Hutchins 1

To: Dr. Superintendent Roberts

From: Stefania Hutchins

Re: District analysis

Date: April, 2019

Thank you for the opportunity to be part of a district team that has been asked to research

a current issue that is a challenge for our district. I reviewed the topic that our focus group

identified: interdisciplinary team teaching in 6th grade at Seneca Middle School. In response to

your request, we followed the Bolman and Deal Four Frames analysis and included a research-

based response to this issue.

As indicated, I have included information that describes the district, the issue at hand, and

the implications as evident in each of the Four Frames. A reference list is also included that cites

all research used to defend the suggestions related to this issue.

It is a privilege to be able to look in-depth at an issue that is a challenge for our district,

and to provide alternative means for a resolution that can move us forward in a positive

direction. I look forward to the December meeting in which we will present our responses in a

public forum.
 Hutchins 2

Demographic Introduction

Seneca Middle School is located in the suburbs of Macomb County, north of Hall Road

and east of Heydenreich. Seneca’s student body is made up of 1,371 students, twenty-five

percent of whom are considered at-risk for grades, not meeting proficiency standards, and/or

poor attendance. Nine percent of students are black, four percent of students are Asian, four

percent are Hispanic/Latino, four percent are multi-racial, and less than one percent are

Hawaiian/Pacific Islander or American/Alaskan Native. Twelve percent of students accept free

or reduced lunch. Seneca is the largest of four middle schools in the district.

The Issue

Students from three district elementary schools feed into Seneca. Seneca offers many

resources for new 6th graders. At the end of 5th grade, students visit the middle school during the

school day. They meet the principal, the counselor, and tour the school with a 6th grade guide.

The week before school begins in the fall, Seneca hosts Jaguar Day. This is time for new 6th

graders to pick up their schedules, forms, locker combination, and student ID card. They may

acquaint themselves with the building and access their lockers.

Students entering middle school are often anxious. They are transitioning from six years

of being in a self-contained classroom with their belongings and a restroom in the same room to

a new school where they are changing classrooms and teachers every hour. They are

overwhelmed with remember which items need to be brought to each class, the many unfamiliar

faces of their classmates, remembering each teacher’s name and policies, and remembering their
 Hutchins 3

schedule and locker information. They often struggle to find their place and make connections

with teachers and peers.

Up until 2016, Seneca Middle School eased this difficult transition for elementary

students by offering interdisciplinary teaming. Each new 6th grader was placed on a team of two

neighboring teachers. Each teacher taught two academic subjects and the students would stay

together and spend a two-hour block with each teacher. The two-hour block allowed teachers to

know their students on a deeper level as well as students forming more meaningful relationships

with each other. This arrangement fostered a sense of belonging and safety with the students, as

well as a supportive community of learners.

One reason the district chose to adopt a traditional six-period day was a budget cut. Less

teachers are required when students visit a different teacher per subject. Classes would be maxed

at thirty-four students. The other reason was the increasingly rigorous teacher evaluation system

and the mandated student growth goal. The district believed if teachers were teaching one subject

instead of two, then they would be more likely to master the curriculum, which would lead to

students showing more academic growth.

I propose to reinstate interdisciplinary teaming for 6th graders entering middle school. It

has been found that through interdisciplinary teaming, students form stronger connections to

their school and to their teachers, which in turn raises achievement (Wallace 2007).

There are several factors to consider with the reimplementation of interdisciplinary

teaming in middle school. This memo will include the analysis of reinstating teaming in 6th grade
 Hutchins 4

at Seneca Middle School through the human resources frame, political frame, symbolic frame,

and structural frame.

Human Resource. Analogy: families

Description: The human resource frame emphasizes relationships and empowering people. If

students feel valued, accepted, and connected to their environment, then they will be motivated

to achieve. Interdisciplinary teaming creates an environment where students collaborate with

each other, as well as with their teachers. Teachers act at facilitators, and students learn through

critical thinking and discovery (Thornton 1998). The idea of teachers sharing the same students

invites opportunities for collaboration in designing engaging, cross-curricular lessons; multiple

perspectives when discussing student progress discuss students’ progress and intervention needs;

and the ability to make scheduling adjustments to accommodate student needs.

Concerns from this perspective include:

 Teachers may find that teaching more than one subject is too much work.

 Teacher collaboration may prove difficult if teaching styles and personalities are not a

good fit.

 Teachers may prefer the independence of planning alone without the pressure of

coordinating interdisciplinary lessons.

Symbolic: Analogy: temples

Description: Success from the perspective of the symbolic frame, is rooted in culture, rituals,

spirit, and faith. The increased collaboration by staff invited by teaming supports the mission
 Hutchins 5

statement of the district: “Inspiring and empowering learners to achieve a lifetime of success”

(https://www.chippewavalleyschools.org/our-district/). The word “team” invites a spirit of

collaboration, looking out for one another, and interdependence. With interdisciplinary teaming,

students should feel a sense of belonging through the community of learners.

Concerns from this perspective include:

 Teachers may desire autonomy and independence with their curriculum. Planning and

delivering a interdisciplinary unit could present a challenge if one teacher falls behind

with instruction. Many teachers appreciate the freedom to extend or shorten a unit or

lesson.

 Teachers may not take advantage of all the opportunities for collaboration due to time

constraints.

 Establishing a team culture and goals could be challenging when deciding on classroom

norms and expectations. There is the potential for conflict if a teacher and his/her partner

have varying philosophies regarding grading and behavior policies in the classroom.

Structural: Analogy: factories

Description: The structural frame uses logic and facts to make decisions. Responsibilities are

allocated, and rules, policies, and guidelines are in place. The structure of interdisciplinary

teaming provides opportunities to adjust the schedule of academic classes based on the needs of

the team.
 Hutchins 6

Concerns from this perspective include:

 Teachers may be inflexible about scheduling.

 Rigidity in team rules and policies may causes teachers to appear controlling and too firm

to students.

Political: Analogy: jungle

Description: This frame emphasizes power and competition. Decisions are made through

negotiations, and typically, individuals look out for their own best interest versus looking out for

the common good. By implementing teaming, student achievement may increase, pushing

schools towards meeting school improvement goals related to achievement.

Concerns from this perspective include:

 Teachers may struggle with power when making decisions for the team.

 Students may perceive teachers as intimidating due to rules and expectations, which

could hamper their social-emotional well-being, which in turn affects academic

performance.

Conclusion

After analyzing interdisciplinary teaming in 6th grade through Bolman & Deal’s four

frames, I feel it is in the best interest of our students and staff to reinstate this model for the

2019-2020 school year. Teachers could be paired together based on their content-area

certifications. Classrooms could be moved so that teachers teaming together would have a

common dividing wall that could be opened for large-group activities. Teamed teachers could
 Hutchins 7

have common planning time to prepare lessons and to meet with or call parents. Through the

sense of belonging realized through the team community, as well as students remaining with the

same group of peers for all academic classes, student achievement should increase. Teachers

should experience less stress and reduced isolation through collaboration and the support they

receive from their teaching partner. Additionally, parents should feel more comfortable with their

student’s transition from elementary to middle school due to the structure provided by multi-

disciplinary teaming. I am confident this will be a positive change for the district and our

students.
 References

 
Bolman, L., & Deal, T. (2008).  Reframing organizations: Artistry, choice, and leadership

San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass

Thornton, Holly J. (1998). A team community redefines teaching and learning, Middle

School Journal, 30:1, 25-34, DOI: 10.1080/00940771.1998.11494560

Wallace, J. J. (2007). Effects of Interdisciplinary Teaching Team Configuration upon the Social

Bonding of Middle School Students. Research in Middle Level Education Online, 30:5,

1–18. https://doi-org.huaryu.kl.oakland.edu/10.1080/19404476.2007.11462038