Institutional Ambiguity and Variation in De Facto Tracking

• In Event: 3429 - Section on Sociology of Education Refereed Roundtables (1 hour)
  In Refereed Roundtable 60min: 6. Diversity, Inequality, and Education: Tracking, Segregation and Racism

Abstract

In this paper we investigate variation in the extent to which mathematics placement informally influences participation or “de facto” tracks students in other courses and extracurricular activities, in the context of school policy that formally rejects tracking. We ask: How do students, teachers, counselors, and administrators understand how to match students to learning opportunities—and what might explain cases where courses are not de facto tracked? Using a survey of 1285 students, over 1,000 hours of observations, and 69 interviews in an inclusive STEM-focused urban school district, we find mathematics de facto tracking occurs in distinctly higher-status and lower-status courses and activities like computer science and automotive, but not engineering. In engineering, “institutional ambiguity,” where competing logics frame courses and activities, appears to ameliorate mathematics de facto tracking. Ambiguity is supported by three organizational factors: 1) courses and activities occurring in vocational and academic spaces, 2) teachers linking vocational and academic fields, and 3) an organizational commitment to the integration of vocational activities. Overall, our findings suggest educational organizations may be able to leverage institutional ambiguity to support greater equity in STEM.

Authors

• Cassidy Puckett, Emory University

• Brian Gravel, Tufts University