Unpacking the Debate: Heterogeneous vs. Homogeneous Math Classrooms with a Differentiated Model
Unpacking the Debate: Heterogeneous vs. Homogeneous Math Classrooms at My High School
Education is a deeply personal profession, and for those of us at Warden High School, it’s more than just teaching equations—it’s about reshaping futures. Over the years, I've had many conversations with colleagues and experts who challenge our approach to ability-tracking students into specific math classes. Some advocate for the progressive move toward heterogeneous grouping, where students of all skill levels learn together in the same classroom. While this idea is rooted in equity and inclusivity, I remain a staunch defender of our current system of targeted placement. Here's why—and why I welcome the ongoing debate.
The Core Argument for Ability Tracking
In our district, 74% of incoming 9th graders score at the lowest level on their 8th-grade Smarter Balanced Assessment (SBA), indicating they lack foundational pre-algebra skills. These students come from a middle school that employs a detracked, heterogeneous, thinking classroom model. However, our middle school data does not support the outcomes often cited in popular research and trends in current math education, and our high school success appears to contradict these approaches.
For these students, jumping into Algebra 1 without addressing these gaps has historically set them up for failure. Conversely, our high-achieving students are often ready to advance to higher levels of mathematical rigor. These stark differences in readiness raise a critical question: How can one teacher equitably support both ends of the spectrum in a single classroom?
To address this, we have implemented ability-tracked classes that allow us to meet students where they are. Individuals who have come to visit our system explain our systems as a differentiated system, "not tracked" where students learn similar content, but with the neccesary scaffolding and extensions needed in different classes to make the content accessable and challanging for all students. Whether it’s applied geometry for struggling learners or honors-level courses for our advanced students, this system has helped ensure targeted support and a tailored pace.
Learning from Experience: Why I Push Back on Detracking
Heterogeneous grouping is not a new concept. Our middle school teachers, who use the Open Up curriculum and emphasize Building Thinking Classrooms, swear by its efficacy. They integrate mindset training and even offer co-requisite support classes to help struggling students. Yet, the results have been mixed at best. While their enthusiasm for these approaches is commendable, I’ve seen a disconnect between the idealism of research and the realities of the classroom.
Teaching lower-level math classes effectively requires a deliberate approach that combines scaffolding and intentional instruction. Scaffolding provides students with structured support as they build foundational skills, enabling them to gradually tackle more complex problems. Intentional instruction focuses on meeting students where they are, identifying gaps in their knowledge, and designing lessons that address these needs. These strategies are crucial when working with students who lack foundational skills, as they help prevent frustration and disengagement while fostering confidence and incremental success.
Classroom Management Challenges
Classrooms with all lower-level learners present unique challenges. When students perceive themselves as being placed in the "dumb class," it can negatively impact their STEM identities, leading to low motivation and self-esteem. Additionally, managing behavior in such classrooms can be demanding if students feel disconnected from the content or lack confidence in their abilities. Without proper support, these dynamics can result in high rates of failure and classroom disruptions.
Benefits of Strategic Placement
When done correctly, grouping students with similar math levels can lead to significant benefits:
- Increased Think Time: Students have the space to process and explore concepts without feeling overshadowed by peers who grasp the material quickly.
- Equitable Access: All students receive content tailored to their current level, ensuring that foundational gaps are addressed systematically.
- Reduced Academic Dishonesty: By working with peers of similar ability, students are less likely to rely on copying answers and more likely to engage in genuine problem-solving.
The Case for Ability-Tracked Classes
At Mark Morris High School, strategic ability-tracked classes produced clear results. Under this model, 70% of students passed the state’s End-of-Course (EOC) exam, demonstrating that tailored instruction and a supportive environment lead to measurable success. However, when these classes were eliminated, the failure rate soared to 85%, underscoring the challenges of detracking without a comprehensive plan for supporting all learners.
Lessons Learned
The experience at Mark Morris highlights the importance of implementing ability-tracked classes thoughtfully. While homogeneous grouping can yield impressive results, it must include:
- Intentional Design: Classes should focus on building positive STEM identities and avoiding stigmatization.
- Professional Development: Teachers need training to effectively scaffold and manage classrooms with struggling learners.
- Continuous Assessment: Regular data collection ensures that instruction remains responsive to student needs.
Strategic placement, combined with intentional instruction, offers a proven path to success for students on both ends of the academic spectrum. When done well, it not only improves academic outcomes but also creates a more equitable and supportive learning environment.
Innovating at Warden: Flipping the Script
Warden has been at the forefront of experimenting with innovative ideas. Five years ago, we flipped our math sequence to teach Geometry before Algebra 1. At the time, critics doubted this approach, claiming Geometry required too much algebraic knowledge. However, our results tell a different story.
By beginning with Geometry, we can close pre-algebra gaps through statistical and spatial reasoning while weaving algebra concepts throughout the course. This sequence (suggested in the NCTM book Catalyzing Change) also helps students succeed on the SBA in 10th grade, which is heavily algebra-focused, and prepares them to double up on math classes in later years to meet college-readiness goals. Our accelerated students do not skip any class in our sequence; they double up as 8th or 9th graders, where Geometry is always the doubled math class: 8th/Geometry H or Geometry H/Algebra 1 H.
The Challenge of Equitable Scaffolding
One of the strongest arguments against ability tracking is the idea that it’s inequitable. Critics argue that heterogeneous classrooms, supported by co-requisite courses, promote inclusivity and high expectations for all students. But I challenge anyone advocating for this model to explain how they would design equitable lessons for two students like these:
- Student A: In the 98th percentile nationally, ready for advanced concepts like Calculus as a sophomore.
- Student B: A multilingual learner with a math proficiency score equivalent to a second-grader’s average.
Both are incredible students, but their needs couldn’t be more different. Attempting to teach them together risks holding one back while overwhelming the other. At Warden, we’ve strategically placed students into homogeneous groups to provide targeted scaffolding or accelerated rigor. It’s not perfect, but it works.
Teacher Tracking: An Often Overlooked Issue
Teacher placement is as important as student placement. A common pitfall in many districts is assigning inexperienced teachers to the most challenging classes. This practice not only burns out new educators but also deprives struggling students of the expertise they need most.
At Warden, we prioritize matching teachers to their strengths. For example, I teach Geometry, Algebra 2, and Personal Finance because I excel in those areas. My colleague, Jessica, handles college-level math and support classes because she’s adept at working with struggling learners. This equitable scheduling benefits both teachers and students.
A Call for Evidence-Based Debate
I understand that my views on ability tracking may not align with popular trends in educational research. However, I believe in following the data. If there’s a school with a similar student population achieving better results through heterogeneous grouping, I want to learn from them. But until then, I stand by our system, which has consistently produced measurable growth for Warden students.
At the end of the day, we all share the same goal: providing the best possible education for our students. So let’s keep the debate alive, grounded in evidence and driven by a commitment to equity and excellence. To those who advocate for change: show me the results, and let’s talk. I advocate for a different type of change, one that focuses on differentiation within homogeneous ability-grouped classrooms because this is what is working for our students.
Comments
Post a Comment