Inequality within Schools: Ability Grouping and Tracking Sociology September 5,2004

How Does the Allocation System in America Work in Practice? SOCIAL ORIGINS SOCIAL DESTI- NATIONS EDUCA- TIONAL SUCCESS ? LEARNING OPPOR- TUNITIES EFFORT ACADEMIC ABILITY ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? Both Between School and Within School Differences

SOCIAL ORIGINS SOCIAL DESTI- NATIONS EDUCA- TIONAL SUCCESS ? LEARNING OPPOR- TUNITIES EFFORT ACADEMIC ABILITY ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? To what extent is grouping a source of inequality in outcomes? What are the relative importance of ability and social origins in shaping track placement? How is tracking related to students’ academic experiences? The Role of Tracking in America’s Allocation System

Grouping Practices in Schools Elementary Schools Elementary Schools –ABILITY GROUPING WITHIN CLASSES (e.g., Reading groups) –ABILITY GROUPING ACROSS CLASSES (e.g., “pullouts”) Middle Schools Middle Schools –“TRACKS” – Students grouped together in several classes across academic subjects with differing levels of academic content/rigor

Grouping Practices in Schools High School High School –COURSE TAKING PATTERNS  Different types of classes within a given subject (e.g., Honors, Advanced Placement, College Prep, Remedial, General)  Advanced Classes (e.g., Calculus, Physics, Fourth Year English, Third Year Language) that are not required  The label of “Track” is difficult to apply to the High School curriculum – students’ course taking experiences may vary across subjects (e.g., “high” in math, but “regular” or “low” English).

Rationale of Ability Grouping and Tracking Intended to address a fundamental problem of schooling: Intended to address a fundamental problem of schooling: –Students do not come to school with the same level of knowledge and/or “ability.” Key Assumption: Teachers are more effective at instructing students when the level of knowledge and/or “ability” in a class is homogeneous. Key Assumption: Teachers are more effective at instructing students when the level of knowledge and/or “ability” in a class is homogeneous.

What is Academic “Ability?” Can the student exhibit mastery over the material? Can the student exhibit mastery over the material? Ex – Can the student learn calculus? Can the student derive proofs on their own? How much time and effort is necessary for a given student to exhibit mastery over the material? How much time and effort is necessary for a given student to exhibit mastery over the material? Ex – How long does it take the student to learn calculus? How much attention from the teacher is needed to learn calculus?

Research on Academic Ability Do most students have the ability to master the K-12 curriculum? Do most students have the ability to master the K-12 curriculum? –Research says, “YES.” Do most students require the same inputs (time, effort, instruction) to learn the same material? Do most students require the same inputs (time, effort, instruction) to learn the same material? –Research says, “NO.” KEY POINT: Most students can learn the material, but the inputs required differ markedly depending on the student. KEY POINT: Most students can learn the material, but the inputs required differ markedly depending on the student.

Ability vs. Knowledge KEY DIFFERENCE KEY DIFFERENCE ABILITY – suggests a capacity for learning something. LEVEL OF KNOWLEDGE (“Achievement”) – indicates whether one has actually learned the material. ** It is possible to lack knowledge in a given area but to still possess an ability to learn it. ** It is possible to lack knowledge in a given area but to still possess an ability to learn it.

How Do Schools Assess Student “Ability?” Intelligence Tests Intelligence Tests –Have Grown Less Popular over Time –Problems:  Persistent Group Differences in Tests are Likely NOT Due to Ability; Rather they are due to constricted Opportunities and Caste Status  Group Differences in Tests Have and Could Be Deemed Discriminatory in Court  IQ tests measure something – but is it “ability?” (E.g., “The Flynn Effect”)

How Do Schools Assess Student “Ability?” Prior Test Scores, Prior Grades Prior Test Scores, Prior Grades –Most Commonly Used Indicators of Ability –Problems:  Content based assessments that are dependent on (1) prior learning opportunities (both inside and outside schools), (2) prior student effort, and (3) students’ academic ability.  Conflates the issues of how much students know with their ability to know it.

How Do Schools Assess Student “Ability?” Teacher Recommendations Teacher Recommendations –Often used alongside grades and test scores –Problems:  Teachers can be biased in their assessments (e.g., same behavior or performance may be seen differently depending on ascriptive characteristics).  Teachers may confuse “ability” with effort or help from home.

Assessing Ability Is it possible or necessary to assess student ability when organizing students for instruction? Is it possible or necessary to assess student ability when organizing students for instruction? –It is possible to assess some aspects of ability (what inputs are needed) but not all (capacity). –It is not necessary but it COULD be helpful.

Sorting by Tracks Track Placement Test Scores and/or Grades Socioeconomic Status Race/Ethnicity A Direct Effect of SES on Track Placement Remains Even after Controlling for Academic Performance All of the Race/Ethnicity Relationship and much of the SES relationship is INDIRECT

Sorting by Tracks If test scores and grades are the primary means of sorting students into tracks, can we conclude that the tracking system is meritocratic? If test scores and grades are the primary means of sorting students into tracks, can we conclude that the tracking system is meritocratic? ** Equal opportunities, but unequal outcomes  Consistent with MERITOCRATIC MODEL

Sorting by Tracks KEY PROBLEM KEY PROBLEM –Where do inequalities in prior achievement come from?  UNEQUAL OPPORTUNITIES, ABILITY, OR EFFORT? * If UNEQUAL OPPORTUNITIES are to blame, then the argument for MERITOCRATIC allocation is weakened.

Sorting by Tracks RACIAL AND SOCIOECONOMIC SEGREGATION AT THE CLASSROOM LEVEL IF WE SORT ON THE BASIS OF ACHIEVEMENT  Is this acceptable, or should we take concerns about diversity into account when sorting students?  Should we judge a sorting regime on the basis of the process, the outcomes, or a mix of both?

Sorting by Tracks What role should “choice” – students own preferences – play in assigning students to ability groups, tracks, and/or courses? What role should “choice” – students own preferences – play in assigning students to ability groups, tracks, and/or courses? Does increased choice by students have implications for inequality of opportunities (and perhaps outcomes)? Does increased choice by students have implications for inequality of opportunities (and perhaps outcomes)?

How Does Tracking Affect Learning Opportunities? CURRICULUM DIFFERENTIATION  Instructional Time – Total time, Time “on task,” homework time  Content Coverage – What is Covered? How Much is Covered?  Instructional Quality – What types of skills are developed? (Writing, Creativity, Problem solving?) More engaging pedagogy, classroom climate?  Teacher Quality – Level of experience, qualifications, teaching “in-field,” etc.

Track Mobility Can students move from one track to another? Can students move from one track to another? Yes, there is a good deal of track mobility. BUT... There is more movement downward (from higher to lower tracks) than upward.

Track Mobility “TOURNAMENT MOBILITY” in tracking: “TOURNAMENT MOBILITY” in tracking: Student compete for positions at each level: – Winners continue in their track position – Losers are eliminated from the “tournament” and do not have the opportunity to move back up

How Homogeneous are Tracks with Regard to Prior Achievement? There is a good deal of overlap in prior achievement across tracks because: There is a good deal of overlap in prior achievement across tracks because: Non-academic factors play too large a role in placing students in tracks. (E.g., Favoritism based on social class, scheduling constraints, scarce resources, etc.)

How Homogeneous are Tracks with Regard to Prior Achievement? LOWLOW HIGHHIGH TRACK MEDMED PRIOR ACHIEVE- MENT HI LOW LOWLOW MEDMED HIGHHIGH In Theory In Practice

What Effect Does Tracking Have on Student Outcomes? Achievement gains are roughly equal for students in tracked and untracked schools Achievement gains are roughly equal for students in tracked and untracked schoolsBUT The distribution of gains differs in important ways in tracked and untracked school. The distribution of gains differs in important ways in tracked and untracked school.

What Effect Does Tracking Have on Student Outcomes? LOW TIME 1 ACHIEVE- MENT HI LOW TIME 2 MED HIGH TRACKED UNTRACKED

What Effect Does Tracking Have on Student Outcomes? High achievers learn more in a tracked system than an untracked system. High achievers learn more in a tracked system than an untracked system. Middle achievers learn about the same in tracked and untracked classes. Middle achievers learn about the same in tracked and untracked classes. Low achievers learn more in an untracked system than in a tracked system. Low achievers learn more in an untracked system than in a tracked system.

Why Does Ability Grouping/Tracking Affect the Distribution of Achievement ? THREE THEORIES ABOUT THE SOURCE OF EFFECTS: THREE THEORIES ABOUT THE SOURCE OF EFFECTS: (1)Instructional (2)Social (3)Institutional

Why Does Ability Grouping/Tracking Affect the Distribution of Achievement ? INSTRUCTIONAL EFFECTS: INSTRUCTIONAL EFFECTS: –Group placements influences the quantity, quality, and pace of instruction and hence learning. ** WELL-SUPPORTED BY RESEARCH

Why Does Ability Grouping/Tracking Affect the Distribution of Achievement ? SOCIAL EFFECTS: SOCIAL EFFECTS: –Ability groups constitute social settings in which individual children evaluate their performance and internalize academic norms  Forms expectations for academic performance. ** EITHER WEAK OR NO EVIDENCE

Why Does Ability Grouping/Tracking Affect the Distribution of Achievement ? INSTITUTIONAL EFFECTS: INSTITUTIONAL EFFECTS: –Group placements symbolize certain shared understandings of the qualities and capacities of group members (independent of actual skills) and affect how teacher and parent expectations for performance. ** SOME EVIDENCE, BUT IT IS ONLY SUGGESTIVE

Student Effort and Tracking STUDENT EFFORT STUDENT EFFORT  Higher track students exert more effort than comparable students in low track classes.  Effort is a strong predictor of achievement.  Differences in effort across tracks explain only a modest portion of track differences in learning.