Skip to main content
Log in

Tracking instructional quality across secondary mathematics and English Language Arts classes

  • Published:
Journal of Educational Change Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Teachers have the largest school-based influence on student learning, yet there is little research on how instructional practice is systematically distributed within tracking systems. We examine whether teaching practice varies significantly across track levels and, if so, which aspects of instructional practice differ systematically. Using multilevel modeling, we find that teachers of low track classrooms provided significantly less emotional support, organizational support, and instructional support to students in their classes than did teachers of high track classrooms. Mathematics classes were also observed to have higher quality instructional support for both content understanding and analysis and problem solving than English classes. We develop cases illustrating how small but significant differences in instructional quality are associated with substantially diverging lived experiences for students in high and low track classes.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Teachers were reluctant to share information that might be used to identify them within their departments. A small portion of teachers (22 %) agreed to provide us with demographic data. In this subsample, 91 % of teachers were certified and 82 % held a master’s degree or higher. Those without a master’s degree or certification were clustered in one rural district and were evenly distributed across content area and track assignments.

  2. CLASS protocols are designed to assess similar constructs across the span of developmental stages from early childhood development through secondary school. At the time of data collection, the CLASS-S protocol was being piloted by the developers. However, the instrument has been validated at the K-3 level and domain scores are significantly related to student achievement and other key student outcomes (Ansalone 2010; Ponitz et al. 2009).

  3. Although double-scoring lessons has been demonstrated to increase the stability of observation ratings, this was not feasible given the scope of the live observations in the study.

  4. According to the official certification training, observers may still be considered reliable when they are one point (on a seven-point scale) away from a master coder’s rating in either direction.

  5. The CLASS-S measures positive climate and negative climate as two separate constructs, rather than as opposite ends of a single spectrum. A classroom can exhibit a highly positive climate in terms of relationships, positive teacher and student affect, positive communications, and respect. At the same time, that classroom may display one or more indicators of negative climate, such as an inappropriately sarcastic comment from the teacher, punitive control of students, or other signs of disrespect. According to the CLASS-S, any instance of negative climate is automatically reflected in an imperfect negative climate score.

References

  • Aaronson, D., Barrow, L., & Sander, W. (2007). Teachers and student achievement in the chicago public high schools. Journal of Labor Economics, 25(1), 95–135.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Abu El-Haj, T. R., & Rubin, B. C. (2009). Realizing the equity-minded aspirations of detracking and inclusion: Toward a capacity-oriented framework for teacher education. Curriculum Inquiry, 39(3), 435–463.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Allen, J. P., Pianta, R. C., Gregory, A., Mikami, A. Y., & Lun, J. (2011). An interaction-based approach to enhancing secondary school instruction and student achievement. Science, 333, 1034–1037.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Allison, P. D. (2002). Missing data. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Ansalone, G. (2010). Tracking: Educational differentiation or defective strategy. Educational Research Quarterly, 34(2), 3–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Archbald, D., Glutting, J., & Qian, X. (2009). Getting into honors or not: An analysis of the relative influence of grades, test scores, and race on track placement in a comprehensive high school. American Secondary Education, 37, 65–81.

    Google Scholar 

  • Asquith, P., Stephens, A. C., Knuth, E. J., & Alibali, M. W. (2007). Middle school mathematics teachers’ knowledge of students’ understanding of core algebraic concepts: Equal sign and variable. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 9(3), 249–272.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ayalon, H., & Gamoran, A. (2000). Stratification in academic secondary programs and educational inequality in Israel and the United States. Comparative Education Review, 44(1), 54–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barton, P. E., & Coley, R. J. (2009). Parsing the achievement gap II. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Services.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boaler, J. (2000). Students’ experiences of ability grouping-disaffection and polarization. British Educational Research Journal, 26(3), 631–648.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bohn, C. M., Roehrig, A. D., & Pressley, M. (2004). The first days of school in effective and less effective primary-grades classrooms. Elementary School Journal, 104, 269–287.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bourdieu, P., & Passeron, J. P. (1990). Reproduction in education, society and culture. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bowman, B. T., & Stott, F. M. (1994). Understanding development in a culture context: The challenge for teachers. In B. Mallory & R. New (Eds.), Diversity and developmentally appropriate practices: Challenges for early childhood education (pp. 19–34). New York: Teachers College Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burris, C. C., Wiley, E., Welner, K., & Murphy, J. (2008). Accountability, rigor, and detracking: Achievement effects of embracing a challenging curriculum as a universal good for all students. Teachers College Record, 110(3), 571–608.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cadima, J., Leal, T., & Burchinal, M. (2010). The quality of teacher–student interactions: Associations with first graders’ academic and behavioral outcomes. Journal of School Psychology, 48(6), 457–482.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cameron, C. E., Connor, C. M., & Morrison, F. J. (2005). Effects of variation in teacher organization on classroom functioning. Journal of School Psychology, 43, 61–85.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chetty, R., Friedman, J.N., Rockoff, J.E. (2013). Measuring the impacts of teachers I: Evaluating bias in teacher value-added estimates. National Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper 19423.

  • Connell, J. P., & Wellborn, J. G. (1991). Competence, authonomy, and relatedness: A motivational analysis of self-system processes. In R. Gunnar & L. A. Sroufe (Eds.), Minnesota symposia on child psychology (Vol. 23, pp. 43–77). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cornelius-White, J. (2007). Learner-centered teacher-student relationships are effective: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 77, 113–143.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Costello, A. (2012). Multimodality in an urban, eighth-grade classroom. Voices from the Middle, 19(4), 50.

    Google Scholar 

  • Creswell, J. (2009). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Incorporated.

    Google Scholar 

  • Decker, D. M., Dona, D. P., & Christenson, S. L. (2007). Behaviorally at-risk African American students: The importance of student–teacher relationships for student outcomes. Journal of School Psychology, 45(1), 83–109.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Diamond, J., Randolph, A., & Spillane, J. (2004). Teachers’ expectations and sense of responsibility for student learning: The importance of race, class, and organizational habitus. Anthropology and Education Quarterly, 35(1), 75–98.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dreeben, R., & Gamoran, A. (1986). Race, instruction, and learning. American Sociological Review, 51(5), 660–669.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Emmer, E. T., & Stough, L. M. (2001). Classroom management: A critical part of educational psychology, with implications for teacher education. Educational Psychologist, 36(2), 103–112.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Flannery, K. B., Sugai, G., & Anderson, C. M. (2009). School-wide positive behavior support in high school: Early lessons learned. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 11(3), 177–185.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ford, D. Y., & Moore, J. L, I. I. I. (2013). Understanding and reversing underachievement, low achievement, and achievement gaps among high-ability African American males in urban school contexts. The Urban Review, 45, 399–415.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gamoran, A., Porter, A. C., Smithson, J., & White, P. A. (1997). Upgrading high school mathematics instruction: Improving learning opportunities for low-achieving, low-income youth. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 19(4), 325–338.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garcia, S. B., & Guerra, P. L. (2004). Deconstructing deficit thinking: Working with educators to create more equitable learning environments. Education and Urban Society, 36(2), 150–168.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gay, G. (2002). Preparing for culturally responsive teaching. Journal of Teacher Education, 53, 110–116.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grossman, P. L., & Stodolsky, S. S. (1995). Content as context: The role of school subjects in secondary school teaching. Educational Researcher, 24(8), 5–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gutiérrez, K. D., & Rogoff, B. (2003). Cultural ways of learning: Individual traits or repertoires of practice. Educational Researcher, 32, 19–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hamre, B. K., & Pianta, R. C. (2005). Can instructional and emotional support in the first-grade classroom make a difference for children at risk of school failure? Child Development, 76(5), 949–967.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hand, V. M. (2010). The co-construction of opposition in a low-track mathematics classroom. American Educational Research Journal, 47(1), 97–132.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hanushek, E. A. (1992). The trade-off between child quantity and quality. The Journal of Political Economy, 100(1), 84–117.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harris, D. M. (2012). Varying teacher expectations and standards: Curriculum differentiation in the age of standards-based reform. Education and Urban Society, 44(2), 128–150.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77, 81–112.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hiebert, J., & Wearne, D. (2003). Instructional task, classroom discourse, and students’ learning in second grade. American Educational Research Journal, 30, 393–425.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hill, H. C., Ball, D. L., & Schilling, S. G. (2008). Unpacking pedagogical content knowledge: Conceptualizing and measuring teachers’ topic-specific knowledge of students. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 39(4), 372–400.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hill, H. C., Umland, K. U., Litke, E., & Kapitula, L. (2012). Teacher quality and quality teaching: Examining the relationship of a teacher assessment to practice. American Journal of Education, 118(4), 489–519.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hox, J. (2010). Multilevel analysis: Techniques and applications. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kane, T. J., & Staiger, D. O. (2012). Gathering feedback for teaching: Combining high-quality observations with student surveys and achievement gains. MET project. Seattle: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kelly, Sean. (2004). Are teachers tracked? On what basis and with what consequences. Social Psychology of Education, 7, 55–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kesner, J. E. (2000). Teacher characteristics and the quality of child-teacher relationships. Journal of School Psychology, 38(2), 133–149.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kulik, C., & Kulik, J. (1982). Effects of ability grouping on secondary school students: A meta-analysis of evaluation findings. American Educational Research Journal, 79, 415–428.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kupermintz, H. (2003). Teacher effects and teacher effectiveness: A validity investigation of the Tennessee Value Added Assessment System. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 25, 287–298.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ladson-Billings, G. (1995). But that’s just good teaching! The case for culturally relevant pedagogy. Theory into Practice, 34, 159–165.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • LaPrade, K. (2011). Removing instructional barriers: One track at a time. Education, 131(4), 740.

    Google Scholar 

  • LeChasseur, K., Mayer, A., & Donaldson, M. (under review). The structuring of tracking: Instructional practice of teachers leading low and high track classes.

  • Lee, V. E., Bryk, A., & Smith, J. B. (1993). The organization of effective secondary schools. Review of Research in Education, 19, 171–268.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, V. E., & Smith, J. B. (1999). Social support and achievement for young adolescents in Chicago: The role of school academic press. American Educational Research Journal, 36, 907–945.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lucas, S. R. (1999). Tracking inequality: Stratification and mobility in American high schools. NewYork: Teachers College Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lucas, S. R., & Berends, M. (2002). Sociodemographic diversity, correlated achievement, and de facto tracking. Sociology of Education, 75, 328–348.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Luke, D. A. (2004). Multilevel modeling. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Mashburn, A. J., Pianta, R. C., Hamre, B. K., Downer, J. T., Barbarin, O. A., Bryant, D., & Burchinal, M. (2008). Measures of classroom quality in pre-kindergarten and children’s development of academic, language, and social skills. Child Development, 79(3), 732–749.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCaffrey, D. F., Lockwood, J. R., Koretz, D. M., & Hamilton, L. S. (2003). Evaluating value-added models for teacher accountability. Santa Monica: RAND Corporation.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Merrienboer, J., & Stoyanov, S. (2008). Learners in a changing learning landscape: Reflection from an instructional design perspective. In J. Visser, M. Visser-Valfrey, D. N. Aspin, & J. D. Chapman (Eds.), Lifelong learning book series (Vol. 12, pp. 69–90). Dordrecht, South Holland: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mickelson, R. A. (2001). Subverting-Swann: First- and second-generation segregation in the Charlotte-Mecklenburg schools. American Educational Research Journal, 38, 215–252.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mikami, Y., Allen, J. P., Pianta, R. C., & Lun, J. (2011). Effects of a teacher professional development intervention on peer relationships in secondary classrooms. School Psychology Review, 40(3), 367–385.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, S. M. (2010). Towards a multimodal literacy pedagogy: Digital video composing as 21st century literacy. In P. Albers & J. Sanders (Eds.), Literacies, arts, and multimodalities (pp. 254–281). Urbana-Champaign, IL: National Council of Teachers of English.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, S. M. (2013). A Research metasynthesis on digital video composing in classrooms: an evidence-based framework toward a pedagogy for embodied learning. Journal Of Literacy Research, 45(4), 386–430.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moller, S., & Stearns, E. (2012). Tracking success: High school curricula and labor market outcomes by race and gender. Urban Education, 47(6), 1025–1054.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • NCTQ. (2013). State of the States 2013 Connect the Dots: Using evaluations of teacher effectiveness to inform policy and practice. Washington, DC: National Council on Teacher Quality.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nieto, S. (1995). Affirming diversity: The sociopolitical context of multicultural education. White Plains, NY: Longman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nunn, L. M. (2011). Classrooms as racialized spaces: Dynamics of collaboration, tension, and student attitudes in urban and suburban high schools. Urban Education, 46(6), 1226–1255.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oakes, J., Ormseth, T., Bell, R., & Camp, P. (1990). Multiplying inequalities: The effects of race, social class, and tracking on opportunities to learn mathematics and science. Santa Monica: RAND.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oakes, J. (2005). Keeping track: How schools structuring inequality. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oakes, J., Gamoran, A., & Page, R. N. (1992). Curriculum differentiation: Opportunities, outcomes and meanings. In P. W. Jackson (Ed.), Handbook of research on curriculum (pp. 570–608). New York: Macmillan Publishing Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oakes, J., & Guiton, G. (1995). Matchmaking: The dynamics of high school tracking decisions. American Educational Research Journal, 32(1), 3–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pace, J. L., & Hemmings, A. (2007). Understanding authority in classrooms: A review of theory, ideology, and research. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 4–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pianta, R. C., & Hamre, B. K. (2005). Classroom assessment scoring system, secondary manual. Charlottesville, VA: Teachstone Training.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ponitz, C. C., Rimm-Kaufman, S. E., Grimm, K. J., & Curby, T. W. (2009). Kindergarten classroom quality, behavioral engagement, and reading achievement. School Psychology Review, 38(1), 102–120.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rice, J. K. (2003). Teacher quality: Understanding the effectiveness of teacher attributes. Washington, DC: Economic Policy Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Riehl, C., Pallas, A. M., & Natriello, G. (1999). Rites and wrongs: Institutional explanations for the student course-scheduling process in urban high schools. American Journal of Education, 107(2), 116–154.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rivkin, S. G., Hanushek, E. A., & Kain, J. F. (2005). Teachers, schools, and academic achievement. Econometrica, 73(2), 417–458.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rockoff, J. E. (2004). The impact of individual teachers on student achievement. American Economic Review Papers & Proceedings, 94(2), 247–252.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roorda, D. L., Koomen, H. M. Y., Spilt, J. L., & Oort, F. J. (2011). The influence of affective teacher–student relationships on students’ school engagement and achievement: A meta-analytic approach. Review of Educational Researcher, 81(4), 493–529.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rothstein, J. (2010). Teacher quality in educational production: Tracking, decay, and student achievement. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 125, 175–214.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rowan, B., Correnti, R., & Miller, R. J. (2002). What large-scale, survey research tells us about teacher effects on student achievement: Insights from the “Prospects” study of elementary schools. Teachers College Record, 104, 1525–1567.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rubin, B. C. (2003). Unpacking de-tracking: When progressive pedagogy meets students’ social worlds. American Educational Research Journal, 40(2), 539–573.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ryan, R., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55, 68–78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sanders, W. L., Rivers, J. C. (1996). Cumulative and residual effects of teachers on future students academic achievement. Knoxville, TN: University of Tennessee Value-Added Research and Assessment Center. Retrieved December 6, 2007, from http://www.mccsc.edu/~curriculum/cumulative%20and%20residual%20effects%20of%20teachers.pdf.

  • Sawchuk, S. (2013). Teachers’ ratings still high despite new measures: Changes to evaluation systems yield only subtle differences. Education Week, February 6, pp. 1–19.

  • Slavin, R. (1990). Achievement effects of ability grouping in secondary schools: A best-evidence synthesis. Review of Educational Research, 60(3), 471–499.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Steinberg, M., & Donaldson, M. (2015). The new educational accountability: Understanding the landscape of teacher evaluation in the post-NCLB era. Education Finance and Policy, 1–40.

  • Stevenson, D. L., Schiller, K. S., & Schneider, B. (1994). Sequences of opportunities for learning. Sociology of Education, 67, 184–198.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stodolsky, S. S., & Grossman, P. L. (1995). The impact of subject matter on curricular activity: An analysis of five academic subjects. American Educational Research Journal, 32, 227–249.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stuhlman, M., Hamre, B., Downer, J., & Pianta, R. (n.d.). What should classroom observation measure? Charlottesville: University of Virgina.

  • Thapa, A., Cohen, J., Guffney, S., & Higgins-D’Alessandro, A. (2013). A review of school climate research. Review of Educational Research, 83(3), 357–385.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Houtte, M. (2004). Tracking effects on school achievement: A quantitative explanation in terms of the academic culture of school staff. American Journal of Education, 110, 354–388.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Veenman, M. V. J., Kok, R., & Blote, A. W. (2005). The relation between intellectual and metacognitive skills at the onset of metacognitive skill development. Instructional Science, 33, 193–211.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Watanabe, M. (2008). Tracking in the era of high stakes state accountability reform: Case studies of classroom instruction in North Carolina. Teachers College Record, 110(3), 489–534.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weinstein, R. S. (1996). High standards in a tracked system of schooling: For which students and with what educational supports. Educational Researcher, 25(8), 16–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wells, A. S., & Serna, I. (1996). The politics of culture: Understanding local political resistance to detracking in racially mixed schools. Harvard Educational Review, 66(1), 93–119.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Williams, W. M., Bluthe, T., White, N., Li, J., Gardner, H., & Sternberg, R. J. (2002). Practical intelligence for school: Developing metacognitive sources of achievement in adolescence. Developmental Review, 22, 162–210.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Woodward, J., & Brown, C. (2006). Meeting the curricular needs of academically low-achieving students in middle grade mathematics. Journal of Special Education, 40(3), 151–159.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Worthy, J. (2010). Only the names have been changed: Ability grouping revisited. Urban review: Issues and ideas in public education, 42(4), 271–295.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Morgaen L. Donaldson.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Donaldson, M.L., LeChasseur, K. & Mayer, A. Tracking instructional quality across secondary mathematics and English Language Arts classes. J Educ Change 18, 183–207 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10833-015-9269-x

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10833-015-9269-x

Keywords

Navigation