From the little bit that we talked about equity in class, I realized that I did not know exactly what this word meant or how it applied in schools. I thought that equity was creating same lessons and teachings and giving all students the same opportunity; however, after reading Carly’s blog, I understood that it is way more than that, so I set out to find an article to better inform me about what equity was and how to promote it in our classrooms. The article I found was
The article that I read was “Promoting Equity in Mathematics: One Teacher’s Journey” by Alan D. Tennison, published by NCTM (link: http://www.nctm.org/Publications/mathematics-teacher/2007/Vol101/Issue1/Promoting-Equity-in-Mathematics_-One-Teacher_s-Journey/). After searching for articles involving equity in the mathematics classroom, I stumbled upon this article when I began to look through the NCTM website. Throughout the article, Tennison describes his personal experience with equity in the mathematics classroom as a teacher. The specific topic of discussion in this article is tracking, or grouping students based on their abilities in different mathematics classrooms. He discusses that although tracking may be helpful to students who are high-achieving, it has proven to be detrimental to poor and minority students in the past. At the end of the article, Tennison describes his own experience with creating a heterogeneous classroom where there is a standards-based curriculum and students with differing mathematical abilities are put in the same classroom. The curriculum was split up into units where there would be a central problem relating to other areas of study that the students would investigate throughout the unit. Within Tennison’s school, he found that students who participated in this track were more likely to enroll in four-year mathematics courses in high school, and had a higher average ACT score by 3 points. The article overall begged the question about the value of tracking in high school, causing me to reflect on what I consider its value to be in the classroom, as I had always considered tracking a positive part of schools because it challenges the students that need more challenge, and gives the students who may need more support in their classes the support they need to be successful. However, there are more questionable aspects of tracking than meet the general onlookers eye.
Tracking is a controversial topic in education as often times the students who are in the “lower” track are often overlooked, and as Tennison writes in his article, they are trained to memorize formulas rather than problem solve. The problem there lies within the instruction itself, which is at the core of equity in schools. Teachers ask that students in “lower” tracks memorize formulas because do not believe that the students are capable of learning the material to the same standard that students in the “higher” track are. Tracking inherently predisposes teachers to have prejudices about students in the different tracks. While in general tracking may seem like it has benefits, the way in which it is too often carried out negates these benefits.
The information that Tennison provided can be used in the future when designing my own curriculum, especially if I am given the opportunity to teach students who consistently struggle in mathematics. A portion of the problem that he mentioned in the article is that students in tracks that are not advanced focus on drilling different formulas for memorization, not problem solving. Problem solving, critical thinking, and other skills that can be developed in the mathematics classroom are focused on in the higher-level tracks. Therefore, if working in a school where tracking is part of the curriculum, the students in “low” tracks may especially benefit from a curriculum that focuses on problem solving, and critical thinking. Thus, the modification I would then make is to implement the standards-based curriculum heavily into tracks where students more noticeably struggle in mathematics to promote equity in mathematics. Tracking in itself does not allow for full equity in the classroom because it separates students based on ability, but there are ways that teachers can work toward creating the most equity they can if working in a school where tracking is present. Tennison’s proposal for creating a heterogeneous classroom prompted me to:
- Ponder the value of tracking in the classroom
- What teachers can do to help students who have been placed in a lower track if a school does implement tracking
- What the underlying benefits are of having a heterogeneous classroom
Therefore, I found a chapter of a book that discusses tracking in schools, and its implications. This chapter addresses the concerns listed above about tracking, and discusses its strengths and weaknesses. The link to the chapter: https://www.google.com/urlsa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=5&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwjbJbT49DYAhVL2oMKHb3SBqcQFghJMAQ&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.nctm.org%2FHandlers%2FAttachmentHandler.ashx%3FattachmentID%3DxjfHMap4gFw%253D&usg=AOvVaw03miqiCNC8UgoGsqh6nfsj.