As a middle-school teacher, I am often like the middle child in a large family. The expectations from my older and younger "siblings" at the high and elementary schools often conflict with what I believe is best for the unique age group I teach. In particular, some high school teachers are scornful about the types of books we teach, essays we assign, structure we provide, and methods for instruction. Books that aren't from the canon are deemed as fluff and the work we require isn't "challenging."
Although in my heart I know that my colleagues and I, who specialize in middle-level education, know what we're doing, it's nice to have support. I found that in a recent workshop
Depth of Knowledge is a lens through which an educator examines her/his questions, assignments, and assessments. Instead of using Bloom's Taxonomy, it condenses those famous verbs into four levels, which demand an increasing complexity of thinking.
I think that many people, including some of my siblings, believe that harder equates with more complex. For example, if I asked you to identify the name of a county that is adjacent to the one in which you live, you could easily do that. Then, if I asked you to name all the counties in your state, you may think that's more complex. However, the type of thinking that's required (recall) doesn't change; therefore, although the question is definitely harder, it's not more complex.
So I'm going to continue doing what I do: asking students to complete developmentally appropriate, complex, and engaging tasks that require them to think critically. Just because their assignments at other levels are hard doesn't mean they're complex.
