Differentiation is essential whether or not students are tracked. They are not mutually exclusive. I would argue they are both essential.

Thank you for your link on differentiation. It does change my perception of the word. After reading it, it seems to be describing both a "style" of teaching and ethics of classroom management. "respectful tasks" and such.

Anonymous wrote:http://differentiationcentral.com/whatisdi.html

Thanks

Anonymous wrote:Maybe it's me, but the YY "tracking" seems different from differentiation because those students are doing a different curriculum, no? The school draws people for Chinese immersion, so if these students are no longer being immersed in Chinese then it seems like they can never jump back on the track.

Not picking on yy, just asking what seems a critical question, but why is that track filled only with AA students? If there aren't many native speakers, then I would assume that non-AA parents can't help their children at home. Then why aren't they too falling behind? If it's tutoring, then they should provide that to families without means. I have no dog in this fight...

Tracking is highly correlated with SES status-- are the AA students in the different track predominately low SES vs the AA students in the mainstream immersion class mid to high SES? Several posters on the other thread on YY did claim that ALL kids were provided tutoring. Many low SES kids regardless of race start off behind their peers the day they start PK, get tracked and never catch up--this is happening all over the US, not just YY.

http://www.caroltomlinson.com/

It would be good for people to be discussing the same idea. It seems like there is a misconception about what differentiated instruction is.

I disagree PP. What you are describing is social integration (not differentiation). Also a rare commodity in DC.

Differentiation is not tracking. Differentiation means that mixed ability, mixed ethnicity, mixed SES are together in one classroom and provided with instruction that meets their needs. Putting students into ability-based groupings on an ongoing basis is not differentiation.

No answer your question, PP. The curriculum at YY is the IB PYP program as an outline. In the outline the children are doing Everyday Math for Math, Daily 5 for Reading, a new writing program. The curriculum is the SAME for both groups. The Language it is taught in is Different.

Anonymous wrote:Let me add that differentiation within a classroom is a skill that teachers should possess. How to to reach each and every student? The better the ability of a teacher to differentiate, the better each student will progress.

But expecting a teacher to differentiate across an extremely wide range of skill and ability and exposure and rate of learning and special needs and language difficulties is madness. Substituting differentiation for flexible and well managed ability grouping is like expecting your family car to fly you to Paris. It's a fantasy fueled by some political agenda.

Traditional tracking did damage. It was harmful unfair and implemented poorly. But scrapping it entirely and expecting differentiation to replace it will do just as much damage by paralyzing teachers and forcing them to involuntarily ignore the outliers in that wide variation. Unless someone is inventing a super robotic perfect teacher machine, professional development can only help so much with this.

There are happy mediums here that support teachers and allow kids at all levels to move forward. Anybody have some examples of something that falls between traditional rigid tracking and forcing a teacher to miraculously teach to everyones individual need at the same time?

Completely agree. When I was in junior high more than a couple of decades ago, I was bussed to a school in another neighborhood where the socio-economics were very different than the elementary I went to. The first year we were tracked into 3 different ability levels. The result of which was most of the poor kids in the lowest tier and the more well off kids in the advanced track. This definitely had draw backs where it felt like 3 different schools and caused a lot of friction between the kids in the lower and higher tracks (that already had socio-economic and race frictions). So my second year they changed to the differentiated model where they had a mix of all 3 tracks in one classroom. ANd man, was that a nightmare. The teacher had to basically teach 3 classes in the time allotted for one. The lower track students felt even more stupid as they had to literally sit behind someone who was receiving a more advanced lesson than them. The advanced students were relentlessly made fun of for actually doing homework or wanting to succeed. And generally no one group of kids was getting the education they deserved and needed while the teacher was left feeling wiped out. This method only lasted one year. (And I unfortunately did not get an education my entire 8th grade year which haunted me and my classmates through high school). I don't think there is any one perfect solution but I would not sent my child to a school with a differentiation model vs. a tracking model- regardless of where they fell. Tracking has its cons and drawbacks, but seems to be the approach given any alternatives.

Maybe it's me, but the YY "tracking" seems different from differentiation because those students are doing a different curriculum, no? The school draws people for Chinese immersion, so if these students are no longer being immersed in Chinese then it seems like they can never jump back on the track.

Not picking on yy, just asking what seems a critical question, but why is that track filled only with AA students? If there aren't many native speakers, then I would assume that non-AA parents can't help their children at home. Then why aren't they too falling behind? If it's tutoring, then they should provide that to families without means. I have no dog in this fight...

Let me add that differentiation within a classroom is a skill that teachers should possess. How to to reach each and every student? The better the ability of a teacher to differentiate, the better each student will progress.

But expecting a teacher to differentiate across an extremely wide range of skill and ability and exposure and rate of learning and special needs and language difficulties is madness. Substituting differentiation for flexible and well managed ability grouping is like expecting your family car to fly you to Paris. It's a fantasy fueled by some political agenda.

Traditional tracking did damage. It was harmful unfair and implemented poorly. But scrapping it entirely and expecting differentiation to replace it will do just as much damage by paralyzing teachers and forcing them to involuntarily ignore the outliers in that wide variation. Unless someone is inventing a super robotic perfect teacher machine, professional development can only help so much with this.

There are happy mediums here that support teachers and allow kids at all levels to move forward. Anybody have some examples of something that falls between traditional rigid tracking and forcing a teacher to miraculously teach to everyones individual need at the same time?

We've learned that one's pro/anti tracking position is directly related to one's child position in said tracking. Now what?

I was going to say Lowell too.

It's funny that whenever tracking is brought up for kids who can't perform at grade level, the parents always bring up how it'll hurt their "self-esteem" to be identified as someone needing extra help. Like the kid doesn't know that already.

Guess for some parents, good self-esteem matters more than reading or doing math at grade level. Or maybe they think it's more about them than the kid.

Anonymous wrote:progressive touchyfeely

hmm, Green Acres? Lowell?

That's pretty funny - I was just thinkign about how I know someone whose kids go to Lowell, and she's convinced that they are geniuses. Absolutely convinced. A fair bit of her self-worth is tied up in that assumption, actually, to the point where she's uncomfortably competitive about it. She'd be fine if they are "tracked" in a GT program, or advanced section, or whatever, but if not? Or (God forbid) they're tracked in a needs help section? She's go batshit crazy, screaming about how it's bad for theit self-esteem, etc. (None of that concern if it wasn't her kids, of course.)