Did Maine ever have a "golden age" of middle level education? At the risk of remembering a series of events that might be stronger in my perception (and memory), I would have to say that the years from 1985 - 1995 were pretty good ones for middle level schools in Maine.
Many middle level schools were on the move...investing in professional development by sending teams to a number of professional development experiences— Middle Level Education Institute at UMaine, MAMLE Conference, NELMS Annual Conference, and many others. Schools were also bringing in many national consultants to work in their districts...John Lounsbury, Nancy Doda, Sue Swaim, to name just three...on a variety of issues and programs from advisory to teaming to integrated curriculum to parent involvement. Graduate classes at UMaine and (I assume other colleges and universities) were full with students pursuing a concentration in middle level education. In short, a bustling, forward-thinking time for middle level teachers and their schools.
And Maine was on the national (middle level) map; first for not getting bogged down in the middle school versus junior high school argument, then later, ignoring the K-8 versus middle level controversy. No big deal here...we've always had more K-8 buildings than stand alone middle level schools and we have always understood that the grade configuration in a particular building was NOT the deciding factor!
With a number of excellent teachers and principals in Maine leading the charge, Mainers were responding to the challenges of providing schools for a student population that had been largely ignored... and trying to do it right. Perhaps the fact that most Maine middle level schools are relatively small gave us a leg up on others states with schools with 1500 to 2000 students. Or maybe it was simply that Maine middle level schools, no matter what they are called, have always been student-centered?
This time of heightened middle level growth was characterized by three distinct areas of focus (ok, not in every school, but in enough schools to make it noticeable). And these three areas were recognized nationally during this time.
1. Schools moving to the middle school model worked very hard to balance both learning and the personal development needs of young adolescents. At a time when middle schools were getting heavy criticism for too many emphasis on the personal development side, teachers and administrators recognized that these two sides of the coin were really one coin after all. (In spite of the persistent stereotype of middle level schools as "soft on academics" there has been no research evidence that this is accurate.)
2. What was called the "curriculum conversation" really took off in the early 1990s with Jim Beane's book, The Middle School Curriculum—From Rhetoric to Reality." Curriculum integration in Maine's middle level schools was right at the forefront of these ongoing "conversations" and Mainers contributed greatly to both the research and the discussion. Unfortunately, just as schools were doing more curriculum integration with greater success, the standards movement, common assessments, NCLB, changed schools dramatically. And curriculum integration faded from our memory...in favor of increased time for test preparation.
3. A third contribution that Maine made to the national scene was in promoting and using smaller, partner teams (as Chris Stevenson at UVM) called them. The four or five-person team in a typical middle school never reached its promise of collaborating beyond administrivia, particularly to develop deeper levels of curriculum integration. But, teams of two or three teachers working together were able to move past separate subject stubbornness to create teams where students focused on learning...and not merely subjects.
One more very important point about all of this early work. I believe that much of the middle school program work done between 1985-1995 set the stage for the biggest challenge of all—the Maine Learning Technology Initiative (MLTI). Middle level schools were ready for this huge opportunity, recognizing that MLTI would change middle level education in Maine forever...as it certainly has done. There is a reason why MLTI started with 7th and 8th grades...young adolescents and their teachers and administrators were ready because they are risk takers, enthusiastic, committed to learning, and forward thinking.
But, where are we now? Are we headed back up or are we on a plateau waiting for better days ahead? And what can each of us do to make sure that we provide the type of learning situations that each and everyone of our students need?
4 comments:
A great reflective, historical perspective. As someone accused of always seeing the glass as half full, I like to think of middle level as in the race, or game for the long haul. Like a well balanced investment portfolio poised to take advantage of favorable conditions while weathering lean times, I like to think of middle level education as ready to move onward and upward as the worst of NCLB recedes into what will become known as the misguided dark ages of educational reform. A new understanding of what effective teaching and learning along with a new generation of courageous leaders will pick up from where you, John Lounsbury, and others have brought us. That's my story and I'm sticking to it!
I couldn't agree with you more Ed. I have fond memories of teaching from 85-95. The interdisciplinary units that we collaborated on were engaging and exciting for students. The teachers I worked with including Angela (Hagstrom) Nelson, Sandy Nevens, John Hilker, Kelly Robbins, Betty Lowe and others had so much fun we couldn't wait to get to school most days.
I can't help but wonder if we missed the boat by not mentoring younger teachers to become leaders and to continue to evolve with the work as it changed. It is not to late and I am hopeful that the Bright Futures Middle Level report that was released in January 2009 from the Maine Department of Education can make a difference. It will still take the leadership of organizations like MAMLE to guide the way!
Hey Ed and Others, I am preparing for my graduate class on Middle Level Curriculum. Ed knows I came to GA after earning a doctorate at U Maine. My Masters degree from UM was in Middle Level Education and I prepare about 20 teachers every two years to be middle level educators. I will agree with Ed. that Maine was on the cutting edge of change in "the golden age" as GA was about 15 years behind. I think ME's progress at that time may have had to do with a regional value regarding freedom to experiment. I have not seen that same ethic in GA, not because people here think any less of young adolescents but because, using Chris' analogy, folks are very risk-averse. It is not a place where people (teachers in particular) want to get their hands slapped. I'm not sure being prepared, as Chris suggests, will be enough to have a neo golden age but I remain hopeful and working hard to ensure there are leaders ready to take us forward.
Thanks for sharing such an amazing information please keep Helping teacher in need
Post a Comment