BREAKING: Target Test Prep releases Brand New 2026 On Demand GMAT prep course

Redeem

Target Test Prep · GMAT

Choose how you want to prepare

Learn live with an expert or move at your own pace. Every option includes the complete TTP study system.

★★★★★5.0559 reviews
GMATLiveTeach 7 seats left
Chris Peckover
NEXT LIVE COHORT

Oct 13 to Jan 7, 2027

with Chris Peckover

Schedule
Tue, Thu · 8:00 to 10:00 PM ET
Included
40 live hours + 6 months of GMAT OnDemand
  • Live instruction and real-time questions
  • Class recordings and assigned practice
View class & enroll
Limited cohort · enrollment openTarget Test Prep
EALiveTeach 5 seats left
Logan Thompson
EXECUTIVE ASSESSMENT

Sep 6 to Dec 6, 2026

with Logan Thompson

Schedule
Sun · 9:30 AM to 12:30 PM ET
Included
Live EA class + 6 months of EA OnDemand
  • Expert-led weekly online sessions
  • EA Masterclass access between classes
View EA class & enroll
Limited cohort · enrollment openTarget Test Prep
GMATOnDemand Start anytime
SELF-PACED MASTERCLASS

Target Test Prep GMAT OnDemand

Complete access from day one. Study on your schedule.

130-point score guarantee
$0to start then $127/mo
  • Personalized study plan and analytics
  • Thousands of lessons and practice questions

Compare the format, schedule, and included access before enrolling. Prices and seat counts shown reflect the supplied offer details.

Tracking seems to contradict the oft-stated assumption

Expert replies
by patanjali.purpose » Wed Aug 10, 2011 12:03 pm
Tracking seems to contradict the oft-stated assumption that all kids can learn. If certain students are better in certain subjects, they must be allowed to excel in those areas and not be relegated to an inferior class imply because they have been tracked in another subject in which they don't excel. The major obstacle to eliminate tracking seems to be scheduling, and tracking has become, in many ways, a means to alleviate difficulties faced by administrators in scheduling their student body for classes.

Tracking has the ability to create divergent experiences, even in identical courses that are meant to be taught at the same level and speed. Administrators who support tracking generally assume that it promotes student achievement, citing that most students seem to learn best and develop the most confidence when they are grouped amongst classmates with similar capabilities. Yet, at least for the lower level tracks, this method of class assignment can encourage dumbing down, or teaching to the lowest common denominator of ability within a particular class, rather than accommodating differences and pushing all students equally hard.

Tracking places different students in groups that are usually based on academic ability as demonstrated by their grades and as described in teacher reports. These tracks mean that a student will proceed through every school day with essentially the same group of peers, assigned to classes at a particular level of difficulty. Researcher R. Slavin notes that students at various track levels experience school differently, depending on their track assignments. There are differences, for example, in how fast a class progresses through material, how talkative and energetic the classroom is, even how stressed or relaxed the teacher appears.

One of the major problems with tracking is that the level in which students are initially placed often determines not only where they remain throughout high school, but also the kinds of courses they are allowed to take. For example, schools that offer Advanced Placement (AP) courses often require that students take the honours-level version of the introductory course before enrolling in the AP course a year or two later. A student who is tracked into the regular introductory course, rather than the honours level, may not be able to take the AP course even after doing an exemplary job in the introductory course, simply because the honours course is offered a year earlier than the regular one-allowing honours-track students to complete enough other graduation requirements to have time for the AP course later on. And, even if the regular-track student could make it into the AP course, he or she would be at a disadvantage, because the introductory course couldn't cover key concepts when the teacher was compelled to slow down the class for the less able students.

1. In spite of what points may be made in other parts of the passage, in paragraph 2, the author is primarily concerned with:
A. contrasting administrative views of tracking with his own views.
B. defining dumbing down and its effect on students.
C. describing the diverse experiences students face when tracked.
D. conveying the importance of pushing all students equally hard.
E. listing down the benefits of tracking

2. According to the arguments made in the passage, students may fall into a particular track because of all of the following conditions EXCEPT:

A. high grades.
B. learning difficulties.
C. honours-course enrolment.
D. how talkative and energetic they are.
E. they are extremely skilled at a particular subject

[spoiler]I am confused btn A&C in 1 and D&E in 2. Could you pls help me understand[/spoiler]
Join the discussion
Source: — Reading Comprehension |

by jonathan123456 » Wed Aug 10, 2011 6:49 pm
patanjali.purpose wrote:Tracking seems to contradict the oft-stated assumption that all kids can learn. If certain students are better in certain subjects, they must be allowed to excel in those areas and not be relegated to an inferior class imply because they have been tracked in another subject in which they don't excel. The major obstacle to eliminate tracking seems to be scheduling, and tracking has become, in many ways, a means to alleviate difficulties faced by administrators in scheduling their student body for classes.

Tracking has the ability to create divergent experiences, even in identical courses that are meant to be taught at the same level and speed. Administrators who support tracking generally assume that it promotes student achievement, citing that most students seem to learn best and develop the most confidence when they are grouped amongst classmates with similar capabilities. Yet, at least for the lower level tracks, this method of class assignment can encourage dumbing down, or teaching to the lowest common denominator of ability within a particular class, rather than accommodating differences and pushing all students equally hard.

Tracking places different students in groups that are usually based on academic ability as demonstrated by their grades and as described in teacher reports. These tracks mean that a student will proceed through every school day with essentially the same group of peers, assigned to classes at a particular level of difficulty. Researcher R. Slavin notes that students at various track levels experience school differently, depending on their track assignments. There are differences, for example, in how fast a class progresses through material, how talkative and energetic the classroom is, even how stressed or relaxed the teacher appears.

One of the major problems with tracking is that the level in which students are initially placed often determines not only where they remain throughout high school, but also the kinds of courses they are allowed to take. For example, schools that offer Advanced Placement (AP) courses often require that students take the honours-level version of the introductory course before enrolling in the AP course a year or two later. A student who is tracked into the regular introductory course, rather than the honours level, may not be able to take the AP course even after doing an exemplary job in the introductory course, simply because the honours course is offered a year earlier than the regular one-allowing honours-track students to complete enough other graduation requirements to have time for the AP course later on. And, even if the regular-track student could make it into the AP course, he or she would be at a disadvantage, because the introductory course couldn't cover key concepts when the teacher was compelled to slow down the class for the less able students.

1. In spite of what points may be made in other parts of the passage, in paragraph 2, the author is primarily concerned with:
A. contrasting administrative views of tracking with his own views.
B. defining dumbing down and its effect on students.
C. describing the diverse experiences students face when tracked.
D. conveying the importance of pushing all students equally hard.
E. listing down the benefits of tracking

2. According to the arguments made in the passage, students may fall into a particular track because of all of the following conditions EXCEPT:

A. high grades.
B. learning difficulties.
C. honours-course enrolment.
D. how talkative and energetic they are.
E. they are extremely skilled at a particular subject

[spoiler]I am confused btn A&C in 1 and D&E in 2. Could you pls help me understand[/spoiler]
In 1. Para 2 talks about positive and negative aspects of tracking
C -> Only talks about diverse exp but does not talk about dumbing down (which is not a diverse exp)
IMO A

In 2. IMO E
If student is skilled in a particular subject doesnt mean he excels in others. teachers look at overall report not just 1 subject. So IMO E
talkative & energetic can be on a diff track so that may be a criteria.

WHats OA?
Join the discussion

by patanjali.purpose » Wed Aug 10, 2011 11:38 pm
Thanks Jonathan.

However, don't you think, the opening line of 2nd para talks about 'divergent experience' and then goes on to elaborate the same from the perspective of administrator and his own.

2: [spoiler]Do you think OA could be D?[/spoiler]
Join the discussion

by mbrown10012 » Thu Aug 11, 2011 7:22 am
Please post OA and explainations
Join the discussion

by patanjali.purpose » Fri Aug 12, 2011 12:21 pm
[spoiler]OA - A/D[/spoiler]
Join the discussion