Key Resources about
Middle Grades Teaming


Middle school researcher and policy expert Tom Dickinson provided this information to MiddleWeb Listserv members during an extended conversation about effective teacher teaming in the middle grades. At our request, middle school "legacy" John Lounsbury also provided his thoughts about effective teaming, adding several other resource suggestions.

From Tom Dickinson:

Greetings:

I've been following the team meetings discussion (I'm usually only a lurker) and I'm moved to offer some comments about teaming through a number of texts that I think would be profitable. I don't want to provide just a bibliography without some commentary so I'm going to construct this message in two parts--first, commentary about the texts that are what I consider essential; second, the bibliographic material. That way if you don't want to read my commentary you can just scroll down to the bibliographic data (which is listed in APA citation form).

Tom Erb's text (with Nancy Doda) has some age on it but it still a wonderful place to begin and it is still in print (thank you NEA for recognizing its utility all these years!). Tom has also continued to write about teaming through a number of other venues which I will mention later. In short, if Erb's name is on it and it's about teaming--read it.

One of the biggest tomes on teaming in recent years is the one that Tom Erb and I edited in 1997 called We gain more than we give: Teaming in middle schools. What we were trying to do with this volume was to get ten years ahead of the field. There are 23 chapters in it that span a range of topics--four yearlong case studies of actual teams (Janet McDaniel's case is about a team that failed and is extremely powerful and moving), a very powerful chapter by Daniel Kain on team leadership, a great chapter by Ross Burkhardt who never taught on anything but teams during his whole teaching career, another one by Tom Erb dealing with the "potholes" on the road to teaming and a concept he calls "adhocracy", and a variety of cutting edge chapters about subjects like co-teaching teams (teams with special education teachers) and whole language on the team. While the book is a monster (it's over 500 pages) there is a wealth of material here. Get your school library to order it for your teacher resource collection.

While Tom and I were editing this book back in the late 90's John Arnold and Chris Stevenson were working on their teaming handbook and John believes that teachers should put the two together--the first provides a deep background on teaming while John's and Chris' book provides immediate and practical help. And if you haven't read either John's or Chris' curriculum work (which you should) you will find these are two of the best authors you will ever hope to find and read. If I could put ONE book in each of your hands on the topic, and this would be a tough choice, it would be this one.
There has already been mention about Daniel Kain's Camel-Makers; it is a excellent work, particularly on "building" teams; and Daniel knows what he is talking about--he is also the most knowledgable middle school educator I know about team leadership, a much neglected sub-topic in teams and teaming. Besides Camel-Makers and the chapter on team leadership that I've mentioned before, you should read any of his chapters and articles that I've included below, especially his review of recent teaming literature.

There are also any number of books dealing with teaming from business and the corporate world. Many of these, especially the ones that deal with structuring conditions, dialogue, incentives, and problem solving are helpful in a broad context. I've listed the best ones that I've worked with (although anytime educators read business books there needs to be reminder close at hand that reminds us that the bottom line in business is not the same as the bottom line in education--in other words students are not "products").

I hope this is helpful as all of you go about struggling with this essential characteristic and your own development and growth. Now I'm back to the shadows in the corner.

Tom Dickinson


Bibliographic citations:

Erb, T.O., & Doda, N.M. (1989). Team organization: Promise--practices and possibilities. Washington, DC: National Education Association.

Dickinson , T.S., & Erb, T.O. (1997). We gain more than we give: Teaming in middle schools. Columbus, OH: National Middle School Association.

Arnold, J., & Stevenson, C. (1998). Teachers' teaming handbook: A middle level planning guide. New York: Harcourt Brace.

Kain, D.L. (1998). Camel-Makers: Building effective teacher teams together. Columbus, OH: National Middle School Association.

Kain, D.L. (2001) Our turn? Teaming and the professional development of teachers. In T.S. Dickinson (Ed.) Reinventing the middle school (pp. 201-217). New York: Routledge/Falmer.

Kain, D.L. (1997). Teacher collaboration on interdisciplinary teams. Research in Middle Level Education Quarterly, 21(1), 1-29.

Kain, D.L. (1998). Teaming in the middle school: A review of recent literature. In P.S. Hleowitsh and W.G. Wraga (Eds.). Annual review of research for school leaders 1998 (pp. 51-75). New York: Simon & Schuster Macmillan.

Kain, D.L. (1995). Adding dialogue to a team's agenda. Middle School Journal, 26(4), 3-6.

Hackman, J.R. (Ed.). (1990). Groups that work (and those that don't): Creating conditions for effective teamwork. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Wellins, R.S., Byham, W.C., and Wilson, J.M. (1991). Empowered teams: Creating self-directed work groups that improve quality, productivity, and participation. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.


Download an article from Middle School Journal, "Reinventing the Middle School," co-authored by Tom Dickinson. (PDF File)

John Lounsbury's Comments and Resource Suggestions on Effective Teaming


Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2001
From: John Lounsbury <john.lounsbury/at/gcsu.edu>
Subject: Team ineffectiveness

A few thoughts on this critical topic.

In my judgment, our failure to adequately define and establish (empower) the role of team leader has been one of the major reasons we have not gone much beyond level-one changes in middle level education. The job has not been viewed, even by those possessing it, as a major professional responsibiity, one with an expectation of leading and initiating curriculum improvement actions, one on one. Rather, it has been viewed primarily as a lower level administrative responsibility, even one that can be passed around --"Who's turn is it this semester?"

A second reason for the ineffectiveness of teams is lack of adequate common planning time apart from that considered personal planning time. Significant innovative curriculum changes by the team cannot be expected if they only have five periods a week for both team and personal planning - it's possible but not likely. Research does support the importance of adequate planning time. But I know of many teams with dual planning periods who still don't use that time as they should. In such cases we should expect more. Here is where the leadership of the principal ought to come in.

A third reason is one receiving increased attention. Teams of four or five are simply too big. Reaching consensus on major changes are hard to come by with so many diverse personalities in the limited time available. Common planning is simply more productive with two or three. And then, too, so long as the team is composed of the major subject specialists , one on one, it is easy and logical, I suppose, to continue teaching via the separate subjects.

Of course, there is always the question of whether the teachers involved are really committed philsophically to the concept and realize the potential for improved student learning that is there with teaming. It requires them to change and that is always difficult. My favorite quotation in that regard is by Henry David Thoreau who pointed out: "Beware of enterprises that require new clothes but not rather a new wearer of clothes."

Certainly, an open, honest discussion of "Why teaming?" should be held. Too often it is viewed as an end, not a means, and when administratively in place, teachers can go on teaching as they did before. The improvement of student learning is what we are after and common sense and research both point to how much better student achievement will be when teaming is exploited and classrooms become student centered rather than teacher centered. Unless teachers' attitudes about teaming are positive, or at least open, trying to make teams effective is tough.

Finally, you asked about references that might be relevant. You should know that with me, whenever anybody has a problem, I'll always be ready to recommend a resource. So here goes -- Still warm from the press is NMSA's latest staff development kit. Entitled "Revitalizing Teaming to Improve Student Learning," this kit-in-a-book is designed as a do-it-yourself staff development resource. A team, on its own, can work its way through the activities and come out better -- guaranteed.

Another excellent resource is one of my long-time favorites. Entitled "Camel-Makers: Building Effective Teacher Teams Togther," this modern fable for educators is fun to read. It is an analysis of how teams work, or don't work, together. Using the purported minutes of the first committee that tried to make a camel out of a horse; this delightful resource makes teams laugh as they recognize their own behaviors in the characters portrayed and they become open to the analysis by the learned professor.

The third resource is the greatly expanded edition of "Implementing and Improving Teaming." It includes chapters on the role of the principal, the role of the team leader, problem solving, and recognizing and managing dysfunctional teams along with many other chapters.

Editor's note: NMSA now offers the Teaming in the Middle Grades Collection, which includes Camel-Makers, Revitalizing Teaming to Improve Student Learning, The Power of Two: Partner Teams in Action, and an interactive CD on the importance of teaming.



Back to the MiddleWeb Conversations Index