# data[].attributes.body
The process of student tracking has consequences on student education, mainly the education of minority students, which can lead to socioeconomic inequality in the future.

"Tracking, or ability-grouping, is the process of separating students based on perceived academic ability, as assessed by teachers, into different levels of classes".

When students feel like they are seen as less intelligent then their classmates, they stop trying in school and don't perform well in their academics.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Tracking in Our Education System — Virginia Review of Politics

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The process of student tracking, despite seeming practical, has had many unhindered consequences on student education, particularly with the education of minority students. Studies on the effects of tracking suggest it may be perpetuating systemic racial and socioeconomic inequality.

# data[].attributes.body
"Instructional methods tend to be more engaging, reflective, and challenging in high tracks, whereas low tracks emphasize good behavior and menial skills".

Students that are tracked at a higher level receive better teachers, whereas students that are tracked lower receive teachers less qualified teachers.

"Tracking is a generally accepted and a central part of the culture of secondary schools and will not be easily abolished. Schools that have attempted to end tracking have faced significant barriers".

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The term tracking refers to a method used by many secondary schools to group students according to their perceived ability, IQ, or achievement levels. Students are placed in high, middle, or low tracks in an effort to provide them with a level of curriculum and instruction that is appropriate to their needs. The practice of tracking began in the 1930s and has been the subject of intense controversy in the past 20 years.

Opponents argue that this model is detrimental to students, especially in the low and middle tracks largely comprising low-income and minority students (Slavin, 1990). Instructional methods tend to be more engaging, reflective, and challenging in high tracks, whereas low tracks emphasize good behavior and menial skills. Moreover, low-track students are often given the least qualified teachers and high-track students receive the best teachers, a practice that exacerbates the achievement gap and perpetuates a cycle of failure for low-achieving students (Education Trust, 2004). Tracking, therefore, unfairly isolates low-income and minority students in what amounts to a resegregation of students within schools (Oakes and Guiton, 1995).

Opponents further argue that, regardless of ability, students will generally attain higher achievement in more-rigorous classes (Hallinan, 2000) Even students who fail in Advanced Placement courses have a better chance of earning a college degree, simply by virtue of having been exposed to a challenging curriculum (Adelman, 1999).

Advocates of tracking argue that this model efficiently addresses the different achievement needs of students. Successful students are sent to high tracks while struggling students are assigned to low tracks, with the expectation that all students can perform according to their ability and motivation levels. It is also expected that students can move up and down the track ladder as their achievement levels change. Tracking, they argue, also makes teaching easier, as teachers can focus their lessons on one level of instruction only. Finally, defenders of tracking argue that research has failed to make a convincing case against tracking as findings show that high-track students would be held back and low-track students would not necessarily benefit from detracking (Loveless, 2002).

Whether right or wrong, tracking is a generally accepted and a central part of the culture of secondary schools and will not be easily abolished. Schools that have attempted to end tracking have faced significant barriers. Parents of high-track students have resisted it, arguing that detracking would harm their children by taking teachers' attention away from them. Many teachers, especially high-track teachers, have also opposed a change that would make teaching admittedly more challenging.
NASSP Guiding Principles

NASSP strongly supports the notion that high achievement is a goal for all students.

NASSP recognizes that educators have a moral imperative to pursue practices that promote equity and excellence. All students have the right to have access to a rigorous curriculum regardless of family income level and race.

NASSP advocates for schools to provide an environment where students are encouraged to take challenging courses.

NASSP encourages schools to provide academic and social-support services, such as co-teaching or tutoring, for students who are struggling.

NASSP is committed to building the capacity of schools to create personalized learning environments, where all students are valued and entitled to pursue their interests.

NASSP believes that, while tracking was originally intended for practical pedagogical purposes, its unintended consequences make it an obsolete practice in the context of high expectations for all.

In Breaking Ranks II, Strategies for Leading High School Reform (2004) and in Breaking Ranks in the Middle: Strategies for Leading Middle Level Reform (2006), NASSP argues that improving schools involves finding alternatives to tracking by eliminating low-level courses and opening challenging courses to all.

Recommendations
NASSP urges principals to:

Create a culture of high expectations for all students. Rather than assuming that only some students need preparation for post secondary education, counsel all students for the possibility that they will seek higher education at some point in their lives.

Provide a safe and personalized learning environment for each student.

Provide early intervention strategies in reading/language arts, math and other core areas for students achieving below grade level.

Identify a set of essential learnings in which students must demonstrate competency in order to move to the next level.

Provide open enrollment for academically rigorous programs such as International Baccalaureate (IB), Advanced Placement (AP) and honors classes, and provide tutoring and other instructional support to enhance chances for success.

Provide focused professional development for teachers to enable them to acquire the skills and dispositions needed in detracked schools. These include high expectations for all, differentiated instruction, cooperative learning, and complex instruction.

Organize students in heterogeneous learning groups; diversity can help students learn from each other.

Reorganize the traditional department structure in order to integrate the school's curriculum to the extent possible.

Involve families at an early stage in planning and implementing heterogeneous groups. Educate families about alternatives to tracking by inviting them to observe classes, reporting results during the phase in state. Reassure parents who oppose detracking by showing how their children will also benefit from the changes.

Provide additional time for struggling students. Interventions designed to remediate students who score two to three years below grade level in certain disciplines and in reading should not be construed as tracking. These students need immediate, intensive accelerated instruction in the form of additional time.

References
Adelman, Clifford, 1999. Answers in the Toolbox: Academic Intensity, Attendance Patterns, and Bachelor's Degree Attainment. U.S. Department of Education, Jessup, MD.

Camblin, Sharon, Gullatt, Yvette, Klopott, Shayna, 2003. Strategies for Success: Six Stories of Increasing College Access. Pathways to College Network, Boston, MA. http://www.pathwaystocollege.net/webarticles/pdf/strategiesforsuccess.pdf

Hallinan, Maureen T., 2000. Ability Group Effects on High School Learning Outcomes.

Loveless, Tom, 2002. The Tracking and Ability Grouping Debate, Thomas Fordham Foundation. NASSP, 2004, Breakthrough High Schools: You Can Do It Too, Reston,VA

Oakes, Jeannie and Guiton, Gretchen, 1995. "Matchmaking: The Dynamics of High School Tracking Decisions." American Educational Research Journal Vol. 32, No. 1:3-33

Slavin, R.E. 1990. "Achievement Effects of Ability Grouping in Secondary Schools: A Best-Evidence Synthesis." Review of Educational Research. Vol. 80: 471-499

The Education Trust, 2004. The Real Value of Teachers, Thinking K-16, Vol. 8, Issue 1. Winter 2004. The Education Trust, Inc. Washington, DC.

Wheelock, Anne, October 1992. "The case for Untracking", in Untracking for Equity, Volume 50, Number 2, p. 6-10, ASCD.

---------

Adopted July 13, 2006

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Tracking and Ability Grouping in Middle Level and High Schools

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The term tracking refers to a method used by many secondary schools to group students according to their perceived ability, IQ, or achievement levels. Students are placed in high, middle, or low tracks in an effort to provide them with a level of curriculum and instruction that is appropriate to their needs.

# data[].attributes.body
The students that know they are being tracked are impacted because it affects the way they view themselves or how teachers view them, which ultimately affects the way they perform in their classroom.

When students perform well academically they consider their academics as part of their identity, which means they will try harder or if they are receiving the support from their parents and teachers then they will believe they have the ability to do well, opposed to when they don't receive the support.

"Compacted students learn critical thinking; they break into small groups and discuss the question of the day. Non-compacted students are given worksheets that the teacher reviews in class".

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
How Does School Tracking Affect Students’ Academic Identity? | Bass Connections

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
“Tracking is endemic in all schools and can perpetuate disparity,” says Kamilah Legette, a leader of a Bass Connections project team that explored tracking and perception

# data[].attributes.body
This article discusses how some students learn better in a classroom that allows for students to work independently, while others require a more hands on/ one-on-one.

One of the pros stated was that students that perform highly can become bored or disinterested if the curriculum is too easy for them, so academic tracking allows those students to not be held back with the entire class.

One of the cons stated was that academic tracking can lead to unequal education. Students that are not performing well may not receive the same educational opportunities as their fellow peers. These opportunities may include their ability to express their intellect, creativity, or unique skills.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Some students learn better in a classroom or training course by working independently, while others require individualized attention. This is just one of the many differences between students. Because students' needs vary widely, many schools find it helpful to implement academic tracking systems.

Academic tracking is an educational system that monitors student progress and divides students into classes based on their abilities. The aim is to ensure each student is on the best learning path for their particular needs and situation. This tracking is sometimes referred to as phasing, streaming, or ability grouping.

In this post, we'll help you decide whether this approach is a good option for your students by considering the pros and cons.

Pros of academic tracking

Academic tracking separates students into three "tracks" based on academic ability: high, average, and low. The system examines student performance at a granular level using test results from specific classes and subjects.

Academic tracking presents several key benefits for education.

1. It creates individualized learning paths

Every student learns in slightly different ways. Academic tracking presents a curriculum for each student that aligns with their specific abilities. With this setup, academic tracking facilitates personalized learning that's akin to one-on-one instruction. Ultimately, this streamlined learning path ensures each student gets the attention and support they need, enabling them to reach their full potential.

2. It prevents apathy

Some high-performing, academically oriented students become bored or disinterested if the curriculum is too easy or slow due to a "one size fits all" model. Because academic tracking groups students with similar abilities, there is less chance of advanced students being stifled or held back for the sake of the entire class.

3. It encourages creative instruction

When teachers can use their creativity to craft unique lessons and specialized curricula for each student, they're able to increase engagement and performance in their classrooms. Also, the creative freedom to get imaginative with lessons benefits teachers and increases their job satisfaction and motivation.

4. It promotes healthy competition between students

Academic tracking offers choices and healthy competition for students. Those who might fall further behind in other systems may feel motivated to keep up with their peers. In doing so, they will get more out of their education and be better prepared for their future careers and other endeavors.

Cons of academic tracking

Academic tracking may provide some great benefits, but no system is perfect. Here are three downsides that you should consider before implementing such a system in your learning environment.

1. It's subject to stereotyping

Students tend to perform to the level their teachers expect, no matter whether those expectations are high or low. This can be problematic, because some teachers may set lower performance expectations for students from historically marginalized groups. As such, these students may miss out on opportunities for growth.

2. It can lead to unequal education

Underperforming students may be at a disadvantage with academic tracking, as their low performance may result in fewer opportunities to express their intellect, creativity, or unique skills. For example, they may be less likely to be selected for extracurricular events, such as the school quiz team or an art expo. In the long term, this lack of individual expression could put them at a disadvantage in their careers.

3. It can have a negative impact on confidence

High self-esteem is crucial to emotional health and positive behavioral choices, particularly during a student's formative years. Knowing that you're at the lower end of the academic performance spectrum compared to your peers can cause a dip in self-confidence, and that can show up both inside and outside of the classroom.

What's more, students in the lower track may feel discouraged from speaking with counselors and teachers about their struggles. Ultimately, this cycle can cause students to drop out of higher education.

Find a balanced system that supports all students

Academic tracking is an educational system that can provide many benefits to high-performing students by allowing them to maximize their potential from a young age. On the other hand, when executed poorly, it can have adverse effects on lower-performing students, who may form negative self-beliefs due to their unfavorable academic standing. As an educator, you must weigh these pros and cons to create the best learning environment for all students. One helpful tool you can use to gather information about your students is the student data tracking sheet from Jotform. With the detailed data you collect, you can make informed decisions to create an educational model that will benefit everyone.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The pros and cons of academic tracking | The Jotform Blog

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Academic tracking has been in use for decades, but does it help every student? Weigh the pros and cons to decide if it will work for your students.

# data[].attributes.body
This article discusses integrating classrooms with a diverse group of students that can lead to an integrated learning environment because academic tracking can cause a divide between students.

"Academic tracking and other forms of homogeneous ability grouping such as gifted programs frequently do a poor job at the main goal they are designed to achieve: sorting students by ability".

Academic tracking doesn't provide students with the ability to access the social networks that a diverse classroom can provide.

"When differentiation in integrated classrooms is done well, it is possible to reduce the achievement gap while maintaining or increasing the performance of all student subgroups".

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
What You Should Know

This toolkit is designed as a resource for teachers, school administrators, and district leaders interested in reducing segregation among classrooms within a school-whether those divides fall along academic, racial, or class lines-and exploring new ways to meet the needs of all students within integrated settings.

This toolkit focuses on three strategies for promoting integrated classrooms within a school: schoolwide enrichment, open/embedded honors, and diversifying Advanced Placement (AP) or International Baccalaureate (IB) enrollment. Schoolwide enrichment can be used in all grades, while open honors and diversifying AP/IB apply mainly to high school.

Each section in the toolkit gives an overview of one strategy, highlights specific examples of schools that are using the strategy, and focuses on the steps that school and district leaders can take to begin work in this area.

This toolkit is part of a series on strategies for creating successful diverse schools.

Enrolling a diverse group of students is only the first step in the creation of an integrated learning environment. In order to harness the full set of academic, social, and civic benefits that racially and economically mixed settings have been shown to offer, schools with diverse student bodies should also have integrated classrooms. Even at schools with diverse enrollment, though, this is not always the case: academic tracking can create situations in which students that are siloed along lines of race and class.

Academic tracking-and the racial and socioeconomic segregation it often creates-raises a number of concerns about equity. First, academic tracking and other forms of homogeneous ability grouping such as gifted programs frequently do a poor job at the main goal they are designed to achieve: sorting students by ability. Research suggests that, aside from their academic preparedness and ability, students' degree of privilege -in the form of families' resources, access to test prep, and social capital, as well as the implicit biases of staff and teachers- may come into play. Second, data shows that academic tracking harms students assigned to lower tracks, who show reduced achievement and increased gaps over time as compared with peers with similar initial achievement assigned to the higher-level courses. Third, when classrooms are skewed by race and class, students are robbed of some of the peer interactions and access to social networks that diversity can provide. Finally, when rich and poor students, white students and students of color, are by and large in different academic programs, the equalizing power of integration-which helps to promote equitable distribution of resources-is weakened.

By contrast, when differentiation in integrated classrooms is done well, it is possible to reduce the achievement gap while maintaining or increasing the performance of all student subgroups. In these settings, all students have access to a challenging curriculum, and the instructional methods, not the standards, are differentiated to meet students' needs. Building from TCF's extensive research on district and charter schools that are committed to integration, this toolkit is designed as a resource for teachers, school administrators, and district leaders interested in reducing segregation among classrooms within a school-whether those divides fall along academic, racial, or class lines-and exploring new ways to meet the needs of all students within integrated settings.

This toolkit focuses on three strategies for promoting integrated classrooms within a school: schoolwide enrichment, open/embedded honors, and diversifying Advanced Placement (AP) or International Baccalaureate (IB) enrollment. Schoolwide enrichment can be used in all grades, while open honors and diversifying AP/IB apply mainly to high schools. Each of these strategies requires tailoring a general approach to the specific school setting; as such, there is not a step-by-step recipe for implementation of any of these approaches. Rather, each section gives an overview of the strategy, highlights specific examples of schools that are using the strategy, and focuses on the steps that school and district leaders can take to begin work in this area.

Schoolwide Enrichment

Research shows that gifted education can be a driver of segregation both within and between schools. Middle-class, white, and Asian students are more likely than low-income, black, and Latinx students to be identified as gifted and participate in gifted education programs. In some districts, students identified as gifted are assigned to classrooms apart from their general education peers, or are enrolled in separate schools that have special admissions requirements-practices which lead not only to a separation of students based on achievement levels but also to geographic stratification that mirrors racial and socioeconomic segregation. Implementing more equitable gifted identification processes that rely on multiple forms of assessment, delay testing until later grades, and screen all students in a district can help to narrow racial and socioeconomic gaps. However, another approach to addressing these gaps is to rethink who gets access to gifted education in the first place. The principles of gifted education-a focus on students' talents and interests, individualized opportunities for advanced instruction, expanded curricula, rigor, and an encouragement of creativity-can also be excellent tools for differentiating instruction within integrated settings.

The Schoolwide Enrichment Model (SEM), developed by University of Connecticut professors Joseph Renzulli and Sally Reis, is an approach to teaching and learning that draws from the pedagogy of gifted education to enhance opportunities to all students in a school. SEM identifies "gifted behaviors," including above-average academic abilities creativity, and task commitment, rather than attaching a binary ("gifted"/"not gifted") label. SEM uses flexible student groupings that change throughout the course of a year and bring together students with different achievement and interest levels. It creates opportunities for all students to be engaged in some type of enrichment, in which students with shared interests engage in investigative learning and explore real-life problems.

The following three examples show how schools have used SEM (or similar methods of enrichment for all) to meet the needs of all learners within heterogeneous student groupings. District of Columbia Public Schools has implemented SEM in twelve of its existing elementary and middle schools. BELL Academy and Veritas Academy, located in Queens, New York, are SEM schools that have used this model since their opening. And City Neighbors Charter School in Baltimore, Maryland uses an academic enrichment and support model of its own creation, called "intensive learning periods," that shares some characteristics with SEM.

District of Columbia Public Schools

District of Columbia Public Schools began their SEM program in 2012 as part of an effort to revitalize middle schools and encourage more parents to keep their children in district schools after elementary school. District leaders heard from parents that they wanted more opportunities to challenge advanced students; however, DCPS ruled out a traditional gifted and talented program, fearing that it might exacerbate inequity. SEM offered the opportunity to provide enrichment that would reach all students-while strengthening schools' overall instruction.

In these SEM schools, enrichment for students ranges from small pull-out groups to whole-school programs. Schools group students for enrichment based on their interests, which they determine using student surveys and teacher observations. SEM teachers then facilitate enrichment for clusters of students who share a broad common interest-such as math, athletics, or social action-guiding students in developing specific topics and projects to undertake within that umbrella theme. One group of students might write creative stories about superheroes, for instance, while another group builds electrical circuits. Although the groups are organized around a shared interest, they are heterogeneous in terms of ability, and creative lesson designs allow students to bring individual strengths and interests to shared group projects. Some of the students in an enrichment group might show high ability in the targeted area, whereas others might show deep interest or creativity.

At the elementary school level, this enrichment often happens by having the SEM teacher pull students out of their classrooms; at the middle school level, students may have an enrichment period as part of their schedule for one or more quarters per year. Schools at which all enrichment clusters are led by a SEM teacher typically set a goal of having at least 40 percent of students participate in enrichment over course of a year. (Some schools set that goal as high as 100 percent.)

BELL Academy and Veritas Academy

In Queens, New York, two recently founded public schools use SEM as a core part of their approaches: BELL Academy, a middle school that opened in 2007, and Veritas Academy, a high school that opened in 2013.

All students at these schools participate in enrichment clusters-which at BELL happen concurrently during a schoolwide enrichment cluster block and at Veritas are scheduled throughout the day as electives. The schools develop the topics for enrichment clusters by asking staff-including teachers, administrators, social workers, community resource persons, and other staff-about skills, experiences, or hobbies they have that could form the basis of a cluster, and then matching those with student interests. Cheryl Quatrano, one of the co-founders of both schools, emphasizes three important elements for successful enrichment clusters:

Student voice in shaping topics and projects. In Quatrano's words, "students [should be] writing curriculum with their teachers."

A culminating product that gives back to the community. For example, students in one school's photography enrichment cluster decided to sell notecards featuring their photographs. They used the profits to purchase a camera, which they donated to a children's hospital for young patients to use.

Ways for all students to contribute. "It creates equity and access for all-students with disabilities, ESL students, struggling students, [and] advanced students," Quatrano explains.

At BELL and Veritas, teachers are also trained to infuse SEM methods into the regular curriculum to help them differentiate instruction. In order to challenge and engage students at appropriate levels, both schools' teachers keep student interests (compiled through surveys) and academic assessment data in mind. Teachers use an online database to find individualized reading materials that match each student's reading level and topics of interest.

City Neighbors Charter School

The intensive learning periods help achieve the goal of differentiation within an integrated classroom in two ways. First, these daily small-group sessions provide an opportunity to deliver differentiated instruction that helps students to be successful in larger, mixed-ability classes during the rest of the day. Second, the intensive learning periods also frequently group together students from different academic levels and grades by combining a mixture of enrichment and support, assigning students by shared interests and needs, rather than strictly by academic ability. For example, one intensive learning period on science writing brought together students who had an interest in science but who could benefit from extra support with nonfiction writing. In a psychology intensive, a group of students, including many with Individualized Education Plans (IEPs), conducted research on their own sleep and hunger patterns and met with researchers studying Alzheimer's disease and memory loss-thereby combining math practice with the development of complex inquiry skills.

Intensives have been so successful in providing a way to respond to students' needs in a differentiated manner that City Neighbors has added them in fourth and fifth grade as well.

Strategies for Getting Started on Schoolwide Enrichment

Build schoolwide enrichment gradually. Using any form of schoolwide enrichment, schools can add elements to their enrichment program gradually. Schools might start by completing student interest profiles and adding enrichment clusters or intensive learning periods in one grade. In subsequent years, school leaders might work with teachers to use the interest profiles and enrichment techniques to enhance core classroom instruction as well as add discrete enrichment periods.

Integrate enrichment into existing school systems and goals. In order to implement school-wide enrichment, administrators and teachers must be on board with regard to modifying the school schedule and curriculum. For any program to succeed, faculty must see schoolwide enrichment as part of the school's core work and a path toward overall academic and cultural improvement -rather than as an optional add-on. Schools can start these conversations by sending teams of teachers to visit schools that are using forms of schoolwide enrichment and by considering how enrichment could help meet some of the specific goals of their schools.

Share the school's definitions of gifted behavior and enrichment and explain how these inform the school's new enrichment approach. Schools should also engage parents to start a dialogue about how school-wide enrichment is different from traditional gifted and talented programs-and what it means to look for strengths, interests, and gifted behaviors in all students, rather than labeling individual students as "gifted" (or "not gifted.")

Access resources on SEM from the University of Connecticut. The Renzulli Center for Creativity, Gifted Education, and Talent Development at the Neag School of Education at the University of Connecticut offers a number of free resources on SEM, and also runs a week-long conference each summer for educators from current and aspiring SEM schools.

Open/Embedded Honors

At the high school level, one method of meeting the needs of students at different academic levels within integrated classrooms is to offer an "open honors" or "embedded honors" option. In this model, all students take a class together, but students who choose to may take the class for honors credit by completing extra assignments. The advantages of an open honors model include:

Heterogeneous classrooms in which students can interact and learn with (and from) a wide range of peers

The option for students to switch in and out of honors without rearranging their schedule.

Harvest Collegiate High School in New York City and the High Tech High network in San Diego offer two examples of how open honors can work in practice.

Harvest Collegiate High School

Harvest Collegiate is a public high school in New York City that opened in 2012 and currently serves close to 500 students in ninth through twelfth grades who come from a broad range of racial and socioeconomic backgrounds. Diversity is one of the founding principles of the school; as of this writing, 46 percent of students are Latinx, 24 percent are black, 20 percent are white, 6 percent are Asian, and 4 percent are other races or ethnicities; 65 percent are low-income. High school enrollment in New York City is determined by a city-wide choice process; it is worth noting, however, that while about one-fifth of all public middle and high schools in New York City use some sort of "screen"-testing, audition, interview, or attendance requirements-to admit students, Harvest has no admissions requirements. John McCrann, a math teacher and union chapter leader at the school, explains this approach: "We really believe that people learning together makes the education experience better for everyone."

As part of this focus on fostering a diverse learning environment, Harvest has been committed from day one to having heterogeneous classrooms, with "open honors" as part of this model: in this way, all students benefit from learning in diverse classrooms-but also have differentiated academic opportunities.

All classes at Harvest (aside from AP classes) are required to have an Open Honors component. Julia Shube, one of the school's math teachers, coordinates the open honors program. She ensures that teachers receive support developing open honors components for their classes both before the start of and throughout the school year. At the beginning of the year, students can apply for Open Honors in any of their classes-a process which usually consists of writing a short statement about their interest-and they can switch in or out of honors during a month-long add/drop period at the beginning of the course.

Open honors work might include developing math functions to advocate for a public policy that they're interested in, serving as a peer writing tutor for an English class, or researching an additional historical event for a social studies class. Students have the opportunity to capitalize on certain interests as they arise during the school year; for instance, one year, the school supported a group of honors students from several global history classes who decided to host a day-long human rights conference for the whole school. Some courses also provide opportunities for honors students to meet outside of class, such as a book club for honors math honors students which meets periodically over lunch.

About 25 percent of students end up participating in open honors over the course of a given year. School leaders and teachers monitor the enrollment numbers and demographics of students who take advantage of the program-and have intervened when they have noticed participation gaps.

Keeping the workload for teachers manageable is an ongoing challenge of open honors, but teachers see a number of benefits for classroom learning. Honors students are often able to bring the extra material that they have been studying into class discussions, which is enriching for the whole class, and there are also plenty of moments when the insights and perspectives shared by non-honors students are reminders of the ways in which the benefits of diverse classrooms flow in many directions. Social studies and English teacher Steve Lazar also sees Open Honors as a useful marketing tool for continuing to attract a diverse student body: he explains that the program signals to students who might also be considering private or screened schools that Harvest presents opportunities to be challenged.

High Tech High

High Tech High, a charter network with foruteen schools serving students in grades K-12 in San Diego, California, also uses an open honors model. From the start, the network, which has a project-based learning model, has been committed to having integrated classrooms with no academic tracking. School leaders originally implemented an open honors model so that students could earn the weighted grade-point averages that selective colleges look for in applicants.

At High Tech High, the honors option is offered in core academic classes for juniors and seniors, and about 70 percent of students in those grades take at least one honors class each semester. While most classes use an opt-in model, a few make honors enrollment the default and enable students to opt-out; they see this as a means of encouraging more students who might have been unsure about taking on honors work to participate.

Strategies for Getting Started on Open/Embedded Honors

Start conversations about the value of diverse classrooms. Getting buy-in from teachers is essential. Kate Burch, the principal of Harvest Collegiate, explains that the open honors approach has been successful at her school because "there's a school culture that normalizes difference and embraces diversity in the classroom." Create time for staff conversations about any concerns which may arise from the transition. Lead educators to reflect on how ability grouping influenced their own educations (and those of their peers) growing up. Ask teachers to share examples of how students with different academic abilities have benefited each other in the classroom. If possible, facilitate visits at other schools that use embedded honors models.

Identify planning time for teachers. The biggest resource needed to implement open/embedded honors is teacher planning time. School administrators and department leads should examine how to rearrange planning schedules so that teachers can have the planning time necessary to implement the program well. Teachers may also use collective bargaining as a tool to help secure planning time for open honors.

Start with one team or department. Schools can try out open honors by starting with just one class or subject. If schools are starting from a position of having de-tracked classes, adding an open honors component to several classes could begin with just a few short meetings (on curriculum development and ways to enroll students).

Start with a few sample assignments. These sample assignments from open honors classes provide examples of what individual honors assignments might look like:

Diversifying Enrollment in AP or IB Classes

Another approach to ensuring that desegregated high schools are integrated at the classroom level is to focus on diversifying enrollment in high-level courses, with the goal of having all student subgroups enrolling in these classes at the same rate. Over 90 percent of all U.S. high schools offer at least one Advanced Placement (AP) course, but within these schools, access to AP differs dramatically based on race and class. Middle- and high-income students are almost three times as likely as their low-income peers to enroll in at least one AP course; and while 25 percent of Asian students and 12 percent of white students take AP courses, just 9 percent of Latinx students, 6 percent of Native American students, and 6 percent of black students do.

Participation rates in the International Baccalaureate (IB) programs show similar gaps. These gaps are partly explained by having different AP or IB offerings at schools serving more low-income students and students of color, but most of the difference in AP and IB participation occurs within schools. A 2013 report from the Education Trust found that less than 5 percent of all high schools with racially and economically diverse enrollment and at least twenty students in AP classes enrolled a proportional share of low-income students and students of color in AP.

Boston Collegiate Charter School, which serves middle and high school students in Boston, Massachusetts, and Equal Opportunity Schools, a nonprofit that works with schools and districts across the country, offer two examples of how to address the challenges of closing AP and IB participation gaps and ensuring integrated classrooms.

Boston Collegiate

Boston Collegiate Charter School has taken clear steps over the past few years to narrow gaps in its AP enrollment based on race, class, and disability. The school, located in Boston's Dorchester neighborhood, serves students in fifth through twelfth grades. About five years ago, school leaders began to notice two trends: white students were overrepresented in both AP and honors courses; and there was no clear pattern showing that students who had taken honors classes in previous years did better in AP classes than students who took the AP class without previously taking an honors class in that subject. Faced with this data, school leaders set out to create more equitable opportunities and more integrated classrooms.

To address these issues, leaders de-tracked math and English courses. Student data had shown that honors courses were unnecessary for students to succeed in AP coursework. Honors enrollment already was not a requirement for AP enrollment, but having a separate honors track seemed to perpetuate the racial gaps in identification for honors courses into AP enrollment. This process took several years and required tackling a few grades at a time.

At the same time, administrators worked with teachers and the college counseling team to build excitement about AP courses as college-level work, and to encourage students of all backgrounds-particularly those subgroups of students that were currently underrepresented in AP coursework-to consider enrolling in at least one AP course.

Administrators and teachers at the school continue to look at AP enrollment data, grades, and behavioral data for every subgroup at least once every quarter. Grade level teams are trained to ask themselves questions like, What are our students experiencing in our grade? Where, if anywhere, is implicit bias playing out? Where do we feel that we need to focus our efforts?

Equal Opportunity Schools

Equal Opportunity Schools is a Seattle-based nonprofit that partners with schools and districts across the country to address gaps in AP and IB participation by race and class. EOS sets a goal of closing these participation gaps while maintaining (or increasing) the achievement of students in the programs.

Schools apply to work with EOS through a competitive application process that includes data on current AP or IB enrollment and evidence that district and school leadership want to address their socioeconomic and racial achievement disparities. EOS selects districts that show promise in making serious strides towards closing gaps and typically partners with those districts for at least three years. Schools pay for a portion of the cost of EOS's assistance, which is also underwritten by grants.

Strategies for Getting Started Diversifying AP/IB

Take a deep dive into the data. Identify gaps in AP and IB participation across race/ethnicity, socioeconomic status, English language learner status, and disability. Where are the largest gaps? How do these gaps relate to other gaps in students' academic trajectories and performance data for students? EOS recommends using the gaps in AP or IB enrollment to calculate how many students are "missing" from AP and IB because their subgroups are underrepresented. How many more students would have the chance to take AP and IB if all subgroups participated at equally high rates? These "missing" students should be the focus of any efforts to expand and improve AP or IB.

Consider pledging to close the gap in a year. EOS CEO and founder Reid Saaris recommends that schools commit to making enrollment changes quickly and then focusing on supporting the students who are new to AP or IB in the years that follow. According to Saaris,

We've seen the greatest success come when leaders decide to close this gap in a year-not work around the margins of it. Incremental change can leave students feeling isolated, experiencing stereotype threat, and under-performing as compared to their potential. Start talking with kids-a school-wide survey is very useful-and making connections. Who wants more challenge? Who wants to go to college? Who has never heard about advanced courses or didn't know they could sign up? Who feels that "students like me" don't belong in AP? Which adults want to work to change this and would participate in an equity committee to close the gap and find all the missing students? What supports do teachers want to feel successful in newly equitable advanced classes?

Schools that are interested in partnering with EOS can look through their online resources and fill out an inquiry form.

Consider de-tracking other classes. Working to diversify AP/IB can also be an impetus to launch broader conversations about the academic gateways and roadblocks that students face earlier in their educations. At Boston Collegiate, for example, leaders worked to diversify AP classes and de-track math and English classes concurrently. Implementing embedded/open honors may also support expanded and diversified AP/IB enrollment. However, Saaris cautions against using the existence of tracking in earlier grades as an excuse for not addressing AP/IB gaps head-on. EOS has seen schools successfully close AP/IB gaps in a year-even when tracking in earlier grades is in place-and then go on to use that success as a motivation to dismantle other forms of tracking.

Additional Resources

Contact TCF researchers with questions by emailing [email protected].

Request to be connected with one of the schools featured in this toolkit to learn more about their approach to diverse enrollment by emailing [email protected].

Read TCF's in-depth case studies of charter schools and school districts that have prioritized school integration:

Conclusion

The strategies and examples outlined in this toolkit are designed to help schools define a path toward improving classroom integration and differentiated instruction. A common theme in the tips for getting started with any of these models is that relatively simple technical fixes-like creating additional assignments for a more challenging syllabus or counseling more students of color to consider AP courses-must often be coupled with the more complex task of intensive staff engagement. The successful implementation of open honors, schoolwide enrichment, or efforts to diversify AP/IB programs relies on administrator and teacher buy-in-which requires building a shared understanding of the institutional racism and classism, implicit bias, and social barriers that have contributed to a status quo of segregated classrooms. Lastly, in addition to sharing a common definition of the problem, school communities must also build a shared vision for what a more equitable environment-one with diverse classrooms that challenge and support all students-could look like.

The work of integrating classrooms lies at the center of the work of successful integrated schools. In order to get to the point of tackling this challenge, schools must create strategies to build diverse enrollment. As schools are working to integrate classrooms, they should also consider how they are fostering opportunities for students to make meaningful connections with peers across lines of difference-two challenges that are the topics of the other toolkits in this series.

Acknowledgments
The author would like to thank the following people for granting interviews, sharing information, and providing feedback for this report: Kate Burch, Mike Chalupa, Ben Daley, Steve Lazar, Tofa McCormick, John McCrann, Felicia Messina-D'Haiti, Sarah Morland, Jenna Ogundipe, Jasmine Oke, Cheryl Quatrano, Matthew Reif, Larry Rosenstock, Reid Saaris, Kate Seidl, and Julia Shube.

Tags: charter schools, school diversity, school integration, student evaluations

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Integrating Classrooms and Reducing Academic Tracking

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Enrolling a diverse group of students is only the first step in the creation of an integrated learning environment. In order to harness the full set of

# data[].attributes.body
In this video Allen Chen defines tracking as "the separation of pupils by academic merit". Which is divided into 3 tracks high performing, average, and below average.

He provides an example and the differences between 3 students that were tracked. The student that was in the high performing category was determined to succeed, however he stated that their were negative affects associated with the amount of stress they had, which included anxiety, depression, competition, etc. This could lead them to fall down into the average track.

"The US is evolving but the education system is the same. We need to end student tracking and we need to evolve our education system".

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Student Tracking Needs to End | Allen Chen | TEDxYouth@Conejo