Results and Recommendations from the 2009 National Surveys of Randomly Selected and Highly Successful Middle Level Schools
Results and Recommendations from the 2009 National Surveys of Randomly Selected and Highly Successful Middle Level Schools
复制标题
2009 年全国随机选择的非常成功的中学调查的结果和建议
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2010
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Melanie W. Greene
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
C. K. McEwin;Melanie W. Greene
在世纪初，初中被建立起来，作为小学和高中之间的过渡桥梁。到了20世纪60年代，这种形式的学校教育看起来更像是高中，而不是一个独特的学校计划，以适应它所服务的青少年学生的性质和需求（见亚历山大，1995年）。中学运动是出于对初中的关注而发展起来的，四十多年来，当考虑到为青少年建立发展反应型中学的运动所取得的成就时，有很多值得庆祝的地方。有中学年级结构的学校数量（例如，5-8，6-8，7-8）自1970年以来几乎增加了两倍，今天89%的中学都有这些流行的年级配置之一。这表明公众认识到需要为这一独特的年龄组提供特殊的学校方案;然而，学校名称和年级配置本身并不能说明学校内方案的质量。问题仍然是许多中等学校未能充分实施文献中所提倡的方案和做法（例如，乔治，2009年a，2009年b;迪金森，2001年;朗斯伯里，2009年;全国中学校长协会（NASSP），全国中学协会（NMSA），2010年a，2010年b）。虽然一些研究已经提供了有关美国中等学校状况的有用信息，（布鲁克斯和爱德华兹，1978年;卡维尔蒂，1988年;康普顿，1976年;爱泼斯坦和麦克艾弗，1990年;乔治，2009年c;乔治和奥尔达克，1985年;乔治和舍韦，1994年;和瓦伦丁，克拉克，哈克曼，和佩茨科，2002年），四个相互联系的国家调查提供了一个纵向的角度对关键的中年级计划和实践的实施程度。这些研究分别在1968年（亚历山大，1968年）、1988年（亚历山大和麦克尤恩，1989年）、1993年（麦克尤恩、迪金森和詹金斯，1996年）和2001年（麦克尤恩、迪金森和詹金斯，2003年）进行。本文报告了McEwin和格林在2009年进行的该系列第五项研究的选定结果，特别关注从对随时间推移而明显的趋势分析中得出的建议。2009年，作者使用基本相同的工具，对一批非常成功的中等学校的课程和实践进行了另一项全国性调查。将非常成功的学校的结果与随机抽样的结果进行比较，以确定是否存在差异，如果存在差异，可以从这些差异中吸取什么教训。2009年随机和高度成功的中学调查在随机研究中，电子调查被发送到20%的随机分层样本的中学，包括5-8年级，6-8年级，或7-8年级（N=2,783），返回率为30%（n=827）。本研究的数据与前四次调查的类似数据进行了比较，以帮助确定随着时间的推移发生的趋势。调查工具包括一些项目的一个或多个以前的四项研究的一部分，以及一些新的项目没有在这篇文章中报道。读者应该参考完整的报告，以获得更多关于这里讨论的结果的详细信息，以及本文中没有介绍的其他结果（McEwin &格林，即将出版）。在2009年的同一时期进行了非常成功的中学调查，作为随机中学调查。为了这项研究的目的，高度成功的中学（以下简称HSMS）被定义为那些学校已被确认为学校的观察，由全国论坛，以加快中学改革或突破中学由全国中学校长协会。在这项研究开始时，186所中学已被确定为学校观看（n=180）或MetLife-NASSP突破中学（n=7），一所学校被两个方案认可。…
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. …