We had tracking and I was at the top. One of my friend was in the middle, even though she was clearly smarter than most of us. It actually affected her in that she didn't have a high GPA since she didn't take the honors and APs that we did, she didn't get into the best college, and didn't get into the best grad school.

Tracking really deals people a sucky hand!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Old mom here who grew up in the time of elementary and middle school tracking. I remember the top, middle and low classrooms. I was square in the middle. My sister was in the top.

Did it make me work harder? I can't say.
Did it emmotionally scar me or keep me from reaching my potential? No.
I made honor roll in high school and finished a bachelors degree straight out of high school.

What was your experience? Did tracking scar you emmotionally or cause you to be a low performer in school or unsuccessful in life?

I was tracked to the middle.
I did not make me work harder but I worked very hard for my mediocre grades. I did not find out why until I was 40, that I was dyslexic.
I would say there are a few scars. Since my spelling was terrible the assumption was that I was stupid. Teachers made comments about not being the sharpest knife in the drawer, checking if I was related to the rest of my family and maybe I wasn't college material. I have a lot of respect for good teachers, I have a chip on my shoulder when I meet a bad teacher.
I have a degree in Math and a Masters in Information Technology.

It makes me believe that measuring intelligence the way we do is missing the mark.

I think real great STEM kids are overlooked because they are not strong in reading and writing.

See, I have found the opposite to be true. STEM seems to be all anyone talks about these days, and the kids who are excellent writers or extremely bright in language arts are pretty much ignored.

+1

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Old mom here who grew up in the time of elementary and middle school tracking. I remember the top, middle and low classrooms. I was square in the middle. My sister was in the top.

Did it make me work harder? I can't say.
Did it emmotionally scar me or keep me from reaching my potential? No.
I made honor roll in high school and finished a bachelors degree straight out of high school.

What was your experience? Did tracking scar you emmotionally or cause you to be a low performer in school or unsuccessful in life?

I was tracked to the middle.
I did not make me work harder but I worked very hard for my mediocre grades. I did not find out why until I was 40, that I was dyslexic.
I would say there are a few scars. Since my spelling was terrible the assumption was that I was stupid. Teachers made comments about not being the sharpest knife in the drawer, checking if I was related to the rest of my family and maybe I wasn't college material. I have a lot of respect for good teachers, I have a chip on my shoulder when I meet a bad teacher.
I have a degree in Math and a Masters in Information Technology.

It makes me believe that measuring intelligence the way we do is missing the mark.

I think real great STEM kids are overlooked because they are not strong in reading and writing.

See, I have found the opposite to be true. STEM seems to be all anyone talks about these days, and the kids who are excellent writers or extremely bright in language arts are pretty much ignored.

We didn't have tracking. In high school we had the general college curriculum (level 3), then above that was honors level (level 4), and then above that was AP (level 5). We did not have choices among levels 3, 4 and 5 for all disciplines/years. For example, in freshman year I had the choice between level 2 plant science and level 5 physical science.

(I'm 50 something and went to high school near Boston.)

Tracking never harmed me, but I was in the advanced group.

That's why so many parents fight so hard for the modern-day tracking of AAP. As long as your kid is there, you know they'll be fine.

Anonymous wrote:Old mom here who grew up in the time of elementary and middle school tracking. I remember the top, middle and low classrooms. I was square in the middle. My sister was in the top.

Did it make me work harder? I can't say.
Did it emmotionally scar me or keep me from reaching my potential? No.
I made honor roll in high school and finished a bachelors degree straight out of high school.

What was your experience? Did tracking scar you emmotionally or cause you to be a low performer in school or unsuccessful in life?

I was tracked to the middle.
I did not make me work harder but I worked very hard for my mediocre grades. I did not find out why until I was 40, that I was dyslexic.
I would say there are a few scars. Since my spelling was terrible the assumption was that I was stupid. Teachers made comments about not being the sharpest knife in the drawer, checking if I was related to the rest of my family and maybe I wasn't college material. I have a lot of respect for good teachers, I have a chip on my shoulder when I meet a bad teacher.
I have a degree in Math and a Masters in Information Technology.

It makes me believe that measuring intelligence the way we do is missing the mark.

I think real great STEM kids are overlooked because they are not strong in reading and writing.

Anonymous wrote:Must be older. No tracking and think it should still be that way. Reasonable class sizes (under 30) and good, strong teachers. Let them TEACH! That's what my teachers did.

How does tracking prevent teaching?

Anonymous wrote:What was your experience? Did tracking scar you emmotionally or cause you to be a low performer in school or unsuccessful in life?

I was tracked in the middle for math. It limited my science options in high school. For the same reasons, I gravitated towards the humanities in college. Calculus would have given me more options in college and grad school.

Tracking at my public high school had nothing to do with social class and was determined by a combination of teacher recommendation and previous performance (grades and standardized test scores). We knew what tracks we were in as it was noted in the course level names on our report cards. It really wasn't any different from regular, honors and AP today.
My Catholic elementary school did not track, but expected everyone to meet the same (pretty challenging) standard. A lot of kids had trouble meeting that standard and a few every got left back. This was back in the seventies.

Anonymous wrote:We didn't have tracking when I was a kid - and I think I'm old now

I do think that tracking is harmful for children. They do this in Europe, and it keeps the upper class in the upper class and the lower class immigrants in the lower classes.

Yet the social mobility is more limited in the States.

I do think that tracking is harmful for children. They do this in Europe, and it keeps the upper class in the upper class and the lower class immigrants in the lower classes.

Uh, oh. Get ready for the onslaught! I think you are right.

We didn't have tracking when I was a kid - and I think I'm old now

I do think that tracking is harmful for children. They do this in Europe, and it keeps the upper class in the upper class and the lower class immigrants in the lower classes.

Must be older. No tracking and think it should still be that way. Reasonable class sizes (under 30) and good, strong teachers. Let them TEACH! That's what my teachers did.

WOW!! So many against it yet 46 views and no comments. Hum...FCPS maybe tracking wasn't so bad after all!

Old mom here who grew up in the time of elementary and middle school tracking. I remember the top, middle and low classrooms. I was square in the middle. My sister was in the top.

Did it make me work harder? I can't say.
Did it emmotionally scar me or keep me from reaching my potential? No.
I made honor roll in high school and finished a bachelors degree straight out of high school.

What was your experience? Did tracking scar you emmotionally or cause you to be a low performer in school or unsuccessful in life?