A RUNNING RECORD
OF OUR CHAT:
"REINVENTING THE MIDDLE SCHOOL"
DISCUSSION
Here's a rough archive of our conversation
about "Reinventing the Middle School." A summary of the conversation's
key points will be posted soon at MiddleWeb.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
John Norton welcomed everyone to the discussion:
This message marks the official beginning of our discussion about "Reinventing
the Middle School."
As most of you know, this chat will use the recent Middle School Journal
article by Tom Dickinson and Deborah Butler as a springboard. From there,
we will go where the discussion leads us!
If you haven't read the article, it's available in the September issue of
MSJ, and can also be downloaded online in PDF format at:
http://www.middleweb.com/MiddleWebimages/reinventing.pdf
I've set up a "homepage" for this discussion, which will include
a link to a running record of our chat:
http://www.middleweb.com/MWLresources/reinventing.html
In my next message, which will follow almost immediately, I'll pose a "starter"
question suggested by Tom.
Meanwhile, here are brief bios of our three guests:
Tom Dickinson teaches at Indiana State University in Terre Haute, Indiana.
Deborah Butler teaches at Wabash College in Crawfordsville, Indiana. Tom
and Deborah, who are married to each other, have two grown daughters (and
a new grandson who just turned one!). They live in the small and cozy town
of Greencastle, Indiana with their three cats. Both began their careers
teaching young adolescents and while they are now college professors they
continue to focus on middle schools and young adolescents.
Hayes Mizell is director of the Program for Student Achievement at the Edna
McConnell Clark Foundation, where he has led the foundation's efforts to
support middle grades reform for more than a decade. He's a founder of the
National Forum to Accelerate Middle Grades Reform, which also supports the
(Middle) "Schools to Watch" website. Before joining the foundation,
Mizell was a school activist in the Southeast for 20 years and chaired the
National Title One Council during the Carter administration. He also served
two terms as a school board member in Columbia, SC.
See this speech by Mizell to find out more about his views:
"What Works? Who Cares?"
http://www.middleweb.com/HMcares.html
Welcome, and let's begin. Question is next!
John Norton, Editor
MiddleWeb
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Then John wrote:
TOM DICKINSON AND DEBORAH BUTLER POSE THIS OPENING COMMENT AND QUESTION:
We have asserted a number of critical points which serve as a foundation
for the MSJ theme issue "Reinventing the Middle School" (and the
book of the same name):
a. there is nothing wrong with the middle school concept;
b. most middle schools are in some stage of "arrested development;"
c. to alleviate this problem we need to "reinvent" middle schools
in
accordance with what the original founders of this movement articulated
while deepening our understanding of the concept.
From your perspective and your daily practice, do these assertions "hold
water" or "ring true"? What do you see happening in the movement--in
your
team, grade level, school, district--that supports these assertions?
JOHN adds this note: As you respond to this question, you might comment
on your perception of what "the middle school concept" is....
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Anne Jolly wrote:
I agree with all three of the assertions Tom and Deborah posed in their
opening email on "Reinventing the Middle School."
> a. there is nothing wrong with the middle school concept;
The middle school concept is a refreshing approach to working with young
adolescents and pre-adolescents. Properly implemented, it can be the key
to
continuing their emotional, physical, and social development rather than
putting their lives on hold through these tough years.
> b. most middle schools are in some stage of "arrested development;"
This was certainly true of the middle schools in which I've taught. My most
recent experience was in a brand new middle school that was organized around
the "model middle school" approach. We had all of the structures
in place.
We had a building designed with teaching team pods and each teaching team
had their own planning/work room. We had both a team planning time and a
personal planning time for one year. We had a new, enthusiastic staff, and
we had two weeks of training prior to the opening of school.
Most of our training focused on how to schedule students (teams assumed
that
responsibility), on "rah rah" sessions where we met fellow teachers
and
decided on ways to get the students pumped up about being on teams. We even
decided on the team names ourselves, and worked on lists of rules, dress
codes, etc. What we did not focus on was instruction and curriculum. We
also neglected the team-building experiences that we needed to build our
ability to work together. We were instructed to write at least one
interdisciplinary unit, and all of us were previously secondary teachers.
None of us had ever worked with other teachers collaboratively. We went
through the motions but didn't honestly have much of a clue as to how to
proceed.
I can't honestly claim that we were in a stage of arrested development,
because I don't think we ever developed as a true middle school. After one
year, class loads went up to 180 students per day, we lost a planning
period, and teachers began teaching six fifty-minute classes per day. At
that point we just went into survival mode.
> c. to alleviate this problem we need to "reinvent" middle
schools
Cheers to this! And we must concentrate as hard on the support structures
and the teacher development needs as we do on setting up the middle school
organization scenario.
Anne Jolly
SERVE
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chris Toy wrote:
MWbooklist@NS.SREB.ORG writes:
>The middle school concept is a refreshing approach to working with young
>adolescents and pre-adolescents. Properly implemented, it can be the
key to
>continuing their emotional, physical, and social development rather
than
>putting their lives on hold through these tough years.
The only thing I would add here is not to leave out academic and
intellectual development. That's been the most pointed and consistent
criticism I've encountered from parents.
Chris Toy
Principal
Freeport Middle School
Freeport, Maine 04032
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Linda Haskell wrote:
Most middle schools are in some stage of "arrested development;"-
Boy does this ever describe my school. Ten years ago we jumped in with both
feet and did everything- teams, looping, advisory, enrichment,etc. It was
so much fun. However, many of those teachers have retired or moved on to
new jobs. Did we burn ourselves out? Now all we have left is teaming- staff
keeps leaving and new people are hired without any staff development on
middle school beliefs,etc. We still loop but class sizes are growing- 125+
per team so administration is talking about adding in new part time people
who will not be on a team but just teaching the overflow. Advisory is down
to once a week for 20 min. on Mondays, when there is one, with no plan or
guidelines for teachers.
To alleviate this problem we need to "reinvent" middle schools
in accordance with what the original founders of this movement articulated
while deepening our understanding of the concept. - Yes, we need to make
the time for staff development and work through this again. The problem
is that the "old-timers" say- Been there, done that", and
think they know it all but aren't using it. Then new people weren't hired
for their middle school beliefs- there is a teacher shortage- just get someone
qualified in the "subject area" to teach. It's hard to keep current
in knowledge and without a push, most teachers don't. Many of our staff
development days seem thrown together at the last minute and divided into
three different "projects". There is no time to reflect and really
work on anything. Also, state mandates and requirements seem to take up
all our time. We constantly feel the pull between taking the time to "bond"
with our students doing "fun" things like bowling or making ornaments
for the school tree and having the students keep working to meet the standards.
Linda
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jack Wallace responded to Tom and Deborah's key points:
>a. there is nothing wrong with the middle school concept;
From what I think about the concept--building a community of learners, an
adult advocate for each child, small teams within a larger school, interdisciplinary
and integrated curriculum, authentic learning outside of the classroom walls,
activities that are developmentally consistent--I believe there is nothing
wrong with the concept.
>b. most middle schools are in some stage of "arrested development;"
From what I hear at conferences, and what little I know of surrounding schools,
but most of all from what I experience every day, we are arrested.
In our school, several sixth grade teachers wanted to change to teams in
the mid-80s, let's say, 1986. They explored the concept, they visited schools
outside of the area to see what it was all about, they changed the name
of homeroom to advisor class. They did change the sixth grade. The problem
was, before they implemented the changes, three of the six who discussed
it, left teaching.
So, the rest of us were saying, what is this team stuff anyway. I wanted
to teach social studies only to the sixth graders. That's why I left elementary
school! I didn't want to teach reading, writing, math, science and social
studies. I wanted to teach social studies! I didn't know nuttin'!!!! Gradually
over the next decade, that's right, decade, the seventh and eighth grades
developed into teams--but still teaching their own subject areas because
of certification issues and because department chairmen controlled the evaluation,
observations, and most important the budget.
Teams eventually got their budget up to $200 per team. Which is where we
are today. I have gone from knowing nothing (see above) to knowing quite
a bit--well, perhaps knowing is the wrong term in the constructive sense.
So.......I'm not going to take it anymore. It's time to change!!
>c. to alleviate this problem we need to "reinvent" middle
schools in >accordance with what the original founders of this movement
articulated >while deepening our understanding of the concept.
Yes, that is true. And that is exactly what I am attempting to do with a
variety of colleagues from different grade levels, departments and teams.
If our school was a democracy, and we could vote on where we want our junior
high to go, it would go to teaming for sure. In our recently completed informal
and scientifically survey of the staff, it turned out to be 85% teaming,
10% departments, and 5% didn't know what we were talking about. Of the 85%,
about two-thirds know for sure. The other one-third talk the talk, but I'm
unsure about walking the walk. We need to educate everyone with the choices
and what I see are the advantages.
So, that is my introduction to the introductory questions. I look forward
to hearing more.
Jack Wallace
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Marsha Ratzel wrote:
Is there something wrong with MS concept? No.
My experience in each of the areas mention on p7 of the article.
Teachers organized into teams that meet
I would say this part of the MS concept is strong. Quite a bit of cross
team planning goes on as well as across the entire grade level. In most
of our seven MS, teams use one plan time for doing individual tasks like
grading, making copies, answering phone calls; and the other for meeting
with their teammates, all the grade level teachers or with the various building
specialists (counselor, LD teachers, gifted teachers). What I think is missing
from these planning sessions, is integrating skills and strategies across
content areas and/or with the explo programs.
Unification between core and exploratory teachers
This is definitely an area of needed improvement. It varies by team, by
school and by time of the year. There are pockets of building-wide collaboration,
for sure. But not to the same extent there was in the first half of the
90s. We used to have building wide themes for the year and much of our library
media programs revolved around winding that theme in and out of all grade
levels and explos. It was very exciting.
Advisory programs
Another area of variability in our MSs. We have had some schedule changes
that dramatically changed the MS day and wiped out the idea of a unified
time the entire building was engaged in advisement. Sure some teachers used
it for a study hall, but more worked hard at establishing a rapport with
a small group of kids and helping them navigate through their year. A schedule
change meant our explo teachers could no longer serve as an advisor for
groups of students and those goals had to be incorporated into other content
areas. But this has been a strength of the district,s MS program in the
past and it may just be a case of needing to figure out work it out given
the new schedule.
Competitive athletics for all
Athletics and drama is strong in our MSs. All are "no cut programs
and literally hundreds of students participate in each school during the
year. It,s amazing. Since neither of these programs are available for sixth
graders, many MSs have developed a well attended and active after school
intramural program. Our district is struggling under a huge budget cut this
year and next and I can,t imagine that MS sports will not be targeted for
some reductions (everything else is), so it will be interesting to see what
happens.
Curriculum
Again I see this as an area of strength in our MSs. We certainly have struggles,
but overall I don,t see the "cemetery model of instruction, heavy reliance
on textbooks or instructional blandness. The district has just completed
a huge round of curriculum revisions, aligning what we do with national
standards and making sure the vertical articulation was in place. Teachers
are VERY encouraged to employ active learning strategies and we are slowly
making inroads to learning to use assessments to guide instruction. The
new K-8 math curriculum for example, is a problem solving based curriculum
that requires students to discover the whys behind symbolic manipulation.
That being said, we are a long way from having an integrated curriculum.
On the smaller teams where teachers have more than one core subject, it
happens much more frequently than on larger teams. I know that there is
a deep division among the faculty about the merits of integration because
many don,t see how it can be rigorous and integrated.
So I guess, all of what I just said would mean we have some stage of "arrested
development in our schools. I would think, "reinventing for our schools
and district must revolve around an effort to convince others that the MS
concept is the best course. We cannot be passive in these important years
--- I passionately believe that MS students are ready, willing and able
to meet any challenge if the environment is correctly set. I,ve seen it
and been inspired by the deep thinking and excitement that happens when
we do the things we know are best for this age group.
I don't know if many, if any, other teachers would think we need to do this,
though. I don't have any idea what our administration thinks. (I asked the
Director of K-12 Schools to join our conversation, though because she "gets"
lots of this and would offer a very practical insight.) I think my district's
biggest challenge is how to avoid budget cut paralysis and stop moving forward.
Cutting back doesn't mean that we should get so occupied with $$$ that we
stop pushing ourselves forward. Much easier said than done.
Marsha Ratzel
Overland Park, KS
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rick Selby wrote:
Marsha poses some good points on these questions.
As a member of a team for over ten years now, I wholeheartedly agree on
the strength of teaming at the middle level. The planning time is important,
and I am very lucky to have a common prep with my team partners.
Unification between core and exploratory teachers
I agree that this is a definite area that needs improvement in my school,
because there is no connections right now. One of the reasons is that many
of our students lose out on their exploratory classes because they are not
reading at grade level.
Advisory programs
I am a huge supporter of Advisory programs if they are used effectively.
We have a 15 period to start each day, where we can discuss issues that
relate to the student's lives, organize their notebook and minds, as well
as do some team building. One thing that we do that I really like is we
get our Advisory as sixth graders, and keep them until they go onto high
school. It allows us to really build rapport with them.
Competitive athletics for all
In San Diego City Schools, we have no competitive athletics at the middle
level, so I have no comment on this, other than the fact that I am jealous
that schools actually have this in other parts of the country.
Curriculum
With the focus on standards, I have really seen an adjustment towards a
more rigorous curriculum at the middle level. I think the standards have
clarified things for teachers, such as a rubric does for students. I know
that the quality of work I expect now is much higher than it was ten years
ago. It is not that the students are more talented, but that the curriculum
is more focused and articulated.
Rick
San Diego City Schools
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
John Norton posted some quotes from the article:
For those of you who have not been able to access the "Reinventing
the Middle School" article, here's an excerpt that may help you grasp
the core issue being raised by Tom and Deborah.
**********
(I)f there is nothing wrong with the middle school concept, what is wrong
with many contemporary middle schools? In middle schools across this nation
the story is the same-schools with signs outside that say "middle school"
but with almost no identifiable aspects of the concept at work inside; teachers
organized into teams but who do not meet even though they have allocated
time in their schedules; a deep cleavage between core and exploratory teachers;
advisory programs that look like administrative homerooms; competitive athletics
for the few; and a curriculum dominated by classical recitation, boring
textbooks, and instructional blandness (McEwin, Dickinson, & Jenkins,
1996).
In school after school the words "middle school concept" has become
a phrase mindlessly uttered, but with no understanding of the real meaning
of the phrase. What has happened across this country at the middle level
is the arrested development of the middle school concept. While there are
many schools that have implemented the entire concept, the majority of middle
schools are in some stage of arrested development-where the middle school
concept has not been completely implemented, or where it was once implemented
and has now grown static and unresponsive (McEwin, Dickinson, & Jenkins,
1996). Arrested development then, is both a structural problem of the lack
of implementation as well as a disposition problem of belief in and attention
to the concept.
What misleads many middle level educators, what the movement has not made
a forceful argument over, is that the original concept is a totally integrated
ecology of schooling. It is an organizational, curricular, instructional
and relational environment that cannot be parsed or broken (Felner, Jackson,
Kasak, Mulhall, Brand & Flowers, 1997). Any attempt to do so, as in
many well-intentioned schools, leads to the condition of arrested development.
John
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
John Norton also posted this:
Chris Toy, who is on this list with us, wrote this diary entry for MiddleWeb
today. Since it relates to our discussion, I'm sure Chris won't mind if
I post it here as well. Perhaps it will prompt some of you to agree - or
take issue - or put your own spin on what he has to say. Thanks, Chris,
for the thoughtful comments!
John
================================
MIDDLEWEB PRINCIPAL'S DIARY
Chris Toy
Freeport (ME) Middle School
One of the backdrops for many of my activities this past week has been some
ongoing discussions about middle school reform. Maine's Middle Level Commission
and MiddleWeb's online discussion on reinventing the middle school are great
opportunities to reflect on the future of middle level education.
I continue to be somewhat mystified by the "dark cloud" hovering
over middle level education, especially in Maine. Maine is considered by
many to have one of the best public education systems in the country. It
seems that middle schools in Maine contribute significantly to our state's
standing nationally. A visit to the state's education website :
http://www.state.me.us/education/goodstories.htm
tells us that
-- Maine eighth graders placed sixth in the nation in Science on the 2000
National Assessment of Education Progress (NAEP).
-- Maine eighth graders placed third in the nation in Mathematics on the
2000 National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP).
-- Maine eighth graders placed first in the nation in Reading on the 1998
National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) test results.
-- Maine eighth graders placed second, along with Massachusetts, in Writing
on the 1998 National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP).
-- Maine eighth graders placed first in the nation in Science on the 1996
National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP). Only students in Singapore
outperformed Maine eighth graders in Science in comparisons with the 41
countries participating in the Third International Mathematics and Science
Study (TIMMS - 1998).
-- Eighth graders also tied for first place in the nation in Mathematics
on the 1996 test. Only seven countries outperformed Maine eighth graders
in Mathematics in comparisons with the 41 countries participating in the
TIMMS - 1998.
I agree that there are many things that need to be improved for our students.
Teachers need to make sure their classrooms reflect effective practices.
We need to make sure there is equity of opportunity for all students, and
that they are held to high standards based on what current research tells
us is defensible. But, I still struggle with the perception that middle
level education isn't working for kids.
I think I got a clue when I asked a parent who had a couple children go
through our school and are now at the high school. She said that the middle
school feels unsettled and uncomfortable because, as a group, the children
in the middle years are in a state of transition and change,which is unsettling
to them and to their families.
This made sense to me. After all, how many of us would voluntarily return
to being 12 or 13 years old? I actually asked a number of adults this question,
and all 20 of them laughed, then replied along the lines of, "no way!,
Why would anyone what to relive that time of life? I then asked some parents
of older children whether they would want to return to being parents of
children who were 12 or 13 years old. Again, without exception, experienced
parents replied that those were the most difficult times for them, their
spouses and their children.
It makes some sense then, that the middle years in schools would be challenging
years. I guess my concern is for the teachers and other folks who work with
these students and their families. Many of them work very hard to help these
students through what may be the most confusing and difficult times. They
balance academic, social, physical, and emotional changes while trying to
help all student realize their potential in each of these areas.
The message that middle schools are not working for its students needs to
be tempered with the recognition that many students are achieving and growing
under the care and guidance of hardworking, skilled teachers running child
centered programs.
Chris
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
After some technical difficulties, the conversation resumed with great
enthusiasm!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Anne Jolly" <jolly61@home.com>
Subject: [MWbooklist] Reventing - - - How?
First - I agree with Marsha that money is a critical issue in reinventing
(or maintaining) middle schools. In our system, we lost 17 middle schools
because of lack of money to hire enough personnel to implement the middle
school concept and beacuse of pure old politics (Why are these middle schools
getting the money and attention when [fill in the blank with any other level]
needs it just as badly?) So the issue of priorities and funding must be
prominent if we ever have full implementation of the middle school model.
Now, I may be out of line jumping in here with questions about the "Reinventing
Middle Schools" article before we've all responded to the initial three
questions. If so, I have every confidence that John will set us all straight
and I'll put this question on hold. However, this question is particularly
near and dear to my heart.
The article states: ". . . movement toward developing and implementing
the concept requires the awareness and understanding of the middle school
concept as an ecology of highly complex elements working simultaneously
together. Across all of these articles is the notion that implementing the
whole of the concent's elements is absolutely fundamental."
My question - does this mean that success depends on simultaneous implementation
of all middle school program components? I rather hope not, as that would
"doom" schools who begin with the pieces they are able to implement
and struggle to add remaining components as allowed.
Thomas and Deborah use the term middle school "ecology." I like
that! I rely on my science knowledge for the meaning of the word ecology.
. . it brings to mind an interrelated system of living and non-living components
that exist together interdependently. That's a great middle school analogy.
However, all of the ecological components don't spontaneously appear - they
grow and become part of the system at different rates. So I'm hoping that
reinvention can be effective if it takes place in stages!
Anne
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Marsha Ratzel" <marsha_ratzel@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: [MWbooklist] Reventing - - - How?
Anne, This is exactly what I was wondering about as well. But I think your
notion of an ecological system (I'm a science teacher at heart, too) is
a good one.
Interdependence doesn't mean that everythings the same. When it works well,
it means that there is a balance of individual components. And when things
are out of balance, the organism works to bring those out-of-bound pieces
into balance.
That self-correcting mechanism is what I think we're missing. I'll have
to think about whether or not it's because we're too busy, too overwhelmed,
or too worried about the implications of corrections. In my case, maybe
I just got too self-absorbed into content and forgot to stay on top of the
Big Picture and the research that supported the notion of excellence through
that Big Picture. I really don't know. This article and discussion have
me really thinking about what's so different than when I arrived in MS in
the early 90s?
Marsha Ratzel
Editor's Note: Marsha is a MiddleWeb diarist.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Ellen Berg <ellen@accessus.net>
Subject: [MWbooklist] First "Reinventing" discussion question
> a. there is nothing wrong with the middle school concept;
I agree. I think the middle school concept seeks to put the whole child
(academic, social, emotional) at the center of everything we do, and I have
always believed that the true goal of education should be to develop and
nuture the whole child.
> b. most middle schools are in some stage of "arrested development;"
Oh my goodness, yes. I see and hear a lot of lipservice to middle school
concepts (teaming, advisory, looping, etc.), but it is just that. So much
in my own school is only on paper. Anything that is actually mandated by
administration is followed to the letter, not the spirit of the idea. We
never get beyond the surface of the concept, and that frustrates me tremendously.
> c. to alleviate this problem we need to "reinvent" middle
schools in accordance with what the original founders of this movement articulated
while deepening our understanding of the concept.
We can reinvent middle schools all we want, but if we do not have committed,
well-trained staff dedicated to deeping their own understandings and building
upon them, nothing will change. The concept cannot simply be mandated (this
is what we're going to do, so do it...), because we can comply and look
as if we are following the mandate, but not really be doing anything effective.
For most people a real paradigm shift or attitude adjustment is necessary,
because so many folks are either used to teaching for their own convenience
or have seen that model throughout their lives and teach the way they were
taught.
It seems that so much of what we do in terms of professional development
is counterproductive. We attend a lot of hit and run workshops that fail
to help teachers explore various aspects of the middle school concept and
effective instruction in depth. We are not taught or expected to be reflective.
Teacher and staff talk is limited to budget items and administrivia. So
little time is spent building our understandings with one another, and so
in many schools the middle school concept is not in practice. You might
find a team or an individual teacher who is doing his/her best, but these
isolated cases fail to effect the type of results we would see if everyone
was on board.
So, that leads me to a question....the seventh grade teacher and I (IMHO)
do a pretty good job of putting our students at the center of our instruction,
and we try to use what we can from the middle school ideals. However, the
8th grade teacher is a good, old-fashioned grammar book them to death type
of teacher--straight rows, quiet, no interaction, no deep understanding.
I am wondering, is there any lasting change for the students who have been
in my 6th and my colleague's 7th grade LA classroom? After they get used
to expressing themselves and thinking at a deeper level, what happens when
they rejoin the mindless, trivial classroom?
Ellen Berg
Turner Middle School
St. Louis
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Thomas S. Dickinson" <tsd@mail.ccrtc.com>
Subject: [MWbooklist] First "Reinventing" discussion question
[Note: this got hung up in all the "downtime" with the mainframe.
Tom]
Greetings all:
Let's see if I can talk about some of the points that you've raised and
then let Deborah weigh in with her initial comments.
First, and I do not mean to direct this personally to only Chris Toy, because
this is one of those issues that doesn't seem to go away, but the comment
that Chris was responding to was from the initial review of the book on
the MiddleWeb book list--it's not our words. Certainly, if middle schools
are to survive and survive in their proper format their mission must be,
as we wrote, to provide a balanced (and I would argue, integrated) environment
where the individual is challenged and nurtured academically and provided
the developmental supports to grow and become.
One of the ongoing problems with middle schools (and I include the range
of individuals involved here from college professors like myself all the
way through school personnel and even down to parents and the general public)
is that people portray this age as an either/or--either developmental support
or academic excellence--and it just isn't that way. Young adolescent development
is a complex set of interactions that must be taken as a whole. So, I've
stated my platform there, and again, from what I've read on the listserv,
most of you know that.
The discussion has raised many of the problems we articulated in the article
that have led to arrested development (Note: while there are six elements
that we discuss in the article there are eleven in the actual first chapter
of the book--Deborah and I combined the last and first chapters of the book
to get the article, just for those of you who want to do some additional
reading). One of the items is near and dear to my heart--the preparation
of teachers.
One of the problems with middle schools as was alluded to was the problem
that once initial faculty who got the "transition" training left,
then they were often replaced with individuals who didn't know anything
or little about the concept.
The single biggest problem, in my opinion, is the lack of teacher education
programs--on both the initial undergraduate level as well aas the graaduate
level--to provide the "replacements" for teachers who leave or
retire. We have made a dent, but it's still only a dent, in teacher education.
This is all wrapped up with the issue of state licensure and all of this
is driven by a "market" view of teaching--teachers are interchangeable
and can be moved from one setting/school organization to another whether
or not they were really prepared for that level.
We have that particular situation governing us here in Indiana. As one of
the best middle school principals said to our professional standards board
a number of years ago, if you want a good middle school teacher in this
state you go out and steal them from some other school or corporation. And
given this lack of initially prepared teachers, teachers who have been through
a middle school teacher education program that is based on the middle school
teacher preparation standars, we will never get to the level of overall
school competence that we need.
Which leads into staff development issues, for one. If teachers, who are
educated to teach other developmental levels in other school organizations,
are being hired to teach in fully functioning middle schools, then staff
development dollars are often spent on initial preparation activities. Or,
given the range of staff expertise in some schools--from zero to 100% knowledge--staff
development just turns to other pressing issues with the tacit statement
of "we did teaming years ago." If we are to aleviate this state
of arrested development, then we have to concentrate on these two issues
as part of the mix: who do we haire? how do we continue to examine and re-examine
our roles as educators in this particular school organization?
Which brings me back to the "complex ecology of middle schools"
that we wrote about. I believe, and I've been pondering this very heavily
for the last six years (someone remind me later on this week to tell you
how the idea of "arrested development/reinvention" actually came
about), that we have only begun to understand what the original founders
of the middle school had in mind when they planted the seeds of this concept
over forty years ago.
I think we have grossly understated the complex nature of the concept; that
we have "dumbed down" what middle schools are about and therefore
the responsibilities involved in teaching in one. Surely this is the problem
with creating organizational structures that have no connection to changing
actual practice in the building. Surely this is the problem with hiring
teachers with no understanding of young adolescent development and the appropriate
pedagogies to teach them. Surely this is the problem with our almost total
lack of attention to an appropriate curricular structure for the school.
I have been priviledged to work with and learn from William Alexander and
other founders (Lounsbury, Vars, Toepfer, and Joan Lipsitz--to whom the
book is dedicated) and I have always marveld at the interwomen nature of
the school that they talked about and envisioned. Literally, and I'm being
very reductionist in this, the school organization and programs that were
proposed for this "new shcool in the middle" were there because
they were to change our whole appropriach to teaching this age group. Remember,
this is in the early 60s and the junior high school was and had been a "cesspool"
for students, teachers and parents.
People like my friend Tom Erb have grown blue in the face (Tom already has
a harvest of grey hair in his beard and on his head--like me!) over the
years from trying to explain to teachers that organizing into teams wasn't
really about scheduling--it was about fundamentally changing how we interacted
as educators with our students; it was about how we were supposed to be
able to create stimulating, involving, challenging, educationally rich learning
experiences that appealed to their interests and their questions as well
as being fundamentally improtant to learn.
I see too many teachers that think teams are there in the middle school
as only an alternative to departments without thinking about whey they were
designed that way and the implications of their design.
We are much too simplistic about this concept. Everything is, literally,
involved. And that's what the original research from Robert Felner and associates
and the continuing research from the University of Illinois (the AIMS project)
says. You literally don't get the "bang" from the concept unless
you're doing it all and if you're doing it right--the way the concept was
intended to be done.
Okay, I've gone on for awhile and I need to collect my thoughts some and
re-read what you've sent to see what else I need to respond to. I'll also
let Deborah weigh in with her thoughts after she reads what I've written.
Talk more soon.
Tom
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Lahaskell@aol.com
Subject: Re: [MWbooklist] First "Reinventing" discussion question
Hello,
Reading Tom's comments about hiring practices and staff development really
hit home for me. This year my team of five lost three members! The other
teacher and I had worked together only a year. So far this year it's really
been about talking about students in CPT. We haven't really had the time
to work on intergrating the curriculum much. These new people ( two of which
are only one year hires-another long story) are still trying to come to
terms with a new district and curriculum.
I would love to have time to discuss more intergrated units and take the
time to examine student work with my team. However, I can't force them to
read extra articles or do this kind of work. Any ideas out there?
Linda
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Thomas S. Dickinson" <tsd@mail.ccrtc.com>
Subject: [MWbooklist] Second response to the discussion
Greetings:
Now that my first response has come through (I've gotten a little jumpy
each time the "Postmaster" line comes up lately) let me go to
some other things that people have raised.
I particularly want to go back to what Jack Wallace initially raised and
link that in with Ellen Berg's more recent commentary.
Jack (and all of us--pardon me in talking "to" one of you which
is actually "through you" to others), I think your point is well
taken. We're not going to go through the 60s and 70s again where we were
converting whole schools from junior high schools to middle schools. We're
about done with the year-long inservice classes and the exclusive focus
on the tenents of the middle school. Now we "have them in place"
and that top-down change just isn't going to happen many places anymore.
What will need to happen, in those schools that match up to the "arrested
development" definition, is exactly what you're talking about--a team,
with a strong leader (you), taking a look at what they're doing and saying
"Wait a minute--this just isn't what we should be doing." This
time around I believe that the effort has to be grass roots, maybe even
team by team, to begin with.
[I say this with a sense that Deborah has some things to say about school
principles and school vision but I'll let her speak for herself.]
And by working together we have to be able to demonstrate success if it
is going to have an impact on the other teams at our level or above/below.
One of the really interesting things to watch happen is a really good team
operating well and parents getting wind of it--the pressure put on the administration
and the other teams can be quite significant and it should be.
My best advice to you Jack, and I'm getting more and more leary of giving
advice as I get older, but my best advice to you and your team is to block
off some time on a consistent basis to read and then discuss the significant
literature that will help you find your way through to where you want to
be. Most articles in the Middle School Journal aren't that long (believe
me, all of us in the reinventing theme issue had problems cutting whole
book chapters down to size!) and won't take that long to read. Then spend
some time discussing the issues with an eye to "are we really doing
this?" It sounds like you're already along this road so this probably
what you're doing.
One of the really nice things is that there is so much really good material
out there on just about every subject of middle schools--and a lot of it
is really well written and timely; not just theory, but good practice as
well. Maybe one of the things we should have a dialogue about as the week
unfolds is just what you need to read to go about reinventing--I did an
earlier posting during the teaming discussion about this. We'll have to
come back to it.
But to come back to you and your team mates Jack, continue to lead, especially
with the hard questions and I know they're hard on the individual self as
well as the professional self. I want to stay positive here so I'll wait
until later to talk with you about how you might deal with the individuals
who aren't "walking the walk."
But to Ellen's comments--about what happens when we send out students "on
to others". To a large extent, and this really isn't a middle school
problem only, we have to trust in the work that we do and how that impacts
our students. I have found that the impact a truly good and caring group
of teachers has isn't washed out by a "grammer book/drill and kill"
instructor. Kids have highly refined crap detectors and they know when,
as my daughters taught me, things are real and things aren't. One of my
daughters and I had a dinner conversation about this years ago. I'd commented
that she didn't say anything about her social studies teacher. She said
to me "Remember Mr. A?" I said yes, the one who did all the neat
projects, the debates, the interviewing, etc. She said "He was real."
and then she held up her glass. "Mr. X . . ." and then she put
the glass under the table and said "he's not real. I try to remember
what Mr. A taught me."
But Ellen, and Jack, raise a particular thorny question about other teachers
who aren't necessarily buying into the middle school concept or even other
important things like active learning, student engagement, rigorous instruction,
etc. I don't want to get negative, as I said, so I'll leave this one for
a little later in the week.
Time to send this off and then read more of what you've been writing. Also
time to get up and stretch and disturb the cat in my lap.
Tom
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Thomas S. Dickinson" <tsd@mail.ccrtc.com>
Subject: Re: [MWbooklist] First "Reinventing" discussion question
Hi, again, and nice comments Linda--
I'm one who believes that continual professional development is part of
the job. I've watched people in other professions have to stay on top of
what they do and I'm not persuaded that the salary difference is the reason
why we can't. Now before someone says "Whoa, Tom!" I believe this
about higher education as well and probably even more. And no, higher education
isn't any more committed to staying on top of professional development in
a productive manner--at the level that I work at the one's that are already
involved in their own development are the ones that keep surfacing at all
the staff development training (they're also the ones that win the teaching,
research and service awards, but you already knew that).
I think that any team that has team planning time should, as an ongoing
basis, be engaged in their own professional development together. Like I
said, reading an article every two weeks and discussing it for a period
or two should have some positive repercussions--first of all, we're intelligent
people and getting away, for however short a period of time, from grading,
conferences, and other pressing agendas should feed the intellect that we
all have. I think, Linda, that being a leader in this regard is possible
and I don't think that you should approach it from the "read extra
articles" but from another point of view. Maybe start with something
more close to home--starting the year, or something pertinent to their immediate
lives. Then branch out to other issues.
I guess part of what I am saying is trying to create a new culture where
intellectual activity isn't something to be seen as laughable or extra work.
And I feel for you in the revolving door of loosing team members.
Along that line, about hiring, have you gone to your administrator and indicated
that you and the team want to be part of the hiring practice? I tell my
students who are going to look for jobs in a middle school not to take a
job unless they have been interviewed by the team. They understand the admonition
and generally respect it. First of all it gives them an indication of whether
the team is "for real" or not.
Around here the good middle schools have the principal go through the pile
to sort out the candidates and then passes the appropriate ones on to the
team and the team does the interviewing and makes the hiring recommendation.
It seems to work well as a "marriage between equals."
Tom
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: [MWbooklist] First "Reinventing" discussion question
From: "Chris Toy" <Chris_Toy@coconetme.org>
MWbooklist@NS.SREB.ORG writes:
>Around here the good middle schools have the principal go through the
pile to sort out the candidates and then passes the appropriate ones on
to the team and the team does the interviewing and makes the hiring recommendation.
It seems to work well as a "marriage between equals.">
Our hiring committees include team members, content peers, a parent, and
students. Everyone except for the students review all applications based
on some agreed upon criteria. Each member identifies their top three or
four candidates, along with notes about others who look promising. The principal
takes everyone's input, hoping there is a reasonable overlap, which there
usually is, and creates the interview list. It works for us.
Chris Toy
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: ATheins77@aol.com
Subject: [MWbooklist] Being a true middle school
Tom Dickinson writes:
> We are much too simplistic about this concept.
Bingo! I couldn't count the number of times we have talked in my school
about becoming more of a middle school among the new teachers. The older
teachers say we are already are a middle school because we have teams. But,
we still have competitive athletics for only some kids, no advisory program,
and our team planning is usually spent on trivial stuff. What do you do
when someone says, "I/We already do that." How do you convince
someone that they're not really integrating a true middle school concept
into their classrooms? We just keep plugging away and trying to start some
new things, but it is incredibly difficult!
Amy Heinsma
Windsor, CO
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Then Chris Toy wrote:
I think this has a lot to do with our arrested development. Having only
the pieces and titles of programs is not enough. It's the quality and nature
of the interaction among teachers and students that makes a school effective.
Some of our more experienced teachers learned about the pieces of middle
level education thinking they knew all there was to know. This may be the
fault of the way professional development happens in schools. (Take any
number of reforms or programs, such as the unwhole implementation of whole
language.)
To be fair, I think the research and knowledge base for middle level and
effective teaching practices is significantly more sophisticated than it
was 10 or 15 years ago when many of our veteran teachers received their
professional development or training. I'm pretty sure there were no undergraduate
middle level courses for them. There still aren't any in Maine. It's still
all elementary or secondary.
Chris Toy
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Hayes Mizell" <HMizell@msn.com>
Subject: Re: [MWbooklist] 'REINVENTING' CHAT
I wonder if the issue is not whether anything is wrong with the middle school
concept, but whether rank-and-file middle level educators (and their bosses!)
have the interest, will and capacity to do what it takes to translate the
concept into practices that improve outcomes for students. In other words,
bringing the middle school concept to fruition in ways that demonstrably
enhance student development and achievement seems to be an unending struggle
that crashes on the rocks of what is REALLY important to the average middle
level educator (getting through the day, order, cari ng about the kids).
Certainly there are wonderful examples of where a principal and a faculty
truly "get it" and are more or less on the same page in working
together to translate the middle school CONCEPT into middle school PRACTICE.
But this is too often the exception rather than the rule. In many places,
as Tom says, there are attempts to implement the structures and processes
of what people understand to be the middle school concept, but these efforts
seem to falter when it is necessary to move beyond the mechanics to higher
order practice.
Then there is the utilitarian dimension of the middle school concept. Given
the standards and accountability pressures that administrators and faculties
now face, why should they believe that the middle school concept will help
them? [Please, can we just drop the word "concept"? Maybe that
is part of the problem. It remains a concept so long as we keep using the
word, thereby suggesting that is the goal we are seeking. It always s eems
so theoretical and ethereal.] Of course, IT CAN help them, but the middle
school community has done a terrible job of making the case and providing
the evidence.
Even though the about-to-be-enacted reauthorization of the Elementary and
Secondary Education Act will establish a 12-year target for closing the
achievement gap between minority and non-minority students by the end of
the eighth grade, will educators rise up and say, " I know, let's do
middle schools!" I doubt it. Middle schools are not seen as a practical
solution to what is now troubling people. That means not only student achievement,
but student development.
How do we mobilize educators to understand and embrace and WORK towards
a new vision and construct that combines what the middle school movement
has learned from 30 years of with the new imperative to educate all children
well?
And, by the way, is it necessary or useful to hold onto all the elements
of traditional middle schools? Are they all equally workable and require
equal effort to implement? Do some yield better results than others when
they are implemented effectively and consistently? Given the resource and
time pressures on educators, where should they put their greatest effort
to achieve the results we say we want?
Hayes Mizell
Edna McConnell Clark Foundation
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Deborah Bambino" <dbambino@earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: [MWbooklist] First "Reinventing" discussion question
Tom wrote:
"I'm one who believes that continual professional development is part
of the job."
I agree with Tom about ongoing professional development and the introduction
of other points of view through articles etc. At my school, we used Critical
Friends Groups to promote reflective practice and collaboration. Our progress
was uneven, but I think it's definitely the way to go. We used protocols
to examine student work together and began to engage in peer observations.
An added bonus was the use of the same tools in our classrooms with our
kids.
I'm interested in peoples' experiences about hiring, we are just beginning
to approach staff hiring decisions in our schools. We have had site selection
of principals for some time.
Deb Bambino
Philadelphia Public Schools
National School Reform Faculty
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Eileen Bendixsen <eb@passporttoknowledge.com>
Subject: Re: [MWbooklist] First "Reinventing" discussion question
I apologize in being way behind in this discussion, but I'm reading at a
rapid speed tonight and will post additional comments. First I wanted to
post the experiences of changing to a middle school in our district which
in some ways are probably unique, but have also contributed to our being
in arrested development.
I agree that there is nothing wrong with the middle school concept. Over
the past year plus I have learned a great deal about what a middle school
really is from the list, by attending NMSA this November and by trying to
spend every spare minute reading as much as I can about the philosophy and
how to teach middle school students.
Our district formed two small middle schools in 1983. At that time they
were called middle schools because if they were named junior highs it would
require teachers certified in their subject area and they would only teach
one subject. Instead they chose elementary teachers to make up the staff
of the middle school. I was not in the district at the time, but this is
still talked about in our district because many of the teachers were chosen
after requesting to not be placed in the middle school.
Five years ago we spent a year looking into middle schools and almost every
teacher in both middle schools was sent to observe a middle school in the
area and to sit in on a team meeting. The following year we were placed
into teams in most cases based on the grade level we wanted to teach. We
were given a team planning time every day and also had the same lunch and
individual planning time. We had three professional development workshops
on teaming by someone who presented ideas even beyond what is part the middle
school concept and most of what he stressed needed to be done we were never
going to be able to accomplish.
After four years of some form of teaming--we still have not added advisories
and the subject has never been mentioned in our district--we have this year
after a 7.5 million dollar bond issue to restructure the district--5 million
to expand the other middle school--combined the two middle schools (6-8)
into one 7/8 middle school. Unfortunately we are still--four months later--trying
to blend from two schools into one.
The current staff is comprised of mostly staff from the other school (about
3/4) along with their principal. This has made it very difficult for the
teachers from our former building to get any of the very successful things
that we did which were very pro student to be incorporated into what we
do. It has been a very difficult time for us to even be really excepted
beyond the friendly hello and the inclusion in conversation. They are still
comparing and asking if students were from "the other building".
I wonder if one of the main reasons so many districts are in arrested development
is not only money to add the common team period and go that step further
to add advisories, but also that you really need a top administration and
a building principal as well as a Board of Education that really understands
the middle school concept and buys into it. Have they taken the time to
read some of the NMSA publications so that they truely understand what the
middle school concept is?
The only thing we were given when we were making the change was "This
We Believe" and that was by placing a couple of copies in the teacher's
room. I'm the only teacher in our building that attends the national conventions.
I've mentioned a number of the things that were brought up in Turning Points
in our team meeting and it is obvious that none of them had heard of it
or read it. Out of the 8 team members 5 of them are 30 or under and thus
should have had the middle school background as part of their certification.
It is obvious that they did not receive this. Also 3 of those 5 taught 6th
grade last year and really would have preferred to stay there, but moved
to 7th to remain in the building with the building principal.
I agree we do need to "reinvent" our middle schools in accordance
with what the original founders of this movement articulated while deepening
our understanding of the concept. It is definitely worth the effort, time
and money as you can see from the results at the schools where this is being
implemented.
Eileen Bendixsen
Hazlet Middle School
Hazlet, NJ
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Thomas S. Dickinson" <tsd@mail.ccrtc.com>
Subject: Re: [MWbooklist] Being a true middle school
I think we've got something here and I think it goes to the discussion that
Anne and Marsha touched on about the ecology. (And Chris is on target about
the sophistication of the current research.)
Part of what I meant about being too simplistic about the concept, and this
is the part about the ecology and other points we were trying to make, is
that the middle school concept was something new.
Try that on for size for a moment (you may have to put yourself back to
1960 in a historical sense here). New. We had not attempted to do this before.
Sure, the junior high school was the "first birth" of a school
for young adolescents but there were a ton of other social reasons pushing
for a separate school in the middle (and for you history buffs who want
to read this there are lots of good historical reviews out there).
The middle school concept was new, however. And it was also different. New.
Different.
But not many schools got the next point, that it was unlike anything we
had ever seen before--here's the ecological point: It was a school concept
so interwoven that yes, you did have to do everything and everything together
to make it work.
There's a marvelous book out there, about Indiana and the Lilly Endowment's
Middle Grades Improvement Program (MGIP) that is pertinent here. The citation
follows--
Ames, N.L. & Miller, E. (1994). Changing middle schools:
How to make schools work for young adolescents. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Nancy Ames and Ed Miller wrote a wonderful book and the pertinent chapter
here is one about two principals, who I know and have worked with named
Jeff Swenson and Wally Bourke--the two best principals I have ever seen
in middle school outside of Wilma Parrish at Western Middle School in Alamance
County, N.C.--and how they made the transition to middle school.
The chapter is titled along the line "A Story of Two Principals",
the book is at work so I'm not sure about the title. What Jeff and then
Wally (they were principal/assistant and then Wally succeeded Jeff when
he moved to another district) did during the transition was to do everything
all at the same time--no incremental stage model; everything.
They knew that everything affected everything and had to happen that way;
yes, it was hard (the book talks about the transition at Decatur Middle
School in some detail) and not everyone made it through the transition.
But they didn't start down the road putting one piece in but neglecting
next year to put in another and integrate them together.
My point is that this concept is too different to do in a linear process--and
that's the problem with what we've done up to this point in many schools.
It's too interwoven together. And like an ecology, everything works together
with complex interactions, reactions, cause and effect.
Anne wrote:
<My question - does this mean that success depends on simultaneous implementation
of all middle school program components? I rather hope not, as that would
"doom" schools who begin with the pieces they are able to implement
and struggle to add remaining components as allowed.>
To get to your point Anne, yes and no (sounds like a college professor,
right?). The yes is that success does depend on implementation of all the
program components together--if not simultaneously like Jeff and Wally,
then pretty quickly. The point is that you've got to get them all in and
working together.
I don't want to doom schools by saying that they've got to begin implementation
all at once (that takes a committed staff and a knowledgeable, strong, committed
leader). But a staff (or administration) can't decide somewhere down the
road that "we've got enough" and leave out any of the fundamental
elements. Or worse, put the individual pieces in and not articulate them
together.
Take teams for example. Again, it's not about scheduling. It's about everything--how
I relate to students, to my team peers, advisory, communication with parents,
my curriculum and its relationship to my team mates' curriculum, how I focus
on individual student needs, how I work with colleagues to integrate a range
of crossover skills like reading and writing, how I look at instruction
and my use of time--that's what teams are supposed to do: change how we
work.
But too many people in middle schools seem to think that it's only about
the structure, the form. If this is a real ecology of schooling as I've
argued and as the founders of the movement intended then we need to spend
much more time thinking about how all of the pieces interact--and I see
that every now and again on one particular team but I don't see that generally
across the board in a school or schools.
That's the point. This is a new and different concept.
Marsha said some provocative things that I've been thinking about and I
need to think about even more:
<Interdependence doesn't mean that everything's the same. When it works
well, it means that there is a balance of individual components. And when
things are out of balance, the organism works to bring those out-of-bound
pieces into balance. That self-correcting mechanism is what I think we're
missing. I'll have to think about whether or not it's because we're too
busy, too overwhelmed, or too worried about the implications of corrections.
In my case, maybe I just got too self-absorbed into content and forgot to
stay on top of the Big Picture and the research that supported the notion
of excellence through that Big Picture. I really don't know. This article
and discussion have me really thinking about what's so different than when
I arrived in MS in the early 90s?>
I think, Marsha, that the self-correcting mechanism that's missing is at
the college level. Without the influx of very focused training on the part
of new hires then any imbalance at the school site will continue out of
balance and even more so. There is nothing like an influx of new teachers
educated in the middle school concept to ask hard questions, to put things
into practice, to stir the mix. I saw this in the two states--North Carolina
and Georgia--where they have both the licensure patterns and the teacher
education programs (on the graduate and undergraduate levels and in Georgia
at the University of Georgia they even have a freestanding Doctorate in
Middle School!).
The schools in this state have had a continuing influx of new teachers who
have been specifically trained in very good programs all across both states.
They come in expecting to do what they were educated to do. And in both
states there are graduate programs--masters and specialists programs galore--where
teachers continue their education in a focused manner, building on what
they already know and can do. And for experienced teachers who may not have
had the undergraduate training, well there are programs for them to initiate
their learning about middle schools.
I think this is the self-correcting mechanism (I'm so glad you brought this
up--now my friend and co-author Ken McEwin and I have another concept to
help hang our arguments for separate and distinct middle school programs
on--thank you!)--teacher education. How we get it is a problem that may
be, in some states, insurmountable.
I think another self-correcting mechanism is also in your response--the
Big Picture. It's like a lot of marriages that I've seen--two people committed
to one another who go along leading their lives, going about their daily
work, but over time forgetting to pay real attention to each other until
one day they wake up in bed together and they are two strangers to each
other.
To make any complex relationship work everyone involved in it has to stop
and pay attention to the Big Picture every now and then. Deborah would argue
that that position should be performed by a knowledgeable principal (she's
finishing her own grading so hopefully I can get her to log on with her
comments soon). But if not a knowledgeable principal then someone on the
staff.
I've found that when I've been called in from the outside to do this that
I meet with polite acceptance and then the passive resistance comes to the
fore. I've just about stopped doing the Big Picture with middle school faculties
and I tell people who call me to do it themselves--they live there and they
can follow up much more fully than I can.
So Marsha, I think the two points of the missing self-correcting mechanism
are teacher education and regular revisiting the Big Picture (and then fixing
what may be awry).
And it's easy to see why the Big Picture would slip off the radar scope--teachers
and schools have gotten so battered and bruised lately with one cintinuing
wave of demands after another without the support or climate to accomplish
it in--it's very easy to understand how to slip into arrested development
while still working very hard at what are often unavoidable tasks.
But the bottom line is that in the end we don't get hurt, the innocent ones
do.
Tom
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Deborah Bambino" <dbambino@earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: [MWbooklist] Being a true middle school
Amy wrote:
<"What do you do when someone says, "I/We already do that."
How do you convince someone that they're not really integrating a true middle
school concept into their classrooms?">
I'm working with a school that is committed to the principles of the Coalition
of Essential Schools. On Thursday I'll be taking a collaborative walk with
the 5-6 team to "take stock" of their progress around the principle
of "student as worker, teacher as coach." Maybe when people say
or think they're already doing something, you can try a similar tack, talk
about what evidence for the practice looks like, sounds like etc. and then
go out in search of evidence/data.20
We hope to find some things that are working, but expect we'll also get
clarity on the weak spots.
Maybe some of the veteran teachers are resisting because they don't feel
the positive aspects are getting honored. I know I've sometimes been guilty
of plowing ahead without enough consideration of previous developments.
There's a good article on the Journal of Staff development site called,
" Shh, the dragon is sleeping and its name is resistance."
You can read it at:
http://www.nsdc.org/library/jsd/janas193.html
(JSD, Spring 1998)
Good luck,
Deb
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Deborah Bambino" <dbambino@earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: [MWbooklist] 'REINVENTING' CHAT
Hayes Mizell wrote:
"Then there is the utilitarian dimension of the middle school concept.
Given the standards and accountability pressures that administrators and
faculties now face, why should they believe that the middle school concept
will help them?"
I'm very concerned with a move away from middle schools back to K-8's in
Phila. The emphasis is on contol and safety, and away from any real analysis
of the adolescent learner. Instead of building understanding, relationships
and new structures, the push is for a retreat, zero tolerance and clamping
down on kids.
I see this approach as going hand in glove with high stakes testing and
thenarrowing of the curriculum that is on the rise. Are folks experiencing
these developments in other areas of the country?
The specter of privatization and Edison looms large here and I am not optimistic
about their "support" of middle schoolers...
Deb
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Deborah Bambino" <dbambino@earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: [MWbooklist] First "Reinventing" discussion question
Eileen wrote: "...many of the teachers were chosen after requesting
to not be placed in the middle school."
Your comment could be made about our staffing practices in Phila. Far too
many middle gtades' classrooms are being taught by teachers who are dying
to get out of the middle.
I trained to be a kindergarten teacher and landed in seventh grade! We need
better preparation, as Tom said, but we also need to break down the misinformation
about our kids, the misinformation breeds fear and misunderstanding of adolescents
and isolates our kids. Once I got to know my students, I was hooked, but
my anxiety level was over the top, the summer before I began teaching.
Deb
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Eileen Bendixsen <eb@passporttoknowledge.com>
Subject: Re: [MWbooklist] First "Reinventing" discussion question
Deb:
I agree with you 100%, but I'm sure there isn't one of us who has not been
to at least one middle school professional development session where the
beginning of the session starts with a comment about the fact that we are
nuts to be teaching this age group. I heard it a couple of times at NMSA
alone. It was interesting that at one of the sessions one teacher did address
the comment, but whenever the session is started in that manner we all laugh
and agree. If we want to break down the isolation it has to begin with all
of us.
I too wanted to become a primary teacher. In fact my original certificate
was from NY as N-6. I moved to NJ right after college and was given permanent
K-8 certification without taking a single course.
BTW I guess I should say that this was in 1973 before the state tests etc.
for certification. I fell into the middle school because they needed substitutes
to work at that grade level and I wanted to work. Even after six months
I was still asking to be moved down to the lower grades. Fortunately the
substitute caller did not listen and after 4 1/2 years of subbing I was
hired as a 7th and 8th grade science teacher.
I spent last year fighting to remain in the middle school--my original assignment
after the restructuring was a move to 5th and 6th grade science. The assist.
superintendent finally forced the middle school principal to agree to my
staying in the middle school.
Eileen
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Ellen Berg <ellen@accessus.net>
Subject: Re: [MWbooklist] First "Reinventing" discussion question
> >I trained to be a kindergarten teacher and landed in seventh grade!
We need better preparation, as Tom said, but we also need to break down
the misinformation about our kids, the misinformation breeds fear and misunderstanding
of adolescents and isolates our kids.>>
I agree, but as Eileen said, our kiddos are a very special breed.
Unfortunately, most prospective teachers are asked whether they want to
teach high school or elementary, and the middle school is neglected entirely.
What I would like to see in *all* teacher education programs is some quality
times for all preservice teachers at all levels. I wanted most to teach
Senior Honors Literature & Composition (caps intended!), and nothing
but a last minute curiosity to do my student teaching at the middle level
helped me find my true calling.
Yes, middle schoolers are unique bunch, but they are definitely not for
everybody, just like elementary or high school is not for everyone. I think
we need to do a better job of promoting ourselves and educating prospective
teachers about their choices. Instead of being stuck in the middle, we need
teachers who elect to serve this very special population.
Ellen
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Jack Wallace <wallacej@blazenetme.net>
Subject: Re: [MWbooklist] Being a true middle school
>>I couldn't count the number of times we have talked in my school
about becoming more of a middle school among the new teachers. The older
teachers say we are already are a middle school because we have teams>>
This is interesting because our team (8th grade) is made up of five core
teachers (four of whom are in their fifties and a team leader who is in
her thirties), and three "diversified studies" teachers all of
whom are in their forties.
The one with the least information about middle schools is the team leader,
but she is very open to change. What is more important in my view is the
background of the teacher. Three of us in the core area are former elementary
teachers and a couple of us taught in the sixth grade which is still the
premiere team concept functioning unit. We experienced true teams (no student
off team, scheduling of the school day the way we wanted it, effective and
efficient team planning meetings), and when we arrived in 8th grade, we
were content area teachers. None of those three characteristics just mentioned
were evident, nor were they sought after.
The certification issue in Maine in seventh and eighth grade is a major
one. There are teachers who were math majors in college, want to teach just
math and have a passion for math. (Substitute any core area). Should they
be expected to leave their area? Or can we manage to integrate them into
the team?
Most of our staff is open to interdisciplinary instruction and can bring
something to the table when planning these projects. For example, if we
have 12 "divisions" of 23 students each, couldn't we devise teams
of 3, 4 and 5 members (sounds like a right triangle, doesn't it?) and utilize
each other's strengths? The team of three could be made up of teachers who
have dual certification (K-8 and 7-12) or just K-8. This would allow us
to teach multiple subjects as they do in sixth grade. The team of five would
be made up of mostly 7-12 certified teachers, but they could still integrate.
The team of four would be a hybrid. That's where I get lost in the details.
I mentioned above about the background of the teacher in terms of certification
and teaching experience. But it is also important in life-long learning.
We are curious people who enjoy discussing educational and personal and
social and moral issues. We are open to change, but fortunately, being of
advanced age, we have some experience to separate the wheat and the chaff.
'Hmmm, is this a significant change, or is this just fluff?"
We also enjoy each other's company. Stories of children and grandchildren
pepper the 20 minute lunch time. The personal connection is so very important,
and having taught in our boxes for so long, it's fun to actually connect
with each other.
Sorry to ramble, but this stuff is interesting!
Jack Wallace
Eighth Grade Social Studies Teacher
Brunswick Junior High School
Brunswick, ME
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Eileen Bendixsen <eb@passporttoknowledge.com>
Subject: Re: [MWbooklist] Being a true middle school
I don't mean this as an argument against what Tom is saying about implementing
the whole concept at once, but I believe in many cases we are even simply
struggling with taking those first couple of steps off home plate. We had
our team period handed to us on a silver platter. My first year of teaming
we had a very difficult group of students. Although it was a very difficult
year for all of us it truly bonded us as a team.
Unfortunately I was asked to cross-team two years later and landed on a
team that had many problems, but again last year we had another rough group
of students and it did once again force us to come together as a team.
This year I'm on the third team I've been on. I'd be embarrassed to tell
you how we spend most of the time during teaming. Most of it has nothing
to do with school, students or curriculum. The "problem" students
are discussed as a venting session only and it was made obvious to me from
the first day that things like setting up action plans etc. was not going
to happen.
There is no teacher/student connection or interest in the student centered
philosophy of the middle school. We are currently putting together an interdisciplinary
unit only because it is required. We just started writing the objectives
today and they plan to implement right after vacation so that they can get
it over with.
The one middle school idea that was brought up with the principal was flexible
scheduling for the half days. It was shot down so quickly (He didn't want
to have to remember the schedules for four different teams. We had explained
that we would work out the schedule.) that I can tell you while this principal
is in the building there is no chance that we can do anything with the schedule.
The team members themselves have never bought into the concept. In fact
during a discussion at lunch one day several team members mentioned they
thought it was a waste of time and that they would rather teach six periods
than have the teaming period. We still have many of the senior staff that
would like to see us go back to the K-8 buildings. We also fill up teaching
positions in the middle school with high school staff that causes "problems"
in the high school and are thus banished to the middle school.
How do you get a district to accept the complete philosophy and implement
it all at once when neither administration nor staff is willing to take
that first step?
Eileen
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Shighley@aol.com
Subject: Re: [MWbooklist] schools and grade configuration
Deb's comment about reverting to K-8 schools in Philadelphia has me wondering.
Can not the middle school ecology be successfully implemented in a K-8 school?
Am I dreaming, or have I read that there is some research supporting K-8
schools? The current trend in the area where I live is to separate even
more, to have 5-6 schools and 7-8 schools. No school district has said that
this plan is supported by any type of research; it always seems to be a
way to work with overcrowding in elementary and middle schools.
Susie Highley
Creston Middle School
Indianapolis, IN
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: bivey@k12s.phast.umass.edu (Bill Ivey)
Subject: Re: [MWbooklist] First "Reinventing" discussion question
Hi!
Whew! You all are amazing! I'm almost caught up (and over half done making
crepes for the 8th grade trip...) So, organizing my thoughts around the
organizational snippets used by Marsha and Jack...
>a. there is nothing wrong with the middle school concept;
I absolutely agree, though I also agree with the notion expressed here that
the word "concept" may be an unwitting liability - it sounds untested
and unformed. I also think that there aren't nearly enough schools which
truly uphold middle school ideals, whether it's a lack of training, a lack
of desire, or a perception of lack of time (put me, sorry to say, in that
third group - for now, anyway).
>b. most middle schools are in some stage of "arrested development;"
Looking at the upper school at Pine Cobble and thinking back to conversations
we've had over the past year on Middleweb, I would say it's hard to argue
with that. I think the above stated problems go to why. For these five criteria
Marsha mentioned, here's how Pine Cobble stacks up...
>Teachers organized into teams that meet
There are only 10-15 kids in each grade at Pine Cobble, so our middel level
faculty is only 13 people (including those specialists who also teach in
the lower school). Nonetheless, I suppose we could create smaller teams
if we wanted to. The 13 of us meet once a week and spend the bulk of meeting
time discussing various students and how we can work together to help them.
We do work well together, and in a sense would be diminished if we only
had half the expertise on any given team.
>Unification between core and exploratory teachers
At a curricular level, this isn't happening at all at Pine Cobble. The closest
we've had to co-curricular is when we had one person teaching 6th and 8th
grade English and History who integrated his own curricula quite effectively
- perhaps through regular meetings with himself. I'd love to see this though.
I will say we do support each other.
>Advisory programs
Pine Cobble does this well, as we have 30-60 minutes every Wednesday afternoon
for advisor group "work jobs" (!!!) and time to talk, play, study,
etc., and 30 minutes every Friday for an advisor group lunch. Of course,
some advisors do more with the time than others, which may in part be a
matter of training???, but at least the time is there.
>Competitive athletics for all
Do we ever have this! With only 51 kids in grades 6-9, everyone is required
to be on a team during fall and spring seasons, and the varsity boys' soccer
team is undeafeated since 1999. We go skiing (downhill or cross country)
in the winter.
>Curriculum
My feeling is that Pine Cobble's curriculum is relatively responsive to
the needs of any individual group of kids and that we are good about imposing
rigor - certainly our kids tend to be about two years ahead of their peers
in the local public schools when they graduated, which has to mean something
even when you consider we can select our population.
Our methods do tend to be varied and suitable for different learning styles.
I do sometimes think we overbalance toward the traditional and practical,
and that a little more knowledge of early adolescent development (intellectual,
social, perhaps even physical) would be good.
>c. to alleviate this problem we need to "reinvent" middle
schools in accordance with what the original founders of this movement articulated
while deepening our understanding of the concept.
Well... I always hate to stick dogmatically to any one vision, and several
people on this list have mentioned how much we've learned about young adolescents
over the past 10-15 years, but the core ideas are certainly solid.
Tom mentioned that one thing we can do over these next few days is delineate
what might be most useful to read. I would totallly support that notion.
Chris said: "It's the quality and nature of the interaction among teachers
and students that makes a school effective." which goes along with
a conversation he and I are having on the main list. I do think that one's
background in early adolescent psychology can drastically affect the quality
of what we do as well as the activities we select to do (the "nature
of the interaction"), and that there are too many people in middle
school education who lack adequate training.
Actually, I should know, because I'm one of them. (Thanks to MiddleWeb,
I'm catching up fast, though!).
Those are my rather choppy and belated two cents.
Take care,
Bill Ivey
Pine Cobble School
Williamstown, MA
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Then John Norton wrote:
Hayes Mizell wrote:
<Certainly there are wonderful examples of where a principal and a faculty
truly "get it" and are more or less on the same page in working
together to translate the middle school CONCEPT into middle school PRACTICE.
But this is too often the exception rather than the rule. In many places,
as Tom says, there are attempts to implement the structures and processes
of what people understand to be the middle school concept, but these efforts
seem to falter when it is necessary to move beyond the mechanics to higher
order practice.>
I think this is really a core issue across the USA (and elsewhere, I expect!).
I know that Hayes has been in dozens, perhaps hundreds, of middle schools
in many states. I've probably been in several hundred myself. As we go through
these schools, interviewing teachers and principals and students, we find
this core issue over and over again. They "do" middle school.
It says "Middle School" over the door, doesn't it?
An analogy might be this: a master chef gives you his/her recipe for a fabulous
dish you just ate at his/her five-star restaurant. You go home, pull out
the recipe, locate all the "ingredients," and attempt to cook
the meal. But you lack the master chef's skills, knowledge, and considerable
experience. And no one with those skills, knowledge and experience is there
to lead and guide you. The Michelin Guide will not be dropping by to rate
your efforts. Does the dish taste the same? Very doubtful. But you can surely
put a sign up in your kitchen, saying "Five-star recipe served here."
Or, we could go with the emperor who had no clothes... I like that one.
I like the part where if everybody just *believed* it was so -- it was so.
For a MiddleWeb diary entry exactly on this point, read Ellen's report (posted
yesterday) about her challenge of her principal and school around the issue
of *implementation* of the school improvement plan.
http://www.middleweb.com/mw/msdiaries/01-02wklydiaries/EB16.html
john
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
John Norton wrote:
OK, we've heard that many middle schools are stalled -- "arrested"
in their development. Tom may want to tell us more about what he and Deborah
had in mind when they used that expression.
But here's my question: Is there anyone on the List who can offer examples
of either:
(1) How a school's evolution toward a fully realized middle school model
has been stymied; OR
(2) How a school (its faculty and administrators) have broken through the
barrier and are achieving the vision of a middle school that meets all students'
needs -- achievement, development, and equity?
Take your pick...
John
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Pedigo, Michelle" <mpedigo@Barren.k12.ky.us>
Subject: RE: [MWbooklist] Reinventing - - - How?
Hi everyone, I'm joining a bit late. As a former middle school principal
and one that believes with all my heart that all components working together
in middle schools work for children at that level, I understand your question
below, Anne.
"My question - does this mean that success depends on simultaneous
implementation of all middle school program components? I rather hope not,
as that would "doom" schools who begin with the pieces they are
able to implement and struggle to add remaining components as allowed."
Anne, I do understand the reality behind what you are saying; however, I
bemoan the fact that so many schools and districts have put the name of
middle school on their letterheads and on their signs, organized in teams,
and called themselves a middle school. They have not really begun to scratch
the surface of what must happen to support high student achievement in a
community of learners. This, in return, gives all middle schools a worse
name because they have not implemented the philosophy and they are in with
us!
While it may be hard to implement, we must work to expect all tenets of
Turning Points 2000, all tenets of the National Forum to Accelerate Middle
Grades Reform's work around being academically excellent, socially equitable
and developmentally responsive, to be infused into the daily joy of middle
schools, for middle school children. There has to be a balance among all
these, and all these serve middle school children.
Here's a secret, though, if one reads any of Turning Points 2000 or any
of the National Forum's work, they will find that it is truly sound, good
education practice, PreK - postsecondary; the developmental stages simply
change.
For more information on the National Forum's work, check out their website
at http://www.schoolstowatch.org
.
Looking forward to hearing your thoughts....
Michelle Pedigo
Barren County Schools
Glasgow, KY
Editor's Note: Michelle was selected by the National Association of Secondary
School Principals as the 2000 Middle Level Principal of the Year.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Then Michelle Pedigo wrote:
Hayes Mizell wrote:
"Then there is the utilitarian dimension of the middle school concept.
Given the standards and accountability pressures that administrators and
faculties now face, why should they believe that the middle school concept
will help them?"
If implemented correctly, around the balance of academic rigor, developmentally
responsiveness, and social equity, the middle school concept will help them
accomplish student achievement, on any state assessment. The big "if"
is when it is implemented correctly.
Michelle
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Then Michelle Pedigo wrote:
Tom wrote:
"I'm one who believes that continual professional development is part
of the job."
I so much agree, especially job-embedded professional development with an
on-site facilitator that ensures follow-up on the professional development
in the classroom.
Michelle
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rick Selby replied to John's question/prompt:
I think one area that has stymied progress toward a full realization of
the middle school model is the lack of training for new teachers about what
a middle school is really about. In California, the student teachers are
not required to have any formal studies on the middle level, for it focuses
all of the attention to secondary as a whole.
Many new teachers come in to a middle school environment with an idea that
is just like a high school, but the kids are smaller. I think we are doing
a diservice to these teachers by not preparing them for the middle level.
Cal State San Marcos in San Diego has a strong middle level program that
truly prepares the student teachers for the middle school. I think if more
educators were cognizant of the ideals of the middle level, we would not
find ourselves as stalled.
Rick
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tom returned from his college paperwork and made up for lost time!
Hello everyone:
I'm back--grades all turned in, student teacher summative assessments graded,
grant budget totalled out and even some shopping done!
Given John's question, I'd like door number two--trying to tell positive
stories on this Tuesday in December.
>(2) How a school (its faculty and administrators) have broken through
>the barrier and are achieving the vision of a middle school that >meets
all students' needs -- achievement, development, and equity?
When I taught at Georgia Southern College (now University) I worked with
a small, rural middle school in Georgia that was making the transition to
middle school from a semi-junior high school/semi-nondescript school model.
Part of the transition was having me come up and teach a semester-long introductory
course on middle schools. Now for those of you that know the Georgia middle
school story you'll know that the state put money around the transition
with supplemental funds for schools that implemented the middle school concept
(sorry Hayes, I'm still captive of my own language but I'm thinking hard
about what you wrote last night)--things like teaming, flexible block schedules,
advisories.
But while that is important to the larger background, I want to comment
on what the school and the district did to make the transition. There were
a number of very specific things:
The district paid for the enrollment of all the faculty and administration
in the course (since the district had officially embraced moving toward
middle school--one of the requirements for the state was that to be eligible
for the additional money then something like 60% of the faculty had to have
a middle school license or endorsement). They required it of the entire
staff, but they paid for it--three hours graduate credit good for renewal
of your license or work on an advanced degree. They also paid for everyone's
books--nothing to share, everyone got all of the books and we used quite
a few.
When there was an objection that people would miss supper the principal,
who I'll get to later told the staff that he'd feed them. Out of his budget.
It wasn't 5-star cooking (the cafeteria staff did it) but it was good and
one of the unintended results was that we didn't "leave" for dinner
when it came time, we just went together and kept talking, getting to know
each other more, getting the social aspect further down the road. And let's
face it--teachers, at any level love to eat (I think it's a result of the
no-time-for-lunch situation at schools).
Then when someone objected about the need for daycare the principal went
to the high school, just a little down the road, and asked the Key Club,
which is a service club, if they could set up a homework helper and a daycare/babysitting
situation. Since service clubs are always on the lookout for meaningful
opportunities they said yes and while we had class in the library they set
up a series of rooms for homework for older kids and a daycare setup for
the younger ones. One teacher, whose husband taught at the high school,
confessed that their child did better in math that semester with the homework
help every Monday night than they had ever done before.
Oh, yeah--Monday night. When the faculty heard that the class was on Tuesday
they wanted it taught on Monday since they figured they had more energy
then so the principal called my chair at GSU and we changed the night (which
wasn't a big deal at all for me).
So by the time the class started, and I didn't know all about this until
later, the principal had responded to (blunted) any problem, question or
concern.
So there we were, the entire faculty (maybe 35 teachers and all of the support
staff--librarian and counselor), the principal and assistant principal.
But that wasn't all--the district curriculum director was there as was a
school board member who had advocated for the change. And then get this--two
parents of middle school kids that the principal had recruited. And everyone--and
I mean everyone--was there every night.
The principal, who had been reading heavily for the last three years about
middle schools and had been taking middle school courses from the University
of Georgia, said something rather profound that first night.
After welcoming everyone and acknowledging the contribution of everyone
there he said this to the faculty (I paraphrase from the exact but the idea
is here): "We are moving to middle schools. That decision has been
made by the school board. We are going to study what we need to do and then
we're going to implement it. You each have a decision to make and that's
whether you want to be here in this middle school. You don't have to make
up your mind tonight or next week or even the next. Take your time. Ask
hard questions. Challenge the materials and the instructor. But make sure
you understand this: we are going to be a middle school. If this is the
place for you,then good; you will be welcome here. But if it's not, then
you need to start thinking about where you'd like to be, because you and
the school and the children don't need to be unhappy."
It got really quiet and he looked at everyone for a very long while and
then he said to me to begin.
We had a wonderful class--lots of "real" assignments, inventories,
case studies, reading research, role playing--the kind of active stuff that
made the hours go by. And each time when we got to a critical point the
principal would stand up and ask "How are we going to decide this?"
The staff didn't know it then but he was creating a shared governance model
with them as we went through the course. And it was interesting, watching
it unfold. When we had about finished with the segment on teams he asked
"How do we decide who's on a team?" The faculty wanted him to
decide and he said no, if I decide then you'll blame me when things go wrong.
He turned it back to them and we ended up making it a four week assignment
for the entire staff (the librarian was critical at this stage to help coordinate
everything but then she'd been coordinating everything at that school for
a long time--aren't they the most valuable people!).
We had them talk to every other member of the staff--and given the small
number it was amazing who didn't know who; we had them do inventories; we
had them post "Job Wanted" advertisements where they described
themselves as teachers and potential team members (their assets and needs)
as well as their image of what they wanted from team members; we had them
role play conflict situations; and I brought in a fully functioning team
from where I worked that had been together as a team for four years and
they described the ups and downs of getting to where they were--that was
a really tough night for everyone; it's not easy to share failures and mis-starts
before others.
Anyway, we proceeded along this line the whole semester. From the time I
got out of the state car (I gradually learned to get there early and then
earlier) I was beseiged with questions and questions and more questions.
They started out as "But what if . . ." and "Now I don't
know if I believe . . ." but as the semester progressed they became
"If we were to implement this model, how would we go about . . ."
and "I'm convinced of the need for this, do you have more for me to
read about it or where can I go to see it up close . . ."
We went to the state middle school conference--registration was very cheap
and it was for one day and it was close--but everyone went and they had
an eye-opening time meeting people who were happy in a middle school environment.
They also made friends and contacts.
I could go on but I think I'll stop here and see if I can point to what
happened with this one rural school (and before you ask, no, they're not
arrested in their development--they are a fully functioning middle schools
with a stable staff, new hires over the year with middle school degrees
and knowledge, and yes, the principal is still there, thank you very much):
First of all, they had buyin from top down and that buyin was overt and
visible--parents, school board members, central office administrators--as
well as from the principal.
Second, they had a visionary leader in a principal. Someone who didn't go
into this transition lightly at all; who'd done his homework, read what
he could, studied with good people on the subject. And he had a vision that
he slowly shared with the staff in a natural way.
Third, the visionary leader had standards. Not arbitrary ones but meaningful
ones. And part of those standards was in not letting people who didn't want
to be there poison the transition and the development of the school. No
one, to use one of my phrases, was going to be a stumbling block in his
school; everyone was invited to be a stepping stone to the next level. No,
not all the staff that took the course stayed and the principal helped find
them places in the system where they could be happy and make a difference.
But the ones that did stay wanted to be there and they'd proved that throughout
the semester.
Fourth, and this is most critical, they used the knowledge base of middle
schools to direct them in what they did. They read and implemented; they
debated things on the merits of their situation and circumstances and their
kids but they didn't out-of-hand dismiss good research or good practice.
I think some of this goes back to our discussion last night on the "self-regulating"
feature of an ecology. Here I think the self-regulator was the principal.
Time to let the cats back in--sometimes I wonder who is keeping who.
Tom
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Phil Binkley joined the conversation:
I'm entering the discussion to offer a couple of observations--thanks for
the opportunity for dialogue on an important issue! First, we need to be
careful of "all or nothing" and "one or the other" kind
of thinking....in other words, the extremes. Very few things are all bad
or all good. Second, while I prefer a middle grades school that has all
the components of the middle school philosophy in place, I know of some
wonderful middle grade schools NOT called middle schools......what goes
on inside a building is important, not what it is called/named. Finally,
an effective middle grades school evolves over time.....there is no single
event which occurs....and, the journey never really ends.
Phil Binkley
Ohio Middle School Association
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Pedigo, Michelle" <mpedigo@Barren.k12.ky.us>
Subject: RE: [MWbooklist] Math team?
Phillip wrote: Why is it "either/or" relative to curriculum/instruction,
or organization? Why not both? Can't each support the other, in fact, aren't/can't
they be interrelated?
Yes, Phillip, I believe they can and should support one another. Actually,
the organizational structure must support curriculum and instruction. Many
times, though, we allow adult wishes to drive the organization, instead
of the results we are trying to get.
Michelle
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Thomas S. Dickinson" <tsd@mail.ccrtc.com>
Subject: Re: [MWbooklist] 'REINVENTING' CHAT
Last night Hayes Mizell wrote:
>Certainly there are wonderful examples of where a principal and a faculty
truly "get it" and are more or less on the same page in working
together to translate the middle school CONCEPT into middle school PRACTICE.
But this is too often the exception rather than the rule. In many places,
as Tom says, there are attempts to implement the structures and processes
of what people understand to be the middle school concept, but these efforts
seem to falter when it is necessary to move beyond the mechanics to higher
order practice.>
I want to pick up on Hayes' comment (see above) about the inability to move
into practice that really impacts student learning.
I just came back from a teacher education conference in NY with some wonderfully
powerful educators (K-doctoral school). We were looking at teacher education
curriculum issues and I've been struck since then that the problem may be
fundamentally on how we look or don't look at learning.
I come in through the development door. I did this before I really knew
about middle schools, but that's another story. I look at development as
my entry point which leads to student and learning. From here I'm shaped
by the standards I have to deal with which points me toward student performances
and dispositions as well as knowledge.
But in my thinking recently I've been tripping over the "learning"
point and I wonder, back to Hayes' comment, if part of our problem is that
we really don't pay attention to how students learn (and as a teacher educator
I think a massive part of the problem is at my level). John Lounsbury in
his chat last year said that young adolescents learn with their mouths and
their hands open. I think John has captured that well.
Are we really looking at, thinking about, student learning? Or are we going
through the motions of "activities" and calling that teaching?
This gets us into a number of areas--ignore the standards for a moment--one
of them being "less is more" (see all of the Coalition of Essential
Schools materials for this topic). Are we really looking at student learning
like we should--which is one of the reasons for having a team rather than
a department; here you have a number of professionals who see the same students
every day who can help each other to see how kids learn best and coordinate
both instruction and curriculum. And teams were designed to cut down on
the massive numbers of students that departmental situations had.
And if you throw in the idea of looping with a group of students and you
make partner teams (2 person teams) then can't you really begin to look
at how students learn and then begin to articulate to that? This is the
kind of thing that Tom Erb talks about when he talks about the purpose and
possibility of teams.
And if we are to help provide environments for kids to learn then we have
to make them environments where the classroom and its interactions are stable
and secure so that kids can experiment, risk, try, stretch their limits.
And if we do that then aren't we really dealing with many advisory issues--not
some ditto master/seats-and-sheets canned program?
Maybe, in keeping with Hayes' observation about language (i.e., the middle
school concept), we should start thinking and asking (out loud?) "How
can my students best LEARN this?" as opposed to how am I going to teach
this?
Like I said, a massive part of the problem is at my level. If you've been
to college then you know how we teach. And if you go back into school you
tend to teach the way you are taught.
The middle school was supposed to be a school, in Bill Alexander's view,
where students had opportunities to "become." Maybe if we re-orient
ourselves toward student learning this will still be a possibility.
Tom Dickinson
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Ellen Berg <ellen@accessus.net>
Subject: Re: [MWbooklist] New question for the List...
John wrote: > But here's my question: Is there anyone on the List who
can offer examples of either:
>1) How a school's evolution toward a fully realized middle school model
has been stymied;>
Three years ago when Turner became a magnet school, I think all the members
of the staff were looking forward to "real" middle school practice.
It was a great opportunity--only two of the existing teachers opted to remain
(I was one), we had a new principal, new toys, a full summer of professional
development prior to reopening, and a staff that was looking forward to
the coming year with excitement. All the motivation and support were there.
So, what happened?
We had an incredibly knowledgeable principal who had no social skills--I
mean, she rubbed people the wrong way with endless meetings where nothing
was ever decided, she'd ask for input and not listen to anyone on the staff,
and she was a micromanager. Incredibly knowledgeable, but she lacked decisiveness
and the ability to really build consensus and buy-in among the staff. Because
she alienated so many people and lost our trust (and made a few comments
linking the behaviors and race of our students...), we went through all
the channels and eventually pushed her out. We spent most of our time and
energy trying to get her to listen and then, eventually, to get her out
of there, that we had nothing left at the end and no leader to lead us to
be able to do all these wonderful things we'd envisioned. We were burned
out.
The new principal is very into looking good on paper, and collecting the
paper to cover her behind. We have no real input, no real accountability,
and so much of what we have tried has failed because of lack of support
or understanding from all involved. What she does not understand is that
if we were actually doing all the wonderful things we said we were doing
on paper (either at all or effectively), she would look a whole lot better.
Instead, she collects her documentation and then places blame as she gets
called on the carpet.
It is disheartening, and if it weren't for my kids, I would leave.
Ellen
Editor's Note: Ellen Berg is a MiddleWeb diarist.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Thomas S. Dickinson" <tsd@mail.ccrtc.com>
Subject: Re: [MWbooklist] New question for the List...
Ellen:
I've literally read your posting three times and I'm pretty well stunned.
What an opportunity and what a failure by the leader, followed by more failure.
Is it any wonder that we have teachers who are just trying to survive on
their own, let alone work on other issues; and any other issue looks pretty
insignificant compared to the picture you've painted.
One of the things that's not posted on the web but that's part of the theme
issue on reinventing (and which is in the book as well in an expanded version)
is Mary Gallagher-Polite's article entitled "From Turning Points to
Transformation Points: A Reinvention Paradigm for Middle Schools" (in
the book it's titled "Hope for Sandy: Trnsformation Points: A Reinvention
Paradigm." I think you (and your colleagues) would benefit from it--especially
if you ever get a real leader or if you have a palace revolution and want
to point in an appropriate direction.
BTW, Mary isn't far from you, physically. She's down the interstate at Southern
Illinois University at Edwardsville. If that connection can be facilitated,
let me know.
Tom
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Jack Wallace <wallacej@blazenetme.net>
Subject: Re: [MWbooklist] New question for the List...
John asked:
>(1) How a school's evolution toward a fully realized middle school >model
has been stymied...
Well, this question is easier to answer since we haven't yet broken through
the barrier. I see it as being stymied in several ways:
1. An administrator in the 80s and 90s who said he wanted to go to teams--never
said middle school--by the next year. But he couldn't take us there because:
a. department heads who had the power, authority and budgetary control
b. teachers who didn't know what we were doing
c. no training for the teachers
d. no budget for teams
e. certification problems
f. he had no training himself in middle level education
2. An administrator in the last three years who has a graduate degree in
Middle Level Education, but has few social skills--whether it's in informal
settings or inspiring teachers or whatever. Sound familiar, Ellen?
3. A major curriculum project for the last four years trying to align our
curriculum with the state's standards (Learning Results). 90% of the staff
development, whether it's before the school year or during our workshop
days, has been spent on this.
We still don't understand the whole concept. I have learned so much from
this listserv, but I alternate between thinking I'm doing ok to thinking
I just don't have a clue. I enjoy going down to the sixth grade and watch
them team nearly seamlessly. It's delightful.
Jack Wallace
Eighth Grade Social Studies Teacher
Brunswick Junior High School
Brunswick, ME 04011
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Jack Wallace <wallacej@blazenetme.net>
Subject: [MWbooklist] Math team?
As I've mentioned several times, I am trying to get the faculty on board
to move more significantly toward middle school. There is a lot of support,
but not from the math department chairman. As he is a good friend, I went
to him early on to let him know I was planning on moving the school in that
direction. He appreciated the "heads up", but said he would fight
it to the end. His strong feeling is that it's not the organization of the
school, but instead the curriculum and teaching methods that makes a school
strong. We agreed to disagree.
One of the suggestions that he has said over the years is that he would
like to see a math team. In other words, not a team of students, but a team
of teachers. In that way, we would send our kids to the "math team"
for one period of the day just as we do now for "diversified studies"
(united arts). I love that terminology! Our math is presently homogeneously
grouped while the rest of the subjects are not. I and most teachers have
no problem with the homogeneous grouping in math, and the math scores have
been consistently high over the years. The math chairman has indicated that
he would be happy to support any integration of subject matter, ie, "How
can we support in math what you are doing in social studies, science or
LA"? But he would not be happy to support our taking the kids out of
his math classes to keep them for an extended period of time.
So, my question to the booklist is if you have ever seen this, and does
it work? Is it true to the concept of the middle school? What are your reactions?
Thanks.
Jack Wallace
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Philip Binkley" <pbinkley@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: [MWbooklist] Math team?
Why is it "either/or" relative to curriculum/instruction, or organization?
Why not both? Can't each support the other, in fact, aren't/can't they be
interrelated?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Juli Kendall
Subject: [MWbooklist] My "lost" email
I apologize for resending this email to the list but it looks like it got
lost in the comings and goings over the weekend.
Someone wrote:
<<I can't honestly claim that we were in a stage of arrested development,
because I don't think we ever developed as a true middle school. After one
year, class loads went up to 180 students per day, we lost a planning period,
and teachers began teaching six fifty-minute classes per day. At that point
we just went into survival mode. >>
I agree with the previous statement. The middle school where I worked adopted
a block schedule (4x4) with teacher approval but without any preservice
or ongoing staff development in the area of maximizing this schedule for
students. We also got a new name and a new mission.
Teachers thought their classloads would decrease but they actually went
from about 180 students to 210+ students. These students were spread out
over 2 days so student contacts were fewer but teachers used lecture based
leson delivery and management problems reigned supreme. There was a serious
problem with staff morale.
The effect of the reform, "block scheduling," was eclipsed by
the difficulty of implementing it without proper/adequate training, collaboration,
and on going professional development geared to helping kids be successful
learners in a middle school environment.
Whatever is done in middle school reform needs to be well thought out and
implemented with enough support to provide teachers with the resources to
help kids be successful.
> c. to alleviate this problem we need to "reinvent" middle
schools
I can't access my pdf files right now to review the article, but I imagine
that "reinventing" definitely doesn't refer to "tinkering
or tweaking." The middle school concept deserves a chance to be implemented
effectively. It sounds to me like Michelle Pedigo's school was well on the
way to this kind of transformation.
Juli Kendall
Teacher/coach
Long Beach Unified School District
Editor's Note: Juli Kendall keeps a weekly Reading Workshop journal
at MiddleWeb.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Pedigo, Michelle" <mpedigo@Barren.k12.ky.us>
Subject: [MWbooklist] a school on its way
Juli Kendall wrote: "sounds to me like Michelle Pedigo's school was
well on the way to this kind of transformation."
Thanks, Juli, for saying this. We tried, and we always we knew weren't there
yet! If you want to know more, you can check out the online tour at www.schoolstowatch.org
Let me know if you want clarification on anything.
Michelle
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: [MWbooklist] Math team?
From: "Chris Toy"
>His strong feeling is that it's not the organization of the school,
but instead the curriculum and teaching methods that makes a school strong.>
It's both structure and pedagogy. One supports or negates the other. The
arrested middle school may have the structures in place, but if the actual
interaction among students, staff, and peers is not effective the whole
thing fails. If the structures in the school do not support a wholistic
approach to students all students will not grow and develop to their full
potential. The situation you describe kind of reminds me of a sports team
that has some good talent, but it is held back from it's full potential
by one member of the team who wants to win individual honors.
Chris Toy
Principal
Freeport Middle School
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: [MWbooklist] Distant Ports
From: James Fenwick <fenwick@fenwicks.com>
First a few personal words and then some observations on the subject of
reinventing the middle school. Perhaps I might be classified among those
whom some would characterize as being among the founders of the middle grades
movement. I'm not sure how many years backward in time it takes to qualify
for this distinction. I do know that I have been an ardent supporter of
the middle school concept for at least twenty-five years dating to my tenure
as an area administrator, assistant superintendent for curriculum and instruction,
and as superintendent of the Portland (Oregon) public schools.
Subsequent to these earlier experiences I was privileged to serve for nearly
fifteen years as an independent strategic planning consultant for the California
Department of Education specializing in middle grades education. Four books
on the subject and hundreds of middle schools later I remain even more firmly
convinced than ever of the rightness of schools designed for young adolescents
which are based on high academic expectations combined with an informed
awareness of the need to provide a safe haven in which the profound cognitive,
physical, emotional, and social development changes characteristic of this
age level can unfold and flourish.
Within the past two weeks alone I have made approximately fifteen visits
to middle school classrooms as a part of my current role as a member of
a university masters degree committee. I have talked with students, walked
the halls, and watched kids and teachers at work. I continue to be amazed
at the multiple differences between middle school students and their elementary
and secondary counterparts in terms of their physical, emotional, and social
unfolding -- they are truly in transition between childhood and adolescence.
I have also been struck once again with the emerging intellectual capacity
of young adolescents including their ability to wrestle with complex concepts
and abstract ideas. The teachers I am observing make extensive use of cooperative
learning strategies. This kind of instructional environment makes effective
use of the preoccupation students at this age have with themselves and with
each other but does so in a setting which is focused on significant academic
priorities -- in this instance, mathematics, including algebra.
There is certainly a touch of magic in a well orchestrated middle school
classroom. However, not for an instant would I contend that I am witnessing
perfection. The middle schools I am visiting have many challenges to deal
with but I am comfortable in the knowledge that they will always be in the
process of becoming what they might be. The search for excellence is always
a journey. Few among us ever have a chance to actually celebrate the journey's
end. As someone who will soon celebrate fifty years of educational service
as a public school classroom teacher, administrator, university professor,
and consultant whose experiences have ranged across all age-grade levels,
K-18, I can say unequivocally that there is a pervasive and continuous struggle
for excellence at every level. Again, it will always be so.
There are many valid but often conflicting demands placed upon us personally
and professionally as middle grades educators. It is understandable when
we sometimes feel like stepping back in time to what was surely a better
and more stable period. Proposals for returning to a K-8 configuration represents
a case in point. But this or similar suggestions are little better than
romantic illusions at best and at worst they have the capacity to do irreparable
harm to our students who are ready for the unique focus which middle schools
seek to provide no matter how imperfect our efforts might seem.
It is my observation that the biggest challenges faced by middle grades
educators and what I consider as essential responses include:
1. Teacher turnover which limits institutional memory; it is essential to
continuously review the fundamental principles of middle school philosophy;
2. Administrative turnover which may compromise previous institutional commitments
before the latter have had a chance to mature; the selection of new principals
with a keen sense of organizational dynamics is a critical priority for
those who are responsible for administrative appointments;
3. School master schedules that reflect a lack of creativity in terms of
their ability to allow full and effective use of available time; it is crucial
for school districts to provide the knowledge and technical skills needed
by administrators and teachers who have scheduling responsibilities; N.B.,
whatever is educationally sound mus