This article falls into the topics of the consequences of tracking, the uneven opportunities in classrooms, other alternatives to tracking, curriculum, and student evaluation.
Tracking is the practice of putting students of the same age and ability in groups to be taught together. In the article, one of the consequences of tracking is having students of higher ability exceed faster than regular students. It is not fair that tracking mostly supports students of high ability while others fall behind. The author, Jeannie Oakes, gives an example by saying how students in high ability English courses have the opportunity to read modern literature, do research and learn vocabulary that will benefit them for college. While the other students just learn the bare minimum.
Oakes then talks about how in low-ability classes teachers treat students differently than teachers in classes with students of high-ability. In low-ability and average classrooms, teachers expect low achievements from students and are less encouraging. To help change the negative affects of tracking, Oakes mentions an alternative to help students achieve in the classroom. She says that teachers might have to change the topics students are required to learn. Topics that they know will benefit them in life.
I do not believe tracking is all that bad. I do believe a great amount of teachers are not doing their jobs as educators in having their students learn in a way that will truly benefit them. I do believe that classes should help students prepare themselves for real life experiences. Teachers should include students aspirations in their curriculum so that students can focus more and actually enjoy what they are learning. If teachers give all students an equal opportunity and make them all feel equally important, I believe students will do better in school.
No comments:
Post a Comment