The Math Forum

Search All of the Math Forum:

Views expressed in these public forums are not endorsed by NCTM or The Math Forum.

Math Forum » Discussions » Education » math-teach

Notice: We are no longer accepting new posts, but the forums will continue to be readable.

Topic: "Tracking and fine distinctions"
Replies: 8   Last Post: May 14, 1997 3:15 PM

Advanced Search

Back to Topic List Back to Topic List Jump to Tree View Jump to Tree View   Messages: [ Previous | Next ]
W Gary Martin

Posts: 55
Registered: 12/6/04
Re: "Tracking and fine distinctions"
Posted: May 14, 1997 9:50 AM
  Click to see the message monospaced in plain text Plain Text   Click to reply to this topic Reply

At 20:27 -0400 5/13/97, Gerald Von Korff wrote:
>On the contrary, I believe in grouping. But before we can have a
>meaningful dialogue on grouping, we need to get some red herrings out of
>the way. It is not necessary to track (my definition) in order to
>group. Kids can, as you properly point out, join different groups,
>depending upon their current level of interest and performance.
>But the "educrats" as you call them, want to conduct the debate on more
>congenial territory. And so, they call grouping tracking, thus forcing
>the discussion around an entirely different issue.

The problem is that grouping, even as you describe it, very rapidly turns
into de facto tracking. It is very common that an elementary classroom will
have different levels of math groups. Now you may not call this tracking,
but in fact students are not shuffled around all that much. And it is
difficult to move up to a higher level. Think about it: If I'm in the red
group working on Chapter 6, how easy will it be for me to move up to the
advanced blue group working on Chapter 8? This can also become a
self-fulfilling prophecy; I am in the low group, which means I'm not good
in math... so what's the use in studying hard? Finally, lower groups may
well receive less intellectually stimulating instruction than the "able"
students, since they are not believed to be capable of higher-level
thinking... leading to less learning.
So, while adjustments for "current level of interest and performance" may
sound commendable, they are just not that likely. As we all know, inertia
is a powerful force in education. Many students are put in the low group
(track) in early elementary... and are put in the low group (track) every
succeeding year for the rest of their careers. It is an awful waste.
Something to think about,
W. Gary Martin

>I'm on your side.
PS: I didn't know this was a competition that had sides. I thought we were
all on the same side, working towards improving the education of children.

Point your RSS reader here for a feed of the latest messages in this topic.

[Privacy Policy] [Terms of Use]

© The Math Forum at NCTM 1994-2018. All Rights Reserved.