We began talking about young adolescent growth and development, reminding ourselves about the unique nature of being in that very interesting time of life, ages 10-to-15. Huge physical changes taking place as children literally grow into their skins at a pace that is regular in its overwhelming diversity. But, the physical changes are only the most dramatically visible; changes in cognitive, moral, psychological, and social-emotional realms follow making this five year span quite a ride.
Interesting and more than a bit perplexing why the growth issues of young adolescents are not used more as a rallying center for the curriculum in middle level schools. If this period of dramatic change is so critical to the clientele we serve, then why don't we consider the myriad issues that arise during this time as elements to study, problems to solve, and issues to ponder?
Here are several issues in young adolescent development that could serve as themes for a challenging and relevant curriculum:
• Physical development—study their own health and physical fitness; growth and development, especially during the middle school years; nutrition, diet, and good choices; obesity, the rising epidemic in this country and its influences
• Moral development—universal values and how they work in different cultures; study famous people who are also good role models
• Social-emotional development—bullying and cyberbullying and their roles as instigators, bystanders, or victims; the influence of media on messages about young adolescents
Instead the "standard" curriculum for most young adolescents contains a random set of experiences in the traditional subject areas of language arts, math, science, social studies. Beyond that it is up to individual schools to set the rest of the curriculum...with subjects like art, band, music, foreign language, physical education, and many others.
The question of the decade becomes (or most likely, still remains)...what do we want our young adolescents to know, be able to do, and what kind of dispositions do we want them to have? Filling in this big blank with the names of the traditional subjects is not the answer. My question to you...what is the answer?
Wednesday, June 29, 2011
Sunday, June 19, 2011
Getting started in EDC 524...Summer 2011
Yes, we will blog in the next four weeks, using this tool as a place to think and respond about a variety of issues in middle level education. I'm asking you to write a minimum of two posts each week, respond to two others from this class, and finally to follow several "professional bloggers" of interest to you. For the latter, please also link them to your blog.
If you haven't set up your own blog before, Blogger.Com makes it very easy to do. Just sign in to Blogger.Com with a previous Google account or gmail account and it will tell you exactly how to get started. Lots of options for formatting, style, and more.
As soon as you have your blog up and running, please send me the URL so I can place all the links on my blog...and that will be available through Moodle. One stop shopping.
I look forward to working with you in the next few weeks.
Ed Brazee
EDC 524 Instructor
Tuesday, November 30, 2010
The golden age of middle level education...behind or still ahead?
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?
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?
Sunday, November 21, 2010
What's in a name?
It's happening again. The same tired stereotypes, cliches, and lack of knowledge about middle school history and research has hit the newsstands and the blogosphere. As an example take a look at this article by Jay Mathews, education writer for the Washington Post. And for even more interesting reading, read some of the 175 responses, including letters from our own Chris Toy in Maine and Rick Wormeli. On the positive side, in these letters you begin to see the fantastic misunderstanding of middle level education in this country. But apparently, no one wants to do any homework to find out the truth. And if you wonder what middle schools Mathews refers to, an even more incredible article is found in Educationnext, "The Middle School Mess."
Both authors base their arguments on the oldest of middle school cliches, that the middle school concept has depressed student learning, at least according to standardized test scores, because middle schools have focused on personal development rather than academics. Or as Peter Meyer, author of "The Middle School Mess," states, "Academic mediocrity was not a hard case to make, since middle-school proponents had given, at best, lip service to academics almost from the inception of the model."
Really! I've been in hundreds of middle schools in the U.S. in the last 35 years and have taught and talked to thousands of middle level teachers. And while the "soft on academics" argument is often dusted off and spouted as if it were true by non middle school educators, I've seen very, very few instances where a school (or a teacher) deemphasized academic outcomes. I've looked and looked and have never found any research evidence that this is true. But the myth persists.
It is highly ironic that such critics believe that any school with the descriptor "middle school" in its name is doing, has done, or will do those things that the middle school concept calls for. National Middle School Association (www.nmsa.org), National Association for Secondary School Principals (www.nassp.org), and the National Forun for Accelerating Middle Grades Progress (www.mgforum.org) all speak with one voice about what middle level schools should be. Separately, they have defined the essential qualities of middle level schools that begin with attention to high level academic learning (of course!!) but go well beyond academics to include skills and knowledge that prepares good citizens who will contribute to our country and our world in myriad positive ways. Some of those things won't show up on the NCLB-mandated test results, but they are essential nonetheless.
Ok, let's be honest about this. Middle schools (and junior high schools before them) have been the unwanted siblings of the K-12 education system. Elementary schools with innocent, cute, and interested children and high schools with adolescents whose sports provide many enjoyable hours of diversion for local communities, are the darlings of the K-12 system. Critics, unable or unwilling to find out what middle level schools are really all about, land on middle schools without really knowing the purposes, functions, and roles of such schools.
While critics insist that middle level schools have failed because they have adopted the tenets of middle level schools—a rigorous and integrated curriculum, team organization, and a culture of advocacy for every student (among others)—the irony is that lowered achievement on standardized tests has happened EXACTLY because thousands of middle level schools while taking the name middle school, have not adopted its essential components.
But this is ancient history. What can we do about this? What are our responsibilities? What can we do in our schools to turn this around? In the next installment, we'll answer each of these questions.
Both authors base their arguments on the oldest of middle school cliches, that the middle school concept has depressed student learning, at least according to standardized test scores, because middle schools have focused on personal development rather than academics. Or as Peter Meyer, author of "The Middle School Mess," states, "Academic mediocrity was not a hard case to make, since middle-school proponents had given, at best, lip service to academics almost from the inception of the model."
Really! I've been in hundreds of middle schools in the U.S. in the last 35 years and have taught and talked to thousands of middle level teachers. And while the "soft on academics" argument is often dusted off and spouted as if it were true by non middle school educators, I've seen very, very few instances where a school (or a teacher) deemphasized academic outcomes. I've looked and looked and have never found any research evidence that this is true. But the myth persists.
It is highly ironic that such critics believe that any school with the descriptor "middle school" in its name is doing, has done, or will do those things that the middle school concept calls for. National Middle School Association (www.nmsa.org), National Association for Secondary School Principals (www.nassp.org), and the National Forun for Accelerating Middle Grades Progress (www.mgforum.org) all speak with one voice about what middle level schools should be. Separately, they have defined the essential qualities of middle level schools that begin with attention to high level academic learning (of course!!) but go well beyond academics to include skills and knowledge that prepares good citizens who will contribute to our country and our world in myriad positive ways. Some of those things won't show up on the NCLB-mandated test results, but they are essential nonetheless.
Ok, let's be honest about this. Middle schools (and junior high schools before them) have been the unwanted siblings of the K-12 education system. Elementary schools with innocent, cute, and interested children and high schools with adolescents whose sports provide many enjoyable hours of diversion for local communities, are the darlings of the K-12 system. Critics, unable or unwilling to find out what middle level schools are really all about, land on middle schools without really knowing the purposes, functions, and roles of such schools.
While critics insist that middle level schools have failed because they have adopted the tenets of middle level schools—a rigorous and integrated curriculum, team organization, and a culture of advocacy for every student (among others)—the irony is that lowered achievement on standardized tests has happened EXACTLY because thousands of middle level schools while taking the name middle school, have not adopted its essential components.
But this is ancient history. What can we do about this? What are our responsibilities? What can we do in our schools to turn this around? In the next installment, we'll answer each of these questions.
Monday, November 8, 2010
Emptying the inbox...hoping for someone to try out one of these ideas
Just back from NMSA's 37th annual conference, held this year in Baltimore. The conference is always a good time to think and reflect and I often come back with several pages of things that must be done. Here are a couple of my 2010 NMSA thoughts...
• We need to figure out a way to use the terrific expertise of retired teachers in our communities. I spoke with a friend at the conference who is two months into her retirement (as an excellent middle school math teacher) and is at loose ends...trying to adjust to retirement. She taught for 39 years for heaven's sake and still has a passion for kids, teaching, and schools. How can we use her to help us in schools. Not teaching kids everyday...she has done this, but perhaps by serving as mentor to younger teachers, maybe as liaison with parents and community, or curriculum writer. Would someone pick up on this idea in your community and try it out. This is urgent! We need these people...and they still want to contribute.
• Is anyone talking about FUN anymore? Certainly not in schools where testing, preparing for tests, test scores, resting up to take another test, test score comparisons, and narrowing the curriculum so more tests can be given are all the rage. Ok, you get the idea. We need to bring back fun to schools—for students, teachers, principals, and parents. In New England where the Puritan Ethic still rules, we often don't talk about schools as fun places, but it has gotten even worse than that. While NCLB and the testing movement are easy targets (and so richly deserved), we have to accept some of the responsibility ourselves for putting fun back into learning. You know how to do it...so try something out and tell me what you did. Please...
• You've heard about slow eating, slow exercising, and even slow driving. I think we need a new initiative in schools and I am calling is "SLOW DAYS". A slow day is a relaxed, but purposeful day at school that does not feel like a sprint. At its basic level, a slow day allows students and teachers to do what they need to do—learn, explore, interact, collaborate, and produce great work—but in a manner that allows thinking, reflection, and calm. I know this is counter-intuitive to the acceleration that we usually call for and perhaps slow has too many negative connotation. But you get the idea. Let's slow things down, perhaps do fewer things, have fewer classes, but meet longer with them, have fewer projects where subjects work together, and time for students and teachers to work together. This can be done in nearly any school. How might you get this started in your school?
Please let me know what you think about these "great" ideas and more importantly, tell me what you have done to try one or more of them out.
• We need to figure out a way to use the terrific expertise of retired teachers in our communities. I spoke with a friend at the conference who is two months into her retirement (as an excellent middle school math teacher) and is at loose ends...trying to adjust to retirement. She taught for 39 years for heaven's sake and still has a passion for kids, teaching, and schools. How can we use her to help us in schools. Not teaching kids everyday...she has done this, but perhaps by serving as mentor to younger teachers, maybe as liaison with parents and community, or curriculum writer. Would someone pick up on this idea in your community and try it out. This is urgent! We need these people...and they still want to contribute.
• Is anyone talking about FUN anymore? Certainly not in schools where testing, preparing for tests, test scores, resting up to take another test, test score comparisons, and narrowing the curriculum so more tests can be given are all the rage. Ok, you get the idea. We need to bring back fun to schools—for students, teachers, principals, and parents. In New England where the Puritan Ethic still rules, we often don't talk about schools as fun places, but it has gotten even worse than that. While NCLB and the testing movement are easy targets (and so richly deserved), we have to accept some of the responsibility ourselves for putting fun back into learning. You know how to do it...so try something out and tell me what you did. Please...
• You've heard about slow eating, slow exercising, and even slow driving. I think we need a new initiative in schools and I am calling is "SLOW DAYS". A slow day is a relaxed, but purposeful day at school that does not feel like a sprint. At its basic level, a slow day allows students and teachers to do what they need to do—learn, explore, interact, collaborate, and produce great work—but in a manner that allows thinking, reflection, and calm. I know this is counter-intuitive to the acceleration that we usually call for and perhaps slow has too many negative connotation. But you get the idea. Let's slow things down, perhaps do fewer things, have fewer classes, but meet longer with them, have fewer projects where subjects work together, and time for students and teachers to work together. This can be done in nearly any school. How might you get this started in your school?
Please let me know what you think about these "great" ideas and more importantly, tell me what you have done to try one or more of them out.
Thursday, October 21, 2010
Learning more than I have a right to know: At the MAMLE and ACTEM Conferences
Spent today at Sugarloaf for the annual Maine Association for Middle Level Education conference. MAMLE has been a steady and present influence on middle level education in Maine since 1986 and this year's conference was no exception. Great to see Lindsay B and Sarah R at the conference. I attended Lindsay's session on "Math and RTI" today and it was an excellent session. She presented with her colleague from Warsaw MS, Kayla Brown, and John Keane (principal of Leonard MS in Old Town). An excellent session and a well done to Lindsay for her articulate and focused session.
I'm going to ask Lindsay and Sarah to give us a bit of a summary of the MAMLE conference, particularly the focus of the conference, what people were talking about outside of the sessions, and anything else they think is relevant. Lindsay and Sarah, feel free to use your blog or do a short voice memo (or podcast) or any format that is simple and works for you. I will open up a place in Moodle for you to drop in whatever you decide on. Thanks and look forward to your thoughts.
I've been in conference mode the last week and attended a day of the ACTEM Conference a week ago in Augusta. This one technology-learning focused...lots of people and excellent sessions as well. I don't think I saw anyone from our class there...so here are a couple of things I learned at the ACTEM Conference. Attended a terrific session by Lisa Hogan and Kerry Gallivan from MSAD 75 (Topsham...Mt. Ararat Middle and High Schools) on digital citizenship. They have been very proactive on this issue and frankly they are doing more than any other school in providing assistance to students, their teacher colleagues, and parents on the key issues of this critical topic.
My second session was by Jeff Whipple (jeffwhipple.ca) on tracking our digital footprint. Also an excellent session and I will share more specifics about this session shortly. Jeff, a tech integrator from New Brunswick, strongly advocates that anyone of middle and high school age (as well as adults) "control" their digital footprint by making it intentional. He suggests setting up a blog of your own (you all have them) that gives a positive and professional image of you and your work...for anyone searching for you. If you haven't Googled yourself lately...do so to see what comes up. Also, for another look at you and your web presence, use SPEZIFY, for a more visual look. Interesting!
I'm going to ask Lindsay and Sarah to give us a bit of a summary of the MAMLE conference, particularly the focus of the conference, what people were talking about outside of the sessions, and anything else they think is relevant. Lindsay and Sarah, feel free to use your blog or do a short voice memo (or podcast) or any format that is simple and works for you. I will open up a place in Moodle for you to drop in whatever you decide on. Thanks and look forward to your thoughts.
I've been in conference mode the last week and attended a day of the ACTEM Conference a week ago in Augusta. This one technology-learning focused...lots of people and excellent sessions as well. I don't think I saw anyone from our class there...so here are a couple of things I learned at the ACTEM Conference. Attended a terrific session by Lisa Hogan and Kerry Gallivan from MSAD 75 (Topsham...Mt. Ararat Middle and High Schools) on digital citizenship. They have been very proactive on this issue and frankly they are doing more than any other school in providing assistance to students, their teacher colleagues, and parents on the key issues of this critical topic.
My second session was by Jeff Whipple (jeffwhipple.ca) on tracking our digital footprint. Also an excellent session and I will share more specifics about this session shortly. Jeff, a tech integrator from New Brunswick, strongly advocates that anyone of middle and high school age (as well as adults) "control" their digital footprint by making it intentional. He suggests setting up a blog of your own (you all have them) that gives a positive and professional image of you and your work...for anyone searching for you. If you haven't Googled yourself lately...do so to see what comes up. Also, for another look at you and your web presence, use SPEZIFY, for a more visual look. Interesting!
Saturday, October 2, 2010
So...what really is important in middle level education in 2010?
I've been thinking a great deal about our first face-to-face (F2F) class and the responses you all have made to several Moodle forums, the original VoiceThread, your blogs, and comments in class. Very interesting how major themes migrate to the top of any discussion...and the topics that you all care about—individually and collectively—did just that. So, at the risk of being redundant (since I mentioned these in my week #4 podcast), I will talk about each of them here because I think they DO represent some of the major questions about middle level education in 2010. The order here is strictly random, although by the end of our study together this semester, I think we will have an order for this list.
• How could we ignore technology and learning, especially given our involvement in MLTI since 2002. MLTI has changed middle level education in Maine more than any other event, initiative, or program. Hands down! No question. MLTI has changed how we teach, how our students learn, and it has raised our expectations for student learning along the way. Lots of issues in this large umbrella topic, of course, but one is more important than all the lessons we've learned from MLTI. Want to know what it is? When MLTI was rolled out, the time from roll-out to implementation was very, very short. Under Bette Manchester's direction (with lots of help from Maine educators) we mounted a massive and effective professional development effort that prepared middle level teachers to (happily) embrace and use the laptops to further learning. This was a huge lesson to learn...that with a singular purpose...and a sharp focus on a goal...we could make such a huge improvement in learning in a relatively short time. What if we applied this "get it done" mentality to every problem/issue we have in education?
• A number of you noted the lack of Maine middle level certification...and that surprised me. Not that it isn't important, middle level teacher certification underlies everything else in this post, but that it so rarely comes up. Several groups over the last 25 years have proposed a ml certificate but that suggestion has gone nowhere! We did have a Middle Level Endorsement for a number of years and that included knowledge about curriculum, instruction, assessment; knowledge of the young adolescent...and several other topics in four different courses. But, the ML Endorsement morphed into something totally different with the advent of NCLB when it became strictly a content issue. Now, ml teachers need 24 credits in a content area to be "highly qualified"...but no more concern that they also know about the students they teach or any of the rest of the ml focus.
• The third theme is the sticking point. How do we fulfill the goals of middle level education AND respond to all the (seemingly separate and sometimes contradictory) initiatives and mandates that are thrown at us from our school districts, the state, and federal requirements? Simply stated, how do we compromise essential middle level practices with NCLB and state testing requirements? At a time when schools are cutting anything that doesn't directly "prepare" students for the many tests they are required to take, where is there time in the day for advisory programs, common planning time for teaching teams, integrated curriculum...and so much more? Can we do both? Should we do both? Or, are these two totally different directions? I think there are many points of compromise here...and I also think that these two points of view can work together. Let's find out how.
• Given the three previous themes, what is the future trajectory of middle level education? Where has it been? What has it accomplished? Where is it going? When we talk about the middle school concept (or ml philosophy) what do we mean? Why are some districts abandoning the ms concept while others eagerly embrace it? Middle school is often referred to as the "bridge" between elementary and secondary education. Why are we unwilling to pay attention to the unique needs of young adolescents, as we so readily serve the needs of children and older adolescents?
• And here is where the rubber meets the road— leadership and advocacy. What can each of us do in our schools, districts, and communities to further the cause of education...to provide the best possible learning for every student. We are finishing an incredible week with the release of Waiting for Superman and the nationwide conversations stimulated by the many activities of Education Nation. Will this impetus die on the vine...or will we take the initiative and move ahead? We need both advocacy for and leadership in middle level education more than ever before. We need you to be an advocate for young adolescents in your own school and district, but we also need you to be a voice of leadership at the state and national levels as well.
What themes would you add to this list?
• How could we ignore technology and learning, especially given our involvement in MLTI since 2002. MLTI has changed middle level education in Maine more than any other event, initiative, or program. Hands down! No question. MLTI has changed how we teach, how our students learn, and it has raised our expectations for student learning along the way. Lots of issues in this large umbrella topic, of course, but one is more important than all the lessons we've learned from MLTI. Want to know what it is? When MLTI was rolled out, the time from roll-out to implementation was very, very short. Under Bette Manchester's direction (with lots of help from Maine educators) we mounted a massive and effective professional development effort that prepared middle level teachers to (happily) embrace and use the laptops to further learning. This was a huge lesson to learn...that with a singular purpose...and a sharp focus on a goal...we could make such a huge improvement in learning in a relatively short time. What if we applied this "get it done" mentality to every problem/issue we have in education?
• A number of you noted the lack of Maine middle level certification...and that surprised me. Not that it isn't important, middle level teacher certification underlies everything else in this post, but that it so rarely comes up. Several groups over the last 25 years have proposed a ml certificate but that suggestion has gone nowhere! We did have a Middle Level Endorsement for a number of years and that included knowledge about curriculum, instruction, assessment; knowledge of the young adolescent...and several other topics in four different courses. But, the ML Endorsement morphed into something totally different with the advent of NCLB when it became strictly a content issue. Now, ml teachers need 24 credits in a content area to be "highly qualified"...but no more concern that they also know about the students they teach or any of the rest of the ml focus.
• The third theme is the sticking point. How do we fulfill the goals of middle level education AND respond to all the (seemingly separate and sometimes contradictory) initiatives and mandates that are thrown at us from our school districts, the state, and federal requirements? Simply stated, how do we compromise essential middle level practices with NCLB and state testing requirements? At a time when schools are cutting anything that doesn't directly "prepare" students for the many tests they are required to take, where is there time in the day for advisory programs, common planning time for teaching teams, integrated curriculum...and so much more? Can we do both? Should we do both? Or, are these two totally different directions? I think there are many points of compromise here...and I also think that these two points of view can work together. Let's find out how.
• Given the three previous themes, what is the future trajectory of middle level education? Where has it been? What has it accomplished? Where is it going? When we talk about the middle school concept (or ml philosophy) what do we mean? Why are some districts abandoning the ms concept while others eagerly embrace it? Middle school is often referred to as the "bridge" between elementary and secondary education. Why are we unwilling to pay attention to the unique needs of young adolescents, as we so readily serve the needs of children and older adolescents?
• And here is where the rubber meets the road— leadership and advocacy. What can each of us do in our schools, districts, and communities to further the cause of education...to provide the best possible learning for every student. We are finishing an incredible week with the release of Waiting for Superman and the nationwide conversations stimulated by the many activities of Education Nation. Will this impetus die on the vine...or will we take the initiative and move ahead? We need both advocacy for and leadership in middle level education more than ever before. We need you to be an advocate for young adolescents in your own school and district, but we also need you to be a voice of leadership at the state and national levels as well.
What themes would you add to this list?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)