Math tracking exists but whether it exists and to what level varies by school district. It’s probably not the same as what you’re thinking. The variance in levels is also limited (based on what I’ve seen) and, in my opinion, carries a stigma because of how it’s presented (ex: honors track is literally named in a way to say “these kids are better”). My comment is more about normalizing the idea of separating by level such that kids don’t feel dumb for being in a “slower” track and to also have the variance span more than a single year/grade level.
How I thought about tracking was allowing kids to take math courses which had different trajectories leading to different "capstones".
If your child is taking Math 6 in 6th grade, that might be considered "normal". An accelerated course would be called Math 6/7, after which is Math 7/8. Then instead of Algebra 2 you could take Algebra 2/Trig.
So largely devoid of terms like "honors" or "slow" or "fast", but whatever you call it, kids understand what's happening — they are jumping ahead, going with the median, or falling behind.
As a relevant tangent, CA is considering proposals under the framework of Equitable Math to de-prioritize algebra as the capstone for middle school and calculus as the capstone of high school. Under the new framework, children will take classes with the same trajectory up to the last year in high school where they choose their own capstone, such as data science or calculus.
