RUNNING HEAD: The Connection Question 1

Westside Middle School, D201:

The Connection Question

Elizabeth Meyers

Nebraska Wesleyan University

The Connection Question 2

Westside Middle School (WMS) is the sole middle school in District 66. According to the most recent demographic

data available from the district, WMS served 960 7th and 8th grade students in the 2017-2018 school year. (Bone and

Thompson, 2017) One of 14 instructional buildings in Westside Community Schools in the heart of Omaha, WMS benefits

from a longstanding positive reputation and support from community members and the local educational community. Once

colloquially known as “Hollywood High,” Westside High School at one time had the reputation not only of being a high

performing school, and a building where students were offered premium learning opportunities, but also boasted a high

socio-economic status across the student body and the surrounding community. This reputation has permeated all of

Westside Community Schools (WCS), despite current membership numbers that tell a more complicated, and diverse story.

Like all surrounding districts, WCS has faced significant budgetary constraints in the past few years. An increase in student

diversity, both racially, socio-economically, and in student learning abilities within the student body have created challenges

for staff, students, and community members alike as we work together to create a new community, a new “Westside Way.”

In the 2017-2018 school year, WMS was comprised of 466 7th graders and 494 8th graders. 48% (459) of these

students were female, 52% (501) male. The student body is predominantly white (71%), which is consistent with overall

district numbers. The remaining student body is comprised of 10% Black or African American, 8% Hispanic, 7% mixed

descent, 3% Asian, and 1% American Indian/Alaska Native or Native Hawai’ian/Pacific Islander. 35% of all students at

WMS were eligible to receive free or reduced meal services, 14% were eligible to receive Special Education services, just

over 10% were eligible to receive Exceptional Youth (Gifted Education) services, and less than 2% of all students at WMS

received English Language Learners’ services. (Bone and Thompson, 2017)

The seventh-grade language arts staff at WMS finds themselves in a unique position among staff. Instead of 1, 44-

minute class period, each section of language arts for students and instructors is comprised of 2, 44-minute class periods. As

a result, class sections are smaller than other courses, and the teacher’s total case load is significantly smaller than other

teachers. For the 2018-2019 school year, Ms. Meyers teaches 3 double blocked sections of 7th grade language arts, and one

homeroom section, creating a total student load of 51 students. Her period 2-3 class is comprised of 15 students: 8 girls and 7

boys, with one student receiving English Language Learner support and one student with services provided via 504 plan for

ADHD. Her period 4-5 class is comprised of 20 students: 14 girls and 6 boys, with one student receiving services via 504

plan for ADHD, and one students receiving Speech and Language support services. Ms. Meyers’ homeroom period is a

study hall and student relationship building course comprised of students who are a part of her other class sections. No

notable instructional responsibilities are present during this class period. Her period 8-9 class is comprised of 16 students: 5
The Connection Question 3

girls, and 11 boys, all in the general education program. Due to lack of support staff, students are often grouped into specific

teams for services to be provided as efficiently as possible with utmost fidelity. For the past two years, Ms. Meyers’ team has

specifically served life skills students, and those with 504 plans, as Special Educators are paired up with other teams.

In room D201, the smallest general education classroom at WMS, students enter into semi-darkness. Overhead

lights are rarely used. Instead, Ms. Meyers utilizes indirect natural light from the south wall of the classroom. Her classroom

features five incandescent lamps around the room to provide a softer, warmer lighting environment. The 21 desks are often

arranged in a U shape toward the front board, which allows space for two small group spaces that feature coffee tables,

bookshelves, easy chairs, pillows and blankets for student use. Six wobble stools are available for students who prefer this to

a traditional school desk chair. The west side of the room is dominated by a full-sized, yellow-paned garage door that opens

to the team common area. This common area is utilized by all core teachers and students on the team, where coffee tables,

high-top and standard-height tables are available for independent and group study. When opened, the garage door provides

an extended classroom space and allows student-created origami cranes to “fly” from the strings affixed to the door. The

eastern front corner of the room features a computer cubby for student computers/cases to be stored during class. A 1-to-1

school, all students and staff at WMS are provided with MacBook Air laptops. Each room also features a mounted projector

and speakers in the ceiling.

Students in Ms. Meyers’ classes encounter a consistently-structured environment. The first five minutes of the first

period of the day is reserved for a daily oral language warm-up. Students complete the 5 grammar and writing style questions

individually and in silence, during which, Ms. Meyers takes care of attendance, getting missed work to students who have

been absent, dealing with late passes, checking homework completion, etc. Warm-ups are scored together daily and

submitted weekly. After the warmup, students and teacher review the daily agenda and any homework that will be assigned

from the posting on the white board, ensuring students have gathered the necessary materials for the day from the On Your

Desk section of the board, before continuing with the days lesson and/or activities. At the end of the first class period,

students take a four-minute “break” during the passing period. Students often choose to stay in the room to complete a task,

or to prep for the next class period. The second class period begins in a similar fashion to the first, except that students focus

on vocabulary lessons instead of grammar.

Students are permitted and encouraged to move about the room as they are comfortable to complete work during

“independent work time.” Many students take advantage of these opportunities to claim ownership of their learning and their

space. A bell system is used to signal transitions: one ring signifies the end of an activity or announcement; two rings
The Connection Question 4

indicates there is one minute left in class. When the end of class bell rings, students are encouraged to pack up, return any

materials borrowed or moved, and to prepare to move to their next class period. So far, Ms. Meyers has elected to keep

students within the classroom walls, instead of opening the garage door and expanding the classroom space due to a lack of

adherence to classroom procedures for keeping the classroom clean, returning borrowed materials, etc. That said, she

believes strongly that encouraging student choice in where they learn and how they move their own bodies in the classroom

space, and how they engage and reflect on their own learning is vital.

Ms. Meyers’ students struggle to connect with each other in meaningful ways during class conversations and

structured discussions. They are very capable of chatting about matters of little importance, however, when tasked with a

pre-determined topic, students disconnect from each other both physically and mentally. Students turn silent, looking down

at their desks, responding only when the teacher calls on them after raising their hands, despite encouragement to “talk to the

humans” around the room and to “pay attention with your face.” Once discussion does begin, students struggle to connect

their thoughts to others’. Instead of building on each other’s ideas or asking questions of each other, they offer what Ms.

Meyers calls “grocery list” opinions:

STUDENT 1: “I think the climax of ‘Rikki Tikki Tavi’ is where Rikki Tikki Tavi kills Nag.”

MS. MEYERS: “That’s interesting. What do you guys think? Do you agree with what [STUDENT 1] has said?”

STUDENT 2: “I think the climax is when Nagaina goes after the family on the porch.”

MS. MEYERS: “Thanks, [STUDENT 2]. It seems like you disagree with [STUDENT 1], why might that be? Can

you build on what [they] said and connect it to your thoughts?

STUDENT 2: “I just think it’s when she threatens the family.”

This style of student discussion is not uncommon for first semester 7 th grade students. It is most pronounced in Ms. Meyers’

8-9 class, where disjointed comments and lack of engagement in the class community are especially challenging.

This group performs at or above grade level, with the average Lexile score of the class resting comfortably at 1072.

They are high achieving in class work, and for the most part, do not struggle with common middle school work completion

issues. However, the group dynamic of this class is dominated by 4 boys who follow each other from class to class for the

bulk of their day. They are friends, all highly competent in 7th grade English skills, and they love to give each other feedback

on every aspect of their days. That said, when their feedback to each other is less than constructive, it negatively affects the

entire class. Without training and practice in joining the conversation, supporting their opinions, allowing others to speak,

and providing constructive feedback appropriately, other students may be less willing to contribute to class discussions.
The Connection Question 5

Moreover, all students need practice and a formal structure for providing feedback to each other in a productive way that will

help all students – not just the loud ones – to ensure their contributions are heard and are considered by other members of the

class. Without specific learned skills and practice, there is a good chance the students in 8-9 will remain disconnected from

each other.

A major tenant of the seventh-grade language arts curriculum is student-led discussion. There is no required nor

consistent methodology used across the nine seventh-grade language arts teachers at WMS. Ms. Meyers has utilized the

Socratic Circle method for teaching the skills necessary to hold high-quality student-led discussions. This method relies on

individual preparation before the discussion, and a two-circle method of class participation. One group of students actively

discusses the work prepared as a second group of students and teacher observes the conversation and provide written

feedback. After a pre-set time period, feedback is given from the outer circle of students to the inner circle before the groups

switch places. When done repeatedly over time, this method has provided a structured environment where Ms. Meyers’

students have honed student-led discussion skills in the past, particularly those skills that encourage connections and

conversation building as a group. The connection question remains: how might Ms. Meyers’ use technology in conjunction

with current methodology to help her students understand their role in a student-led discussion and encourage a better whole

group dynamic.

One of the most difficult aspects of encouraging 12-14 year old students to be bold enough to share their thoughts in

a whole-class discussion is emphasizing and prioritizing the feedback be as judgement-free as possible. Pre-teaching and

practicing the Socratic Circle style of student-led discussion is vital. However, on the day, small strategy changes and

technology can be used to help. Instead of creating the classic two-circle approach to the Socratic Circle, Ms. Meyers would

like to focus on one large discussion that allows for longer conversation time, and the potential for more depth of thought.

Removing the outer and inner circles should eliminate the immediate reminder of judgement from discussion participants.

That said, feedback is an important tool to improving student-led discussion. By filming student led-conversations, Ms.

Meyers hopes to create an audio/visual file where students are able to look back after the fact, to assess their own

performance as well as look at the group dynamic as a whole. This video file will be shared with all students, and class time

will be provided to review the film individually and complete a reflection sheet. By seeing and listening to the discussion

from a removed position, the hope is that students will be able to identify personal strengths and weaknesses, as well as see

their role in the way the group functioned during the discussion. A second discussion will be held to discuss the group

dynamics and share their feedback for what went well for the group and what the class community can do together to grow
The Connection Question 6

for the next discussion. Ms. Meyers hopes students will be able to see their contributions in a new light, and ultimately, work

together toward the success of the entire group.

In a school district, and a specific classroom of students, where changing populations and cultural attitudes have the

potential to prioritize disconnection and judgement, utilizing technology to foster objective feedback and self-criticism has

the potential to create a safer space for students to share their opinions. It is Ms. Meyers’ intention to utilize this technology

to enhance her student-led discussion instruction throughout the school year. Focusing specifically on the success of the

group over any individual contribution should benefit the classroom community as a whole. When the whole is addressed,

not in contrast to the individual, but in conjunction with it, students benefit both in and out of the classroom.

Reference

Bone, A., & Thompson, M (2017). Selected Demographic and Statistical Data. Unpublished manuscript.