Fundamentals for Student Success in the Middle Grades

Determining how to provide the best education possible for young adolescents begins with the answers to three essential questions: Who are young adolescents? What do we know about them, their abilities, interests and strengths? Based on what we know about young adolescents, what should schools do to provide a quality education for each and every student? And finally, is there evidence that these recommended practices improve student achievement? How do we know programs and practices designed specifically with young adolescents in mind make a difference? To answer these questions, we will first outline some of the developmental characteristics of young adolescents and look at the implications for teaching and learning. We will then look at national recommendations for schools based on what we know about young adolescents. Finally, we will consider some of the research that supports these recommendations

Research Summary: Young Adolescents’ Developmental Characteristics

Early adolescence is a distinct period of human growth and development situated between childhood and adolescence. During this remarkable stage of the life cycle, young adolescents (10- to 15-year-olds) experience rapid and significant developmental change. Recognizing and understanding the unique developmental characteristics (traits associated with human growth) of early adolescence and their relationship to the educational program (i.e., curriculum, instruction, and assessment) and to the structure of the middle school (e.g., fl exible block scheduling, advisory programs, and team teaching) are central tenets of middle grades education

Anfara, Vincent A., Jr., and Leonard Waks, Resolving the Tension Between Academic Rigor and Developmental Appropriateness: Part I, Middle School Journal, 32(November, 2000), 46-51.*

Demonstates that there need not be a dualism between developmentally appropriate curriculum and subject-centered academic knowledge; Part II [MSJ, 32(January,2001), 25-30] describes the difference between adult patterns of academic knowledge and youth\u27s knowledge-in-use; implications are drawn for middle school education

Research Summary: Characteristics of Exemplary Schools for Young Adolescents

Two dangers are associated with any list purporting to include the characteristics of exemplary schools for young adolescents. One danger is a perception that the list is exhaustive—that it includes everything that needs to be considered. In reality, a list cannot capture the subtleties and complexities of schooling. A second danger is that each component will be seen as somehow self-contained, something that can be addressed in isolation. Instead, research demonstrates that the characteristics listed above are “an interacting and interdependent group of practices that form a unified whole… [that] must be dealt with holistically, systemically, to ensure success” (Jackson & Davis, 2000, p. 27). Research evidence points to the value of a systems approach for improving schools, an approach that intentionally and carefully considers the interactions between and among the characteristics of exemplary schools for young adolescents (Anfara, Andrews, Hough, Mertens, Mizelle, & White, 2003; Felner, Jackson, Kasak, Mulhall, Brand, & Flowers, 1997; Johns Hopkins University & Abt Associates, Inc., 1997; Lee & Smith, 2000; Lee, Smith, Perry, & Smylie, 1999; Mertens & Flowers, 2003; Sweetland & Hoy, 2000)

Using the Lesson Study Approach to Plan for Student Learning

The Lesson Study approach is a method of professional development that encourages teachers to reflect on their teaching practice through a cyclical process of collaborative lesson planning, lesson observation, and examination of student learning. This results-oriented professional development model is an ideal vehicle for improving instructional practice in middle schools. Characteristically, middle schools are (a) learning communities where teachers and students engage in active learning, (b) places with high expectations for every member of the community, and (c) organizational structures that support meaningful relationships (National Middle School Association, 2003). Middle school teachers have to know their students well—who they are and how they learn best—and use this information when planning instruction and assessing student performance (Jackson & Davis, 2000). Most teacher planning focuses primarily on teacher actions rather than on student results (Ornstein, 1997). The Lesson Study approach, however, can provide an opportunity for middle school teachers to work together to strengthen the link between instructional planning and student learning

Common Planning Time

The article focuses on common planning time. According to a definition by Kellough and Kellough, common planning time is a regularly scheduled time during the school day when teachers who teach the same students meet for joint planning, parent conferences, materials preparation and student evaluation. It notes that student achievements are typically high in schools with high levels of common planning time. It claims that most district schools in the U.S. perceive common planning time as a privilege but due to challenging financial times, it is said to be one component to be eradicated from school budgets. It notes a study presented in the article that showed the positive effects of common planning time on teaching, learning and achievement of young adolescents

A National Research Project Revitalizes and Strengthens a SIG’s Membership, Leadership, and the Quality of Research in the Field

A recent moratorium has temporarily halted the creation of new Special Interest Groups (SIGs) in the American Educational Research Association (AERA). The AERA SIG Executive Committee, the official governance body that oversees approximately 160 SIGs, requested this moratorium, which was subsequently approved by AERA Council. The purpose of the moratorium is to allow the SIG Executive Committee to gather data to facilitate a more critical examination of issues related to SIGs, including low membership numbers, leadership challenges, and specific membership needs addressed by SIGs. This article offers the Middle Level Education Research (MLER) SIG as an example of a SIG that grappled with low membership from the mid-1990s to early 2000; suffered from a lack of leaders willing to invest the time and energy to revitalize, sustain, and expand the organization; and included members who were facing important issues related to the nature and scope of research in their field (e.g., the lack of a national database and the need for large-scale studies to potentially influence policy and practice). In 2003, the officers of the MLER surveyed its membership to ascertain research interests, potential activities, and future directions. Based on the results of that survey, the SIG\u27s officers and council members developed and implemented a five-year strategic plan. The five components of the strategic plan were to (1) Become more active in advocacy work at local, state, and national levels; (2) Disseminate information on middle grades education to policy makers and others; (3) Gather information from SIG members about their expectations and participation in the SIG; (4) Sponsor a symposium or summit to address a current and/or critical issue of middle grades education research; and (5) Sponsor and develop a national research project designed and implemented by the SIG membership. This article briefly describes and discusses the fifth component of the MLER strategic plan, the SIG\u27s National Research Project on Common Planning Time. With this initiative the MLER offered its members an opportunity to participate in a national research project, combined with opportunities to present their research findings at national conferences and publish their results in a book series. Other AERA SIGs and divisions may benefit from the lessons learned as the MLER effectively revitalized its membership and leadership and contributed significantly to the quality of research in middle grades education

What Research Says about... The National Project on Common Planning Time

What Research Says about... The National Project on Common Planning Time PDF version of a PowerPoint presentation given at the National Middle School Association Annual Conference, Indianapolis, IN, Nov. 6, 2009

Research Summary: Courageous, Collaborative Leadership

While courageous, collaborative leadership has not been formally recognized as a “model” by those who study educational leadership, there is a wealth of information about collaborative (i.e., participatory) leadership and a growing corpus of literature focused on courageous leadership. As in the development of the ideas connected to collaborative leadership, the world of business is taking the lead in delineating what courageous leadership means. Some of this literature has even surfaced in the realm of religious studies (Hybels, 2002). Simply defined, courageousness in leadership addresses the necessity to step outside the box and take chances to help the organization establish appropriate and defensible goals. It also clearly places those who are leaders in a position to confront adversity. Collaborative leadership refers to inclusiveness— teachers, staff, administrators, parents, and other stakeholders—in decision making related to organizational goals. Research in both of the areas of courageousness and collaboration should advance a fuller understanding of what courageous, collaborative leadership is. Since courageous, collaborative leadership is by its very nature effective leadership, this research summary will also briefly review the literature regarding effective leadership