The middle school debate has been going on the United States for sometime. Several years ago our superintendent asked me to begin researching whether our district should move away from middle schools to K-8 schools, or not. Last year our Board of Education set up a committee that I was part of to review the middle grade options for our district. Once again, I was involved with these discussions. As recently as yesterday, I was reading about the issues that are developing in NYC schools over the changes in middle schools through out their district.
I am more convinced than ever that how middle school goes for students, so goes their high school education. A recent educational article states, (I do not know if the numbers are accurate but they are worth repeating), that eighth graders who are academically successful have a 8 out of 10 chance of succeeding in high school and moving on to college. A student who is unsuccessful in 8th grade (I take this to mean gaining social promotion into high school) will have a 2 out of 10 chance of succeeding in high school and moving on to college.
Reviewing the research of MacIver, from Johns Hopkins University, and of Weiss, from Columbia University, it is clear to me that the wrong educational question is once again being asked. The answer to educating middle grade students is not found in the school structure, but rather in the planning and implementation of an instructional program, and personalization efforts made by staff and community for a particular school.
Both studies come to the conclusion that middle schools and K-8 schools provide similar outcomes for middle school aged students. The differences that they find are more in what is happening in the classroom and how students feel about attending their school and working with their teacher. If you read my previous blogs you will see how I would approach the middle school issue, so I will not restate it here. However, I will simply say that "Form must follow Function" in determining the structure of the school to be implemented. If a district determines that one size fits all when it comes to working with middle grade students, they will quickly find that they have some successes and some failures in the implementation of that model.
Both studies point out advantages and disadvantages found by their research. In my district we did our own research and came to similar conclusions. My district was large enough that the study had merit as we studied a variety of educational groupings that existed, and with minimal exceptions the academic outcomes were very similar in each setting. What I found interesting and will write about at another time is that there were significant differences for students in the 6th grade in an elementary school compared to 6th grade students in a middle school.
Education is a people activity. It is all about how people talk with, share with, treat, and present to other people. It is about administrators interacting positively and collaboratively with faculty and staff. It is about faculty and staff interacting with students and parents in positive ways. It is about faculty that are collaboratively learning from each other on an ongoing basis. It is about parents feeling comfortable enough to work with their child, their child's teachers, and the other staff members at their child's school. Student learning is a result of these interactions. The more positive the interactions, the more learning will occur.
If you are in a school district that is considering an end to middle school education, I would encourage you to respond to this blog and to read and share the studies by MacIver and Weiss before any final decisions are made. Educating middle school aged students is all about the kids, not the school structure that they attend.
(If you read this article before the links are placed in the article, please return after January 5 and the links will be included in the article)
Friday, December 26, 2008
Sunday, December 21, 2008
Teaching the Net Generation in Secondary Schools
I recently read an article by Don Tapscott, a university president, that fits perfectly with what I have observed as a supervisor of schools over the past eight years and as a current middle school principal in Southern California. Speaking to my colleagues, I hear a similar story from around the nation.
This is a story about how our secondary aged students learn, as much as it is about how our secondary teachers teach. Why is this important? It is important to me because our job as educators is about student learning, more than it is about teachers teaching. What does this mean? I learned as a teacher and as a principal, it did not matter how exciting, dynamic, or refreshing a lesson was as presented by a teacher, if it did not lead to improved student learning. Once I realized this, it became more important to me to assess teachers on what students understood about the lesson being presented, what they learned from the lesson, and how would they show what they have learned from the lesson. This administrative style was a little nerve racking for some of my teachers at first, but once most saw that it changed the way teachers planned their lessons, taught their lessons, and assessed student learning, the easier it became for most of the school staff to accept.
Changing the paradigm of school and the classroom is not easy. It is for this reason that educators need to have a deep understanding of what the 21st century world looks like and what is expected of our students when they reach adulthood. We have not spent much time considering the experiences that our kids bring to school, and what our national workforce requires of them. These are not the same experiences that most teachers prepared for when they were in middle and high school.
Dr. Tapscott calls our current students Net Geners (Net Generation). They have known and grown with technology and the internet since they were born. They may have never taken a touch typing class but they probably are more fluid and much faster on the keyboard of a computer than most adults. I know that is true of my two sons. They use technology to find information, to use information, and to sometimes inappropriately share information. They multi-task all of the time using their cell phone, Nintendo, and IPod, all at the same time. They learn in a technology enriched multi-tasking world. At least they do until most of them enter the gates of school each day.
Most of our schools are educating 21st century students using 20th century instructional tools and assessments. For the good of our students, our city, and our society we need to reach out to our students with the learning tools that best fit their experiences and the countries workforce requirements. I have asked many principals over the past years if they were aware of the SCANS report, and most say they had not heard of it. And yet this report sponsored by the U.S. Department of Labor that came out toward the end of the 20th century was telling educators of the changing needs of the workforce in America. How can schools change if the educators are not aware early on of what changes are needed?
Now we know more about the requirements for the 21st century. Many people have read The World is Flat and similar books that have been published in recent years. Many people have seen the video clip, Shift Happens, that is available on the web. Many people have viewed the video, 2 Million Minutes, the story of top academic students in the United States, India, and China, and shows the differences in life style and education for the three nations. Are we competitive now in the current global economy? Will we be competitive in ten, fifteen, twenty years from now in the growing global economy? Unless we can answer yes to these questions, and others, our nation will not hold the high level of esteem that most of us have believe existed since we were born.
Net Generation students do not learn as well using post Gutenberg model world instructional tools. They read differently, their attention is focused differently, and they question information differently. They will not be well prepared to work on an assembly line, but what will we the educators help them to be prepared to do? There may be few, but we do have school models that we can visit and learn from. One of those models that prepares students for the 21st century world is the New Tech High School model. I have worked with several of these types of high schools, and saw first hand that when implemented well, our students can achieve at levels beyond the expectations that many adults hold for them.
We need to see the urgency for paradigm shifting. This need has direct impact on our own economic well being, and on the well being of this nation. Without change the economy of this country will not be able to recover from the current depressed state that it is in. I hope that all educators choose to find time to discuss the issues that 21st century education requires us to have to have answers for. We need those conversations to occur now, not in the future. I hope that this topic will spark conversation on this blog and in faculty meetings around the country.
This is a story about how our secondary aged students learn, as much as it is about how our secondary teachers teach. Why is this important? It is important to me because our job as educators is about student learning, more than it is about teachers teaching. What does this mean? I learned as a teacher and as a principal, it did not matter how exciting, dynamic, or refreshing a lesson was as presented by a teacher, if it did not lead to improved student learning. Once I realized this, it became more important to me to assess teachers on what students understood about the lesson being presented, what they learned from the lesson, and how would they show what they have learned from the lesson. This administrative style was a little nerve racking for some of my teachers at first, but once most saw that it changed the way teachers planned their lessons, taught their lessons, and assessed student learning, the easier it became for most of the school staff to accept.
Changing the paradigm of school and the classroom is not easy. It is for this reason that educators need to have a deep understanding of what the 21st century world looks like and what is expected of our students when they reach adulthood. We have not spent much time considering the experiences that our kids bring to school, and what our national workforce requires of them. These are not the same experiences that most teachers prepared for when they were in middle and high school.
Dr. Tapscott calls our current students Net Geners (Net Generation). They have known and grown with technology and the internet since they were born. They may have never taken a touch typing class but they probably are more fluid and much faster on the keyboard of a computer than most adults. I know that is true of my two sons. They use technology to find information, to use information, and to sometimes inappropriately share information. They multi-task all of the time using their cell phone, Nintendo, and IPod, all at the same time. They learn in a technology enriched multi-tasking world. At least they do until most of them enter the gates of school each day.
Most of our schools are educating 21st century students using 20th century instructional tools and assessments. For the good of our students, our city, and our society we need to reach out to our students with the learning tools that best fit their experiences and the countries workforce requirements. I have asked many principals over the past years if they were aware of the SCANS report, and most say they had not heard of it. And yet this report sponsored by the U.S. Department of Labor that came out toward the end of the 20th century was telling educators of the changing needs of the workforce in America. How can schools change if the educators are not aware early on of what changes are needed?
Now we know more about the requirements for the 21st century. Many people have read The World is Flat and similar books that have been published in recent years. Many people have seen the video clip, Shift Happens, that is available on the web. Many people have viewed the video, 2 Million Minutes, the story of top academic students in the United States, India, and China, and shows the differences in life style and education for the three nations. Are we competitive now in the current global economy? Will we be competitive in ten, fifteen, twenty years from now in the growing global economy? Unless we can answer yes to these questions, and others, our nation will not hold the high level of esteem that most of us have believe existed since we were born.
Net Generation students do not learn as well using post Gutenberg model world instructional tools. They read differently, their attention is focused differently, and they question information differently. They will not be well prepared to work on an assembly line, but what will we the educators help them to be prepared to do? There may be few, but we do have school models that we can visit and learn from. One of those models that prepares students for the 21st century world is the New Tech High School model. I have worked with several of these types of high schools, and saw first hand that when implemented well, our students can achieve at levels beyond the expectations that many adults hold for them.
We need to see the urgency for paradigm shifting. This need has direct impact on our own economic well being, and on the well being of this nation. Without change the economy of this country will not be able to recover from the current depressed state that it is in. I hope that all educators choose to find time to discuss the issues that 21st century education requires us to have to have answers for. We need those conversations to occur now, not in the future. I hope that this topic will spark conversation on this blog and in faculty meetings around the country.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
