Detracking for Excellence and Equity

Carol Corbett Burris Corbett Burris, Delia T. Garrity

• Publisher: ASCD
• Year: 2008
• ISBN:
  9781416616634
• Topic: Education
• Subtopic: Education General

Ability grouping. Leveling systems. Streaming. This is the modern way of talking about tracking -- the traditional practice of sorting and selecting students based on test scores and other criteria, and then steering these groups into "the most appropriate" course of study.

In 1987, New York's suburban Rockville Centre School District faced the fact that its longstanding tracking system was resulting in unequal educational opportunities and allowing racial and socioeconomic stratification of its student population. School leaders embarked on an ambitious program of reform: reexamining beliefs about intelligence, ability, and instruction, and offering all students the opportunity to study a rigorous curriculum in heterogeneous classrooms.

In this book, authors Carol Corbett Burris and Delia T. Garrity, veterans of the Rockville Centre School District, offer an experience-based and research-supported argument that detracking--implemented with planning, patience, and persistence--can do in every school district what it did in theirs: raise achievement across the board and dramatically narrow the achievement gap. Their main goal is a practical one: to provide educational leaders with proven strategies for launching, sustaining, and monitoring a successful detracking reform. Here, you'll read

* Why detracking is necessary, the benefits it brings, and how to build support among teachers and parents
* How to revise curriculum to "level-up" instruction
* How to establish a multiyear, personalized professional development program to help teachers address new instructional needs
* How to best support effective teaching and learning in a heterogeneous classroom

Detracking for Excellence and Equity outlines a comprehensive approach built on self-reflection, direct action, vigilant supervision, and a set of very clear beliefs: that schools and opportunity matter; that acceleration and enrichment will improve all students' achievement; and that all students deserve access to the best curriculum.

---

Chapter 1

---

One District’s Story

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

In 1986, South Side Middle School in suburban Rockville Centre, New York, was similar to many middle schools across the United States. Formerly a junior high school, it retained a tracked structure, with levels of courses from remedial to honors. These tracked classes, stratified by ethnicity and social class, did not reflect the demographic diversity of the school’s student population. Upper middle class white students comprised the majority of students in high-track classes; ethnic minority students were, for the most part, in the low-track classes or in self-contained special education classes. There were five tracks in English and three each in social studies, science, and mathematics. Foreign language classes were not tracked, but taking a foreign language was reserved for the school’s highest-achieving students, eliminating the need for a “lower” level of study for students who did not excel.

South Side Middle School’s tracking system was particularly rigid in mathematics, with students carefully assigned to courses based on standardized test scores, grades, and teacher recommendations. Incoming 6th grade students needed to meet strict standards to qualify for a seat in one of the two sections of accelerated mathematics, the course of study that would lead to taking calculus in the senior year of high school. Even then, only the “Top 50” qualifying 6th graders were accepted, meaning that the “cut line” for admission to accelerated mathematics varied from year to year.

Tracking continued when students matriculated to South Side High School, which had a minimum of three tracks in addition to self-contained special education classes and an array of remedial and technology class electives. General education students were directed to “non-Regents” courses with unchallenging curricula. Other students were channeled into “Regents classes,” the college prep course of study necessary to earn the New York State Regents diploma. Still others were selected for the “Regents with honors” track, taking rigorous honors classes that prepared them for Advanced Placement and International Baccalaureate (IB) courses in their senior year. Students’ high school track assignment was determined almost exclusively by their middle school track placement. More often than not, well-meaning teachers recommended “borderline” students to a lower track rather than have them risk failure in a more rigorous curriculum. This practice not only prevented most students from attempting the top-tier IB diploma but also kept many students from pursuing the New York State Regents diploma designed to prepare them for college.

As was the case in the middle school, the demographics of each of the high school’s tracked classes did not reflect the rich diversity of the student body in both family income and race. Although 9 percent of South Side High School’s students were African American and 12 percent were Latino, 97 percent of the students in the highest track were white or Asian American students. And although the percentage of students who were eligible to receive free or reduced-price lunch ranged each year from 11 to 14 percent, it was unusual to find students from poor households in high-track classes.

Minority students and low-socioeconomic-status (SES) students were overrepresented in the lowest tracks, however. In addition, tensions existed between minority and majority students in the low-track classes, and the classroom focus was on discipline rather than academics. Learning outcomes reflected this inequity of opportunity. There were wide achievement gaps between the tracks that remedial and self-contained classes were never able to close. The more the curriculum was “slowed down,” the wider the learning gap between high-track students and low-track students became.

In 1987, it became apparent to William H. Johnson, the new superintendent of schools, that tracking was contributing to the gap in achievement, and that the middle school was the critical point at which academic sorting began. Superintendent Johnson carefully examined the achievement data for each of the middle school’s demographic groups and noticed how the school was divided into the academic “haves” and “have-nots.” This academic division closely mirrored the economic division in the district: students from wealthy homes were, for the most part, highly successful; students from homes with fewer financial resources were not doing as well; and students of color and poverty were meeting with little or no success in school.

Superintendent Johnson considered the divide to be unacceptable. Recognizing that low-track classes with low expectations were a major cause of the problem, he decided to do away with low-track classes. In 1989, the district’s middle school English and social studies teachers started by redesigning the curriculum for grades 6–8 to follow an honors curriculum model. A few years later, in 1993, the superintendent set a clear, measurable goal: By the year 2000, 75 percent of all South Side High School students would earn a Regents diploma.

At that time, the district’s Regents diploma rate—the number of students graduating with at least a Regents diploma—was 58 percent. To reach the 75-percent goal, the high school would need to give each student access to more challenging academic classes. The low-track, non-Regents courses would need to be eliminated. The effort to achieve this goal would need to span the grades from kindergarten through grade 12.

Detracking the Elementary Gifted Program

The five elementary schools in the district presented the first obstacle to detracking. Although there was no formal tracking system in place at that level, the gifted and talented program, which began in grade 4, tacitly fed the middle school honors track in academic subjects. The program had powerful parent advocates who lobbied for accelerated curricula and enrichment for their high-achieving students. The challenge for the district, then, was to ensure that gifted students had their needs met, while at the same time providing greater access for all students to the most challenging curricula of the middle and high school.

The solution was to transform the elementary gifted program from an exclusive program that served a few students to an inclusive program that identified and nurtured the gifts and talents of all students. Over a four-year period, the exclusive gifted and talented program was phased out as its curriculum was blended into each elementary classroom using a new districtwide enrichment program known as STELLAR, which stands for “Success in Technology, Enrichment, Library, Literacy, and Research.” Staffing at each elementary building included (and still includes) a STELLAR teacher to support classroom teachers by enriching the grade-level curriculum.

Detracking the Middle School

As the transition in gifted education was taking place, administrators and teachers carefully dismantled the remnants of the middle school tracking system. The redesigned, detracked English and social studies program were operating well, with additional support classes set up in reading and writing to help students who struggled. The mathematics and science departments were more resistant to detracking, and in these subjects multiple tracks remained.

In 1990, middle-school tracking in mathematics and science decreased from three tracks to two, but there was still work to be done. South Side High School’s principal, Robin Calitri, asked for the middle school’s cooperation in preparing more students for the advanced mathematics and science courses required to achieve a Regents diploma. He was also interested in expanding the high school’s International Baccalaureate program and increasing enrollment in Advanced Placement calculus courses. For this to happen, more 8th grade students would need to take the accelerated mathematics course called Sequential I Mathematics, then generally reserved for gifted 8th grade students statewide and, at South Side Middle School, restricted to the Top 50 qualifiers. Sequential I Mathematics culminated with a New York State Regents exam to measure student achievement. As expected, the middle school’s restrictive enrollment policy translated into very high scores. Students’ median score on the 8th grade Sequential I Mathematics Regents exam was 95 percent.

Principal Calitri found an ally in South Side Middle School’s principal, Larry Vandewater, who readily agreed that more students should be allowed to take Sequential I Mathematics. He disagreed with the “limited seat” approach supported by the middle and high school mathematics departments and used the high school principal’s request as well as Regents examination data as the rationale to open opportunity for more students.

Over the course of a few years, South Side Middle School revised its course assignment policy to remove restricted enrollment standards and allow students and parents to decide whether students would accelerate in mathematics. This paralleled the high school’s movement toward open enrollment in honors and IB classes and the elimination of all low-track, non-Regents courses. Superintendent Johnson referred to the process as leveling up and strongly encouraged students to take the schools’ most challenging courses. From 1992 until 1995, the number of middle school students opting to accelerate in mathematics grew from one-third to nearly one-half of the class. Yet the median score for 8th grade accelerated students on the Sequential I Regents exam remained high at 94 percent.

Although acceleration was now theoretically available to all students, in practice, white, African American, Asian, and Latino students were not choosing to accelerate at the same rates.^* For example, during the 1996–1997 school year, only 11 percent of African American students and 15 percent of Latino students were accelerated in 8th grade mathematics, while the overall acceleration rate of white and Asian students was 50 percent. With the district’s upper middle class students choosing to accelerate, the nonaccelerated pre-algebra 8th grade mathematics classes began to assume the characteristics of low-track classes documented in the literature on tracking (see Lucas, 1999; Oakes, 2005; Slavin & Braddock, 1993; Vanfossen, Jones, & Spade, 1987). Not only were minority students overrepresented in the less demanding classes, failure rates in those classes were higher, and student motivation was lower.

The middle school assistant principal who supervised mathematics, coauthor Delia Garrity, studied the results of international reports such as the Third International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS), which demonstrated a connection between the underperformance of U.S. students and the repetitive and unchallenging math curricula of grades 6–8. She had observed that student performance had not decreased on the New York State Regents examination, even after the school had allowed more students to accelerate. She shared her findings with her colleagues, and school leaders began to consider a key question: If nearly half of all middle school students could successfully study accelerated math, why couldn’t all students do so?

Based on the positive data from previous detracking efforts, the results of international studies, and the belief that all middle school students would benefit from instruction in high-level, heterogeneously grouped classes, the district developed a multiyear plan to eliminate all tracking in mathematics. After a careful review of the mathematics curriculum, teachers came to the conclusion that eliminating topic repetition would make it possible to compact the curricula of grades 6–8 into grades 6 and 7, teach the Sequential I Mathematics curriculum in grade 8, and accelerate all students in mathematics. Some teachers wanted the revised curriculum to begin in the elementary schools, which would have postponed acceleration at the middle school level for several years, but the middle school leadership team and the superintendent believed the delay was not necessary; thus, implementation began, despite teacher reservations, with the incoming 6th grade class of 1995. In June 1998, the first cohort of detracked, accelerated students took the New York State Sequential I Mathematics Regents examination in grade 8. The passing rate on the exam proved to be higher than passing rates obtained when students took the course in tracked middle and high school classes. Over 84 percent of the students passed the exam, and 52 percent attained mastery level (a score of 85 percent or above). That passing rate on the exam continued to improve in the two subsequent years.

Detracking the High School

As the middle school implemented detracking practices, the number of tracks in the high school decreased from three to two with the elimination of low-track, non-Regents classes. The first cohort of detracked students entered South Side High School in 1998 and chose either the Regents- or honors-level course of study in mathematics. Their middle school experience in detracked, accelerated math classes generated achievement benefits throughout their four years of high school (Burris, Heubert, & Levin, 2006). Over 50 percent of students went on to take an Advanced Placement calculus course in their senior year, and nearly all students passed the state examination in advanced algebra and trigonometry (the Sequential III Mathematics Regents examination) prior to graduation. Although the achievement gap in mathematics did not close, it narrowed dramatically. During the first three years following mathematics detracking, the percentage of minority students who passed the Sequential III Mathematics Regents exam increased from 46 percent to 67 percent.

Detracking did not end with mathematics in the middle school. After a review of the 9th grade English and social studies Regents and honors curricula, high school teacher leaders and administrators agreed to detrack 9th grade English and social studies classes beginning in September 1998. An “honors by application” process was retained to challenge high achievers during the first year, and in the second year of implementation (1999–2000), all students studied the former honors curriculum. Teachers noticed the improvement in performance of the students who would have taken the lower-track class. In addition, the heterogeneously grouped classes had fewer behavior problems than the former low-track classes and exhibited an academic tone similar to the former honors classes. Higher achievers were still challenged, and final examination results were good. In fact, the passing rates on the final examinations in English and social studies improved, even though the challenge level of the exams was similar to the former “honors” exams.

In 2000, New York unveiled new statewide curriculum standards for biology. South Side High School, needing to revise its biology curriculum to focus on these standards, took the opportunity to create one appropriate for a detracked, heterogeneous population. (The middle school had successfully detracked science, its last tracked subject, two years earlier.) Superintendent Johnson and the Board of Education approved the change to a single biology course, The Living Environment, for grade 9. At that point, mathematics was the only 9th grade subject that maintained two levels; the next year, the high school modified the already accelerated mathematics curriculum, begun in grade 8 and completed in grade 9, from a two-track course to one, heterogeneously grouped course titled Mathematics A. This course typically begins in grades 9 or 10 for most students in other New York state high schools.

Grade 10 was the next step in the detracking process. After discussion with school leaders and faculty, it was proposed that in September 2003, all 10th graders would take the same pre-IB English and social studies classes. Despite ample notice and data from the Sequential I Mathematics and Living Environment Regents exams demonstrating the success of detracking, some parents were furious. The principal and teachers carefully explained their rationale in public forums. Doubts remained for some, but the courses went forward and were highly successful. The passing rates in each course increased, teachers reported enjoying the academic tone of the classes, and parents, including many who had opposed the change, provided positive feedback. Perhaps most significantly, the number of minority students who elected to take IB English and history in 11th grade increased from 30 percent to 50 percent.

In September 2005, the high school detracked Mathematics B, an advanced, accelerated course. In 2006, it detracked chemistry. Each time a course was detracked, there was resistance from some parents. However, student achievement in these classes always increased by the end of the first year. For example, when Mathematics B classes detracked, the 10th grade passing rate on the Mathematics B Regents exam increased from 70 percent to 85 percent. This was a remarkable achievement, given that the State of New York considers Mathematics B to be an advanced mathematics course, and that most students who take the exam take it in grade 11.

Superintendent Johnson exceeded his goal for an increase in Regents diplomas. As a result of detracking, by 2000, the Regents diploma rate at South Side High School was 84 percent, and it continued to rise in the years that followed. By 2005, it reached 97 percent. The achievement gap began closing as well. The overall rate of Regents diplomas had masked a considerable achievement gap between the district’s majority and minority students. In 2000, only 32 percent of South Side High School’s minority students achieved a Regents diploma; by 2005, that rate jumped to 92 percent. Detracking also benefited students with learning disabilities. From 2000 to 2005, the percent of special education students graduating with a Regents diploma increased dramatically, from 26 percent to 76 percent.

The effects of detracking went beyond the attainment of Regents diplomas. As detracking progressed, enrollment in the high school’s IB program soared; over 80 percent of all members of the graduating class of 2007 took at least one IB course, and one-third of this graduating class earned the International Baccalaureate diploma. Ten years prior, in 1997, less than 30 percent of all graduates took at least one IB course, and just 6 percent of the class earned the IB diploma. Once the high school detracked, minority students’ participation in the IB program increased dramatically as well. In 1999, only 6 percent of the school’s minority students chose to pursue the rigorous IB course of study; in 2006, more than one-third of the school’s minority students were IB diploma candidates.

Despite the expanded enrollment and greater heterogeneity of IB classes, South Side High school’s IB examination scores have remained strong. The rate of students earning the highest scores on IB exams (6 and 7) has remained stable too, supporting the conclusion that greater heterogeneity does not necessarily result in a reduction of rigor, and that excellence need not come at the expense of equity (Burris, Welner, Wiley, & Murphy, 2007).

Examining the Detracking Reform

This chapter has presented an overview of what occurred as an integrated, suburban school district detracked. When tracks were dismantled, student achievement improved across the board, and the gaps between majority and minority students began to close. We share the story to demonstrate that detracking is not only possible, but can be clearly beneficial, especially for students who were underserved in low-track classes. The important message for educators, however, is found in both the results and the process of change.

As many who have attempted detracking know, it is far more than a mechanical process of dismantling low-track classes. It is a complex reform that requires educators, along with various members of the communities they serve, to examine and challenge their beliefs about intelligence, ability, and instruction. It takes political acumen, intense planning, and strong leadership. Those who attempt to detrack their schools encounter stiff resistance from groups who have a vested interest in the status quo and believe that their students or their children will be hurt by detracking (Oakes, 2005). Detracking requires teachers to examine their practices, learn new techniques, and change how they teach as the range of achievement levels in their classes widens. To sustain detracking reforms, educators must keep objective measures of students’ learning and clearly communicate results with the community. And detracking requires a sense of mission grounded in the belief that public schools are democratic institutions dedicated to the success of all students, not just the academic elite.

Schools all over the United States are struggling to meet the mandates of the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act, which requires that all students meet high learning standards and that the gaps in achievement between racial and ethnic groups disappear. Although there is much to criticize about the mandate, it has f...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Table of Contents
• Foreword by Jeannie Oakes and Martin Lipton
• Introduction
• Chapter 1. One District’s Story
• Chapter 2. What Tracking Is and How to Start Dismantling It
• Chapter 3. The Curriculum Process for Leveling-Up Instruction
• Chapter 4. The Politics of Detracking
• Chapter 5. Professional Development for Equitable Practices
• Chapter 6. Teaching and Learning in the Heterogeneous Classroom
• Chapter 7. Maintaining the Reform and Pushing Forward
• Chapter 8. The Essentials for Excellence with Equity
• Appendix A. Growth Portfolio Model for Student Self-Reflection
• Appendix B. Rubric for Differentiation
• References
• About the Authors
• Related ASCD Resources
• Study Guide
• Copyright