GRAND RAPIDS, MICHIGAN (February 6, 2025) — A recent Fordham Institute report analyzes several perceived threats to educational opportunities for students who score well on standardized tests and class grades. It contends these threats come from those who are overly concerned about “equity” and who seek to undermine programs designed for these high-achieving students.
In her review of “Think Again: Are Education Programs for High Achievers Inherently Inequitable?” Margaret Thornton of Rowan University finds the report adds nothing to the debate about the best way to place students in classrooms and programs. The report’s tone is one of concern for students, agreeing that equity considerations in educational settings are important while cautioning they must not go too far. As the report notes, research does support the finding that many students are insufficiently challenged. The research is also mixed on how best to design schools to avoid any students languishing academically.
But the report fails to take seriously the decades of research showing the harms of the tracking and ability grouping systems in secondary schools that have stratified opportunities to learn. Instead, the report conflates that research with other research on grade-acceleration (skipping a grade), flexible grouping in elementary schools, and other approaches to what the report calls “readiness grouping.”
After muddling the research evidence, the report then recommends the practice most harmful to equity: Increased tracking (called “readiness grouping in separate classrooms”). Thornton points out that, in doing so, the report fails to consider literature supporting potential instructional practices that might counter the discrimination some students face.
Instead, the report dismisses research-based concerns about inequality, offering instead several strawman arguments about why educators and students’ families should not question potentially discriminatory structures.
The report does acknowledge that biases based on race, gender, and class may exist, but it does not adequately examine potential solutions, calling instead for screening of all students (for advanced programs/tracks) and compliance audits.
Ultimately, the report fails to offer any useful guidance for lawmakers or others interested in a public school system that beneficially serves all students.
Find the review, by Margaret Thornton, at: greatlakescenter.org.
Find “Think Again: Are Education Programs for High Achievers Inherently Inequitable?” written by Brandon L Wright and published by the Thomas B Fordham Institute, at: fordhaminstitute.org/national/research/think-again-are-education-programs-high-achievers-inherently-inequitable.
NEPC Reviews (nepc.colorado.edu/reviews) provide the public, policy-makers, and the press with timely, academically-sound reviews of selected publications. NEPC Reviews are made possible in part by support provided by the Great Lakes Center for Education Research and Practice: greatlakescenter.org.
The mission of the Great Lakes Center for Education Research and Practice is to support and disseminate high-quality research and reviews of research for the purpose of informing education policy and to develop research-based resources for use by those who advocate for education reform. Visit the Great Lakes Center website at GreatLakesCenter.org.
