as a source of friction. Parents, on the other hand, gen-
erally tended to support tracking and ability grouping.
The depth of feeling that we encountered about tracking is illustrated in a com-
ment by the mother of a student at King Junior High School, a middle-achieving
school in Metro City. The mother was describing her reactions after being told
that her son would not be placed in a high-level math course.
It’s the public schools’ responsibility to educate my child with respect to his
ability. I told them, I come from a family of lawyers. If he tests for scholar’s
math, you have to put him there. You put him there today or I’ll see you in
court tomorrow. That evening the principal called me and said he was put in
scholar’s math.
Further conversations at King Junior High School revealed that the local school
board was attempting to reduce the number of students in the high-level math
classes in order to implement a detracking program. The parents with whom we
talked did not support the detracking philosophy. A parent had this to say about
the school board’s policy regarding tracking and ability grouping:
The present superintendent . . . . I don’t think he has done much good for
the district, frankly. My kids are out of that district and I’m very glad that they

---

66
are out of there. The present board is very much against ability grouping. The
board has this feeling that all kids are equal, all kids should be treated equal,
and gotta be very sensitive to their needs, their social and emotional needs,
and somewhere their academic needs gets left out. And to our minds, that has
hurt a lot of kids because they aren’t challenged. What they’ve done in the
junior high system (King) was to take away all advanced classes except for
math. My three younger children have gone through that system (King) and
have not been adequately prepared for high school.
Although a number of teachers and administrators supported detracking, many fa-
vored tracking as a way to deal with individual differences in ability. In fact, one
teacher at South Central Vocational High School argued for earlier tracking of stu-
dents, especially for those from disadvantaged backgrounds, who are unlikely to
attend college:
I think somewhere in the sixth grade we should start molding these kids. I’m
talking about channeling these kids. We are gonna say, you are going to be
a carpenter. You see that’s your first source. That’s your creativity. To develop
yourself. No one says you’re going to be a carpenter your whole life. But there
you have a position that gives you some self worth.
The following comment from a middle school teacher in West City was perhaps
most representative of the majority of math and science teachers we interviewed.
‘‘Oh yes, it is a must. You have to separate students by ability.’’
In sum, reactions to the practices of tracking and ability grouping were quite var-
ied. Parents tended to support tracking and ability grouping. Several administrators
expressed preference for diverse classrooms, but many tended to support tracking
and ability grouping. Most math and science teachers reported that it is difficult
to teach classes with students who vary greatly in aptitude and interest in these
subjects. Hence, they tended to support ability groupings, though with ambiva-
lence.