Heterogeneity vs Tracking - Is the pendulum swinging back?

On Sunday Aug. 30th, the New York Daily News published as its lead Op-Ed piece a "critique" of heterogeneous class and a call for a return to tracking of students. In this article Anna Penny, a teacher for all of 3-and-a-half years decries her inability to motivate students in a 12th grade Literature elective. What is the cause? Could it be a society that does not value reading? Could it be class sizes of 30-34 students? Could it be a system that throws new teachers into a class with little or no support?(her principal taught for all of 2-1/2 years before getting his job through the "mis"-Leadership Academy) NO! It is the fact that she had a heterogeneous group of students with a wide range of reading skills.

It is not that I am not sympathetic to Ms. Penny's ordeal. I have taught Chemistry and Physics to heterogeneous groups of students for many years. Believe me, I KNOW what it is like to have students who are ill-prepared and unmotivated. The thing is, there is a history to heterogeneous grouping that is very important to remember. The tracking systems that were being used in the past were inherently racist. Statistics showed that many more black and latino students were being kept out of college-prep and honors tracks than white students. The placement of student was based on the whim of teachers, guidance counselors and administrators or the results of tests that were culturally biased.

I remember my elementary school P.S. 165 in Manhattan. All of the classes were numbered: 5-1, 5-2, 5-3 etc. Everyone knew who the "smart" class was. And guess which class got the extras, like trips or the most experienced and motivated teachers- It wasn't 5-10. So for many years progressive educators, students and families fought to bring and end to tracking. We fought to allow all students the opportunity to take courses that would prepare and allow them to go to college. We fought for heterogeneous classes.

Are heterogeneous classes a panacea? No. They are more work for teachers. It is always easier to teach a more homogeneous group of students especially if they are motivated. But we should not stop heterogeneity because it is hard. We need to fight for ways to make us more effective teachers. We have to fight for the resources that our students really need. So if you have a 12th grade student with a 2nd grade reading level in an elective lit. class (as Ms. Penny claims) the struggle should be for the literacy support that this student obviously needs. Did her school have a pullout literacy program? If not, why not? Was this a full class of 34 students? Why aren't more teachers, parents and students fighting for smaller classes so that we can give all of our students the attention they deserve. For too long we have accepted it when the UFT leadership says that we can't negotiate for smaller classes in the contract. OF COURSE WE CAN! We just can't use it as trade-off to get higher wages.

I'll end with some questions that I hope you respond to.
Why did the NY Daily News give such primo space to this article?
How does this tie in with Obama's "Race to the Top" call for more testing and an end to tenure?
How do we motivate students, parents and teachers to get involved in these struggles?