THEORY INTO PRACTICE, 45(1), 4–14

Beth C. Rubin Tracking and Detracking: Debates,Evidence, and Best Practices for a Heterogeneous World

Although debate over tracking continues, many that best support learning in heterogeneous and districts have attempted various de- settings. tracking reforms. Detracking efforts vary greatly in method and scope. Assessments of detracking are widely divergent as well, making it difficult to gauge the effectiveness of the reform. Evidence suggests that when implemented well, detracking RACKING, THE SORTING AND GROUPING of opens new academic opportunities for students. Tstudents for instruction based on an assess- Additionally, as difference and equity are, argu- ment of academic ability, is a long-standing orga- ably, issues in all classrooms, detracking best nizational practice of schooling in the United practices are potentially helpful for and States. Tracking has frequently been critiqued as students in tracked and detracked settings. This providing inadequate and inequitable education to article provides an overview of (a) the debate over students in lower ability tracks, for separating stu- tracking, (b) various attempts at de- dents along race and class lines, and for perpetuat- tracking, and (c) best practices in detracked class- ing unequal access to a college-bound curriculum. rooms and schools, highlighting instructional pra- Detracking, a reform in which students are placed ctices, institutional structures, and belief changes intentionally in mixed-ability heterogeneous classes, is an attempt to remedy the negative ef- fects of tracking. The debate over the implications Beth C. Rubin is an Assistant Professor in the Graduate of each of these forms of school organization is School of Education at Rutgers, The State University of ongoing, arousing great interest and fervor in edu- New Jersey. Correspondence should be addressed to Beth C. Ru- cators and noneducators alike. bin, Graduate School of Education, 10 Seminary Place, In this overview, I discuss tracking and the cri- Rutgers,TheStateUniversityofNewJersey,NewBruns- tiques that have been leveled against the practice wick, NJ 08901. E-mail: [email protected] and describe various forms of detracking that have

4 Rubin Tracking and Detracking: Debates, Evidence, and Best Practices for a Heterogeneous World emergedinthepast20yearsinresponsetothesecri- grouping even when it is done in a covert manner tiques. Also, I sort through the numerous studies of (Oakes, 1985; Wheelock, 1992). detracking in practice to outline promising teach- Many researchers argue that the practice of ing practices for detracked classrooms and institu- tracking is inherently unfair and that it plays a cru- tional reforms that support detracking, many of cial role in the creation of inequalities within our which are described more fully in this issue. The society (Goodlad & Oakes, 1988; Mehan, 1992; most powerful examples of detracking occur in Meehan et al., 1994; Oakes, 1986, 1992; Slavin, schools where changes in instruction, institutional 1991, 1995). Critics argue that tracking serves as a structures,andbeliefsoccursimultaneouslytosup- device for sorting students by race and class. port the academic success of all students in newly Moreover, many researchers claim that students in challenging and stimulating settings. different tracks do not receive the same quality of Research on detracking and heterogeneous education (Oakes, 1985; Page, 1987). These crit- grouping has relevance beyond detracked settings. ics hold that curriculum, teaching, and social in- Most classes, even those in which students are teractions in the classroom are all affected by grouped by various indicators, are heterogeneous tracking, to the detriment of students in the lower in that they are composed of individuals with vary- track. The consequence, these researchers argue, ing interests, attitudes, talents, and backgrounds. is a system that is demoralizing and demotivating No matter one’s stance amid the political debates for the children, usually poor and of color, who over detracking, detracking best practices have end up in the lowest tracks (Murphy & Hallinger, broad applicability as they are designed to support 1989; Oakes, Gamoran, & Page, 1992). student learning in heterogeneous settings. Indeed, the correspondence between school tracking and structural inequalities found in the larger society has been well documented. African American, Latino, and low-income children of all Tracking and Its Critics ethnicities are overrepresented in low tracks and vocational programs (Oakes, 1992). In integrated Tracks and ability groups, along with age-level schools, tracking often resegregates students by grades, are among the predominant organizing race, and tracking has been legally challenged as practices of U.S. public schools (Wheelock, amounting to de facto segregation (Welner & 1992). Not all students are in tracked classes for Oakes, 1996). Tracking can be seen as a vital part the entire school day, but as students move on of how schools reproduce inequality, a structural through school they usually encounter an increas- arrangement through which individuals come to ingly rigid ability-driven structure (Oakes, 1985; accept their own socioeconomic positions as inev- Wheelock, 1992). Proponents of tracking argue itable and natural. that ability-driven tracks make it easier for teach- Although curricular tracking was originally de- ers to target instruction appropriately for varying veloped to provide a more tailored educational ex- student needs (Hallinan, 1994). perience for the benefit of all students, the nega- Tracking occurs in a variety of forms within in- tive impact of tracking on students who are dividual schools. It may be overt, with counselors grouped low is clear from a variety of empirical working at times in consultation with students to studies over several decades. In several studies, choose a particular class belonging to a certain Hallinan (Hallinan & Kubitschek, 1999; Sørensen track. It may be automatic, with test scores from & Hallinan, 1986) found that students assigned to junior high automatically determining a student’s low-ability groups scored lower on standardized high school track. It may be covert, with grouping tests than if they had been placed in mixed or done by and counselor recommendation high-ability groups. Braddock and Dawkins and no sign in the master schedule to indicate that (1993) analyzed National Education Longitudinal one section of a particular class is any different Study (NELS) data and found that students in from another. Students are often aware of ability lower tracks moved more slowly through the cur-

5 Detracking and Heterogeneous Grouping riculum and did worse in school. Gamoran (1987) Council for Adolescent Development, the College found that the achievement gap between low- and Board, The National Education Association, the high-track students was larger than the gap be- National Council of Teachers of English, the Cali- tween students who leave high school without fornia Department of Education, the Massachu- graduating and high school graduates. He also setts State Legislature, and others (Welner & found that low-income students and students of Oakes, 1996). This led to a proliferation of color were disproportionately represented in low- detracking reforms, many of which are discussed er tracks. in the following section. Recent research, most notably in the United Kingdom and the Netherlands, extends these find- ings. Wiliam and Bartholomew (2004) concluded Implementing Detracking that in the United Kingdom, one’s track (or set) was more consequential for academic progress As noted earlier, in the last 20 years many edu- than the school one attended. Researchers in the cational researchers have critiqued tracking and Netherlands found that students in homogeneous other forms of ability grouping as an inequitable clusters became more interested in the academic educational practice, unsuccessful at meeting the performance of their same-track peers, with a neg- purported aim of improved academic achievement ative effect on low achievers, and students in for all students. This condemnation of tracking mixed-ability groupings were less vulnerable to has given rise to a variety of attempts at de- this reference process (Meijnen & Guldemond, tracking, the dismantling of ability-driven group- 2002). ing practices. Although there is considerable vari- Other researchers argue that tracking affects all ation in how it has been carried out, detracking students negatively, regardless of track. Boaler, generally entails an attempt to group students het- Wiliam, and Brown (2000) concluded that stu- erogeneously as a means of ensuring that all stu- dents in setted (tracked) math classes in the United dents, regardless of their race or class background Kingdom experienced a curriculum polarization or their academic ability, have access to high-qual- where high-tracked students were forced to move ity curriculum, teachers, and material resources. too rapidly through course material and low- Some of these variations on detracking are ex- tracked students experienced restrictions in their plored more fully later in this issue. opportunities to learn. This was disadvantageous Detracking efforts have frequently generated to both groups, and students in both tracks re- controversy and, in some communities, concerted ported dissatisfaction with their placement. opposition. Those most likely to oppose these ef- Stearns (2004) concluded, based on her analysis forts are the parents of children who previously of NELS data, that schools with a high degree of had been placed in the higher tracks, and fear that tracking differentiation had a lower degree of in- efforts to promote detracking will result in low- terracial friendliness.InOff Track, a video pro- ered academic standards. With political and eco- duced by Fine, Anand, Jordan, and Sherman nomic resources on their side, such parents have (1998), students and teachers in a detracked world succeeded in blocking detracking efforts in some literature class argue that high-track students lose schools and communities (Oakes, Quartz, Ryan, out on diverse perspectives when they are tracked & Lipton, 2000; Wells & Serna, 1996; Welner, because tracking segregates students by race and 2001). In other communities, opponents of track- class. ing have squared off with its defenders in drawn- In the late 1980s and 1990s opposition to track- out conflicts that have involved legal challenges, ing moved beyond the academic community and, the use of local referendums, and even street pro- in some places, became policy. During this time tests (Oakes, Wells, Jones, & Datnow, 1997). period, tracking was formally condemned by the Despite the controversy, variations of de- National Governors Association, the Carnegie tracking have been implemented in many schools

6 Rubin Tracking and Detracking: Debates, Evidence, and Best Practices for a Heterogeneous World and, in some cases, entire school districts. Schools Mehan, Hubbard, & Villanueva, 1994; and school districts have taken widely divergent Rothenberg, McDermott, & Martin, 1998). approaches to detracking. On one end of the spec- The broad range of reforms falling under the trum are deep restructuring efforts, such as the heading of detracking creates a conundrum for complete elimination of ability grouping in all judging its success; it is difficult to make an over- subject areas throughout an entire school district. arching assessment of a reform that has been im- On the other end are changes that do not directly plemented in such a wide variety of ways (see Ru- affect a school’s track structure, such as providing bin & Noguera, 2004, for a more in-depth more access to high-track classes for students for- summary of research on the effectiveness of de- merly in lower tracks. tracking). Although researchers claim positive, There are a number of large-scale examples of negative, and mixed effects of detracking on stu- detracking. Grossman and Ancess (2004) de- dents’ school performance, my review of the liter- scribed a suburban school district in the Northeast ature and my work in detracking schools leads me that detracked math from elementary school to conclude that the most successful instances of through the end of high school. Oxley (1994) de- detracking combine deep structural reform with scribed the reorganization of several high schools thoughtful pedagogical change, and are under- into smaller, detracked subunits. At Southside girded by an engagement with students’and teach- High School in Rockville Centre, New York, de- ers’ beliefs around notions of ability and achieve- tracking reform began in English and social stud- ment. When these facets converge, the positive ies, then continued into science and finally to math results for students are startling. classrooms (Garrity, 2004; “Tracking Trounces Test Scores,” 2004; Welner & Burris, this issue). In this school, after detracking in all subjects, 71% Detracking Institutions, Instruction, of low-income students passed the state’s Regents and Beliefs: Best Practices exam, and the Regents diploma rate rose to from for a Heterogeneous World 58% to 96%. Welner and Burris (this issue) and Alvarez and Mehan (this issue) describe highly A review of the detracking literature reveals a successful school-wide detracking efforts. number of best practices that can be of use to edu- Other efforts are on a smaller scale. Some are cators working in a variety of settings. As previ- limited to particular subject areas, frequently lan- ously noted, the most powerful reforms engage on guage arts and social studies in a cored structure; several levels at once: grappling with teacher, stu- others implement detracking at a specific grade dent, and community beliefs; reshaping instruc- level or one subject at a particular grade level. At tional practices; and reforming school structures. some schools, detracking is in the hands of the This section explores best practices in each of students, who are allowed to self-select into these three areas, noting when they overlap. higher levels if they choose to do so. In other schools, students are chosen to take part in col- Best Practices for Engaging With Beliefs lege preparatory courses, and given academic and social support to help them succeed. Such Underlying belief systems of teachers, stu- reforms provide a detracked experience or dents, and communities come into play in de- greater access to previously exclusive courses for tracking schools and classrooms. In a detracked some students, while maintaining a track struc- ninth-grade program at a diverse urban school, for ture in the rest of the school. A number of recent example, conflict between teachers’ and students’ studies have found positive results for this sort of underlying beliefs about difference and the social detracking and the heterogeneous grouping that world of the school interfered with successful de- it creates (Cooper, 1996; Klingner, Vaughn, & tracking (Rubin, 2003b). Indeed, teachers’ beliefs Schumm, 1998; Mehan & Hubbard, 1999; about ability appear to deeply affect the enactment

7 Detracking and Heterogeneous Grouping of detracking (Rubin, 2005). Students’ beliefs described later, and in more detail in the individual about their own abilities and their emerging identi- articles in this issue. ties amid the social world of the school complicate On a community level, researchers report that the notion of student choice as a mechanism for underlying discourses of race and ability enter into detracking (Yonezawa, Wells, & Serna, 2002). schools’ struggles with detracking, leading many Community-wide beliefs about race and ability parents with resources to oppose the reform. can also inhibit detracking reform (Oakes et al., Welner and Burris (this issue) describe how school 1997; Wells & Serna, 1996). Engaging with leaders and teachers used clear explanations and teacher, student, and community beliefs is a fun- hard data to convince stakeholders of the value of damental part of successful detracking work. detracking, despite initial resistance by some Yonezawa and Jones (this issue) focus on stu- members of the community. This strategy shifted dents’ perspectives on detracking reform, arguing underlying beliefs about students’ potential and that many students are concerned about inequita- the need for tracking. Belief change and student ble education across tracks and want to see achievement gains were linked in this instance, in- changes in grouping practices, but are concerned dicating their interwoven presence in effective de- that teachers need to be retrained for such tracking reform. changes to be effective. Watanabe (this issue) and Lotan (this issue) pick up where Yonezawa and Jones leave off, describing effective ways to Instructional Best Practices retrain teachers in this vein. Watanabe explores teacher inquiry groups as a means of helping Freedman, Delp, and Crawford (2005) noted practicing teachers wrestle with the preconcep- that effective teaching in detracked classrooms is tions about ability and difference that they bring less about using particular activity systems such as to a newly detracked setting. Such groups, she small group work, and more about building from argues, encourage teachers to examine and chal- an underlying set of principles. These include: (a) lenge underlying beliefs to arrive at more equita- building a learning community that respects and ble classroom practice. Lotan reaches back fur- makes productive use of diverse contributions ther, describing how preservice teachers can be from varied learners; (b) providing opportunities trained in ways that broaden their thinking about for diverse ways of learning; (c) providing support the capacities of their students and provide them to individuals as needed; (d) challenging all stu- with concrete guidance for teaching in heteroge- dents; (e) keeping learners actively involved; (f) neous settings. building a year-long curriculum, which promotes In the classroom, the most effective strategies the recycling of structures and ideas, with room for detracking encourage and incorporate student for ever deepening levels of complexity; and (g) and teacher redefinitions of underlying beliefs considering learners to be in control of their learn- about ability. For example, Herrenkohl (this issue) ing and building structures that support them in describes intellectual role taking, an instructional challenging themselves. practice that encourages students to expand their The detracking literature is filled with exam- own views of themselves as learners, helping them ples of instructional or classroom-based best prac- to take on roles within the classroom that entail tices that echo this framework. These include em- higher order thinking and academic engagement. ploying curricula and pedagogies with multiple Cone’s (this issue) first-person case study of a points of entry that are challenging, relevant, and detracked ninth-grade English class demonstrates engaging; building a classroom community that how students’ apprenticeship into the academic includes all learners; and incorporating targeted and social discourses of high school English is and effective support for students. As noted previ- fundamental to their success in the detracked set- ously, many of these practices help students to re- ting. Other instructional practices in this vein are define their own capacities, shifting their sense of

8 Rubin Tracking and Detracking: Debates, Evidence, and Best Practices for a Heterogeneous World themselves as students so they can take advantage dents’ strengths (Ladson-Billings, 1995). In of a newly challenging curriculum. detracked classrooms, Rubin and Noguera (2004) noticed that when students’ knowledge and skills were drawn on, previously quiet and disengaged Curriculum and pedagogy for detracking: Ac- students became active participants. cess, interest, challenge, relevance. Many con- A flexible approach to grouping often seems tributors to this issue note that a curriculum that to be part of successful detracking efforts. provides multiple entry points and is accessible to Tomlinson (2001) recommended an approach in students working at a variety of levels is essential which grouping is frequently reconfigured based for detracking. In math this might take the form of on content, project, and ongoing evaluation. Pe- group-worthy problems that allow learners to terson (1998–1999) used constantly shifting work together on problems that teach fundamental groups in his English class, based on a variety of mathematical principles (Boaler, this issue; Horn, aspects, including student interest, reading skills, this issue). In English this could entail a careful and background knowledge. In shifting students’ mix of texts and assignments to enfranchise and reading groups every 2 weeks, with a different apprentice all students as readers and writers. Ru- novel for each group, he created an element of bin (2005) described a ninth-grade social studies self-selection by interest. Flexible grouping al- classroom in which the teacher spiraled through a lows students to get to know all of their class- variety of projects with her global studies stu- mates, fosters the sense that ability is not fixed dents—travel journals, maps, research papers, and given, and allows the teacher to target in- PowerPoint presentations—allowing all of the struction more effectively. students in her class to excel at various points, and Building students’ skills of analysis and cri- expanding their range of skills. These are activi- tique is another detracking best practice. In the ties that every student in the class can participate Advancement Via Individual Determination in at his or her own level of expertise, showcasing (AVID) program, lower achieving students of and engaging a multiplicity of skills, talents, and color enrolled in college preparatory courses and learning styles. in a support class that developed their academic Students in detracked settings appear to benefit skills and helped them to foster an academic iden- from a curriculum that is enticing, open to their in- tity. This support class was a place where students terests, and varied in approach. Tomlinson (2003) developed their critiques of the school’s (and of suggested that a coherent, important, and inviting society’s) opportunity structure and learned how curriculum is the first step in reaching all learners to participate effectively in that structure (Mehan in a heterogeneous classroom. In his detracked et al., 1994). Morrell and Collatos (2003) de- English classroom, for example, Peterson scribed similar effects in a support program for (1998–1999) used a structured project approach, students of color in a high-ranking California high in which students created magazine-sized book- school. In their description of a heterogeneous lets following a prescribed outline. In this class, small learning community, Keiser and Stein students also participated in role plays, wrote po- (2003) explored how teaching students the skills etry, and showed their learning in multiple ways. of critique and democratic participation empow- Freedman et al. (2005) described the multimodal ered students of color in this integrated setting. In approach taken in a detracked middle school Eng- this issue, Cone, Boaler, Horn, Herrenkohl, and lish classroom, integrating drawing, music, and Hyland all describe innovative pedagogies to build dance into the curriculum. Related to this is the students’ analytical capacities that are specific to use of culturally relevant pedagogy—building on particular content areas. Such strategies play the students’ own interests and knowledge, incorpo- dual role of cultivating higher order thinking skills rating students’ real-life experiences into the cur- and making the curriculum more dynamic, inter- riculum, and using activities that showcase stu- esting, and meaningful for students.

9 Detracking and Heterogeneous Grouping

Community building for detracking. Many heterogeneously grouped classes of students with detracking researchers note that curriculum and and without learning disabilities. pedagogy do not take place in a vacuum. De- The structure of the curriculum itself can pro- tracking must be accompanied by a community- vide support for students. Freedman et al. (2005) building effort that makes the heterogeneous and Horn (this issue) describe curricula in English classroom a safe and supportive place for all stu- and math that recycle or loop key ideas to provide dents. Such efforts frequently overlap with curric- students with multiple opportunities to learn im- ular and pedagogical best practices, as in the portant concepts at varying levels of complexity. mathematics classrooms of Railside High School, Providing individualized support for students where the curriculum necessitated students’ mu- within the context of the detracked classroom tual academic support of one another, resulting in through such activities as reading journals and tar- a deepened sense of community across differences geted assignments appears effective as well. Insti- (Boaler, this issue). Cone (this issue) established tutional support for students is described next. mutual respect and a community feel through the sharing of autobiographical statements at the be- Institutional Best Practices ginning of the school year and the incorporation of reading groups into her curriculum. Freedman et Reforming institutional structures to better al. (2005) described how a teacher began the year meet student needs is critical to the success of with a consideration and adoption of a common detracking efforts. Institutional reforms include moral and ethical code based on the values of dig- the creation of supplemental support classes to as- nity, respect, and integrity. These values became a sist students who are struggling in one or more community reference point and part of the actual subject areas, meaningful support for teachers curriculum, integrated into the students’ study of striving to implement detracking reform, and literature. Addressing the social and community whole-school and district changes that create dimensions of detracking is essential for avoiding deeper roots for classroom-level detracking the refragmentation of the class into within-class reform. tracks based on ethnicity or perceived ability that The level of academic work in the detracked can impede the academic progress of students in classroom can present a challenge to students who detracked settings. are less adept at various tasks than their peers. Support classes, sometimes referred to as backup classes, can provide the essential bridge between struggling students and the new opportunities Academic support for detracking. The suc- available to them in detracked settings. Such cess of detracking efforts, particularly for students classes should be designed to help students catch who were previously tracked low, hinges on stu- up on skills and concepts they may have missed dents’ access to meaningful academic support. along the way, and to support them in completing Such support must be built into the detracked their daily work in the detracked class. At a pre- classroom itself, as well as into the structure of the dominantly affluent suburban high school, stu- school day (as described in the next section). dents enrolled in a structured support class were Within the detracked classroom itself, several spe- better able to meet the challenges of their cific scaffolding strategies have proven success- detracked English and social studies classes than ful. Klingner, Vaughn, and Schumm (1998) found students without such support. These students ap- that teaching students reading comprehension proached their detracked classes with greater con- strategies and having them apply these strategies fidence because they knew they would receive to social studies textbooks in heterogeneous stu- time and assistance to complete reading and writ- dent-led groups resulted in an improvement in per- ing assignments in another setting (Rubin, 2003a). formance on assessments. Horton and Lovitt Similar findings have been generated from re- (1989) found that study guides helped students in search on programs aimed at bringing low-income

10 Rubin Tracking and Detracking: Debates, Evidence, and Best Practices for a Heterogeneous World students of color, formerly tracked low, into hon- and encouraging environment that produces suc- ors and advanced placement courses by providing cess in a detracked context for previously them with complementary support (Mehan, Hub- underserved students. District-wide reforms are bard, Villanueva, & Lintz, 1996). At Southside particularly useful in helping to get at the root High School, students are enrolled in small sup- causes of students’ low performance in certain ar- port classes in English, mathematics, and science, eas. In Rockville Centre, troubled by students’dif- taught by subject area teachers. ficulties in high-level mathematics and science Teachers need time and resources to accom- courses, district administrators decided to begin plish the sorts of instructional and belief changes the implementation of heterogeneous grouping described in previous sections. In the Rockville earlier in these areas to increase students’ success Centre school district, teachers were paid stipends in later grades (Welner & Burris, this issue). The to design new curriculum, were given common district eliminated tracking in math beginning in planning time by department, and time to work sixth grade and phased out the gifted and talented with students was built into the contract (Ameri- program that began in fourth grade, integrating a can Youth Policy Forum, 2003). At another district-wide enrichment program for all students. school, detracking was supported by district-wide As they dismantled middle school tracking they professional development on differentiated in- required accelerated math for all students and a lab struction. At schools where detracking was not ac- science for all eighth graders. companied by time and resources for professional Such changes go far beyond the elimination of development and instructional retooling, teachers tracks for a single course or grade level; they ad- floundered, frequently reverting to practices com- dress the multiple causes of the academic achieve- mon in tracked settings (Rubin & Noguera, 2004). ment gap and provide teachers the time and assis- Departmental, school, and district-wide re- tance they need to revolutionize their approach to forms embody a more holistic approach, creating the classroom. As Rubin and Noguera (2004) a hospitable context for detracking classrooms wrote: and the students and teachers within them. Horn (this issue) describes how two different schools supported a full detracking effort in mathematics Although detracking itself may seem like a substan- (often considered the most difficult subject to tial alteration of the usual manner of business in our detrack) through a raft of changes. These included public schools, even deeper changes in school struc- changes in teachers’ views of the subject to focus ture and distribution of institutional resources may be necessary for the reform to reach its intended on connections and meaning, curricular reforms to goals of increasing equity and access for previously center courses on the study of important mathe- underserved students. For detracking to truly serve matical ideas, and incorporation of new pedago- those whom it was intended to benefit, schools may gies to broaden students’ notions of what it meant need to put more resources into measures that sup- to be good at math. This department-wide port these students. This may include ensuring that approach ensured that difficult but necessary detracked classes are smaller and therefore able to changes were made in all mathematics class- provide more personalized support for students. It is rooms, providing a solid framework for the also helpful to add classes and programs designed to schools’ ambitious detracking efforts. accelerate the skills development of students who School and district-wide reforms provide an were previously tracked low. Finally, and perhaps even deeper foundation for detracking. Alvarez most importantly, teachers who will be required to teach detracked classes must be provided substantial and Mehan (this issue) describe the efforts of the support and training on how to teach such classes. Preuss School on the University of California, San They may also need the opportunity to meet regu- Diego campus, a school dedicated to preparing all larly as a group, to observe each other teach, and to 700 of its low-income students to be eligible to at- share and analyze student work so that they can sup- tend college. At this school, a broad range of so- port each other in meeting the academic goals of this cial and academic supports create a challenging reform. (p. 98)

11 Detracking and Heterogeneous Grouping

Institutional reforms are the backbone of suc- Fine, M., Anand, B., Jordan, C., & Sherman, D. (1998). cessful detracking, providing a broader context for Off track: Classroom privilege for all [Video]. New classroom-level changes and setting the stage for York: Teachers’ College Press. the shifts in student, teacher, and community be- Freedman, S. W., Delp, V., & Crawford, S. M. (2005). liefs that are essential to any flourishing detrack- Teaching English in untracked classrooms. Research in the Teaching of English, 40(1), 62–126. ing effort. Gamoran, A. (1987). The stratification of high school learning opportunities. Sociology of Education, 60, 135–155. Conclusion Garrity, D. (2004). Detracking with vigilance. The School Administrator. Retrieved October 29, 2004, Whether or not detracking itself becomes a from www.aasa.org/publications/sa/2004_08/garrity. prevalent practice, issues of equity and difference htm will remain central to the concerns of educators. Goodlad, J., & Oakes, J. (1988). We must offer equal ac- Heterogeneity is the norm rather than the excep- cess to knowledge. Educational Leadership, 45(5), tion in school classrooms. All classrooms are het- 16–22. Grossman, F., & Ancess, J. (2004). Narrowing the gap erogeneous, made up of individuals with varying in affluent schools. Educational Leadership, 62(3), interests, attitudes, talents, and backgrounds. Fur- 70–73. thermore, as the of Hallinan, M. (1994). School differences in tracking ef- students and English language learners becomes fects on achievement. Social Forces, 72, 799–820. prevalent in tracked and detracked settings, the is- Hallinan, M., & Kubitschek, W. (1999). Curriculum dif- sue of heterogeneity is at the forefront of teachers’ ferentiation and high school achievement. Social concerns more than ever. The best practices drawn Psychology of Education, 3, 41–62. from research in detracked settings can be of use Horton, S., & Lovitt, T. (1989). Using study guides with to all concerned educators. Detracking, when three classifications of secondary students. The carefully implemented, involves a set of Journal of Special Education, 22, 447–462. intuitional, instructional, and belief changes that Keiser, D., & Stein, S. (2003). “We have a motion on the floor”: Montclair High School and the Civics and provide outstanding educational opportunities for Government Institute. In B. Rubin & E. Silva (Eds.), all students. Critical voices in school reform: Students living through change (pp. 171–187). London: Routledge Falmer. References Klingner, J., Vaughn, S., & Schumm, J. (1998). Collab- orative strategic reading during social studies in het- American Youth Policy Forum. (2003). Creating equita- erogeneous fourth-grade classrooms. The Elemen- ble high schools: Strategies to eliminate tracking and tary School Journal, 99, 3–22. ability grouping. Retrieved October 29, 2004, from Ladson-Billings, G. (1995). The dreamkeepers: Suc- www.aypf.org/forumbriefs/2003/fb121203.htm cessful teachers of African American children. San Boaler, J., Wiliam, D., & Brown, M. (2000). Students’ Francisco: Jossey-Bass. experiences of ability grouping—Disaffection, po- Mehan, H. (1992). Understanding inequality in schools: larization and the construction of failure. British Ed- The contribution of interpretive studies. Sociology of ucational Research Journal, 26, 631–648. Education, 65, 1–20. Braddock, J. H., & Dawkins, M. (1993). Ability group- Mehan, H., & Hubbard, L. (1999). Tracking ing, aspirations, and attainments: Evidence from the “untracking”: Evaluating the effectiveness of an ed- National Educational Longitudinal Study of 1988. ucational innovation. Center for Research on Edu- Journal of Negro Education, 62, 324–336. cation, Diversity and Excellence. Retrieved October Cooper, R. (1996). Detracking reform in an urban Cali- 29, 2004, from www.cal.org/crede/pubs/ResBrief- fornia high school: Improving the schooling experi- 3.htm. ences of African American students. Journal of Ne- Mehan, H., Hubbard, L., & Villanueva, I. (1994). gro Education, 65, 190–208. Forming academic identities: Accommodation

12 Rubin Tracking and Detracking: Debates, Evidence, and Best Practices for a Heterogeneous World

without assimilation among involuntary minorities. Rothenberg, J., McDermott, P., & Martin, G. (1998). Anthropology and Education Quarterly, 25, Changes in pedagogy: A qualitative result of teach- 91–117. ing heterogeneous classes. Teaching & Teacher Edu- Mehan, H., Hubbard, L., Villanueva, I., & Lintz, A. cation, 14, 633–642. (1996). Constructing school success: The conse- Rubin, B. C. (2003a). “I’m not getting any F’s”: What quences of untracking low achieving students. New “at-risk” students say about the support they need. York: Cambridge University Press. In B. Rubin & E. Silva (Eds.), Critical voices in Meijnen, G., & Guldemond, H. (2002). Grouping in pri- school reform: Students living through change (pp. mary schools and reference processes. Educational 188–207). London: RoutledgeFalmer. Research and Evaluation, 8, 229–248. Rubin, B. C. (2003b). Unpacking detracking: When Morrell, E., & Collatos, A. (2003). Apprenticing urban progressive pedagogy meets students’social worlds. youth as critical researchers: Implications for in- American Educational Research Journal, 40, creasing equity and access in diverse urban 539–573. schools. In E. Morrell, A. Collatos, & E. Silva Rubin, B. C. (2005). Detracking in context: A study of (Eds.), Critical voices in school reform: Students detracking in three racially and socioeconomically living through change (pp. 113–131). London: distinct schools. Paper presented April 2005 at the RoutledgeFalmer. annual meeting of the American Educational Re- Murphy, J., & Hallinger, P. (1989). Equity as access to search Association, Montreal, Canada. learning: Curricular and instructional treatment dif- Rubin, B., & Noguera, P. (2004). Tracking detracking: ferences. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 21, 129–149. Sorting through the dilemmas and possibilities of Oakes, J. (1985). Keeping track. New Haven, CT: Yale detracking in practice. Equity & Excellence in Edu- University Press. cation, 37, 92–101. Oakes, J. (1986). Tracking, inequality, and the rhetoric Slavin, R. (1991). Are cooperative learning and of reform: Why schools don’t change. Journal of Ed- “untracking” harmful to the gifted? Education Lead- ucation, 168, 60–80. ership, 48(6), 68–71. Oakes, J. (1992). Detracking schools: Early lessons Slavin, R. (1995). Detracking and its detractors: Flawed from the field. Phi Delta Kappan, 73, 448–454. evidence, flawed values. Phi Delta Kappan, 77, Oakes, J., Gamoran, A., & Page, R. (1992). Curriculum 220–221. differentiation: Opportunities, outcomes, and mean- Sørensen, A., & Hallinan, M. (1986). The effects of ings. In P. Jackson (Ed.), Handbook of research on ability grouping on growth in academic achieve- curriculum (pp. 570–608). New York: Macmillan. ment. American Educational Research Journal, 23, Oakes, J., Quartz, K., Ryan, S., & Lipton, M. (2000). 519–542. Becoming good American schools: The struggle for Stearns, E. (2004). Interracial friendliness and the social civic virtue in school reform. San Francisco: organization of schools. Youth & Society, 35, 395– Jossey-Bass. 419. Oakes, J., Wells, A. S., Jones, M., & Datnow, A. (1997). Tomlinson, C. (2001). How to differentiate instruction Detracking: The social construction of ability, cul- in mixed-ability classrooms (2nd ed.). Alexandria, tural politics, and resistance to reform. Teachers VA: ASCD. College Record, 98, 482–510. Tomlinson, C. (2003). Deciding to teach them all. Edu- Oxley, D. (1994). Organizing schools into small units: cation Leadership, 61(2), 6–11. Alternatives to homogeneous grouping. Phi Delta Tracking trounces test scores. (2004). Education Di- Kappan, 75, 521–526. gest, 69(7), 15–17. Page, R. (1987). Lower track classes at a college prepara- Wells, A., & Serna, I. (1996). The politics of culture: tory high school: A caricature of educational encoun- Understanding local political resistance to detrack- ters. In G. Spindler & L. Spindler (Eds.), Interpreta- ing in racially mixed schools. Harvard Educational tive ethnography: At home and abroad (pp. 91–117). Review, 66, 93–118. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc. Welner, K. (2001). Legal rights, local wrongs: When Peterson, B. (1998–1999). Tracking and the project community control collides with . method. Rethinking Schools, 13. Retrieved Decem- New York: SUNY Press. ber 7, 2005, from www.rethinkingschools.org/ar- Welner, K., & Oakes, J. (1996). (Li)ability grouping: chive/13_02/track.shtml The new susceptibility of school tracking systems to

13 Detracking and Heterogeneous Grouping

legal challenges. Harvard Educational Review, 65, fluence of ability grouping practices on student 451–470. progress in mathematics. British Educational Re- Wheelock, A. (1992). Crossing the tracks: How “un- search Journal, 30, 279–293. tracking” can save America’s schools. New York: Yonezawa, S., Wells, A., & Serna, I. (2002). Choosing New Press. tracks: Freedom of choice in detracking schools. Wiliam, D., & Bartholomew, H. (2004). It’s not which American Educational Research Journal, 39, 37–67. school but which set you’re in that matters: The in-

14