CURRICULUM DELIVERY for Years 7 to 10

Richard Ward University of Waikato

One of the effects of the 1989 Education Act and Tomorrow’s Schools in New Zealand was to allow schools to broaden their client base. This had a most significant impact in the area of schooling where there was the greatest possibility for change, the classes either side of the transition between primary or secondary schooling – the intermediate schools. Under the Act, primary schools had the option of recapitating to retain their old pupils. Secondary schools were able to extend downwards and offer a junior high school structure. But most restructuring was associated with the intermediate schools themselves.

Traditionally, intermediate schools have provided a two-year transition at Years 7 and 8 between primary and secondary education. The 1989 Education Act allowed them to extend this and develop three- to four-year middle schools, spanning Years 7 to 9 or 10.

The organisation of the middle schools became an extension of the traditional intermediate school format: largely homeroom based and under the care of one teacher, with some specialisation. This led to the opportunity for a new form of curriculum delivery at Years 9 and 10, one which challenged the traditional role of the secondary schools. Previously the first two years of secondary at Years 9 and 10 commonly emulated the structure of the upper part of secondary schools, so curriculum delivery was typically programmed around subject areas.

The establishment of seven middle schools in New Zealand has offered an alternative form of curriculum delivery. Their establishment has fuelled the debate about their ability to prepare pupils adequately, particularly at the Year 9 and 10 levels. The key areas of debate have included:

1.&&The provision of adequately qualified teachers

2.&&The adequacy of resources, including specialist rooms

3.&&The educational and social opportunities for Year 9 and 10 pupils in different educational settings

4.&&The effects of delayed transition to secondary school.

Generalist or specialist?

Common to all these is the notion of what is the “best” form of curriculum delivery and the extent to which it represents a generalist approach or a subject specialism approach. The emergence of middle schools in New Zealand has allowed the extension of a more generalist approach, often typical of Year 7 and 8 programmes, into Years 9 and 10. This type of programme utilises large blocks of time, in which core subjects are taught in an integrative way. Some specialism is offered, usually in the form of an options programme, and also specialist technicraft teachers. At the Year 9 and 10 levels, this contrasts with the more subject specialism approach offered by secondary schools, although secondary schools often include homeroom teachers for the core subjects at Years 9 and 10.

There has been an implication that programmes where integration is favoured may not be as effective as those who are able to take advantage of specialist teachers. For some it has even been implied that to be educationally viable, curriculum delivery for Years 9 and 10 at middle schools could be advantaged by emulating their secondary counterparts, as is often the case overseas, and adopting a subject-centred organisation.

The literature on curriculum delivery in New Zealand for Years 9 and 10 has acknowledged that differences exist between the delivery styles in primary and secondary schools, but it has offered little direction. McGee’s (1987) examination of linkages between primary and secondary schools drew attention to the need for teachers in secondary schools and their contributing schools to have a greater understanding of each other’s roles, including how the curriculum was taught. The review went no further than to acknowledge that there are differences between the two forms.

The Education Review Office (ERO) (1992) identified the adequacy and depth of coverage of curriculum as one concern in the provision of Year 7 to 10 education, although there is an unfortunate implication of a causal relationship in their assertion that “Boards which employ specialist teachers with qualifications specific to each essential learning area provide a balanced curriculum” (p.18). This view was not shared by Stewart and Nolan’s (1992) review of literature on middle schools; although making several recommendations for Year 7 to 10 curriculums, they merely suggested that teachers should have “the expertise and experience required” (p.66). More recently, a case study report by a research team from the University of Waikato (Strachan, McGee, Oliver, Ramsay, Ward and Winstone, 1995) identified implications associated with establishing a Year 7 to 10 school, and noted that the principals of the secondary schools to which the middle school under study would contribute viewed the availability of qualified specialist teachers as a major concern. This clearly indicated that some principals viewed curriculum delivery as more effectively done by specialist teachers.

Recent research has also suggested that catering for curriculum content requirements for emerging adolescents is best effected when both the education and the social requirements are addressed (Wood and Jones, 1997; Raebeck, 1998). At this stage of their development, pupils benefit from active rather than passive learning (Santrock, 1996; Ward, 1997a). For the emerging adolescent, active learning also implies a collaborative role in decisions about what is to be learned, as well as some ways of learning it. Supportive interaction with their peers and recognition of success also promote a positive concept of self (Beane, 1991; Santrock, 1996). In turn this provides motivation for further learning, particularly learning that has a personal relevance.

However, it is widely acknowledged that addressing the practicalities of providing for the “collegial” and “collaborative” needs of emerging adolescents becomes more challenging with the increasing size of the institution. Large secondary schools, by the very nature of their size, often adopt a subject-orientated organisation. This is reflected in organisational features such as a structural timetable, specialist rooms and assessment for qualifications. It also reflects the traditional change in education at about age 13 from a nurturing model to a more disciplined and functional model.

A corollary of this is that if a subject-oriented organisation ensures that a student at Year 13 is knowledgeable in particular curriculum areas, then the process to attain this is best begun when the pupil enters secondary school at Year 9. Most secondary school Year 9 programmes usually include organisational elements that become more strongly featured as the pupil progresses through the school (Ward, 1997b).

How students see their learning environment

One study that addressed the preferred form of curriculum delivery was associated with the development of a middle school in Hamilton, New Zealand. The study focused on a class of students and their perceptions of their learning environments as they moved through Years 9 and 10 at a middle school and into Year 11 at a secondary school (Ward, 2001).

As the study progressed, the group also included those who returned to the middle school from other secondary schools. At the Year 11 level, the comments of those pupils who had transferred to secondary school at the end of Year 10 were also sought. An additional inclusion was a group of 16 parents who had children at both middle and secondary schools for Years 9 and 10.

The research methodology was qualitative, largely based on interviews with pupils, teachers and parents. This was supported by pre-transfer and post-transfer Q-Sort and Picture Interpretation surveys with pupils in the sample class.

In the case of the Q-Sort survey, at the end of their Year 10, pupils were asked to rank a series of items about their perceptions of their academic and social development. Additionally, a Picture Interpretation survey invited the pupils to project themselves into school settings and relate what they thought members in a series of pictures might be saying or thinking. The surveys were also administered one month after transition into the new secondary schools at Year 11.

Participants in the middle school study clearly favoured the more integrated approach to curriculum delivery. For the pupils, the best features of curriculum delivery were associated with the homeroom teacher having a detailed knowledge of their abilities in each subject.

Ongoing interviews with the pupils revealed their appreciation of being able to explore a subject largely without time restraints, and to integrate one subject with another. A study of the Waikato River, for example, included dimensions of Social Studies, History, Maths, Conservation, Literature and Art. Making study choices within a theme was also appreciated. For example, one pupil chose to present an illustrated account of the changing vegetation cover in the river valley, over time. However, forced or unauthentic teacher-initiated integration was not valued by the pupils.

After transition to secondary school, the (now) Year 11 pupils noticed that their study included fewer choices and more copying of notes. Scholastic progress previously characterised by descriptive terms become more comparative and ranking-based. Subjects were treated as discrete disciplines and more individual effort was expected.

Post-transfer Q-Sort and Picture Interpretation surveys supported these views. Within the themes of schoolwork, relationship with teachers, school organisation and social pre-development, pupil pre-transfer surveys indicated greatest satisfaction with post-schoolwork and relationship with teachers. Post-transfer surveys reflected a diminished confidence in schoolwork and a greater concern with social relationships. While this may in part be associated with adolescence (Santrock, 1996), a greater confidence in the more nurturing form of curriculum delivery was clearly favoured.

This was also expressed in interviews with those who returned to the middle school from secondary school. In part this was reflected in pre- and post-transfer perceptions of the role of the teacher. Pupils’ pre-transfer comments clearly favoured their teacher’s knowledge of their abilities and interests. Post-transfer results indicated a more distant teacher relationship with pupils, in favour of subject knowledge.

Teacher and parent views

After experimenting with a variety of forms of organisation, such as each teacher taking responsibilities for a subject across three classes, the teachers at the middle school under study favoured an integrative approach because it allowed flexibility of subject application. The use of large units of time, of between one and two hours, in which to offer the core subjects favoured being able to follow interests that emerged from class lessons. At the Year 7-10 level, the teachers did not significantly support the need for specialist rooms.

The middle school study included a sample of 16 parents, each of whom had one child attending the middle school for Years 9 and 10 and one at secondary school. All the parents valued the middle school teachers’ knowledge of their pupils. Most felt that the large-scale organisation necessary to secondary schools compromised subject teachers’ knowledge of their pupils. Two had experienced confusion of student names at secondary school parent interviews.

They also drew unfavourable comparisons in terms of access to teachers. Contact with subject teachers at secondary schools was frequently frustrated by levels of access; in comparison, the middle school principal and teacher appeared to be readily available. Most parents saw this as a factor of school size.

Conclusion: Support for integration

The middle school years lie in an uneasy state between the “nest” philosophy and specialisation. A junior high school model of secondary education suggests a downward extension of the subject-oriented model, typical of most secondary schools. The advent of the four-year middle school has allowed the development of an alternative philosophy, based on the extension of the homeroom philosophy into the first years of what has traditionally been secondary education.

Middle school programmes tend to be characterised by continuing the learner-centred approach of primary schools, in an environment where the core subjects are taught in an integrative way, using large units of time, in a flexible manner. More specialist pursuits can be catered for in an Options Programme.

The middle school study clearly indicated favourable support for a more integrative approach from pupils, teachers and parents. Further research is now needed to determine if this greater satisfaction with schooling translates into higher retention rates for these students and, in time, to greater success in the attainment of qualifications at the senior level.

References

Beane, J.A. (1991). The middle school: The natural home for integrated curriculum. Educational Leadership, pp. 9-13.

Cooney, M. (1996). The middle schools question. STA News 7.

Education Review Office (1994). Form 1 to 4. Issues for students. National Education Review Reports No. 5. Wellington: ERO.

Lange, D. (1988). Tomorrow’s schools: The reform of education administration in New Zealand. Wellington: Government Printer.

McGee, C.F. (1987). Crossing the divide: The transition from primary to secondary school in New Zealand. Wellington: Ministry of Education.

Raebeck, B. (1998). Transforming middle schools – A guide to whole-school change. Lancaster: Techmic Publishing.

Santrock, J.W. (1996). Child development. Dubuque, IA: Brown & Benchmark.

Stewart, D. & Nolan, S. (1992). The middle school: Essential education for emerging adolescents. Palmerston North: ERDC Press.

Strachan, J., McGee, C., Oliver, D., Ramsay, P., Ward, R. & Winstone, K. (1995). Middle schools: A case study. Hamilton, NZ: School of Education, University of Waikato.

Tait, J. (1996). Middle schools. New Zealand Education Review, October, pp.11-17.

Ward, R.S. (1997a). Curriculum delivery in middle schools. New Zealand Principal, March, p.27.

Ward, R.S. (1997b). The middle school dilemma: Issues about curriculum delivery for Years 7 – 10. Teachers and Curriculum 1, pp.53-56.

Ward, R.S. (2001). The development of a middle school. Unpublished PhD thesis, School of Education, University of Waikato.

Wood, D.K. & Jones, J.P. (1997). When affect informs instruction. Childhood Education, pp.292-296.