"To stream or not to stream, this is a question"

"To stream or not to stream, this is a question"

- A brief introduction to academic tracking

PCEd (FT) 2002 - 2003 Option 5 Assignment

Education Reform: Comparing Hong Kong and Other Places

- by Fong Yun

Introduction

As the abolishment of controversial Academic Aptitude Test (AAT), academic tracking is a hot topic around the world. Different methods are tried out in different countries, but the scholars are still arguing about the pros and cons of tracking.

Many studies of tracking have found that the practice has little, if any, direct impact on student achievement. Critics suggest, however, that ability grouping all too often limits the instructional experience of lower-track students to little more than rote drill on basic skills. Further, because mobility between tracks is rare, students placed in low tracks at a young age may never be transferred to the upper tracks where higher-order skills are typically taught. (Burnett, 1995)

On the other hand, some research (e.g. Slavin's) suggested that students in certain forms of ability grouping learned more than their ungrouped counterparts. (Gamoran, 1987) However, the controversy about tracking is not only an educational or psychology issue, but also a political issue. Some detracking policy even presented as an equity issue rather than a learning issue. (Loveless, 1998)

Is the trend of detracking happened in Hong Kong preferable?

What should we do to achieve better learning outcome when detracking?

What do we learnt from the foreigners' experiences?

In this essay, I will first introduce the related policies in different countries and regions, then the situation in Hong Kong. As conclusion, I will introduce the pros can cons given by the scholars, then their implication for Hong Kong.

Ontario, Canada (Robertson et al, 1998)

By the introduction by Robertson et al (1998), the policies of destreaming and integration in mandated by the Ontario Ministry of Education in 1993, and implemented by 1995. Afterwards, the streaming in grade 9 is eliminated. The teachers need to instruct students for all ability levels.

The concern about origin policies raised in the late 1980s, people said that the dropout rate is high, education experience in school is irrelevant, and there are difficulties in meeting adolescent students' needs. Then the province government raises three major policy initiatives:

1. Destream grade 9

Under the new policy, the credit system for individual subjects were eliminated in grade 9, the students will just receive a pass/fail results for the subjects.

2. Transition Years Policy

The policy tried to help students to deal with the problems of adolescents facing transition between elementary and secondary school. The origin divisions of schooling system were re-grouped into fewer divisions.

3. Introduction of outcome-based, common curriculum for grade 1 - 9.

This integrates subjects into a series of clusters, e.g. the mathematics, science and technology (MST) curriculum. Which forms core areas of study across the subjects.

Schools were required by the province government to adopt and implement the policies and practices by September 1996.

The destreaming of grade 9 is very important in the transition years policy. Before that, the students in grades 9 to 12 had been streamed in a three streams as 'basic', 'general', and 'advanced', and study different courses according to student ability and interest. The streaming between the three levels was based on the grade 8 teachers recommendations, and all students entered grade 9 enrolled in one of these three streams. This approach had been the subject of considerable criticism. Researchers suggested that streaming disadvantaged students in the lower streams and perpetuated social injustice. Grouping according to ability level was said to be biased in terms of gender, socio-economic class and cultural background. (Robertson et al, 1998)

By observation, the new policies bring four major changes simultaneously: (Robertson et al, 1998)

1. Destreaming affect the structure of classroom. Teachers were confronted with abroad span of abilities among students in their classrooms.

2. The integration of subjects (e.g. MST)

3. Focus on social dimensions of the subject (i.e. the Science, Technology and Society approach - STS approach)

4. Increased emphasis on achievement targets (an outcome-based curriculum).

However, by Robertson et al (1998) investigation, there are also challenges of destreaming:

1. Teachers' view: they think that the new curriculum is departed to far from the traditional one and is hard to adapt, and did not know how to adopt it.

2. Students' disagreement on destreaming. Although more than half of the students glad not to be streamed, there are still many students disagree with destreaming. Especially, more high-achieving students disagree with destreaming.

3. Difficulties of courses: Students think that the grade 9 courses were too easy and not challenging. Students think that grade 9 is not in a secondary school, it is just an extended grade 8 - elementary school.

4. Disappointment to new credit system. Students like an old-fashioned report card, and they think that the grade 9 report cards did not indicate a great deal about their performance.

Israel (Resh, 1998)

By Resh (1998) introduction, the Israeli education system is a centralized administrated system. Free education is provided and no streaming occurs until grade 10. The students are non-selectively assigned to elementary school (grade 1 - 6) and junior schools (grade 7 - 9) by neighborhood zoning and enrollment zones respectively.

The high school education is highly tracked and fully differentiated by central definition. Students are separated in different classes in the school, and even different kinds of schools (academic, vocational, and low-level vocational) according to academic attainment. High proportion of students, usually those from lower social groups, was placed in vocational schools for practical labor training. The occupation future, even the certificate, is different from one track to another.

The tracking of students from junior schools to high schools is highly selective, and the teachers and counselors in the junior schools shared powerful position in the assignment process. The competition between high schools in higher tracks caused them to set up demanding entrance standards. As the tracks are differentiated so greatly and the track structure is so rigid, the mobility between tracks is very low.

There may be some factors cause the tracking shift away from meritocratic tracking: (Resh, 1998)

1. The parents from higher social background can invest more for their children's placement. Also, the status quo may cause perceptions on the needs and future perspectives of students from different social origin.

2. The lack of appropriate vocational tracks for girls (the content of vocational schools are more "male-prescribed") may hinder counselors and parents form assign them into vocational tracks, thus gives girls advantage to be placed in the academic track.

By Resh (1998) investigation, the tracking placement is affected by ascriptive factors. Students with higher socioeconomic status, western origin and girls have better chance to be placed in academic track, vice versa. The effect of family background becomes stronger and stronger when goes from the higher tracks to the lower tracks. Thus a correlation between family resources and achievement build.

Although the Israeli high school education is nearly universal, the competition over vacancies in prestigious academic and high vocational tracks is highly selective and crucial. In such tracking system, the students of lower social background are triply disadvantaged:

1. The lack of resources affect their ability and attainment

2. They have higher chance of being placed in a lower, less promising track

3. The placement itself affect students education outcomes

These create and maintain the status of educational stratification.

Also, the curriculum content is gender-related between tracks play a role in educational stratification on genders too.

Resh (1998) has an interesting point: 'the high vocational track is closest in its prestige and academic curriculum to the academic one. However, it is one of the vocational tracks; thus it may seem to better suit good students who come from a lower social background, both in the minds of the school decision makers and in the eyes of those parents who may believe that their child will graduate from school "with something practical in hand."'

Singapore (Kam & Gopinathan, 1999)

As Kam & Gopinathan (1999) introduction, Singaporean education system is also a highly centralized system, but some decentralization effort is paid in the last decade. The streaming in Singapore is also highly selective and crucial, and even happened more earlier than Israel: started in primary 5, and through out the education system beyond. (Although its already delayed by 1 year from primary 4 since 1991 reform) The streaming is according to students' academic ability toward language (i.e. English) and mathematics. The students streamed into different classes for different courses that are suitable for their learning ability.

After the Primary School Leaving Examination, students are divided into different courses that can regard as three streams: Special, Express and Normal. The students in Special and Express streams can finish their secondary study in 4 years. The students in Normal stream use 5 years for their secondary study. (Then sit for the GCSE "O" level examinations)

Beside that, a Normal (Technical) stream is available for some less academically oriented students to have a basic secondary education comprising a curriculum of four core subjects (i.e. English language, the mother tongue at the functional level, mathematics and computer applications) together with science, technical studies and home economics.

In the post-secondary education level, the students are further streamed. About 20% of the age cohort could go to junior colleges for preparing university studies. About 40% could go to polytechnics for technical or commercial training (in diploma level). Another 20% could go to the Institute of Technical Education for vocational training (in certificate level).

The streaming not only occurs between students, but the schools. Government introduces market principles into education sector. Since 1992, secondary schools and junior colleges have been ranked in the Straits Times Schools 100 Report each year, principally on the basis of the schools' 'O' and 'A' level examination results. The Straits Times, as Singapore's only English daily, make this information available to the whole population. This make schools more efficient as parents would be able to make more informed choices as to which were more "effective" schools.

Also, the government selects some schools to become "neighbourhood schools", and let them enjoy more autonomy under the decentralization policy. One of the criteria of being chosen as "neighbourhood schools" is the "value-added" attribute in public examination results.

Critics already appeared when the streaming policy first suggested in 1979 report:

1. The possible adverse effects on pupil motivation and self-concept that would flow from the streaming-labeling process.

2. It would be very difficult to make accurate predictions about students' ability at the age of 8 (an earlier practice)

3. The prediction making is even more difficult in Singapore, a system in which English was the main medium of instruction and Chinese dialects (for the Chinese community at that time) the main home language.

But the government urges that the original system wasted student talent and cannot provide for Singapore's needs. Also, streaming would make it more efficient as it would force teachers to come to decisions about students' ability and performance. As a result, the system was able to reduce attrition but at the cost of segregated classrooms and narrowed academic opportunities.

As an ex-pupil of Singapore, in my own opinion, because the streaming in Singapore is so crucial (and it determines the "label" of students and their future), the adverse effect of this system is more serious then that happening in Hong Kong (AAT in 1980's to 90's). The problems made by the AAT are incomparable to the P3 (now P4) streaming test in Singapore. Although the Singapore government stress that the mobility between streams are increased. (The struggles in Singapore streaming system is recently presented by a film "I not Stupid"《小孩不笨》, the film showed how students suffered under that harsh streaming system.)

Hong Kong

1979 and 2000 are two important years in Hong Kong streaming system.

Before 1987, all P6 students had to sit for the Secondary School Entrance Examination (SSEE), in Chinese, English and Mathematics, and grouped into 9 grades. In 1974, 48% of the age cohort gets a secondary place. Since 1978, the government was able to provide nine years of compulsory education to all students aged 6 to 15. Therefore, SSEE was abolished since all students could get a secondary place. (Hong Kong Government, 1974)

The distribution of students into secondary schools was achieved by a new system: the Secondary School Places Allocation (SSPA) scheme, with following features: (as stated by Cheung, 2003)

1. Internal examination results counted with a formula.

2. The Academic Aptitude Test (AAT) in language and mathematic logical ability is used to scaled and compare students from different schools.

3. All students in the same school net (8 in HK) divided into 5 bands equally.

4. Parents choose secondary schools in an order of preference.

5. Students are allocated for secondary places according to parental choice and under the banding order (allocate band 1 students first, then the band 2…). The students in the same band are allocated in a random basis.

6. The school can keep maximum 10% of its form 1 places as discretionary places for direct admission from all over Hong Kong.

The SSPA is started to work in 1979.

However, the practice of AAT brings drilling effect to primary studies. Therefore, under the Education Commission's suggestion, the government decided to abolish AAT and reduce the number of bands into 3. Also, the discretionary places quota was increased from 10% to 20%. This is a short-term treatment only, the long-term placement scheme is still under consideration. (Education Commission, 2000)

The distribution of form 4 places is based on internal examination results of form 3, and let most of the students (if not all) to have form 4 places in the same school. No bandings are formed beyond, but students are streamed into Science, Arts, and Commerce streams under competition. Usually, the Science stream shared higher academic achievement (but there are still some schools will Art stream better than Science stream in academic results).

After form 5 study, the Hong Kong Certificate of Education Examination (HKCEE) results determine if a student could get a form 6 place, and continue in matriculate study. After then, the Advance Level Examination (HKALE) determines who can go into the universities. The Polytechnic University, City University and the Institute of Vocation Education (IVE) provide diploma and certificate courses for those who want to have post-secondary study but cannot go into universities (now, also the associate degrees).

Discussion

Under historical approach, Hong Kong is seemed having a trend of detracking, from a highly selective system like Singapore to a less selective system like Ontario.

As Burnett's (1995) description, detracking no only changed the makeup of classes, but the pedagogy and curriculum (like the example in Ontario). Teachers are encouraged to personalize their instruction to meet individual needs, and emphasize project-based, social aspects and experiences in studying.

However, streaming also has some advantages. As Ontario experience, high-achieving students dislike detracking, as they think that the courses for multi-ability students are not challenging (Robertson et al, 1998). On the other hand, researches show "Big Fish Little Pond" effect that, the students self-esteem build on comparison with people around them, so the lower-achieving students may gain higher self-esteem compare to the higher-achieving ones (Kemp & Watkins, 1996; Wong & Watkins, 2001).

For alternation, some suggest that the within-class grouping can achieve the advantage of streaming, but reduced the disadvantage of labeling effect. Research shows this still affects students' self-concept, and once the groups established, mobility between groups is low. Misplacement formed when students' ability changed. It simply replicates the inequities of tracking. (Burnett, 1995; Macintyre & Ireson, 2002)

Cooperative learning is also suggested to let students learn and support each other in the heterogeneous and multi-ability background in detracking. However, critics suggest that cooperative learning need teacher in better pedagogy skill, otherwise will not have good effect compared to traditional teaching. (Burnett, 1995; Hallam & Toutounji, 1996)

In my own view, the detracking trend of Hong Kong is appreciable. It reduces students' pressure on the "fate-determined" examinations and the effect of education stratification. However, detracking itself is not a solution for all, we must pay extra effort in education reform to achieve our students with innovative mind, adequate knowledge and skills, and competitive in the future society.

As researches still provide different results and suggestion in recent years:

To stream or not to stream, this is still a question.

Reference:

1. Burnett, Gary (1995). Alternatives to Ability Grouping: Still Unanswered Questions. ERIC/CUE Digest number 111.

2. Cheung, KW (2003). Education Reform: Comparing Hong Kong and Other Places, Session 4. The course notes.

3. Education Commission (2002). Learning for Life, Learning through Life, Reform Proposals for the Education System in Hong Kong. HK: Government Printer.

4. Gamoran, A. (1987). Organization, instruction, and the effects of ability grouping: Comment on Slavin's "Best-Evidence Synthesis." Review of Educational Research, 57(3), 341 - 345.

5. Hallam, Susan & Inji Toutounji (1996). What do we know about the grouping of pupils by ability? UK: University of London, Institute of Education.

6. Hong Kong Government (1974). Secondary Education in Hong Kong over the next decade (the White Paper). HK: Government Printer.

7. Kam, H.W. & Gopinathan, S. (1999). Recent developments in education in Singapore. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 10(1), 99 - 117.

8. Kemp, S. & Watkins, D. (1996). Self-esteem and academic streaming in Hong Kong. The Journal of Social Psychology, 136(5), 651 - 653.

9. Loveless, Tom (1998). The Tracking Wars: State Reform Meets School Policy. US: Washington DC: Brookings.

10. Macintyre, H. & Ireson, J. (2002). Within-class ability grouping: placement of pupils in groups and self-concept. British Educational Research Journal, 28(2), 249 - 263.

11. Oakes, Jeannie (1995). Two Cities' Tracking and Within-School Segregation. Teachers College Record, 96(4), 681 - 690.

12. Resh, N. (1998). Track Placement: How the "sorting machine" works in Israel. American Journal of Education, 106, 416 - 438.

13. Robertson, C.L., Cowell, B., & Olson, J. (1998). A case study of integration and destreaming: teachers and students in an Ontario secondary school respond. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 30(6), 691 - 717.

14. Wong, K.C., Cheung, K.W., Ip, H.K. Research on the Impact of Abolishing the Academic Aptitude Test on Teaching and Learning in Primary Schools, Final Report. HK.

15. Wong, S.W., & Watkins, D. (2001). Self-esteem and ability grouping: a Hong Kong investigation of the big fish little pond effect. Educational Psychology, 21(1), 79 - 87.