Throughout this project I have learned a significant amount about why tracking is used in schools and the alternatives to this divisive method of school grouping. The roots of public school tracking are found in segregationist sentiments when the U.S. was forced to integrate and maintain public schools following Brown vs. Board. The tests that divide students into accelerated or non-accelerated tracks at an early age find their basis in the same tests that cities used to discriminated against minorities and poorer students when Southern cities were exclusively using private schools in the face of integration. This tracking then carried over into the integrated public schools and although the racist sentiments may not be there, the privileges seen by upper class white students remains. In schools that do not track there has been significant improvement for the school overall with previously "accelerated" students making the same grades or higher and also increasing their social skills by being in untracked classrooms. The students that would typically be "non-accelerated" or "college prep" students perform much better in schools that do not track. These are just a few main points that I learned over the course of this project.
Going forward, I do still wish to learn about the specific statistics behind tracking, which has alluded me in my current research. Experts that I have seen writings of and the interview that I performed claim the same statistical evidence, but I have yet to find those data points for myself. The statistical evidence behind tracking is important to stake the claim that tracking actually hurts more students than it helps. I would love to also hear more accounts from principals, teachers, and students about their personal opinions on tracking through either a survey or interview format in order to get a public opinion poll outside of simply test grade comparisons or social skills analysis. I would also like to increase my knowledge about this subject by interviewing the superintendents or the public school officials that are in charge of the curriculums and systems of schools that includes tracking to get an understanding of why tracking continues or changes in its respective school districts.
Equality in educational opportunities is something that is crucially important as the correlation between educational success and accomplishing career or life aspirations is direct and well documented. I believe that understanding the rationale behind selecting students for a path that leads to higher paying careers or universities with higher prestige is an understandably important task. The school system unfortunately benefits a certain type of student currently and as a society we must ask if this is right. The opportunity for success in school is something that each child deserves and they should not be placed behind the eight ball in as early as first grade for their future success like many schools do. U.S. public schools should approach tracking from a empirical review standpoint and consider the feasibility and curriculum of a possible change regarding tracking, should there be evidence that tracking aids a specific student and is not flexible for success down the road.
Continuing this research, future questions should be raised over the viability of a nontracked school system and whether that actually harms teachers' grasps on a classroom or if this does hold other students back from their full potential. This is a difficult topic to measure based on its long term impact, but comparing schools that track and that don't in similar conditions can provide some significant data to educators that make the choices behind tracking programs. Further research should also consider the potential that ability grouping has to disrupt the non-tracking formula. As some educators might naturally divide their classrooms into groups of students based on ability like reading speed or math comprehension that can impact the success or flaws in untracked schools, so this topic should be considered as well.