K-8:Panacea or Can of Worms?

I've been a teacher for over 25 years, teaching grades 7-9 (not in PPS), as well as working for Portland State, Oregon Department of Education, and as a private consultant. I am the mother of two PPS students, and I've summarized several articles from last September's Middle School Journal which focused on K-8 school configurations. In this summary I tried to capture the essence of several articles, and I did not analyze or draw conclusions of my own within the report. You may wish to survey this research, in order to form personal opinions, or to share it with others.
Respectfully,
Amy Meabe

Keep in mind, since the journal is for middle school teachers, counselors and administrators, the focal question is about the impact of k-8 on middle schoolers, not so much on its impact for the younger students. Also, it appears that much movement to k-8 involves moving 6th through 8th graders into elementary buildings, whereas in many cases PPS is talk about doing the opposite. Anyway, some positives and negatives, and some interesting quotes. My commentary is in italics.

“The Making of a New Urban Myth” by Tom Erb (editor of Middle School Journal)

• One researcher states that the issue of reducing the number of transitions is a red herring, because any academic gains that are produced in grades 6-8 are diminished or completely gone by 9th grade (research based in Dade County, Fla.)
• K-8 can be beneficial, if middle school concepts are still available to older students (inter-disciplinary instruction, teaching teams, exploratory electives offered, teacher-student advisory program). Not sure how many of our middle schools have an advisory program now, or teaching teams; perhaps a restructuring would provide the opportunity to develop these components.

“K-8 or Not? Reconfiguring the Middle Grades” by Paul S.George
Potential positives for k-8:
• reduced # of transitions (see above)
• longer teacher-student relationships
• longer time in neighborhood schools (in multiple articles they mention the popularity of neighborhood schools)
• students stay "younger" longer
• greater degree of parent involvement, sense of community
• potential enrichment opportunities for younger students
• potential for elementary/secondary teacher collaboration

Potential negatives for k-8
• unlikely to work unless thorough, careful work is done to design age-appropriate structure for the complete range of ages (what a kindergartner needs is not what an 8th grader needs--how can the same building/schedule/staff be set up to accommodate them all?)
• potential conflicts between elementary and secondary staff
• little evidence exists for an increase in test scores
• hard to meet teacher certification requirements (secondary-certified staff and elementary-certified staff can't be used interchangeably)
• transition to high school may be more difficult (I worry about this one a lot--if your child struggles with transitions, do you really want that struggle to happen when it will show up on his high school transcripts--wouldn't it be better to have that challenge mastered at age 11 or 12 when grades don't directly affect college admission--especially in boys, who mature later)
• some students will need/be ready for a more rich, rigorous curriculum than would be available in such a small cohort (can the school still offer algebra to an 8th grader, if there are only 120 8th graders, and only 23 of them are ready for it?--that's just one example) Another article says there's insufficient research about whether a k-8 curriculum will be sufficiently appropriate and rigorous"(Mizell 18)
• "corruption" of younger children
• scheduling issues are enormously complex--who has the expertise to design the building's master schedule?
• administrators' preferences (many principals are experienced, trained, and interested in either elementary or secondary, may be less able to handle a hybrid)
• middle school often require an assistant principal, counselor, security officers, disciplinary staff and specialized staff (music, foreign language, etc.). Will a k-8 school be able to afford these?
• building, equipment, materials, furniture--how will it all be changed to accommodate the range of students?

Some quotes:

"Are the announced reasons for reorganization currently offered by district leaders the acutal reasons for the changeover? Only a much closer examination of current school district decision making will reveal the extent to which k-8 schools are being proposed for pedagogical as opposed to political, economic, or social reasons"(George 6).
"So, how should educators, parents, and community members interpret the increasing number of school districts moving to replace 6-8 middle schools with k-8 programs? How should they respond when such proposals are placed in front of their local school boards?With great caution, and with the realization that a simple reconfiguring of middle grades programs may not result in immediate or sustained improvements in academic achievement, student personal developmen, or citizenship"(ibid.)

He goes on to say that it could be an improvement over the status quo ("in districts where the commitment and the resources exist to provide k-8 schools with effective implementation of developmentally appropriate practices"), and
"in the context of this lack of knowledge, hurried and injudicious action could lead to great waste--to yet another era of uncertainty and dissatisfaction with middle level education" (ibid).

“Grade Configurations for Educating Young Adolescents Are Still Crazy After All These Years” by Hayes Mizell

"Does all this suggest that school systems should proceed with haste to abandon their 6-8 middle schools and create in their place a system of k-8 schools? The answer is 'no'" (Mizell 19).
It's unclear what panel the author is referring to--possibly a panel looking at schools in Cleveland, but he quotes from a report created by this panel:
"The panel recommended that the district phase out its existing k-8 schools that fail to provide separate and distinct middle school programs...Middle schools should be located in their own buildings and include grades six to eight, the report said. The panel based its findings in large measure on a 2002 state Education Department policy study of middle schools. The panel, calling k-8 a short-term solution, urged the district to take a long-term approach to middle schools. The long-term answer is 6-8, the report said'" (Mizell, quoting Nolan, 2003).
An audit from Montgomery County, Maryland describe some parents' perspectives: "A group of black parents who recently criticized the system for the low number of black and Hispanic students admitted to magnet programs said that if the overall quality of middle schools were better, parents might be more comfortable sending their children to non-magnet programs" (Mizell, quoting Aratani, 2003)

"Contrary to some reports, the conversion to k-8 grade configurations is not a 'trend.'....
"The only trend is that in some large cities, there are, thankfully, aggressive, reform-minded superintendents seeking to drag their dysfunctional school systems into the 21st Century. They believe that converting from 6-8 schools to k-8 schools is one way to make a bold stroke for reform, wipe the slate clean, and chart a new and perhaps more productive course for middle grades education"(Mizell 20).
"..but school boards and superintendents need to know that the wholesale conversion to a k-8 structure is not a matter of set it and forget it"...(the authors describe problems in Denver, such as the program not seeming to provide the rigor and structure to prepare the students for high school)

" A good program can operate in a k-8 building, in a 5-8, or 6-8. But if the program is wrong, moving to a k-8 organization, or any other, isn't going to make a difference" (Mizell quoting Abramson, 2004).

"There is not adequate research to provide definitive guidance about the relative effectivenes of K-8 and 6-8 schools" (Mizell quoting Pardini, 2002a, 2002b).

"...the push for k-8 schools ignores the key problems facing middle schools: little rigorous curricula in important subjects like math, science, and English, and too few teachers qualified to teach those topics. 'Until we confront those issues, all this chair-moving isn't going to make much difference,' said Schmidt. 'This strikes me as another one of those oversimplified solutions to a complicated problem" (Mizell quoting Schouten 2002).

“How Effective Are K-8 Schools For Young Adolescents” by C. Kenneth McEwin, Thomas S. Dickinson, and Michael G. Jacobson

“The reasons for making this change (to K-8) include the hope for higher test scores, the quest for lower operating costs, and the desire to respond to the wishes of family members to keep their children in their neighborhood schools as long as possible. These major reorganization decisions have been based primarily on anecdotal information and very limited research (Gewertz, 2004). No empirical, large-scale studies have examined the relationship between grade configuration and student achievement as measured by standardized test scores” (25)
“Rather than abandoning them (middle schools) for a different grade configuration that seems less likely to serve young adolescents’ unique needs, educators should renew their efforts to implement the middle school concept” (ibid).

“Only 16% of K-8 principals believed that the K-8 configuration they were currently heading was ideal for young adolescents while 84% favored separate middle schools...The collective judgment of practitioners does not ‘prove’ that young adolescents are better off when placed in middle schools than elementary schools. However, these results should give pause to those considering moving young adolescents to elementary schools” (26).

“Young adolescents in K-8 schools were likely to spend somewhat more time in core subjects in part because there are fewer courses offered outside the core. The availability of non-core and elective courses directly affects the master schedule and , therefore, the amount of time spent in core courses...(young adolescents) often have fewer choices with regard to elective courses than their counterparts in middle schools” (ibid.).

“...young adolescents attending K-8 schools are less likely to be taught by teams than those attending middle schools. Considering the significance of the relationship between interdisciplinary teaming and student achievement (National Middle School Association, 2004), this is a point of great importance to those making decisions about the optimum placement for young adolescents” (ibid.).

“Results from the status studies of K-8 schools and middle schools reveal no programmatic reasons to support the idea that placing sixth, seventh, and eighth grade students in elementary schools is a better educational idea” (27).

“Based on the information gathered in two national surveys and in an investigation of the middle level knowledge base, the authors conclude that the separately organized middle school is the best option when a choice is possible....When student populations are so small that providing separate middle schools is not possible, steps should be taken to implement the middle school concept in a K-8 or 7-12 setting to ensure that young adolescents receive a high quality education....(ibid).

Quoting “respected middle school expert Joan Lipsitz,” “ ‘This is another attempt at a magic bullet, which is much easier than getting down to the really hard work of preparing teachers to work with this age group, having strong curricula for this age group, and having personalized school that hold high expectations for all kids and also meet their developmental needs’ (Gewertz, 2004, p. 20)”

“All stakeholders need to focus on actions that will lead to real improvement in schools instead of searching for a ‘magic bullet’ that may be inexpensive and give the appearance of reform but lacks educational validity. Moving beyond attempts at an expedient quick-fix will require unprecedented and courageous efforts from all responsible parties” (28).

“The Effects of Small K-8 Centers Compared to Large 6-8 Schools on Student Performance” by Rodolfo Abella

“Overall, reports from districts with K-8 centers indicate that K-8 centers help improve student performance in the areas of academic achievement, attendance, and discipline (Pardini, 2002)” (29).
After one year of exposure to the K-8 center model, results showed K-8 students academically outperforming comparable students attending traditional middle schools. K-8 students also had better attendance and fewer out-of-school suspensions. Survey results indicated that a majority of the parents of K-8 students favored the K-8 centers over the traditional middle schools. Furthermore, students and school personnel also expressed favorable opinions of the K-8 centers (Abella, 2000)’ (30).

“A look at the absentee rates across a four year period shows that K-8 students were less likely than comparison students to increase their level of absenteeism” (33)—In other words, students are usually absent more often as they get older, but this tendency appears to have been reduced by the K-8 structure.

“Through grades six and seven, K-8 students showed greater improvements in reading scores than their student counterparts attending traditional middle schools. However, by ninth grade the two groups once again have identical reading scores”(31).

“A look at the absentee rates across a four year period shows that K-8 students were less likely than comparison students to increase their level of absenteeism” (33)—In other words, students are usually absent more often as they get older, but this tendency appears to have been reduced by the K-8 structure.
This article also says that the rate of students suspended in K-8 programs does not increase at the rate it does in middle schools, although the difference at grade 9 is statistically insignificant.

“Therefore, it seems that K-8 students drew the most benefit from attending K-8 centers during the first two years of middle school. During subsequent years, in the eighth and ninth grades, the school performance gains made by K-8 students attending traditional middle schools diminished, but, in most cases, did not completely disappear”(34-35).
“the present evaluation confirmed the significant short-term effects of the centers and suggest that K-8 centers currently in existence reside in academically average to above average schools....it would be interesting to know whether K-8 centers can exhibit positive academic effects when these factors are taken into account: (a) greater numbers of students, (b) lower performing schools, and (c) centers that have been in operation for an extended number of years” (35).

“Grade Configuration and the Education of Young Adolescents” by
Vincent A. Anfara, Jr. and Alison Buehler

This article describes the dissatisfaction with middle schools that has led some districts to consider other configurations in 1993 there were “about 30 different grade configurations” (!) The authors explain that many middle schools were middle schools in name only, and lacked the essential components that are integral to the middle school concept. They say that K-8 is attractive because “it appears to accomplish several desirable ends all at the same time” (55).

They say that “Empirical research on the topic is sparse... The results could be vastly different if exemplary middle schools were used in this research” 55.

The authors cite studies showing that transitions hurt student performance, and that the move into middle school or junior high hurts both boys and girls (girls lose “self-esteem, extracurricular participation and leadership behaviors when they made the transition into middle school or junior high, but not if they remained in an elementary setting. For young adolescent boys, making the transition into middle or junior high schools had negative effects extracurricular participation and grades, but not on self-esteem” (Simmons and Blyth, 1997) (56).

There is a great checklist of questions that should be addressed by anyone who “opens this door”, asking about the proposal’s impact on the following issues:
Parent involvement
• Course offerings, instructional groupings
• Addressing of transition points
• Effect of older students on younger students
• Design of school buildings
• Student travel
• Opportunities for interaction between age groups
• Curriculum—“better continuity and articulation, and fewer gaps and overlaps”
• Ties among schools, students and parents

“In all of the juggling that occurs in the educational policymaking arena and all of the reform bandwagons that pass us by, we must not lose sight that the focus should be on meeting the needs of young adolescents. A grade span that is desirable in one situation may be undesirable in another...This grade fragmentation can easily lead to school consolidation and school closures”(57).

In conclusion, the authors note the need for middle grade teachers and administrators to be trained for that specific age group, and that “No sequence of grades is perfect, or, in itself guarantees healthy social and emotional development. As Paglin and Fager (1997) remind us, ‘sound educational practices are more important than grade span’ (p.9)” (ibid.).