On the Wrong Track: How Tracking is Associated with Dropping Out of High School

Werblow, Jacob; Urick, Angela; Duesbery, Luke

doi:10.1080/10665684.2013.779168

Cited by 52 publications

(43 citation statements)

References 63 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In more recent studies, leadership behaviors that contribute to a creation of a school climate have been found to have an increased influence on teacher and student outcomes compared to managerial tasks (Hoy & Hannum, 1997;Hoy, Sweetland, & Smith, 2002;Hoy, Tarter, & Bliss, 1990;Hoy, Tarter, & Woolfolk Hoy, 2006;Urick & Bowers, in press;Werblow, Urick, & Duesbery, 2013). In a meta-analysis of studies on the impact of different leadership styles on student outcomes, Robinson et al (2008) identified five core measures of effective leadership behaviors, which included establishment of goals, promoting and participating in teacher development, planning, coordinating and evaluating instruction and managerial tasks of resourcing, and creating a safe and orderly environment.…”

Section: Importance Of Principal Perceptionmentioning

confidence: 99%

What Are the Different Types of Principals Across the United States? A Latent Class Analysis of Principal Perception of Leadership

Urick

Bowers

2013

Educational Administration Quarterly

Self Cite

133

170

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: Effective styles of principal leadership can help address multiple issues in struggling schools, such as low student achievement and high rates of teacher attrition. Although the literature has nominated certain “idealized” leadership styles as being more or less effective, such as transformational, instructional, and shared instructional leadership, we have little evidence about how principals may or may not choose to practice these styles across U.S. schools. Research Design: Latent class analysis was used to identify different types of principals across the United States. We analyzed the 1999-2000 Schools and Staffing Survey as it presents a unique opportunity to study the different types of U.S. principals since it contains leadership measures not found in other national surveys. A final sample of 7,650 public schools and principals was included in the analysis. Findings: Instead of idealized leadership styles signifying variations in practice, the differences between types of principals were defined by the degree of principal and teacher leadership. Further, the school and principal context, such as school size, urbanicity, accountability performance, and principal background, predicted the three significantly different principal types: controlling, frequent principal leadership; balkanizing, high degree of leadership shared with teachers; or integrating, frequent principal leadership as well as a high degree of leadership shared with teachers. Conclusions: These types suggest that principals simultaneously practice leadership behaviors associated with multiple leadership styles in accordance with their background and school context. These findings provide support for the use of more complex models to assess school leader effectiveness.

show abstract

Section: Importance Of Principal Perceptionmentioning

confidence: 99%

What Are the Different Types of Principals Across the United States? A Latent Class Analysis of Principal Perception of Leadership

Urick

Bowers

2013

Educational Administration Quarterly

Self Cite

133

170

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Much of the international research on ability grouping focuses on student outcomes, especially academic achievement. Students in lower streamed classes are found to be exposed to less demanding work and hence achieve lower exam grades, have lower educational aspirations and are more likely to drop out of secondary school than those allocated to higher stream classes (Boaler et al 2000;Gamoran et al 1995;Tach, Farkas 2006;Kerckhoff 1986;Oakes 1985;Werblow et al 2013). Given that workingclass and minority group students are more likely to be allocated to lower ability groups, streaming is found to exacerbate social inequality between students (Gamoran and Mare 1989;Oakes 1990).…”

Section: Research On Curriculum Differentiationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Working at a different level? Curriculum differentiation in Irish lower secondary education

Smyth

2018

Oxford Review of Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen:Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden.Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen.Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. Non-technical summaryYoung people in Irish secondary schools sit their lower and upper secondary exam subjects at higher or ordinary level. This paper draws on a study which followed young people in twelve case-study schools from the beginning to the end of their secondary education. The study involved both quantitative survey data and qualitative group interviews, providing a more comprehensive picture of the factors influencing subject level take-up.Half of the schools in the study used streaming, with students assigned to different ability groups for all subjects. This approach was more common in schools serving more disadvantaged communities. Within streamed schools, young people in the lower stream classes were usually allocated to ordinary level, which limited their potential achievement and the kinds of options open to them on leaving school.Half of the schools had mixed ability base classes, though sometimes used ability grouping for specific subjects such as Maths, Irish and English. These schools were found to differ in the extent to which teachers encouraged students to take higher level for as long as possible.Young people from working-class or non-employed backgrounds are much less likely to take higher level subjects at lower secondary level, even taking account of their prior ability in reading and maths. Over and above the effect of individual social class background, students attending schools with a concentration of working-class students were much less likely to take higher level subjects. This was partly explained by the greater use of streaming in these schools but teacher expectations and encouragement were found to play an important part.Overall the paper shows how schools frame the opportunity for students to make choices that matter for their later educational career and school practices can act to reinforce social class inequalities in educational outcomes.

show abstract

“…As increased demands to produce people to fill voids in more desirable markets, less desirable voids are created in societies that need to be filled by someone. This is one instance where tracking can be exploited in order to provide advantages for some, while disadvantaging others (Battey, 2013;Oakes, 2005;Oakes & Guiton, 1995;Werblow, Urick, & Duesbery, 2013).…”

Section: The Roots Of Trackingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Oakes and others found that, as universities began placing higher importance on advanced placement courses, many urban schools were able to provide their students with more access to these types of rigorous courses. Nevertheless, many minority students continued to be tracked into lower-level courses, despite access to a wider array of course offerings (Oakes, Joseph, & Muir, 2003;Werblow et al, 2013). While recognizing this is helpful in beginning to pose alternatives to tracking culture, it cannot singlehandedly solve larger problems of "access to universities, living-wage jobs, and affordable housing" (Battey, 2013, p. 351).…”

Section: Deconstructing Tracking Culture In Mathematics Educationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Understanding Issues Associated with Tracking Students in Mathematics Education

2018

JME

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Academic tracking, particularly in subjects like mathematics, has existed in the United States' education system for decades. A problem with tracking is that, in many cases, students are sorted based on external factors beyond their control, rather than their abilities. This article expounds upon theory supporting these claims, providing support through literature that suggests tracking is rooted in capitalist exploitations and settler colonialism. In deconstructing tracking in schools, connections are made that illustrate how tracking creates cultures of academic apartheid, providing advantages for some and disadvantages for others. To conclude, possibilities are proposed to begin rethinking mathematical curriculum in order to disrupt tracking in education. These possibilities include creating spaces in schools for democratic learning environments to thrive, while calling for curriculum to be structured around students' interests. Furthermore, ideas like incorporating multiple perspectives in mathematics curricula through rethinking the labels associated with mathematics courses, teaching mathematics through the context of history, and teaching mathematics for social justice, are introduced. Each proposal serves as a potential alternative to traditional, hierarchical mathematics curriculum.

show abstract

On the Wrong Track: How Tracking is Associated with Dropping Out of High School

Cited by 52 publications

References 63 publications

What Are the Different Types of Principals Across the United States? A Latent Class Analysis of Principal Perception of Leadership

What Are the Different Types of Principals Across the United States? A Latent Class Analysis of Principal Perception of Leadership

Working at a different level? Curriculum differentiation in Irish lower secondary education

Understanding Issues Associated with Tracking Students in Mathematics Education

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About