As with most controversial issues, especially those concerning education, tracking has both pros and cons. I personally feel that, if implemented correctly, the positive significantly outweighs the negative. Clearly, math classes must be separated by ability. The ability gap is probably wider in math than any other subject. It is the unfortunate nature of math that students cannot move to a higher class if they show increased aptitude. The key to math is to get students in the correct class in the first place. Upon starting high school (or 8^th grade) math, teachers should identify as quickly as possible students that may not be in the correct class and move them up or down accordingly. Being in the most appropriate math class, even in high school, can ultimately have major career implications for students wishing to enter certain fields.

Today we briefly discussed science classes. I always found their linear progression in high school very odd. Unlike math, most science concepts differ so greatly between earth science, biology, chemistry, and physics that a linear progression seems inappropriate. All students should probably take a year of biology and earth science, but a year of physics without chemistry should be fine. As far as tracking goes, I wonder if it is such a good idea in science classes, particularly those incorporating many experiments. I cannot really explain why, however.

In social studies, however, I feel that tracking would be an excellent idea, if implemented correctly, of course. The lower track students would learn the essentials, but the higher track students could learn more information, cover more events, and explore deeper concepts. As a fan of writing, tracking would provide more opportunity to explore more complex writing in the higher track classes, while tailoring writing to the skill level of the lower track as well.

Still, there are issues. A teacher should ensure that the lower tracks do not get by easy. Students do not need incentive to stay in (or even drop to) the lower track.. It does seem to work well in English classes. I think what it boils down to is, do we sacrifice the higher performing students for the lower performing students? If our concern is competing on a global level, we need our strongest minds to be as strong as possible. Even on a national level, we have some major problems, and perhaps the brightest young minds of the next generation are the ones to solve them.