Teaching and Learning in Middle Schooling: A Review of the Literature

Difficulties Associated with Middle Schooling Initiatives

In their review, Dinham and Rowe assert that two key factors in the success of any school change or initiative are leadership and teachers’ professional learning. They note that these elements need to be combined with accepted principles for organisational and educational change, in order to avoid obstacles to progress or unintended, negative consequences, such as:

• a reluctance to change on the part of teachers, eg, from typical subject approaches to integrated approaches;
• insufficient funding to bring about change, especially funding for teacher release and professional engagement and learning;
• a situation where those involved find they have an increased workload associated with change;
• expectations of change are not met and targets fall short; and
• timetabling and/or staffing difficulties, and time constraints generally.¹
  

It is further emphasised that ‘one of the major dysfunctional consequences of prevailing middle schooling reform initiatives is the tendency by school leaders and teachers to focus unduly on the ‘developmental needs’ and ‘problems’ of adolescent students – often at the expense of students’ teaching and learning needs for achievement progress and ‘growth’.’ The reviewers consider, therefore, that in this context, it is helpful to note what students themselves nominate as key characteristics of ‘good teaching’, and ‘effective teachers’ in particular. They cite evidence² that indicates that students (and especially adolescents) want their teachers to:

• know and understand their subject(s);
• treat each student as an individual;
• make learning the core of what happens in the classroom; and
• manage distractions that disrupt and prevent learning.
  

In a range of studies³, students were found to consistently report ‘good teachers’ as those who:

• “Care about me and encourage me”;
• “Know what they are teaching and help me to learn”;
• “Are enthusiastic about what they teach and want me share in their enjoyment of learning”; and
• “Are fair”.
  

Comments on Current Status and Suggestions about Future Directions for Reform

Current status

With the following statements, Pendergast (2005)⁴ provides a useful summary of the current status of middle schooling.

• “ …middle schooling is a slippery concept. There is no single definition [or] … formula for middle schooling.”
• “Middle schooling is consistently constructed as being about rethinking education that meets the needs of young people in a changing world.”
• “There appear to be some commonly agreed middle schooling practices, but these are not exclusive to middle schooling.”
• “Middle schooling reform does not exist in isolation [from previous and subsequent phases of schooling], making it difficult to implement, explore and determine outcomes and efficacy.”
• “While middle schooling has achieved debutante status in terms of acceptance as a reform platform, policies, positions, their implementation and evaluation are very much in their infancy; so many educators are working on anecdotal evidence, gut feeling and good faith.”
  

Future directions

Also according to Pendergast, this time in relation to ‘where to from here’ …

• “Middle schooling is not about implementing a three-tiered school structure. It is about a unique philosophy, with concomitant changes in pedagogy, curriculum and assessment. These changes are not about repackaging, but about a new way of doing.”
• “Middle schooling means change for teachers.”
• “Middle schooling is complex, site-specific and requires sustained, systemic reform.”
• “Middle schooling is here to stay – there is widespread evidence that middle schooling [has] a legitimate place in our education system. Regardless of this however, champions of middle schooling are required at all junctures: in schools, in systems, and especially in universities, where academic, research-based evidence is required.”
  

Pendergast further stated that “Middle schooling will [positively] affect later phase learning if it achieves its goals.”

Footnotes

1. Elsworth et al (2004, p.74). Ibid.
   
2. For example: Ramsey, G. (2000, p.12). Quality matters – revitalising teaching: Critical times, critical choices. Report of the Review of Teacher Education. Sydney, NSW: Department of Education and Training [ISBN 073107 8842].
   
3. For example: Slade, M. (2002). Listening to the boys: Issues and problems influencing school achievement and retention. Series: Flinders University Institute of International Education Research Collection, Number 5. Adelaide, SA: Shannon Research Press.
   
   The reviewers also included the following note in their report: ‘From extensive interview data, Slade (2002, pp.175-177) provides a list of 68 characteristics and practices of “good teachers” reported by students. The chapter in which this list is provided (Chapter 10) is compelling reading that in our view should be compulsory for teacher education courses.’
   
4. Pendergast, D. (2005). The emergence of middle schooling. In D. Pendergast and N. Bahr (Eds.), Teaching Middle Years Rethinking Curriculum, Pedagogy and Assessment. Cross Nest, NSW: Allen & Unwin.