Cycle 2: The effect tracking has on building an effective classroom community.

            The idea of tracking and differentiation are hot topics in the education community. It seems like they are always hot topics, with a lot of different viewpoints, experiences, and data to support either side. I only used “tracking” in my title because there are many different forms of tracking. There is ability tracking, or tracking students based on academic ability. There is also interest tracking, where you track and group students based on their interests. I have had experience in both with math unit grouping and the idea of Authentic Enrichment Clusters (http://www.gifted.uconn.edu/sem/semart01.html). I have formed the conclusion that when implemented correctly, these can be not only a positive influence on my students’ academic progress but also on my progress on building an effective classroom community.

            In math at my school for the last two years we have implemented a math tracking system within our third grade classes. Every unit, the whole third grade takes a unit pre-test. Based on those scores we split up our students into three groups based on how well they did on that pre-test. The three groups are pacing groups, a fast, medium, and slow. We never use those terms, and the same material is taught, but at different paces. At the end of each unit, we all take the same post-test. This has been a controversial topic but I think that it all depends on how you look at it.

            Those who are opposed to ability level grouping state that there is “no group of students has been found to benefit consistently from being in a homogenous group” (Oakes, p. 5).  There has also been studies that “show that struggling students fall further behind when segregated. Teachers lower their expectations and the gulf separating the children from their peers widens” (Schumer, p. 2). These are both good points and the main things that I want to address in both of these statements are “homogenous” and “lowered expectations”.

            The one area where I think ability grouping gets a bad rap is the idea that when you group a certain group of students, they stay that way for a long time. In our math groupings, students were changing groups every four to five weeks. These groups were not homogenous but were every changing. “The purpose of grouping and regrouping is not only to give children of different skills a chance to shine but also to expose them to different ways of learning and to one another” (Schumer, p. 1). I realize that there are arguments that grouping students does not allow them to shine or do better (Oakes). But these groups did allow students who needed more time on a concept the support and help needed to achieve success. At the same time it also provided the student who knew the material already to be challenged with a quicker pace and extensions, rather than being bored with material he already knows. Throughout the year we learned that “some students would learn better if they had more time to master a skill or achieve an understanding and some students might learn better if they spent less time on a particular skill or understanding” (Tomlinson and McTighe, p. 90).This directly applies to the Multiple Intelligence Theory (http://www.pbs.org/wnet/gperf/education/ed_mi_overview.html) that students are smart in different areas.

************* Analogy that supports flexible grouping and multiple intellengeces***********

            Tiger Woods is an excellent putter of the golf ball. It’s been said that putting is his greater strength. Therefore when Tiger Woods goes to practice he does not spend a lot of time practicing putting because he is the best in the world. However, Tiger Woods is a notorious poor driver of the golf ball. Therefore, when he goes to practice he spends more time hitting his driver. When he practices like this, he is able to become a more complete and better golfer.

cool Tiger Woods commercial just for fun (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QAf0kVFNqrI)

            Just like the student who does not need a lot of time with multiplication facts, but needs more time with fractions. Flexible grouping allows the specific types of instruction and learning needed to make that student a more complete and better student.

******************************************************************************

            The other area that I would like to address is lowered expectations. The reason that these groups were so successful was that the expectations from the teacher were high regardless of the pacing group. It does not matter which group you have as a teacher, you still expect great things from your students. Just because students are tracked and grouped does not mean inequality learning. There are still high expectations from teachers, meaningful learning opportunities for students and equal exposure to the content. The only different or unequal is the pace. And just like we should differentiate and create a classroom community that meets the diverse personalities or our classrooms, we should also create a learning environment that meets the diverse learning abilities and styles of our students.

            Flexible grouping based on ability and interest should not be seen as something that takes away from an effective classroom community. When students are able to experience success and share that success with their peers, the learning community is further strengthened (http://www.alfiekohn.org/teaching/progressive.htm). When students are able to share interests and ideas with each other, the learning community is further strengthened. When this is accomplished in a classroom, students are able invest in not only their own learning but invest and care about the learning of the other students in the classroom. “If classrooms are to be places where students care about each other and are committed to each other’s academic success, a cooperative structure must exist” (Johnson and Johnson, p. 169).