Search

BackgroundPreparing middle grades students to be successful in the 21st century has long been the goal of the middle school movement. For students to be successful, it is imperative that they receive an education that goes beyond basic instruction in reading, writing, and mathematics to include opportunities for them to use their unique abilities to solve real-world problems, work collaboratively, and deepen their knowledge base in a safe, supportive, and nurturing environment.In recent years, middle schools have been criticized and accused of replacing academic rigor with identity development. In the report Mayhem in the Middle: How Middle Schools have Failed America-and How to Make Them Work, Cheri Pierson Yecke (2005) stated, "Middle schoolism is based on pseudo-scientific theories and downplays academic achievement. The middle school movement advances the notion that academic achievement should take a back seat to such ends as self-exploration, socialization, and group learning" (p. ii). Other organizations and councils with a long history of focusing on middle level education have been proponents of rigorous academic programs for middle level students (i.e., Carnegie Council on Adolescent Development, 1989; Jackson & Davis, 2000; National Forum to Accelerate Middle-Grades Reform, 2006b; National Middle School Association, 2003), while continuing to address the social, emotional, and physical needs of these adolescents. This study acknowledges the middle school movement has both proponents and critics but that both positions seek a relatively similar goal-an excellent educational experience for all middle level students.In an effort to heighten the sense of urgency concerning the need for high-performing middle schools, the National Forum to Accelerate Middle- Grades Reform launched the national Schools to Watch (STW) program to recognize middle level schools that are on a trajectory toward academic excellence, developmental responsiveness, and social equity (National Forum to Accelerate Middle-Grades Reform, 2006b). Since its inception, the National Forum's Schools to Watch program has expanded to include state-level recognition programs. This study explored the relationship between schools recognized as a Kentucky School to Watch (KSTW) and the implementation of the tenets of the middle school concept as outlined in This We Believe (NMSA, 2003), a commonly accepted standard for effective middle level education. Though they are separate entities, the visions for effective middle schools espoused by the National Forum and the National Middle School Association (NMSA) are similar. Because Kentucky's Schools to Watch were evaluated using the criteria established by the National Forum to Accelerate Middle-Grades Reform, using the same criteria to evaluate other schools would be unfairly biased against schools that have not applied for the Kentucky School to Watch designation. To avoid this bias, This We Believe was used as the conceptual framework for this research. Using survey data and data available through the Kentucky Department of Education, the researchers examined Kentucky Schools to Watch from two perspectives and sought to:* Compare the perceived level of middle school implementation between schools designated a Kentucky School to Watch and Kentucky middle schools that have not earned this designation* Compare the levels of academic achievement between schools designated a Kentucky School to Watch and those that have not earned this designation.This study addresses two key research questions outlined by National Middle School Association's A 21st Century Research Agenda (1997): (1) What is the depth and breadth of implementation of middle level education programs, policies, and practices necessary to bring about various levels of change? (2) What are the direct and indirect effects of middle school programs, policies, and practice on student achievement? Having this information helps validate the use of the Schools to Watch criteria as a means of middle school program evaluation and staff development. …

As a result of the pressures of educational reform and high-stakes assessment, some schools run the risk of foregoing active, student-centered learning activities for building test-taking skills and the memorization of discrete facts (Gredler, 1999; Jackson & Davis, 2000). Coupled with the additional pressure to fulfill the expectations of No Child Left Behind (NCLB), educators may feel the need to abandon the tenets of the middle school philosophy for more teacher-centered instructional approaches. Since the enactment of the Kentucky Education Reform Act (KERA) in 1990, schools and teachers have been accountable for the achievement of students and implementation of the state’s assessment standards. Using the responses of 216 educators from 17 middle schools in Northern Kentucky, this descriptive study explores middle grade teachers’ perceptions of how high-stakes testing and state accountability standards influence instructional strategies utilized in the classroom. Results indicate that though teachers acknowledge the importance of including active and student-centered strategies on a consistent basis, the state tests seem to drive the curriculum and warrant more teacher-focused instructional methods—lecture, worksheets, and whole-class discussion. In addition, recommendations are offered to improve instructional practice, enhance middle grades teacher preparation programs, and guide future research.