The possibilities and limitations of educational policy: AMLE’s national policy agenda for middle grades

This past November, the Association for Middle Level Education (AMLE) celebrated its 50th anniversary during its annual conference in National Harbor, Maryland. It was a festive event filled with electric energy, engaging educational presentations, a dynamic keynote talk by Jason Reynolds about the power and essential elements of meaningful relationships, outstanding musical performances by middle grade students, and cheerful reconnections with colleagues. Without a doubt, AMLE 50 was one of the most memorable conferences that we have attended, largely because this golden anniversary conference also inspired a lot of reflective moments connecting the past to the present, particularly for those of us who have been members of the association from the National Middle School Association (NMSA) days.

Indeed, a lot of progress has been made over those 50 years around advocacy for and research on young adolescents. However, there is still much work that needs to be done to support the personal and academic success of every young adolescent. It is with this understanding that we are excited that AMLE released A National Policy Agenda for Middle Grades to coincide with the conference and their 50th anniversary. The release outlines seven proposed federal priorities for middle level education. In response to the release, this special issue of Middle School Journal (MSJ) is compilation of invited pieces from folx involved in middle level education. The invited educators were asked to craft responses to the policy agenda using one or more of the following prompts:

• Why is there a need for a middle level education policy agenda?

• What is my honest reaction to the content of the policy agenda given my investment in middle level education?

• While highlighting the strengths of the agenda as it’s currently written, what do you think should be added to the next iteration of it?

• How do I see myself as a middle level educator and/or the identities of my students represented in this policy agenda?

• What are my recommendations for implementing this policy agenda?

With the understanding that any progress made must be a collective effort, this issue features voices from administrators, teachers, preservice teachers, and teacher educators. As middle level advocates we also know that we must always center the voices of those with whom we advocate. Therefore, we are also excited to feature two 9th grade students’ reflections on the policy agenda. These two students were given the agenda and asked to reflect on the following prompts:

• What would you want policymakers to change about your middle school?

• What would you want policymakers to know about middle schoolers?

• Do you think that this policy agenda represents your identity or needs as a middle school student? How or how not?

As you read the policy agenda and the responses included from the collective middle level education community, we also invite you and your students to reflect on these same prompts. We then challenge you to take it one step further and determine how you can move those reflective thoughts into action within the classroom, school building, district office, local community, state, and/or at the national level. While the policy agenda represents federal priorities, we know that any substantial change in society does not occur in a silo.

History tells us that a policy agenda symbolizes the beginning of transformative work by providing direction, goals, and aims. In addition, woefully, our past tells us that even when laws and policy changes have occurred, we must remain vigilant. While much progress has been made in the middle school movement (Schaefer et al., 2016), we know that states are currently removing middle grade licensure, as most recently seen in Ohio. Furthermore, it only takes reviewing one of the most well-known education cases, Brown v. Topeka Kansas Board of Education, to realize that a federal change in law does not necessarily lead to immediate change. While the outcome of that case ended legalized racial segregation in schools, we know that well into the late ‘60s and early ‘70s, many schools in the South refused to abide by the federal law and remained segregated (Reardon & Owens, 2014). Garcia’s (2020) research found that schools today are still heavily racially segregated and argued that “the promise of integration and equal opportunities for all black [sic] students remains an ideal rather than a reality” (p. 1). As we reflect on the release of the National Policy Agenda for Middle Grades, the legacy of the Brown v. Board of Education case can serve as a cautionary frame of reference.

While the middle grade policy agenda has several important federal priorities that if enacted hold significant promise for middle level education, we know that these priorities within itself are not enough. In particular, Brown v. Board of Education tells us that if we want to see meaningful change in supporting the educational success of young adolescents, there must be a shift in the dominant discourse on how we actually think and speak about young adolescents. Many scholars argue that the promise of Brown was unfilled because of the way that racism is woven into the framework of US society (Bell, 2004). As George (2020) argued “efforts to advance racially integrated education primarily through reliance on federal courts have been largely unsuccessful due to the inability of federal courts to recognize contemporary forms of racial discrimination” (George, p. 189). Though we are not equalizing the harsh experiences of African Americans in society to the experiences of young adolescents, some of the racist rhetoric of being lazy, irrational, wild, and lacking the ability to think in complex ways that has been used across United States history to justify the subordination of African Americans in society runs parallel to the biased and deficit beliefs that society shares about young adolescents. In essence, similar to Brown, regardless of what middle grade federal priorities are in place, we will never have an education system that truly works for young adolescents without changing how we think about young adolescents. Society must see young adolescents as the intelligent, socially minded, thoughtful, insightful, and determined humans that they are in the present. Without first centering the humanity of young adolescents, we will never create an education system worthy of their greatness no matter how many federal priorities are implemented.

The second lesson from Brown that we would like to take up is the deprofessionalization of educators. One of the most detrimental legacies of the Brown decision was the displacement of highly qualified Black teachers and administrators in the public school system (Peters, 2019). This is a story that I, Lisa, know all too well from firsthand narratives from my mother who started her teaching career in South Carolina in the ‘60s. When her school was integrated, similar to the documented experiences of other Black educators, she was no longer allowed to teach the honor’s math course within her school even though she had a teaching certificate and a Bachelor of Science degree in Mathematics. This resulted in my mother deciding to leave that school for another school though the harsh reality is that many educators left the profession altogether. This is especially true of many Black administrators who were no longer allowed to serve in leadership roles in an integrated school. Both of these types of scenarios led to a significant void of Black educators within schools. Fenwick (2022) stated:

Left behind were knowledgeable school leaders who could have shaped district policies and practices to make real the ideal of integrated schools … Furthermore, the widespread displacement of educators during these years has been documented to have dissuaded an entire next generation of young Black people from entering the teaching profession in the first place. (p. 134)

As we think about the national policy agenda, we also must be cognizant of the important role that middle level educators play in the actualization of successful middle schools. Arguably outside of parents, middle grade educators are the ones who understand the genius that young adolescents hold the most. Simply put, middle grade teachers’ voices and expertise matter. However, we are also in a context where the national teacher shortage and the deprofessionalization of educators have taken center stage (Will, 2019). To have an office at the United States Department of Education that is dedicated to elevating the middle grades as advocated for in priority one of the policy agenda is valuable. However, if the individuals in that office do not consider middle grades educators’ input, there is the potential consequence of creating policies and practices that are harmful by running counter to their intention of supporting positive outcomes for young adolescents. Such an outcome could also work to further isolate middle grade educators from the profession, though in less involuntary ways than Black educators experienced during post Brown.

We share these cautionary points not to downplay the importance of and potential impact of AMLE’s National Policy Agenda for Middle Grades. Contrarily, it is indeed because of the significance of this document that we highlight the possible perils that come with advocating for federal policies as a solution to complex issues. We want the agenda to be successful and highly believe in the seven proposed federal priorities in advocacy for middle level education. However, we also know it is myopic not to contextualize the environment in which AMLE’s national policy agenda was formed and the ways that it might limit the transformative intended positive outcome for middle grade education. Therefore, as you engage in this special issue of MSJ, we hope this framing of the policy agenda will ultimately help you critically explore how to move from this written document to a living document in its most revolutionary way. Only then can we create the schools that all young adolescents deserve.