Finn and Oaks- “Keeping Track” (Argument)

This week I explored articles about tracking. Tracking is a term that relates to keeping children of the same learning level in the same classes. Oaks states that some people think this helps target individual needs so that children can learn more. In the article a main argument is pointed out.  Oaks argue that children should not be tracked because it actually puts them at a disadvantage.

So what if some kids feel disadvantaged a few people would say but Oaks begs to differ. She first starts off by talking about the consequences of tracking. She say that with tracking that only those on the higher end of it are getting the education that everyone deserves. The children in the honors classes are able to move faster and cover more material, but the kids in the lower learning classes she says are not able to cover the amount of subjects at such a rapid pace. It’s just like she said the rich get richer and the poor get poorer. The ones who have been exposed to this higher intense learning are getting the great education, and those who do not have the same benefits are lacking. As Oaks said, this tracking can also affect average learners. Average kids are given average teachers and minimum workload. It just points out why tracking works for the top students. Here is an Oaks video that shows more about the gap between the students.

Now what many would feel, how does one fix such a problem? Oaks has a some ideas that could be possible solutions. She says that children should be graded on how much they progress throughout the learning process. There needs to be communication and feedback. The students need to know that they can talk to the teacher and that the teacher cares.

Overall Oaks says that tracking is an unsuccessful tool for education. We need to teach teachers how to teach to all levels of students. My question for this week is how did we get into this system of tracking?