C. Kenneth McEwin

Results and Recommendations from the 2009 National Surveys of Randomly Selected and Highly Successful Middle Level Schools.

In the early 20th century, junior high schools were established to serve as a transitional bridge between the elementary and high school. By the 1960s, this form of schooling had come to look more like senior high school than a unique school program responsive to the nature and needs of the young adolescent students it served (see Alexander, 1995). The middle school movement grew out of concerns with the junior high school, and after more than four decades there is much to celebrate when considering the accomplishments of the movement to establish developmentally responsive middle level schools for young adolescents. The number of schools with a middle school grade configuration (e.g., 5-8, 6-8, 7-8) has nearly tripled since 1970, and today 89% of all middle level schools have one of these popular grade configurations. This indicates public recognition of the need for special school programs for this unique age group; however, school names and grade configurations alone do not speak to the quality of programs within schools. Questions remain concerning the failure of many middle level schools to fully implement programs and practices that have been advocated in the literature (e.g., George, 2009a, 2009b; Dickinson, 2001; Lounsbury, 2009; National Association of Secondary School Principals (NASSP), National Middle School Association (NMSA), 2010a, 2010b). While a number of studies have yielded useful information regarding the status of middle level schools in the United States (Brooks & Edwards, 1978; Cawelti, 1988; Compton, 1976; Epstein & Mac Iver, 1990; George, 2009c; George & Oldaker, 1985; George & Shewey, 1994; and Valentine, Clark, Hackmann, & Petzko, 2002), four linked national surveys provide a longitudinal perspective on the degree of implementation of key middle grades programs and practices. These studies were conducted in 1968 (Alexander, 1968), 1988 (Alexander & McEwin, 1989), 1993 (McEwin, Dickinson, & Jenkins, 1996), and 2001 (McEwin, Dickinson, & Jenkins, 2003). This article reports selected results of a fifth study in this series conducted in 2009 by McEwin and Greene, with a particular focus on recommendations derived from an analysis of trends evident over time. An additional national survey of programs and practices in a sample of highly successful middle level schools was conducted by the authors in 2009 using essentially the same instrument. The results from the highly successful schools are compared to results from the random sample to determine if differences existed and, if so, what lessons might be learned from those differences. The 2009 Random and Highly Successful Middle Schools Surveys In the random study, an electronic survey was sent to a 20% random stratified sample of middle level schools that included grades 5-8, 6-8, or 7-8 (N=2,783), with a return rate of 30% (n=827). Data from this study are compared with similar data from the four earlier surveys to help identify trends that have occurred over time. The survey instrument included some items that were part of one or more of the four previous studies as well as some new items not reported in this article. Readers should refer to the full report to obtain more detailed information about the findings discussed here as well as additional results not presented in this article (McEwin & Greene, forthcoming). The highly successful middle school survey was conducted during the same period in 2009 as the random middle school survey. For the purposes of this study, highly successful middle schools (hereafter, HSMS) were defined as those schools that had been recognized as Schools to Watch by the National Forum to Accelerate Middle Grades Reform or as Breakthrough Middle Schools by the National Association of Secondary School Principals. At the time this study was initiated, 186 middle schools had been identified as Schools to Watch (n=180) or MetLife-NASSP Breakthrough Middle Schools (n=7), and one school was recognized by both programs. …

High Schools for a New Century: Why Is the High School Changing?.

Secondary education in the United States has undergone a great deal of change in the last half of the 20th century. In the first wave of change, lower secondary education was transformed, changing the junior high school to the middle school. Most of this modification in middle level education has been completed; now profound change has reached the high school level.

Which School for the Fifth Grader? Programs and Practices in Three Grade Organizations

The middle school movement has focused primarily on separately organized grades six through eight schools in recent years. There are now over 5000 such schools making the 6-8 middle school the most popular middle level organization in the United States (Market Data Retrieval, 1991). It should not be assumed, however, that widespread consensus on the best grade organizational plan for young adolescents has been reached. Grade organization remains a controversial topic in American education as it has for at least 80 years. This lack of consensus is clearly reflected when the organizational placement of fifth grade is considered. Large numbers of fifth grade students attend over 1200 5-8 middle schools. However, many thousands of others are enrolled in schools with various other grade organizations. For example, fifth grade students attended 13,842 K/l-5 schools, 20,774 K/l-6 schools, and 5,394 K/l-8 schools during the 1988-89 school year (National Center for Educational Statistics, 1990). The practice of fifth graders attending middle schools is not a newly established one. Some middle schools have included the fifth grade since the emergence of the middle school movement. Early leaders in the movement, including William M. Alexander, advocated the inclusion of fifth grade as early as the 1960s. Proponents of the 5-8 organization contended that fifth and sixth graders had more in common with seventh and eighth graders than with younger children (Alexander, et al., 1968). Those favoring leaving fifth grade students in the elementary school believed that they had more in common with the younger students and did not belong in the same school with seventh and eighth graders (Moss, Jackson, & Jackson, 1979). To further complicate the issue, fifth graders often attend schools that enroll both younger and older students, for example K-8 schools. The debate concerning the optimum placement of fifth graders continues. Factors, too numerous to be discussed here, indicate that these placement decisions are too often made with little regard for which grade organization best serves these youth. The lack of consensus regarding which grade organization best serves this grade level caused the auth rs to examine programs and practices in three major grade organizations that house fifth grade (K-6, K-8 and 5 8). A later phase of the study will include K-5 schools.

Schools for Early Adolescents.

Special schools for early adolescents have become a significant component of American education. These schools have their roots in the later years of the 19th century and the early years of the 20th century. A wide variety of forces have converged to bring about two major approaches to middle level education-the junior high school and then the middle school. This article briefly traces the development of these schools, partially compares them, and suggests characteristics needed in middle level schools, whatever their grade organization.

National Board Certified Teachers' Views Regarding Specialized Middle Level Teacher Preparation.

As educators and policymakers acknowledge the unique demands of teaching young adolescents (usually considered to be ages ten to fourteen and enrolled in grades five to eight), the call for specialized professional preparation of middle level teachers is gaining momentum. A consensus is also growing about what the contents of professional preparation programs for teaching on the middle level should be (e.g., comprehensive study of early adolescence and of the philosophy and organization of middle level education; middle level field experiences; and preparation in two or more teaching fields, such as mathematics and social science [McEwin and Dickinson 1995]). The emergence of the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards1 offers new opportunities for exploring the views of highly accomplished middle level teachers concerning the professional preparation for teachers of young adolescents. For the first time in history, nationally recognized and board-certified middle level teachers have been identified through a rigorous assessment program. It seemed logical to us to ask these distinguished teachers what they believe about the professional preparation of middle level teachers. We were especially interested to learn whether their views strengthened or contradicted the decades-long call for the specialized preparation of middle level teachers.

The Effects of Comprehensive Middle Level Teacher Preparation Programs

AbstractThis study examined the impact of high quality middle level teacher preparation programs as determined by 2,139 middle school teachers teaching in 525 middle schools (grade 6-8). These schools were located in six states that have separate middle level teaching licensure. Approximately 55% of all respondents had received some kind of specialized middle level preparation, 22% at the initial and 33% at the graduate level. Teachers prepared in special middle grades programs were more likely to have had each of seven program components considered essential for successful middle level teaching. Respondents prepared in comprehensive middle level teacher preparation programs gave more favorable ratings to their preparation programs than teachers from programs with medium or low comprehensiveness. The more middle level courses preservice teachers had taken, the more likely they were to report their programs were highly comprehensive. Those who had separate middle grades certification/licensure were more li...

Why Specialized Preparation is Critical

Abstract Mandating specific teacher-preparation programs may be necessary to ensure that teachers are adequately prepared for the unique challenges and rewards of teaching young adolescents

Training the Middle Level Educator—Where Does the Solution Lie?

Poorly prepared and uncommitted personnel cannot do the job required at the middle level. These educators note that increasing numbers of states are establishing special middle level teacher certification programs.

What is the Place of the Middle Grades in the K-8 School?

^jE large majority of the nations young adolescents are now ry 1 attending separately organized middle level schools for example, about 80 percent of all seventh graders (Epstein & Maclver, 1990). Significant progress is being made toward making these middle level schools developmentally responsive ones which reflect the unique needs and interests of young adolescents. However, many thousands of middle grades youth, including nine percent of all seventh graders, continue to attend 5,552 K 8 schools (National Center of Educational

Middle Level Schools--Their Status and Their Promise.

Middle schools are here to stay, these writers say. They believe the overriding purpose of middle level education continues to be that of providing programs based on the unique characteristics, needs, and interests of middle level students.