s/o Middle school lax/waste of time in American schools?

[Jenny in GA]

In the "Better Late Than Early" thread, Esther Marie said something I thought was really interesting:

 

I do think the Anglo-American culture of early start is a bit insane. You guys seem to be very hard, in terms of your expectations, on the littles (academic pre-K and K and alike, with a lot of seatwork and forcing certain skills which would have come a lot more naturally to children if you only gave them a year or two more to play and mature), but then somewhere about upper elementary you start erring on the lax side. From middle school onwards, there is little place for comparison, because by that point the educations our children receive are so fundamentally different (and, if you ask me, in Europe it is typically academically superior). And ironically, kids still spend often less TIME in school.

 

Another poster or two added that the years between 10-14 were totally wasted in American school.

 

I was really curious about that. What does Europe do differently that is so very superior? If Americans are spending more time, how is it so lax? What are they doing?

 

And I'm curious about the implications that schools here starts out being rigorous and having high standards, then just goes completely to pot after several years. When -- and how -- does it change? And why do you think this happens?

[Dmmetler]

I don't know what the European system is, but I know that having taught in US schools, even before I had children, I'd always said that I'd pull my kids out in middle school-because it seems so much of the focus is the social and hormonal stuff, and very little new content is learned in those years. I figured, even then, that the typical kid would learn more if you could take those years and travel, or attempt to raise/cook 90% of your food from scratch, or build houses with Habitat for Humanity-or just about ANYTHING to make them think about something beyond their bubbling hormones and how they fit in with their peers! By about 9th grade, the brains seem to return and they're capable of logical thought again.

 

It wasn't until I started to meet homeschooled tweens/teens that I realized that it's not necessarily a function of the age, but of the environment-because all in all, they seem so much more PRACTICAL than those 6th-8th graders I've worked with in PS. I can easily see where, if there's a culture that doesn't expect kids to go to pot mentally those years that you could easily have vastly different results by high school.

[wapiti]

In a typical public middle school, yes, I think a lot of time is wasted, perhaps trying to make up for what was not taught well in mid-elementary. (lol, just today I was wondering just what is in 6th and 7th grade math for the average kid who will not take algebra until 9th)

 

Think about it this way - standards have been pushed lower and lower (e.g. "kindergarten is the new first grade") and yet it's not as though most high school students come out any more educated than earlier years. What are they doing? Good question.

[Lang Syne Boardie]

I've personally lost interest in the topic of the superiority of Europeans, but I will comment that these changes to the American system are a major reason so many are homeschooling now.

 

It wasn't always like this here. We used to have gentle but rigorous primary years during which the children actually received a good foundation in the 3R's. The school years were short due to agricultural calendar, and the school days were also short. We didn't even have homework in elementary school.

 

The jr. high years weren't wasted in America's past. My grandfather kept all of his eighth grade schoolbooks from before WWII, and they are superior to the texts used by my local high school today. That common old saying, "He did all that, and only had an eighth-grade education.." well, if today's high school seniors and college freshmen had their great-grandfather's eighth-grade education we wouldn't be in this mess. Grandpa didn't leave school unable to comprehend a newspaper (or the Constitution), write an essay, or figure out a real-life math problem with excellent arithmetic and a good grasp of Algebra.

 

Things have changed here, certainly. The 3R's are not mastered in elementary school. Junior high is a waste of time. The children are being given time to handle their hormones in an undisciplined environment, just idling until they get through the worst of puberty and have academic classes again in high school. It's ridiculous. That's why we homeschool.

 

I will certainly grant that some Europeans might be better educated academically than some Americans. (Except for the UK. They seem to be on par with us in many respects and worse off in others; their failures have been all over the news lately.) I am still waiting for evidence that Europeans are superior persons overall, though, and of course they are not. There are all kinds of people in every land. It takes more than book learning to grow a whole person.

 

My brother-in-law has raised two sons in Belgium. (Their sons never lived in the U.S.) He and his wife are so weary of the suicide, binge drinking, drug use, and immorality that plague their sons' friends and families. Who cares how many languages you speak if such is your life? They sent their eldest son here to go to a private university with a strong conservative religious focus, even though he was near the top of his class in his Belgian school and could have gone anywhere.

 

My nephew is nearly done with his undergraduate work here. He has promising plans for continued education in the field of his choice. He is engaged to a wonderful American girl who is a devout Christian, and he is very, very happy to be in America. My BIL plans to send his younger son to school here, as well.

[Kathy in Richmond]

I've observed my neighbors and my kids' friends over the years. Parents here are super involved during the elementary school years, on top of what their kids are learning, and eager to help them at home. As soon as the kids enter middle school, though, they all seem to pride themselves on how uninvolved they are; the majority don't have a clue what their kids are studying, who they're hanging out with, and they only get involved if the kids are in trouble. Kids get home earlier than they did in the elementary school days, mom has returned to the working world, the house is empty, and kids are left to their own devices. They spend far too much time on electronic devices w/o limits (you wouldn't believe how many young teens I tutor who can't make it through a 60-minute tutoring session without texting under the table, lol.)

[Bluegoat]

I don't know what the European system is, but I know that having taught in US schools, even before I had children, I'd always said that I'd pull my kids out in middle school-because it seems so much of the focus is the social and hormonal stuff, and very little new content is learned in those years. I figured, even then, that the typical kid would learn more if you could take those years and travel, or attempt to raise/cook 90% of your food from scratch, or build houses with Habitat for Humanity-or just about ANYTHING to make them think about something beyond their bubbling hormones and how they fit in with their peers! By about 9th grade, the brains seem to return and they're capable of logical thought again.

 

It wasn't until I started to meet homeschooled tweens/teens that I realized that it's not necessarily a function of the age, but of the environment-because all in all, they seem so much more PRACTICAL than those 6th-8th graders I've worked with in PS. I can easily see where, if there's a culture that doesn't expect kids to go to pot mentally those years that you could easily have vastly different results by high school.

 

Yes, I came to the same conclusions about middle school kids and then had the same reversal.

 

My thought is that in the early years, people think they know what kids need to learn - the three R's, and so the earlier the better. But very quickly any idea of some kind of educational program disappears. I think it was originally jettisoned on purpose as a part of a political decision in the 60's and 70's, but now the teachers and administrators are people who came through the same kind of environment and they have no clue what it might mean to be educated.

[Hunter]

I think people get so lost in CONTENT that they burn out the students and themselves so much that they don't get around to teaching SKILLS. For example how many people start using science and social studies and literature textbooks? The lists of CONTENT topics are insane and impossible and distracting.

 

And also, I think all that early pushing has side effects, that start to present themselves in the middle school years.

 

Kids also start spending more time with electronics which seems to wear them out and numb them in some way.

 

Children in the past used to work and by middle school were doing a LOT of work. I think we have upset something in their development by not allowing children to work anymore.

 

I think the whole hormone social excuse is far too simple.

[regentrude]

I was really curious about that. What does Europe do differently that is so very superior? If Americans are spending more time, how is it so lax? What are they doing?

 

And I'm curious about the implications that schools here starts out being rigorous and having high standards, then just goes completely to pot after several years. When -- and how -- does it change? And why do you think this happens?

 

 

It was exactly our experience with the local US public schools: great elementary school, good academics (almost too much for some students), until 4th grade. At the end of 4th grade, my kids were ahead of their same age peers in Germany.

 

Then they entered middle school - and the learning stopped. I am not even exaggerating. In 5th grade, in math the students reviewed until Christmas, spent four weeks on new material in January, started drilling for the state tests in February until the tests in April, and the rest of the school year tapered off. Four weeks of actual instruction in new material in a whole year. Pathetic. We pulled the kids out of school when we found out that, at the beginning of 6th grade, DD was a full year behind in math compared to her same age peers in a German school.

 

The main difference is that, in Germany, students who possess the ability to learn more and faster are grouped together and taught with a more challenging curriculum, beginning in 5th grade. Students who are slower learners are grouped together to follow a different curriculum. They are tracked to two different school types (there are possibilities for crossover for "late bloomers"; my niece did the lower track, added an extra program and started at a 4 year university with just one year delay).

 

In the US, we have the "one size fits all" aka NCLB approach. We had no opportunities for differentiation, strong students were forced to progress at the pace of the slowest learner.

This is precisely the reason we homeschool.

 

ETA: You cite EsterMaria:"And ironically, kids still spend often less TIME in school." This is definitely true for Germany. Elementary age kids are home by noon, often earlier. Middle school kids get out between 1 and 2pm, occasionally 2:30.

Edited March 22, 2012 by regentrude

[Ester Maria]

It was exactly our experience with the local US public schools: great elementary school, good academics (almost too much for some students), until 4th grade. At the end of 4th grade, my kids were ahead of their same age peers in Germany.

 

Then they entered middle school - and the learning stopped. I am not even exaggerating. In 5th grade, in math the students reviewed until Christmas, spent four weeks on new material in January, started drilling for the state tests in February until the tests in April, and the rest of the school year tapered off. Four weeks of actual instruction in new material in a whole year. Pathetic. We pulled the kids out of school when we found out that, at the beginning of 6th grade, DD was a full year behind in math compared to her same age peers in a German school.

 

The main difference is that, in Germany, students who possess the ability to learn more and faster are grouped together and taught with a more challenging curriculum, beginning in 5th grade. Students who are slower learners are grouped together to follow a different curriculum. They are tracked to two different school types (there are possibilities for crossover for "late bloomers"; my niece did the lower track, added an extra program and started at a 4 year university with just one year delay).

 

In the US, we have the "one size fits all" aka NCLB approach. We had no opportunities for differentiation, strong students were forced to progress at the pace of the slowest learner.

This is precisely the reason we homeschool.

I was waiting for you to answer so that I can quote you and put :iagree:, LOL.

[momto2Cs]

This is really interesting to me, with one kid about the enter "The Middle School years" (similar to entering The Twilight Zone). I've been hearing a lot about how less prepared American high school graduates are for college, and as a reader (grader) for an English composition class (NOT entry level), I would have to agree.

 

I think a good part of that is the waste of time so common in middle schools/junior high schools, continuing on into high school in far too many cases. There are so many problems with it I'm not sure where to start! The classes are not rigorous, even in the AP-type classes. A lot of what is done in class is busywork, hence the enormous loads of homework many tweens and teens cart home daily. Standards consistently drop as testing becomes more and more the focus.

 

One of the problems, I think, with junior high/middle school is the gigantic change in approach - kids go from being in one class all day, for the most part, to having short periods with lots of switching around. Then there is the fact that placement in classes seems somewhat arbitrary. Mix hormones in with that, and a general lack of parental involvement, and there you go-- a recipe for disaster.

 

I do agree too that we ask too much of younger kids. Generally speaking, although I know there are exceptions to this, most kids at 4 or 5 are not ready for academics. Kindergarten, in my day, was about playing together, cooperating, learning the letters of the alphabet (though my mom taught me to read at home before I started school), counting, coloring, arts and crafts, learning about different jobs/roles in the community, and so on. We never had homework! Today's kindergarteners are supposed to be reading, doing math, completing homework, etc., having learned the basics in preschool! It seems to me much of the joy and exploration of life that the early grades once offered has been lost in our relentless pursuit of higher test scores.

 

I do admire much about foreign approaches to learning: as an example, schools in Sweden. They have a play-based approach in the early years, with kids learning to read around 7 or 8, and still by 12, their kids outperform ours in reading skills and comprehension. (This is based off research I have done, never having actually been to Sweden)

 

I think part of the problem is that we start so young and so heavy that by the time kids reach adolescence, they are a bit burned out. Junior high schools know this--they see it every year--and so rather than demanding a lot that will likely never get done, they back off. By the time kids get into high school, they're used to this approach, and thus many under-perform then as well.

 

JMHO.

[momto2Cs]

I think people get so lost in CONTENT that they burn out the students and themselves so much that they don't get around to teaching SKILLS. For example how many people start using science and social studies and literature textbooks? The lists of CONTENT topics are insane and impossible and distracting.

 

And also, I think all that early pushing has side effects, that start to present themselves in the middle school years.

 

Kids also start spending more time with electronics which seems to wear them out and numb them in some way.

 

Children in the past used to work and by middle school were doing a LOT of work. I think we have upset something in their development by not allowing children to work anymore.

 

I think the whole hormone social excuse is far too simple.

 

Really good points! I do think our lowered expectations of children, as far as skills they can perform, is more harmful than helpful in their development. And electronics, when not properly managed, can be very mind numbing.

 

One of the reasons we homeschool is to make sure our children have a well developed skill base, as well as academic. Yes, a child should be exposed to great poets, but they should also learn how to cook, garden, and sew a button back on. Physical activity is necessary to everyone, children not to be excluded, and should be a part of daily routine. And it helps balance out those pesky hormones! ;)

[ekfk]

"I do admire much about foreign approaches to learning: as an example, schools in Sweden. They have a play-based approach in the early years, with kids learning to read around 7 or 8, and still by 12, their kids outperform ours in reading skills and comprehension. (This is based off research I have done, never having actually been to Sweden)"

 

I did some research on Finland. Formal academics don't start there until 7. But about a third of kids can read before starting school. Most of the rest have some beginning reading skills in place. So, obviously there is quite a bit of teaching of children going on in the early years in the home. Parents in Finland also read a lot to their kids. This is true in many Asian countries as well. So, kids enter school already knowing a lot. Having large numbers of prepared kids frees up school resources for the unprepared kids. So, early "homeschooling" may be a factor in the success of many European and Asian students.

[Enough]

:bigear: What a great question.

 

No answers, just more questions: I'm curious, do other countries do a dedicated 'middle school' the way we (mostly) do it in the U.S., i.e. 6th-8th grade in its own campus/building?

 

I ask because- as a former middle school teacher- I was always astounded by the stupidity of segregating this age group. Why anyone thinks it's advantageous to lump all these kids together is beyond me, frankly. :confused: It seems as though we just (wrongly) assume that this age is an academic wasteland and therefore we aren't even going to TRY to do anything of value. Middle school curricula is, in general, ABYSMAL. It's a running joke among middle school teachers that the ONLY reason we teach/taught this age is because we love the kids- NOT because there's anything remotely interesting about the curricula.

[Made Unfit]

No answers, just more questions: I'm curious, do other countries do a dedicated 'middle school' the way we (mostly) do it in the U.S., i.e. 6th-8th grade in its own campus/building?

 

Here in Australia the general system is to have two schools: Primary School, from 5yo to 12yo (roughly) and High School, from 13yo to 17yo (roughly). Although I think in other states high school may start a year earlier, ie for 12 yo.

 

The 11/12 yo in our primary schools (in my experience) are given leadership and buddy-type roles within the school community. I remember at high school, though, that a few teachers made it pretty clear that years 8 and 9 were simply to be endured!

[Hunter]

I think our PS schools are asking a LOT from our middle schoolers, but not the RIGHT things. No one is dealing with REALITY and setting PRIORITIES. As I said in my signature, "Shooting for the moon, without the resources to get there, can leave you stranded in outer space."

 

I think many homeschoolers, and yes, many classical homeschoolers fall into the same fear based mentality, and too full curriculum that DROWNS out the skills, in a tidal wave of CONTENT.

[jennynd]

In Taiwan, we have elementary (1-6) middle (7-9) high (10-12) schools.

Middle school were grouped by ability. High school has entry exams so you have to pass a city exam to get in a high school (our city, taipie has population of 6 millions and 11 or 12 public high school at the time when I was in middle school, some private schools but not considered main stream) so the middle school is very vey competitive. U kinda have to study hard or you go to secondary technical school rather than formal high school

[Roadrunner]

We only had one school growing up (and still do). I sat in the same classes for 11 years with same kids. I have very, very close friends from school. :001_smile:

[regentrude]

No answers, just more questions: I'm curious, do other countries do a dedicated 'middle school' the way we (mostly) do it in the U.S., i.e. 6th-8th grade in its own campus/building?.

 

No. In Germany there is elementary school 1st through 4th grade, and then the kids change to secondary school where they stay in the same building and together with the same classmates from 5th through 10th or 12th grade (depending on school type).

[Bootsie]

This is what we experienced when my dd was in ps for middle school. On one hand the students were "pushed" to take algebra early and to have huge assignments over summer break. At first glance it appeared rigorous. But, when you really got down to it, nothing was happening in the classroom. Repeatedly, dd came home and reported how she watched Little Mermaid in math class or Beauty and the Beast in science class.

[Jenny in GA]

It seems as though we just (wrongly) assume that this age is an academic wasteland and therefore we aren't even going to TRY to do anything of value. Middle school curricula is, in general, ABYSMAL. It's a running joke among middle school teachers that the ONLY reason we teach/taught this age is because we love the kids- NOT because there's anything remotely interesting about the curricula.

 

Interesting ... what do you mean, exactly? Is it abysmal because it's all review from elementary school? Do you mean the topics themselves are boring? And/or that the topics are fine, but the way they're taught is boring?

 

What is the middle school curriculum like?

 

One thing I have found interesting is that I have a fifth grader who is just beginning the logic stage. As I look to begin WWS, and HO Level Two, I keep thinking, "Wow, I never did anything remotely like this in fifth grade ... or sixth, for that matter."

 

And then it dawns on me that I don't remember ever doing some of these types of assignments! (especially in history. We spent a LOT of time doing fill-in-the-blank worksheets, and almost no time outlining a history text or keeping any kind of notebook where we wrote information on famous people. Reading something like the Federalist Papers?? Forget it!)

 

I grew up in what were considered top-notch schools, in two different parts of the country. Maybe things are very different now (for better or worse), but that's how I remember my experience.

[sagira]

Food for thought. When people were talking of skills, I was thinking critical thinking, reasoning, spelling, outlining, mapping skills, etc. Then again, I graduated college without knowing how to cook, bake, do laundry, clean, organize.. I still struggle daily with the latter and don't know how to sew. I remember doing lots in what people consider middle school here - academically, that is.

[mom2scouts]

This is what we experienced when my dd was in ps for middle school. On one hand the students were "pushed" to take algebra early and to have huge assignments over summer break. At first glance it appeared rigorous. But, when you really got down to it, nothing was happening in the classroom. Repeatedly, dd came home and reported how she watched Little Mermaid in math class or Beauty and the Beast in science class.

 

Ugh, one of my sons watched so many movies in middle school that I don't think he ever had a complete week of lessons. He went to one of those "excellent" suburban schools, but his teacher was lazy and never prepared.

[Enough]

Interesting ... what do you mean, exactly? Is it abysmal because it's all review from elementary school? Do you mean the topics themselves are boring? And/or that the topics are fine, but the way they're taught is boring?

 

What is the middle school curriculum like?

 

One thing I have found interesting is that I have a fifth grader who is just beginning the logic stage. As I look to begin WWS, and HO Level Two, I keep thinking, "Wow, I never did anything remotely like this in fifth grade ... or sixth, for that matter."

 

And then it dawns on me that I don't remember ever doing some of these types of assignments! (especially in history. We spent a LOT of time doing fill-in-the-blank worksheets, and almost no time outlining a history text or keeping any kind of notebook where we wrote information on famous people. Reading something like the Federalist Papers?? Forget it!)

 

I grew up in what were considered top-notch schools, in two different parts of the country. Maybe things are very different now (for better or worse), but that's how I remember my experience.

 

Let me be clear: I am talking about the curricula that *schools* use! I haven't seen a lot of it, but the homeschooling curricula that I've seen for middle school is quite good. School curricula/textbooks/enslavement to standardized testing is what I (and my fellow middle school teachers) thought was abysmal- much like you describe: worksheets, no depth, very little new material, very little in the way of dynamic/engaging material or material that we could even MAKE engaging, LOTS and LOTS and LOTS of material that had to be covered in order for teachers to keep licensure /not get reprimanded and for kids to pass the standardized test (in other words, seriously overdone breadth vs. depth). It's very telling that in every middle school I taught in or worked with, the good/meaty stuff was happening ONLY in pull-out gifted programs, and many schools had 30% (or more) of kids ID'd as gifted. :lol: Yeah, I wonder why?!?! LOL.

[stripe]

It seems as though we just (wrongly) assume that this age is an academic wasteland and therefore we aren't even going to TRY to do anything of value. Middle school curricula is, in general, ABYSMAL.

Have you ever seen anything about Kay Toliver? She's a middle school math teacher.

I watched a documentary on PBS about her (Good Morning Miss Toliver) but here are some short lesson videos:

http://www.thefutureschannel.com/kay_toliver/kay_toliver_classroom_lessons.php

 

I have to say, I agree with EM that there is always an emphasis on getting tiny kids to do things like read but that pressure vanishes later on.

[cherylw]

I can see the day when Pre-K will become mandatory. I believe it's so popular with parents because it's one less just a year they to pay for daycare...not to start that debate:001_huh:. Before hsing I was a substitute teacher for a short while. That's a real eye-opener! I subbed in a public pre-k class one day and it just broke my heart to see those little ones cooped up in a classroom all day. The only time they left the room was for lunch or bathroom. One of the aids had been scolded earlier for letting one of the kids sit in her lap. There wasn't a lot of organized instruction which at that age was fine, but most of the day was keeping them corraled here and there in the room. Everything had to be cleaned after use, kids had to be keep so many inches apart during naptime, etc. Lots of wasted energy imo. I just wonder if the kids exploded when they finally got home.

[Leav97]

Have you ever seen anything about Kay Toliver? She's a middle school math teacher.

I watched a documentary on PBS about her (Good Morning Miss Toliver) but here are some short lesson videos:

http://www.thefutureschannel.com/kay_toliver/kay_toliver_classroom_lessons.php

 

I have to say, I agree with EM that there is always an emphasis on getting tiny kids to do things like read but that pressure vanishes later on.

 

Wow, those are very cool videos.

[stripe]

I can see the day when Pre-K will become mandatory. I believe it's so popular with parents because it's one less just a year they to pay for daycare...not to start that debate:001_huh:. Before hsing I was a substitute teacher for a short while. That's a real eye-opener! I subbed in a public pre-k class one day and it just broke my heart to see those little ones cooped up in a classroom all day. The only time they left the room was for lunch or bathroom.

One could choose to enroll a child in Pre-K without it being mandatory.

 

I do know children in early education environments who have thrived. Especially in places where children have nothing to do at home. If you think a child's natural environment is a home where adults are doting on the child, reading to him or her, and there are lots of age-appropriate activities, yes, it could seem strange to put the child in a nursery school.

 

But I know children who are either benignly neglected at home or just get in the way, where there are no books, or no children's books, and no one reads to the child. I saw for myself how much a niece of mine (who lives outside the US, btw) has thrived in an early education setting. She is only there for the mornings. She eats lunch at home. They sing lots of songs and do age-appropriate activities. At home, no one does particularly anything with her, so she just gets in the way, basically. It's not that no one loves her, it's just that people are busy cooking, for example, and people don't really talk/chat to or with kids. And her mother is comparatively well educated, so it's not that her parents are illiterate. They just don't have any particular skills with early childhood activities. So I think she does gain many things from being with a reasonably good, non-academic activity. Her verbal skills increased considerably by having someone to talk directly to and with her.

[Briartell]

I have kids in Middle School PS now, 6th and 8th grade. I will be homeschooling my 6th grader next year. I hate middle school. Here is the problems I am seeing/experiencing.

 

-My son is picked up by the bus at 6:55 am and does not return until 4:25 p.m. In that 9.5 hours away from my home, only 4 hours are spent in subjects with real meaning . The rest is bus time, lunch time, band class, drama (this was not a choice, the school picks your schedule for you!). There is a closer middle school and he would gain an hour back if they would redistrict, but they don't.

 

Overwhelming, state standards are killing the enthusiasm and creativity of teachers. My middle school experience was full of devoted teachers who wanted to inspire students to LOVE the subject that were teaching. For example, my 7th grade science teacher had us walk around the school yard and identify all the trees we could. We created a 'town arboretum' and drew a field guide to the trees. We did the same for indigenous birds. He took us bird watching (something I still do today). He had woodshop students build a greenhouse and students grew flowers and vegetables. In later classes, he organized trips to the Amazon for students and their families (and I don't mean the store).

 

Today, my kids have teachers who live and die by the textbooks, which are written to TCAP standards with TCAP practice questions in them, instead of making the subject come alive. Teach them to love learning.

 

-My sons school is overcrowded. Too few classrooms and teachers lead to teachers who are overwhelmed with those who are failing. My son went from an 'A' to a low 'C' in Math in four weeks with no communication from the teacher to me. When I asked her about this, she said that "When I have 15 other kids failing, it is hard to be concerned with a kid who is passing." What! A 'C' is not passing in my home. A 'C' is not mastery.

Edited March 23, 2012 by Briartell