middle-level education: gateway or gap? what have we learned about effective programs and practices?
TRANSCRIPT
Middle-Level Education: Gateway or Gap?
What have we learned about effective programs and
practices?
Purpose
What are the reasons for the middle school?
What are the elements that contribute to a successful middle school experience for students?
What is the evidence?
1961
1900-1910
1910-55
1956
1957
Charles Eliot & G. Stanley Hall
JHS “Movement”
“The Modern Junior High”
“Crisis in the Classroom”
1985-89
1961
1960-70
1977
1984
2000 -
Tanner’s Research on Adolescent Development
Alexander & Eichorn
NMSA
The Major Policy Statements
Standards & Assessments
“A Nation at Risk”
Middle Level Recommendations
1985-89
NMSA"This We
Believe
NYSRegents Policy
Statement
Carnegie"Turning Points"
NASSP -1985
Regents Policy Statement (1989)
…what is provided in the elementary or high school grades is not necessarily appropriate for children in the middle grades.”
Developmental Needs of Young Adolescents
Teachers & Instruction for Young Adolescents
M-L Organization
Leadership
Essence of All Policy Statements
How did we respond?
Configuration Changes
Formation of Teams Increased dialogue of
early adolescent development
“MIDDLE SCHOOL”
Middle School Configurations
Grade Span
81-82 91-92 98-99 99-00 00-01 20 Year
Change
5-8 50 87 101 101 102 +52
6-8 162 292 398 397 436 +274
6-9 34 30 15 15 14 -20
6-12 16 30 42 43 48 +32
7-8 120 93 71 71 76 -44
7-9 211 78 39 39 29 -182
7-12 227 224 166 171 168 -59
How well did we implement the model?
Paths that we took…
Business as usual
The Checklist Approach
“Balance of purpose and comprehensive fidelity”
“Currently, few middle grades schools have implemented many of the practices recommended for the education of early adolescents, and even fewer have implemented them well.”
Epstein and MacGiver1993
National Middle School Association Survey….
Education Week - October 2000
The Weak Link … “ill equipped to deliver” An Incomplete Education… “teachers lack
knowledge about subject matter and young adolescents”
Adrift at the Top… “principals without much preparation”
Missed Opportunities… “shallow, fragmented, and unchallenging curriculum”
Frustration?
“This We Believe and Now We Must Act”
Turning Points 2000
NYS’s Essential Elements
Et. al.
Why the resistance to change? “unresolved tensions”
academic development
vs
personal and social development
Current Needs
“Safe Schools”
Standards & Assessments
What is the Evidence for MS Model?
The Young Adolescent Instruction School Organization Leadership Academic Achievement
Early AdolescenceDevelopmental Research
Physical
Psychological
Cognitive
Social
Developmentally Responsive Instructional Strategies
Varied and Multiple Social “Hands-on” Meaningful, Connected,
and Relevant Challenging
Organization
Interdisciplinary Teams Flexible Schedules Flexible Grouping Comprehensive Guidance Services Exploratory Experiences Articulated and Integrated Curriculum
Teaming
CPT – Frequency and Length
Teacher-student ratios
Training & Experience
Quality of Planning
What is the relationship between interdisciplinary curriculum and academic achievement?
Brazee & Capelluti, 1995
Clark and Clark, 1992 St. Clair & Hough,
1992 Vars, 1987 “The Eight Year
Study” - Aiken, 1942
Leadership
Aging Inexperienced Lack of training for
work with young adolescents
Academic Achievement
How well do students learn in well-designed middle schools?
Do Middle Schools Result in Higher Academic Achievement than Junior High Schools?
The Bradley Study 1988 National Longitudinal Study 1988
University of Florida 1987 Clark & Clark 1992
Maine SED 1991 University of Michigan 1993
California SED 1994 Keefe, et. al 1994
George & Shewey 1994 New York 2001
Felner, et. al. 1997
The Maine Study (1991)
15,000 eighth graders 220 Maine schools The Maine Educational Assessment Scores of 48 schools that used the
middle level model approach were compared to another group of 48 schools that did not use the approach.
University of Michigan Longitudinal 1988 (Lee & Smith 1993)
Studied a sub-sample of 8,845 8th graders in 1,035 middle schools* of a 25,000 student study
Results - Gains in student achievement
*Had implemented recommendations of Turning Points
California 1994
A 1988-1993 California study of the implementation of middle grade public school reforms
600 schools Approximately 425,000 students 40-43% gain in all areas of student
achievement occurred since implementing the reforms.
Felner, Jackson, et.al. 1997 Longitudinal Study of 1500 students & 900
students in five states (Schools that have implemented Turning Points recommendations)
Results--greater outcomes in achievement,
behavior and socio-emotional factors in schools with a HIGHER IMPLEMENTATION FACTOR
New York - 2001
Study of low and high performing schools Performance on assessments Level of “Essential Elements”
implementation
Degree of Implementation of the Characteristics of an Effective Middle-Level School by Need/Resource Category)
A
B
C
D
E
High Need - Urban/Suburban
High Performing 11/9 1413 3.76/6.00
High Need - Urban/Suburban
Low Performing 12/8 1368 2.92/6.00
High Need – Rural High Performing 11/10 1424 3.82/6.00
High Need – Rural Low Performing 11/10 1389 2.39/6.00
Average Need High Performing 12/11 1453 4.64/6.00
Average Need Low Performing 12/11 1390 3.33/6.00
Low Need High Performing 11/8 1483 5.40/6.00
Low Need Low Performing 12/10 1423 3.99/6.00
The Multiplication Factor MacIver & Epstein,
1991 Van Zandt & Totten,
1994 George & Shewey,
1994 Felner, 1997 New York, 2001
Teams
Advisory
Comprehensive Guidance
Heterogeneous Grouping
Strong Transitions
Appropriate Instruction
Researchers have concluded that the combined benefit of using multiple program components enhances the effectiveness of individual practices (MacIver & Epstein, 1991; Van Zandt & Totten, 1994).
Connor & Irvin (1989)
74% of nationally recognized middle schools implemented 6 to 10 of the essential elements of a true middle school as compared to 47% of randomly selected schools
Effective middle schools reflect a higher degree of “middle schoolness”
Closing the Middle School Gap
“Balance of Purpose and comprehensive fidelity”
“You may not divide the seamless cloak of learning. There is only one subject matter for education and that is life itself in all its manifestations.” –The Aims of Education Alfred North Whitehead