Ability grouping and tracking have been a major focus in educational research because of its role in promoting curriculum differentiation. However, there has been limited attention to how this differentiation occurs in contemporary schools involved with reform efforts including those focused on subject specific academic standards designed to improve student access to rigorous academic content. This article examines how varying teacher expectations regarding the implementation of academic standards promotes curriculum differentiation in middle schools involved with comprehensive school reform. Drawing on teacher interview and survey data from five middle schools, the author shows the challenges teachers confronted when implementing standards; the contradictory expectations teachers held toward students; and how teacher expectations affected to what extent standards were evenly applied. Despite the fact that standards are supposed to promote equity, this analysis shows these aims can be compromised by the challenges teachers confront in schools and contradictory expectations regarding standards.
AyalonH. (2006). Nonhierarchical curriculum differentiation and inequality in achievement: A different story or more of the same?Teachers College Record, 108 (6), 1186-1213.
2.
BalfanzR. (2000). Why do so many urban public school students demonstrate so little academic achievement? In SandersM. G. (Ed.), Schooling students placed at risk: Research, policy, and practice in the education of poor and minority adolescents (pp. 37-62). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
3.
BelfioreP. J.AuldR.LeeD. L. (2005). The disconnect of poor-urban education: Equal access and a pedagogy of risk taking. Psychology in the Schools, 42(8), 855-863.
4.
BodillyS. (2001). New American schools’ concept of break the model designs: How designs evolved and why. Santa Monica, CA: RAND.
5.
BrophyJ. E.GoodT. L. (1970). Teacher communication of differential expectations for children’s classroom performance: Some behavioral data. Journal of Educational Psychology, 61(3), 365-374.
6.
ClairN.AdgerC. T.ShortD.MillenE. (1998). Implementing standards with English language learners: Initial findings from four middle schools. Providence, RI: Northwest and Islands Regional Educational Laboratory at Brown University.
7.
CoddingJ. (2001). An up ramp for struggling readers. Principal Leadership, 2(2), 22-25. Retrieved from Wilson Web database.
8.
CohenL.ManionL. (1994). Research methods in education. London, UK: Routledge.
9.
CrossC. T. (2004). Political education: National policy comes of age. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
10.
DiamondJ.RandolphA.SpillaneJ. (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.
11.
FlessaJ. (2009). Urban school principals, deficit frameworks, and implications for leadership. Journal of School Leadership, 19(3), 334-373.
12.
FinnC. E.KanstoroomM. (2001). State academic standards. In RavitchD. (Ed.), Brookings papers on educational policy 2001 (pp. 131-179). Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.
13.
FritzbergG. J. (2001). Less than equal: A former urban schoolteacher examines the causes of educational disadvantagement. Urban Review, 33(2), 107-129.
14.
GarciaS. B.GuerraP. L. (2004). Deconstructing deficit thinking: Working with educators to create more equitable learning environments. Education and Urban Society, 36(2), 150-168.
15.
GamoranA. (2000). High standards: A strategy for equalizing opportunities to learn? In KahlenbergR. D. (Ed.), A notion at risk: Preserving public education as an engine for social mobility (pp. 93-126). New York, NY: The Century Foundation Press.
16.
GamoranA.BerendsM. (1987). The effects of stratification in secondary schools: Synthesis of survey and ethnographic research. Review of Educational Research, 57(4), 415-435.
17.
GrahamP. A. (2005). Schooling America: How the public schools meet the nation’s changing needs. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
18.
HansonS. (1990). The college-preparatory curriculum across schools: Access to similar learning opportunities? In PageR.ValliL. (Eds.), Curriculum differentiation: Interpretive studies in U.S. secondary schools (pp. 67-89). New York, NY: State University of New York Press.
19.
HinnantJ. B.O’BrienM.GhazarianS. R. (2009). The longitudinal relations of teacher expectations to achievement in the early school years. Journal of Educational Psychology, 101(3), 662-670.
20.
JohnsonR. B.OnwuegbuzieA. J. (2004). Mixed methods research: A research paradigm whose time has come. Educational Researcher, 33, 14-26.
21.
KozolJ. (1991). Savage inequalities. New York, NY: Crown.
22.
KozolJ. (2005). Confections of apartheid: A stick-and-carrot pedagogy. Phi Delta Kappan, 87(4), 265-275.
23.
KulikJ. A. (2004). Grouping, tracking, and de-tracking: Conclusions from experimental, correlational, and ethnographic research In WalbergH. J.ReynoldsA. J.WangM. C. (Eds.), Can unlike students learn together? Grade retention, tracking, and grouping (pp. 157-182). Greenwich, CT: Information Age.
24.
LipmanP. (2004). High stakes education: Inequality, globalization, and school reform. New York, NY: RoutledgeFalmer.
25.
McKenzieK. B.ScheurichJ. J. (2004) Equity traps: A useful construct for preparing principals to lead schools that are successful with racially diverse students. Educational Administration Quarterly, 40(5), 601-632.
26.
McPartlandJ. M.SchneiderB. (1996). Opportunities to learn and student diversity: Prospects and pitfalls of a common core curriculum. Sociology of Education, 69, 66-81.
27.
National Center for Education Statistics. (2003). Overview and inventory for state education reforms: 1990 to 2000 ( NCES 2003020). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
28.
National Center on Education and the Economy. (2000). National principals’ academy notebook, August 2000. Washington, DC: Author.
29.
National Center on Education and the Economy. (2001). Middle school literacy institute I literacy coach notebook, summer 2001. Washington, DC: Author.
30.
OakesJ. (1992). Can tracking research inform practice? Technical, normative, and political consideration. Educational Researcher, 21(4), 12-21.
31.
OakesJ. (2005). Keeping track: How schools structuring inequality. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
32.
PayneC. M. (2010). So much reform so little change: The persistence of failure in urban schools. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
33.
RistR. (1970). Student social class and teacher expectation: The self-fulfilling prophecy in ghetto education. Harvard Education Review, 40, 411-451.
34.
RitchieJ.SpencerL.O’ConnorW. (2003). Carrying out qualitative analysis. In RitchieJ.LewisJ. (Eds.), Qualitative research practice: A guide for social science students and researchers (pp. 219-262). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
35.
RosenthalR.JacobsonL. (1968). Pygmalion in the classroom: Teacher expectation and pupils’ intellectual development. New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston.
36.
RumbergerR. W.PalardyG. J. (2005). Does segregation still matter? The impact of student composition on academic achievement in high school. Teachers College Record, 107, 1999-2045.
37.
SkrlaL.ScheurichJ. J. (2001). Displacing deficit thinking in school district leadership. Education and Urban Society, 33(3), 235-259.
38.
SlavinR. (1987). Ability grouping and student achievement in elementary schools: A best-evidence synthesis. Review of Educational Research, 57(3), 293-336.
39.
SlavinR. (1990). Achievement effects of ability grouping in secondary schools: A best-evidence synthesis. Review of Educational Research, 60(3), 471-499.
40.
StandholtzJ. H.OgawaR. T.ScribnerS. P. (2004). Standards gaps: Unintended consequences of local standards-based reform. Teachers College Record, 106(6), 1177-1202.
41.
StevensF. I. (1993). Applying an opportunity-to-learn conceptual framework to the investigation of the effects of teaching practices via secondary analyses of multiple—Case study summary data. Journal of Negro Education, 62(3), 232-248.
42.
TateW. F. (2005). Access and opportunities to learn are not accidents: Engineering mathematical progress in your school. Greensboro, NC: SERVE Center at University of North Carolina.
43.
TenenbaumH. R.RuckM. D. (2007). Are teacher expectations different for racial minority than for European American students? A meta-analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99(2), 253-273.
44.
TuckerM. (2004). Reaching for coherence in school reform: The case of America’s choice. In GlennanT. K.BodillyS. J.GalegherJ. R.KerrK. A. (Eds.), Expanding the reach of education reforms: Perspectives from leaders in the scale-up of educational interventions (pp. 197-258). Santa Monica, CA: RAND.
45.
TuckerM. S.CoddingJ. B. (1998). Standards for our schools: How to set them, measure them, and reach them. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
46.
TushnetN.HarrisD. M. (2006). The influence of states and districts on comprehensive school reform. In AladjemD. K.BormanK. M. (Eds.), Examining comprehensive school reform (pp. 57-80). Washington, DC: The Urban Institute Press.
47.
ValenciaR. R. (1997). Conceptualizing the notion of deficit thinking. In ValenciaR. R. (Ed.), The evolution of deficit thinking: Educational thought and practice (pp. 1-12). New York, NY: RoutledgeFalmer.
48.
ValenciaR. R.ValenzuelaA.SloanK.FoleyD. E. (2001). Let’s treat the cause, not the symptoms: Equity and accountability in Texas revisited. Phi Delta Kappan, 83(4), 318-326.
49.
ValenciaR. R.VillarrealB. S. (2003). Improving students’ reading performance via standards-based reform: A critique. Reading Teacher, 56(7), 612-662.
50.
VoltzD. L.ForeC. (2006). Urban special education in the context of standards-based reform. Remedial and Special Education, 27(6), 329-336.
51.
WalshF. (2006). A middle school dilemma: Dealing with “I don’t care”. American Secondary Education, 35(1), 5-15.
52.
WarrenS. R. (2002). Stories from the classroom: How expectations and efficacy of diverse teachers affect the academic performance of children in poor urban schools. Educational Horizons, 80(3), 109-116.
53.
WeinsteinR. S. (1996). High standards in a tracked system of schooling: For which students and with what educational supports. Educational Researcher, 25(8), 16-19.
54.
WeinsteinR. S.MadisonS. M.KuklinskiM. R. (1995). Raising expectations in schooling: Obstacles and opportunities for change. American Educational Research Journal, 32(1), 121-159.
