SD Notebook is back in 2024 with a new post by Margaret Thornton about her great new book on an overlooked aspect of contemporary school segregation: classroom ability tracking.

We know that segregation has increased rather dramatically since the late ‘80’s. Of the schools that maintain some level of diversity/integration, however, we can’t fully know whether students are segregated within their schools, through academic tracking policies for example. That data just doesn’t exist at scale. Meanwhile, it’s obvious to say that the benefits of school integration are best realized when students of different racial and social backgrounds are actually learning together in the same classrooms. It’s harder to form cross-racial friendships or reduce/challenge existing stereotypes or learn social empathy, if students aren’t in the same actual classes together. As noted below, tracking has been around for a while, and methods for detracking aren’t well understood. Based on case studies of four schools, the new research here addresses that gap with tons of concrete suggestions for school leaders.  

The advent of comprehensive high schools in the United States coincided with a wave of immigration from Southern and Eastern Europe. Primarily non-English speaking, these immigrants were initially seen as not quite white and ended up in a strange space in the educational landscape of their new country. Unlike Black, Latine, and Indigenous children, the children of immigrants were permitted to attend school with white children in order to assimilate them to our culture. By and large, however, they were not permitted to share classrooms with children at the top of the racial hierarchy. Many educationalists at the turn of the 20^th Century were also obsessed with efficiency in schools, so they, too, supported separate tracks for students who would try for a college education and those who would go on, at best, to learn a trade. Thus, tracking in the United States was born. Many public schools doubled down on tracking after school desegregation began in the 1950s and 60s. Historian Jim Wynter has written extensively about these white anxieties feeding classroom-level segregation. 

To some, organizing students by interest or perceived ability may make innate sense. Extensive research suggests, however, that Black, Hispanic, Latine, Indigenous, poor, and disabled students along with those learning English are more likely to be placed in lower-track classes even after accounting for their previous academic performance. Once they’re in these lower-track classes, students are more likely to have inexperienced teachers who focus on rote memorization rather than enrichment and are less likely to go onto any sort of postsecondary education. 

To combat these inequalities, schools began implementing what is known as detracking in the 1980s. Detracking can take many forms. Schools may simply remove barriers to enrollment in upper-level courses and let students choose or schools may get rid of all of their levels but the highest one for all students but those with the most severe intellectual disabilities. Large-scale research on the effects of detracking is scant. Some researchers have found that detracking schools enjoy the same or higher student test performance and improved students’ sense of community and democratic participation. Other research suggests, however, that test scores may decrease and students who were previous in lower-level classes might actually see decreased feelings of competency when they begin to compare themselves with historically high-achieving peers. Detracking schools also have to contend with the perennial parental concern that opening the gates to higher-level classes will “dumb down” the curriculum. 

Schools throughout the United States are tackling the inequalities of tracking through detracking, often with great success. In my new book, Classroom Detracking in the US: Examples for School Leadership, I explore four schools that are in the process of detracking their schools. Each school’s journey is unique but they share a common beginning: Educators were disturbed at the racially-identifiable nature of their honors and nonhonors classes. One school has taken the first step of dropping their lowest level courses and making sure that all classes are taught rigorously enough to prepare students for college or a career after education. Two schools have adopted the International Baccalaureate curriculum and have most of their students in pre-IB classes in ninth and tenth grade. In eleventh grade, students can then choose if they want to attempt the rigorous IB diploma. At one school on Long Island, students who do not wish to pursue the IB diploma are placed in the same classroom as the IB students. They all learn together and meet the same learning objectives but take either the state-mandated or IB-mandated assessments. The number of students earning IB diplomas at both schools have increased over time, including more students of color and students who qualify for free or reduced lunch.  At the fourth school, most students in ninth and tenth grade are placed in honors classes for their core courses of English, math, science, and social studies. Students with disabilities are included in these courses as much as possible by having some sections of them co-taught between general and special education teachers. The school has seen Black enrollment in Advanced Placement courses hold steady while Hispanic enrollment has increased. 

None of these schools have perfect detracking models and none have completely solved for the problems of certain groups of students being underrepresented in higher-level classes and underrepresented in lower-level classes, but each school leader demonstrates that detracking is possible and can be successful when teachers and students are given appropriate support. At each school, teachers could access meaningful, year-round professional development to learn and refine systems of differentiation so that students were neither left behind or lacking challenge in the classroom. Three of the schools also explicitly reduced class sizes to make it easier for teachers to plan different activities for students based on their skill and interest level while making sure students are still working toward the same broader learning objectives. Two of the schools also include special education teachers in honors-level courses as co-teachers to work with the subject-matter teacher on supporting students. Two of the schools are within districts working to explicitly begin detracking in earlier grades although all leaders at all schools saw earlier detracking as a necessary condition for success.  

School leaders cannot solve every type of inequality students face, but they do have the power to craft student sorting systems that open up opportunities for students regardless of race, class, disability, or any other marginalized identity. The leaders profiled in my book provide four separate examples of how to do this, but there are many more throughout the United States. We are missing out on the brilliance of kids who have been told continuously that they are not smart. When done well, detracking has the potential to unlock this brilliance. What is stopping us from trying?

Update: For more check out this great conversation between Margaret and Anne Helen Peterson at Culture Study.