As we have seen, middle childhood is a time of great learning. Children worldwide learn whatever adults in their culture teach, and their brains are ready. Traditionally, they were educated at home, but now more than 95 percent of the world’s 7-year-olds are in school, with completion rates for primary education at 92 percent (World Bank, 2015).

A foundation of this is language, with many young children learning two or more languages and almost all mastering several codes. Therefore, to understand education, we begin with language and then focus directly on school.

As you remember, by age 6, children already know the basic vocabulary and grammar of their first language. Many also speak a second language fluently. These linguistic abilities allow the formation of a strong knowledge base, enabling children in middle childhood to learn thousands of new words and to apply complex grammar rules. Here are some specifics.

VOCABULARY As Piaget stressed, in middle childhood thinking becomes more flexible and logical. This allows children to understand prefixes, suffixes, compound words, phrases, and metaphors. For example, 2-year-olds know jump, but 10-year-olds also know jump start, jumpsuit, ski jump, and both meanings of jumper.

255

Metaphors, jokes, and puns are finally comprehended. Some jokes (“What is black and white and read all over?” “Why did the chicken cross the road?”) are funny only during middle childhood. Younger children don’t understand why anyone would laugh at them and teenagers find them lame and stale, but 6- to 11-year-olds delight in puns and unexpected answers to normal questions, as well as metaphors and similes.

Indeed, a lack of metaphorical understanding, even if a child has a large vocabulary, signifies cognitive problems (Thomas et al., 2010). Humor is a diagnostic tool; a child who takes a joke too literally may have difficulty with social interaction.

Metaphors are context-specific, building on the knowledge base. For bilingual children, understanding metaphors is difficult—and an important part of language mastery (Heredia & Cieślicka, 2015).

An American who lives in China noted phrases that U.S. children learn but that children in cultures without baseball do not, including “dropped the ball,” “on the ball,” “play ball,” “throw a curve,” “strike out” (Davis, 1999). If a teacher says “keep your eyes on the ball,” some immigrant children might not pay attention because they are looking for that ball.

CODE-SWITCHING One aspect of language that advances markedly in middle childhood is pragmatics, defined in Chapter 5. This practical knowledge of communication is evident in the contrast between talking formally to teachers and informally with friends. As children master pragmatics, they become more adept at making friends.

Shy 6-year-olds cope far better with the social pressures of school if they use pragmatics well (Coplan & Weeks, 2009). By contrast, children with autism spectrum disorder may learn to talk, but they are still very poor at pragmatics (Klinger et al., 2014).

Mastery of pragmatics allows children to change styles of speech, or “linguistic codes,” depending on their audience. Each code includes many aspects of language—tone, pronunciation, gestures, sentence length, idioms, vocabulary, and grammar. Code-switching is part of the social awareness that humans need to function well.

Sometimes the switch is between formal code (used in academic contexts) and informal code (used with friends); sometimes it is between standard (or proper) speech and dialect or slang (used on the street). Code in texting—numbers (411), abbreviations (LOL), emoticons (:-D), and spelling (r u ok?)—demonstrate pragmatics.

Some children do not know that slang, curses, and even contractions are not used in formal language. Everyone needs some language instruction because the logic of grammar (who or whom?) and of spelling (you) is impossible to deduce. Peers use the informal code; local communities transmit dialect, metaphors, and pronunciation; schools teach the formal code.

BILINGUAL EDUCATION Every nation includes many bilingual children; few of the world’s 6,000 languages are school languages. For instance, English is the language of instruction in Australia, but 17 percent of the children speak one of 246 other languages at home (Centre for Community Child Health & Telethon Institute for Child Health Research, 2009).

In the United States, almost 1 school-age child in 4 speaks a language other than English at home. Most of them also speak English well, according to their parents (see Figure 7.3). In addition, many other children speak a dialect of English that differs from school English. Teachers need to help children master the formal code, without making them feel that their home language is inferior.

256

If a child learns one language and then masters a second language, the brain adjusts. A study found no brain differences between monolingual children and bilingual children who spoke both languages from the first years of life.

However, from about age 4 through adolescence, the older children are when they learn a second language, the more likely their brains develop more cortical thickness on the left side (the language side) (Klein et al., 2014). This reflects what we know about language: School-age children can master a second language, but they must work at it.

In the United States, some children of every ethnicity are called ELLs, or English Language Learners, based on their ability to speak, write, and read English. Age, schooling, and SES all have an effect, but even high-SES children of Spanish-speaking homes are, on average, less proficient readers than European American children (Howard et al., 2014). Their learning style may clash with the school’s style, and their achievements may not be reflected in the standard tests.

Methods for teaching children the majority language range from immersion, in which instruction occurs entirely in the new language, to the opposite, in which children are taught in their first language until the second language can be taught as a “foreign” tongue (a rare strategy in the United States but common elsewhere). Between these extremes in the United States lies bilingual education, with instruction in two languages, and ESL (English as a second language), with all non-English speakers taught English in one multilingual group.

Each of these methods sometimes succeeds and sometimes fails. The research is not yet clear as to which approach is best at what age, although vast differences are apparent from one nation to another (Mehisto & Genesee, 2015). The success of any method is affected by the literacy of the home environment (frequent reading, writing, and listening in any language helps); the warmth, training, and skill of the teacher; and the national context.

257

In the United States, in the twenty-first century, many bilingual classes have been eliminated, for reasons less reflective of the minds of children than on the politics of adults (Menken & Solorza, 2014). We turn now to schools. As you will see, political controversies about bilingual education are only one example of many disputed ideas regarding education.

Everywhere, children are taught to read, write, and do arithmetic. Because of brain maturation and sequenced learning, 6-year-olds are not expected to multiply three-digit numbers or read paragraphs fluently out loud, but every nation teaches 10-year-olds to do so. [See At About This Time.] International research on economic growth suggests that better-educated adults become more productive workers (Hanushek & Woessmann, 2009).

DIFFERENCES BY NATION Although literacy and numeracy (reading and math, respectively) and educated workers are valued everywhere, curricula vary by nation, by community, and by school. These variations are evident in the results of international tests, in the mix of school subjects, and in the relative power of parents, educators, and political leaders.

258

Geography, music, and art are essential in some places, not in others. Half of all U.S. 18- to 24-year-olds say they had no arts education in childhood, either in school or anywhere else (Rabkin & Hedberg, 2011) (see Figure 7.4). By contrast, educators in Finland consider arts education essential in every school, with a positive impact on learning (Nevanen et al., 2014).

Educational practices differ even between nations that are geographically and culturally close, and from one region to another within nations. For example in Canada, children in the province of Quebec study science about half as much as those in Ontario (50 compared to 92 hours per year) (Snyder & Dillow, 2013).

International variations are vast in the hidden curriculum, which includes all the implicit values and assumptions evident is course offerings, schedules, tracking, teacher characteristics, discipline, teaching methods, sports competition, student government, extracurricular activities, and so on.

259

In the United States, the hidden curriculum is thought to be the underlying reason for a disheartening difference in how students respond if teachers offer special assistance. In one study, middle-class children were more likely to ask for help than lower class children, who feared they would be criticized (Calarco, 2014). The researcher concluded that divergent expectations benefited the middle-class students. Teachers need to help low-SES children directly, without criticism, not wait for the children to ask for help.

More generally, if teachers’ gender, ethnicity, or economic background is unlike that of the students, children may conclude that education is irrelevant for them. If the school has gifted classes, or if a charter school co-located in the school building has more computers or better lighting, the hidden message is that the rest of the students are less capable.

INTERNATIONAL TESTING Over the past two decades, more than 50 nations have participated in at least one massive international test of educational achievement. Science and math achievement are measured by Trends in Math and Science Study (TIMSS). The main test of reading is the Progress in International Reading Literacy Study (PIRLS). These tests have been given every few years since 1995, with East Asian nations ranking at the top.

Elaborate and extensive measures are in place to make the PIRLS and the TIMSS valid. For instance, test items are designed to be fair and culture-free, and participating children represent the diversity (economic, ethnic, etc.) of each nation’s children. Consequently, most social scientists respect the data gathered from these tests.

The tests are far from perfect, however. Designing test items that are equally challenging to every student in every nation is impossible. Should fourth-graders be expected to understand fractions, graphs, and simple geometry, or should the test examine only basic operations with whole numbers? Can specific questions be fair to every culture? The following item was used to test fourth-grade math:

Al wanted to find out how much his cat weighed. He weighed himself and noted that the scale read 57 kg. He then stepped on the scale holding his cat and found that it read 62 kg. What was the weight of the cat in kilograms?

This problem involves simple subtraction, yet 40 percent of U.S. fourth-graders got it wrong. Were they unable to subtract 57 from 62, or did they not understand the example, or did the abbreviation for kilograms confuse them because—unlike children in most nations—they are more familiar with pounds? On this item, children from Yemen were at the bottom, with 95 percent of them failing. Is that because few of them have cats for pets or weigh themselves on a scale? As you see, national and cultural contexts may affect test scores.

260

Many educators in the United States have tried to figure out what makes students in some nations do much better than those in others. A recent example is Finland, where scores have improved dramatically in the twenty-first century. Finland reformed their education system, abolishing ability-grouping in 1985 and changing pedagogy in 1994 to foster more cooperation and active learning (Sahlberg, 2011).

Those changes may be crucial, or the teachers themselves may be the pivotal difference. Finnish teachers have more autonomy to decide what to do and when to do it than is typical in other systems. Since the 1990s, they have also had more time and encouragement to work with colleagues than is true elsewhere.

Finland designs school buildings to foster collaboration, with comfortable teacher’s lounges (Sparks, 2012). That reflects a hidden curriculum regarding teachers. Many Finns want to be teachers, and teacher colleges are free, but only the top 3 percent of Finland’s high school graduates are admitted to them. They must study for five years before they are ready to teach the children.

261

GENDER DIFFERENCES IN SCHOOL PERFORMANCE In addition to marked national, ethnic, and economic differences, gender differences in international achievement scores are reported. The PIRLS finds girls ahead of boys in verbal skills in every nation by an average of 16 points, almost 4 percent. The female advantage is somewhat less in the United States (10 points), Canada, Germany, and the Netherlands.

Traditionally, boys were ahead of girls in math and science. However, the 2011 TIMSS reported that gender differences among fourth-graders in math have narrowed or disappeared, with the United States showing the greatest male advantage (9 points).

In many nations, girls are ahead in math, sometimes by a great deal, such as 14 points in Thailand. Such results lead to a gender-similarities hypothesis that males and females are similar on most test measures, with “trivial” exceptions (Hyde et al., 2008, p. 494).

Classroom performance during elementary school shows more gender differences than tests do. Girls have higher report card grades overall, including in math and science.

Then, at puberty, girls’ grades dip, especially in science. In college, fewer women choose STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, Math) majors, and even fewer pursue STEM careers. For instance, in the United States as in most nations, although women earn more college degrees than men, in 2011 only 22 percent of the doctorates in engineering were awarded to women (Snyder & Dillow, 2013).

Many explanations have been suggested. Analysts once blamed the female brain or body; currently the blame often falls on culture (Kanny et al., 2014).

Although most national tests indicate improvements in U.S. children’s academic performance over the past decade, when U.S. children are compared with children in other nations, they are far from the top. The rank of the United States is below several other nations, not only those in East Asia but also some in eastern and western Europe (see Tables 7.2 and 7.3).

262

THE ETHNIC AND ECONOMIC GAP A particular concern is the gap between children of various ethnic and income households, a gap much wider in the United States than in other nations, including some (e.g., Canada) that have more ethnic groups and immigrants than the United States.

Although many U.S. educators and political leaders (including all the recent presidents) have attempted to eradicate performance disparities linked to a child’s background, the gap between fourth-grade European Americans and their Latino and African American peers is as wide as it was 15 years ago (Snyder & Dillow, 2013). The gap between low- and high-SES students is widening, as is the gap between Native Americans and others (Maxwell, 2012).

One reason may be that each state and each school district in the United States determines school policy and funding. Local economic policies and investment in education are thought to be the reason that Massachusetts and Minnesota are consistently at the top of state achievement, and West Virginia, Mississippi, and New Mexico are at the bottom (Pryor, 2014). Similarly within states, the affluent suburbs tend to have smaller classes, bigger playgrounds, and more extracurricular activities than the cities.

263

NATIONAL STANDARDS International comparisons as well as disparities within the United States led to passage of the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) of 2001, a federal law promoting high national standards for public schools. One controversial aspect of the law is that it requires frequent testing to measure whether standards are being met. Low-scoring schools lose funding and may be closed; teachers may be dismissed based on student scores.

Most people agree with the NCLB goals (accountability and higher achievement) but not with the consequences (Frey et al., 2012). The NCLB troubles those who value the arts, social studies, or physical education because those subjects are often squeezed out by reading and math (Dee et al., 2013). Teacher evaluation and training has increased, but class size has not decreased. Many parents and educators are critical of tests because they undercut creative teaching and character building.

Since 1990, the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), a federally sponsored test of fourth-, eighth-, and twelfth-grade students, has measured achievement in reading, mathematics, and other subjects. Note that children are not tested every year by the NAEP. Fewer children are considered proficient on the NAEP than on state tests. For example in one recent year, New York’s state tests found 62 percent proficient in math, but the NAEP found only 32 percent (Martin, 2014).

Concern about variability in state tests and standards led the governors of all 50 states to designate a group of experts who developed a Common Core of standards, finalized in 2010, for use nationwide. The standards, more rigorous than most state standards, are quite explicit, with half a dozen or more specific expectations for achievement in each subject for each grade. (Table 7.4 provides a sample of the specific standards.)

As of 2013, forty-four states adopted this Common Core for both reading and math. Minnesota is a partial adopter, in reading but not in math, and five states—Texas, Virginia, Alaska, Indiana, and Nebraska—opted out of the Common Core.

Most teachers were initially in favor of the Common Core, but implementation has turned many against it. In 2013, a poll found only 12 percent of teachers were opposed to the Common Core; a year later, 40 percent were (Gewertz, 2014). Likewise, many state legislators as well as the general public have doubts about the Common Core. This is another example of a general finding: Issues regarding how best to teach children, and what they need to learn, are controversial among teachers, parents, and political leaders.

264

An underlying issue for almost any national or international school is the proper role of parents. In most nations, matters regarding public education—curriculum, funding, teacher training, and so on—are set by the central government. Almost all children attend their local public school, whose resources and standards are similar to those of the other schools in that nation. The parents’ job is to support the child’s learning, by checking homework and so on.

In the United States, however, local districts provide most of the funds and guidelines, and parents, as voters and volunteers, are often active within their child’s school. As part of the trend toward fewer children per family, parents focus more on each child. They evaluate schools, befriend their child’s teacher, join parent–teacher associations (PTAs), move to a particular school zone, switch from one school to another, vote for particular policies.

Most U.S. parents send their children to their zoned public school, but almost one-third do not. Other choices include a more distant public school, a public charter school, a private school, or home schooling (see Figure 7.5).

The existence of education options creates a problem for parents. It is hard to judge the quality of a school, partly because neither test scores nor the values a particular school may espouse correlate with the cognitive skills or learning potential that developmentalists recognize in middle childhood (Finn et al., 2014).

CHARTER SCHOOLS In the United States, charter schools are public schools funded and licensed by states or local districts. Typically, they also have private money and sponsors. They are exempt from some regulations, especially those negotiated by teacher unions (hours, class size, etc.), and they have some control over admissions and expulsions. They tend to be more ethnically and economically segregated and enroll fewer children with special needs (Stern et al., 2015).

On average, charter school teachers are younger and work longer hours than regular public school teachers, and school size is smaller than in traditional public schools. Perhaps 5 percent of U.S. children are in charter schools.

265

Some charter schools are remarkably successful; others are not (Peyser, 2011). A major criticism is that not every child who enters a charter school stays to graduate; one scholar reports that “the dropout rate for African–American males is really shocking” (Miron, quoted in Zehr, 2011, p. 1).

Overall, children and teachers leave charter schools more often than they leave regular public schools, a disturbing statistic. Substantial variation is evident from state to state and school to school (some schools are sought by many parents; some are avoided for good reasons), which makes it difficult to judge charters as a group.

PRIVATE SCHOOLS Private schools are funded by tuition, endowments, and church sponsors. Every nation has private schools. Traditionally in the United States, most private schools were parochial (church-related), organized by the Catholic Church to teach religion and to resist the anti-Catholic rhetoric of many public schools. Recently, many Catholic parochial schools have closed, while some other church-related or independent private schools have opened.

All told, 11 percent of students in the United States attend private schools. Economic factors are a major concern: Since private schools get very limited public funding, tuition costs mean that few private-school children are poor or even middle class.

To solve that disparity, some U.S. jurisdictions issue vouchers, which parents can use to pay tuition at a private school, including a church-sponsored one. Advocates say that vouchers increase competition. Vouchers are controversial because they mean less money for public schools and more tax money for religious institutions.

HOME EDUCATION Every child learns more at home than at school, but some parents avoid sending their children to any school. Instead, they choose home schooling, educating their children exclusively at home. Home schooling is an option in 35 of the 50 states in the United States, and in some—but not all—other nations. In the United States, home-schooled children must learn certain standard subjects (achieving benchmarks in reading, math, and so on), but each family decides specifics of curriculum, schedules, and discipline.

This choice is more common for younger children—6-year-olds more than 16-year-olds. About 2 percent of all U.S. children were home-schooled in 2003, about 3 percent in 2007, and perhaps 4 percent in 2012 (Snyder & Dillow, 2013; Ray, 2013).

Numbers are not expected to increase much more, however, because home schooling requires an adult at home, typically the mother in a two-parent family, who is willing to teach the children. The mother is not paid, so the father typically has a well-paying job. Such families are increasingly uncommon.

266

The major problem with home schooling is not academic (some home-schooled children have high test scores) but social: no classmates. To compensate, many parents plan activities with other home-schooling families. Home schooling is more common in the South and Northwest than in the Northeast or Midwest. Local popularity affects how readily parents can find other home-schooled children.

HOW TO DECIDE? The underlying problem with all these options is that people disagree about what is best and how learning should be measured. For example, many parents consider class size: They may choose private school because fewer students are in each class. Some parents want children to have homework, beginning in the first grade. Yet few developmentalists are convinced that small classes or homework are essential for learning during middle childhood.

Mixed evidence comes from nations where children score high on international tests. Sometimes they have large student–teacher ratios (Korea’s average is 28-to-1) and sometimes small (Finland’s is 14-to-1). Fourth-graders with no homework sometimes have higher achievement scores than those with homework (Snyder & Dillow, 2010). Many explanations are possible. Perhaps weaker students are assigned to smaller classes with more homework?

Who should decide what children should learn and how? Statistical analysis raises questions about home schooling and about charter schools (Lubienski et al., 2013; Finn et al., 2014), but as our discussion of NAEP, Common Core, TIMSS, and so on makes clear, the evidence allows many interpretations. As one review notes, “the modern day, parent-led home-based education movement . . . stirs up many a curious query, negative critique, and firm praise” (Ray, 2013, p. 261). Parents, politicians, and developmental experts agree that school is vital, but disagreement about teachers and curriculum—hidden or overt—abound.

267