About the Book

ABOUT THE BOOK

In 1983, A Nation at Risk declared: “If an unfriendly foreign power had attempted to impose on America the mediocre educational performance that exists today, we might well have viewed it as an act of war.” How did American educators respond? At first, there was an enthusiastic interest in raising academic standards, but by the late 1980s, some voices representing the modern middle school movement began a drive to reduce academic expectations.

Ability grouping was discouraged as elitist, and in many places was replaced with “cooperative learning,” where a few students did all the work and everyone shared the grade. High ability students were often not allowed to work at their own pace, but instead were held to the pace of the rest of the class and required to tutor others--resulting in a loss to their own intellectual growth. Based on misinterpretations of scientific theories addressing brain development, a number of schools watered-down the middle school curriculum out of fear that pre-adolescent brains could not be expected to handle rigorous learning. And in some cases, academic competition was discouraged. These policies and practices resulted in some middle school environments that actively encouraged a culture that looked down upon high academic achievement.

This was nothing less than a declaration of war against academic excellence.

By the early 1990s, the motivation for this move away from academics was identified by many respected education professionals as an attempt to use the schools to implement broader social reforms. According to Dr. John Feldhusen from Purdue University, some reformers “are calling for a cultural revolution in America starting with the schools but eventually permeating all aspects of American society.” Dr. John J. Gallagher, a professor at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, stated that the these reform practices had “become hostage to major social forces.”

Other documentary evidence, such as articles in professional education journals, national conference programs, and other primary sources supports these claims and make it clear that some middle school reformers were driven to implement non-academic goals and aims.

Certainly, not all middle schools succumbed to these policies, but the influence of these changes appears to have seriously crippled our middle schools in their obligation to provide a solid academic foundation for all students.

Although these professors and others issued their warnings in the early 1990s, they were largely ignored until the dismal performance of American middle school students on an international achievement test became front-page news. The 1995 Third International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) compared the academic achievement of students from 41 countries. American fourth graders scored above the international average, but by eighth grade, the performance of U.S. students started to lag. Eighth grade students from 16 other countries registered performance that was higher than the United States in science. In math, the performance of students in 27 other countries was higher than that of U.S. students - a statistically significant difference in the case of 20 of these countries. And it should be noted, contrary to the claims of some, that this was not a case of average U.S. students being compared to only the top students in other nations.

The results came as a shock to many. A policy brief on the results issued by the U.S. Department of Education declared: “U.S. students don’t start out behind; they fall behind.” According to Dr. William Schmidt of Michigan State University, the U.S. research coordinator for the study: “I believe that one of the single most important policy implications of the TIMSS study is this precipitous decline in our international ranking from fourth to eighth grade.”

The realization that U.S. children appear to lose their achievement advantage once they leave elementary school was one reason officials decided to repeat the study in 1999 as the TIMSS-R (TIMSS-Repeat), with 38 countries participating and only eighth grade students being tested. The results were alarming.

Although the 1995 math scores of U.S. fourth graders were right at the international average, by 1999 their scores as eighth graders were 22 points below the international average, suggesting a sharp decline in performance. The results in science are even more dramatic. In 1995, U.S. fourth graders scored 28 points above the international average, but in 1999, the scores of eighth graders had dropped to nine points below the international average--a full 37-point decline.

Clearly, such massive declines in academic performance warranted serious study. A report by the United States Commission on National Security/21st Century, published seven months before the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, addresses this issue and echoes the sentiments of A Nation at Risk. Second only to securing the safety of American citizens on American soil came the recommendation that American education must be overhauled and strengthened:

The inadequacies of our systems of research and education pose a greater threat to U.S. national security over the next quarter century than any potential conventional war that we might imagine. American national leadership must understand these deficiencies as threats to national security….In the next quarter century, we will likely see ourselves surpassed, and in relative decline, unless we make a conscious national commitment to maintain our edge.

In the 1950s, there were calls for more adequate educational opportunities for high ability students in the United States. It took the 1957 launch of Sputnik by the USSR for many people to awake to the fact that our international technological edge was slipping, and this realization was followed by a concerted effort to provide enhanced opportunities for advanced students. Likewise, the September 11 terrorist attacks were preceded by a call for a renewed commitment to develop the talents of high ability students. Only time will tell if this call will be heeded.

The issue we now face is how to meet the challenge of making a “conscious national commitment” to rigorous academic quality when the reforms of the last few decades have had a negative impact on all of our children--especially those who are gifted, talented, or possessing above-average abilities.

The current standards and accountability movement offers hope for reversing these negative trends, provided that public education remains responsive to the priorities of the public. This book provides a chronology of the middle school movement, including its shift away from academics, and proposes solutions to this rising tide of mediocrity.