Writer’s Block Demolition Site

Our blog article today heralds (haha! “herald!”) from a local news source in Wisconsin.

The articles’ title drew me in because it had the word “Starbuck” in it. Two ideas popped into my head: “Typo!” and “What the heck is Starbucks doing in my “high school tracking” search results?”

Apparently, there’s a middle school named “Starbuck” in Racine, Wisconsin. Who knew? Anyway, they just received an award for being an “exemplary” middle school because of their improvements on math test scores. Cool stuff, I guess. This award is targeted specifically at middle schools as opposed to elementary or high schools.

You’re probably wondering exactly how this has anything to do with tracking. Well, it doesn’t have much to do with tracking, except that when Starbuck began receiving low math scores, they decided to make some changes. The called one of their strategies “grouping students by their ability.” “It seems to have made a difference,” says the article.

An extremely scientific correlational study has caused me to believe that when my auditory or visual organs receive the wording “grouping students by their ability” the stimulus activates the region of my brain labeled “tracking.” Not only that, but whenever I read “grouping students by their ability” I automatically think “tracking.”

Hmmm…a tracking program yielding positive results? How is this accomplished? Unfortunately, the article doesn’t report much more on the new teaching strategies at Starbuck Middle School. The cynical part of me wants to believe that Starbuck’s (haha…”Starbuck’s”) “ability-based-grouping” is different from the conventional tracking that I’ve grown to know and love. Perhaps teachers simply give out different assignments to different students in the same class? Or perhaps they have “math circles” within a class and not necessarily separate levels (e.g. “Advanced 6th Grade Math vs. Remedial 6th Grade Math”). Or maybe the “evil” practice of tracking works well in response to the “evil” practice of standardized testing. Like attracts like and whatnot. Both are possibilities.

There is another option: perhaps this school and these students, like all middle schools and students, are unique. It is likely that a practice which is so reprehensible in one or most schools might work in another. Possible? Sure, why not? I could deal with that. There is something to say about being pragmatic and open-minded about teaching strategies, so it’s likely that even blanket statements like “tracking is ineffective” are sometimes wrong.

So we have multiple responses here. Of course, each side of an issue tends to have supporting examples (otherwise it really shouldn’t be an issue), so maybe this is a fluke and shouldn’t be taken too seriously. It really depends on how you view the tracking issue: if you see tracking as an immoral practice, then no success tales should/would change your view; if you see tracking as simply an ineffective teaching strategy, stories such as this one should bear some weight. I hate to be a moral relativist, but I’ll allow you to make your own decision here.

Also, this post is heavily dependent on my response as opposed to the article. For more information, see my citation:

“Starbuck recognized as exemplary middle school.”

The Journal Times.

December 1, 2007.

By Paul Sloth.