A COMPARATWE STUDY OF INSTRUCTIONAL POLICIES " 0F MIDDLE SCHOOLS ADMINISTERED RESPECTIVELY BY ELEMENTARY - ORIENTED PRINCIPALSAND SECONDARY - ORIENTED PRINEEPALS Thesis for the Degree of‘Phl D. MICHteAN STATE UNIVERSH‘Y DORIS LEE MARSHALL 1970 ”w. . ‘s S |\\\W\\\\\|\\\\\\\\\N\\|\\\\\|\\\\\\\\\\\\WW , I L [B R A R Y 3 1293 10383 7252 Michigan State University This is to certify that the thesis entitled A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF INSTRUCTIONAL POLICIES OF MIDDLE SCHOOLS ADMINISTERED RESPECTIVELY BY ELEMENTARY:ORIENTED PRINCIPALS AND SECONDARY-ORIENTED PRINCIPALS presented by Doris Lee Marshall has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for Ph . Do degree inWN 0-169 AIKVVHACTP A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF INSTRUCTIONAL POLICIES OF MIDDLE SCHOOLS ADMINISTERED RESPECTIVELY bY ELEMENTARY-ORIENTED PRINCIPALS AND SECONDARY—ORIENTED PRINCIPALS by boris Lee Marshall There are over 1,200 middle schools in the United States, a trend reaching the proportions of a movement. While the related literature well establishes that trans— escent youth have unique needs that dictate certain broad courses for educational action, variation in instruc— tional policies presently is the hallmark of thought and practice. New school principals have been trained specifi— cally for middle school programs. Generally their back— grounds reflect either an elementary school or a second- ary school orientation. A knowledge of the relationship of the instructional policies to the organizational orientation of the principal will be instrumental in setting the emergent middle school on an educationally sound foundation. The purpose of this study was to deter— mine if these instructional policies differ between Doris Lee Marshall elementary—oriented and secondary-oriented middle school principals. Five major hypotheses were established to test for differences in policies regarding the (a) subject matter programs, (b) articulation, (0) social activities, (d) motor development programs, and (e) self—concept identity programs. Each major hypothesis was augmented by two or more of 18 corollary hypotheses. Data were gathered from 80 multiple choice items on a questionnaire constructed by the writer. Face validity for the questionnaire was established by send- ing it for review to leading proponents of the middle school movement. The statistical validity and reliabil— ity indices were 0.82 and 0.89, respectively. The questionnaire was mailed to the principal of each of Michigan's 82 middle schools with either a 5-8 or 6—8 grade organization. Fifty-eight per cent of the questionnaires were returned. They were divided into two sample groups, one representing the population of elementary-oriented middle school principals and the other representing the secondary-oriented principals. The number of returns favored the secondary—oriented group by a ratio of three to one. Hoteling's T2 test, a multivariant test of analy— sis, was the statistical instrument used to treat these data. The mathematical transformations were performed Doris Lee Marshall by the Control Data Corporation (CDC) 3600 Computer at Michigan State University. The threshold of signifi- cance was established at the 90 per cent level of con- fidence. Generally,rm significant differences were found between the two groups of principals. The exceptions are discussed in the following specific findings and conclusions: 1. All schools in both samples offered comprehen- sive courses in the basic skills and explora— tory experiences. Fifty-five per cent of the schools had team teaching programs. A school with a unidisci— plinary team program generally had multidis- ciplinary teams, as well. Similarly, 55 per cent of the schools offered a variety of independent study programs. Self—contained lower grades and departmental- ized upper grades were the most common grade organization pattern for both groups. Depart- mentalized programs for all grades accounted for approximately #0 per cent of the combined sample. No clear pattern of grouping pupils for class— room experiences emerged for either sample group. Departmental class period time modules were generally fixed and of the same length for all courses in the schools of both groups of prin- cipals. Programs for social facilitation generally were provided and were nearly identical in schools Operated by both elementary-oriented and secondary-oriented principals. While elementary-oriented principals demon— strated a statistically significant greater involvement in both programs for incoming IO. ll. 13. l“. Doris Lee Marshall elementary pupils and out-going eighth grade pupils, the policies for both groups of prin- uipuis provided for only limited programs. Although almost one—half of the schools offered no sex education programs, significant differences between the groups existed within the programs offered. Specific units taught exclusively by the staffs of the secondary- oriented principals contrasted with the elementary—oriented principals' policy to integrate sex education with other units and to utilize both staff and specially trained lay people such as physicians. There was no evidence that any school had explicit policies for each pupil to be known well by at least one teacher. Programs of interscholastic athletics were widespread throughout Michigan's middle schools. They generally were limited only to the upper grade levels. Intramural athletics programs existed in about 75 per cent of the schools and generally were available for pupils at all grade levels, although the participants were predominately boys. All schools had physical education programs, offering an average of four hours of class time each week. Policies for both groups of principals indi— cated that grades five and six reflected ele— mentary school features in both structure and function; whereas grades seven and eight had many of the features of the secondary school. Michigan's middle schools have not emerged as a distinct educational organization. That departmentalized programs, interscholastic athletics, and school dances represent lower grade level programs for a limited number of schools suggested the encroachment of secondary school concepts into middle school programs, much the same as was the case with the junior high school “0 years ago. A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF INSTRUCTIONAL POLICIES OF MIDDLE SCHOOLS ADMINISTERED RESPECTIVELY BY ELEMENTARY—ORIENTED PRINCIPALS AND SECONDARY—ORIENTED PRINCIPALS By Doris Lee Marshall A THESIS Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Department of Education 1970 r¢Copyright by DORIS LEE MARSHALL 1971 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I should like to thank the members of my doctoral committee for their willingness to serve and the gener— osity of their guidance, time and effort. They are Dr. Donald Leu, now at San Jose State College: Dr. George Johnson, retired; Dr. John Hanson; Dr. Bruce Cohen; and Dr. John Suehr. Dr. Louis Romano, who directed this thesis, estab- lished a scholary climate in which I could work. His assistance always was thorough, exact and personal. I am grateful and appreciative. The motivation behind this work can be singularly identified and is recognized with love: Rachel Ann, Doris Lea, and Martha Lynn, my daughters. Clerk, typist, secretary, inspiration, solace, and wife: that's Dody. Lovingly, I dedicate this thesis to her. ii TABLE OF ACKNOWLEDGMENTS LIST OF APPENDICES. Chapter I. THE PROBLEM Introduction. Statement of the Problem. heed Definition of Terms Assumptions of the Study. Limitations of the Study. Hypotheses General General General General General Procedures Overview II. REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE History of the American Intermediate School. The Case for Establishing a New Hypothesis Hypothesis Hypothesis Hypothesis Hypothesis for Analysis Of Data Middle School. The Case Against the Middle School Daily Concerns of Middle School Principals Transescent Youth Intellectual Characteristics of Transescent Youth . . Physical Characteristics of Transescent Youth Social and Emotional Characteristics of Transescent Youth Goals and Objectives of the Middle School. iii CONTENTS U‘l-t’UUNl—J Page ii vi H HIAFJ rocaoxomnocnarqsatwon2H l—' LU IA 18 2A 27 30 32 35 39 A3 Phnptur III. IHH Knowlvdgc About How to Achieve Those Goals :hllnnulrfiy IIGN OF THE STUDY Introduction. . . "ource of the Data. Instrument Employed Procedures Analysis of the Data (IdIdCLePloIlL of the Sample Summary IV. ANALYSIS OF THE ICIA’I‘A General Hypothesis 1 hypothesis la Hypothesis lb Hypothesis 1c Hypothesis ld Hypothesis le Hypothesis 1f General Hypothesis Hypothesis 2a Hypothesis 2b General Hypothesis Hypothesis 3a Hypothesis 3b Hypothesis 3c Hypothesis 3d General Hypothesis A Hypothesis Ha Hypothesis Nb Hypothesis Ac General Hypothesis 5 Hypothesis 5a hypothesis 5b Hypothesis 5c Summary I‘D LU V. CONCLUSIONS .“Llrr:rr1;II?y Findings Stubject Matter Facilitation. Articulation Facilitation Social Facilitation Pupil Identification Facilitation. Motor Facilitation. iv Page “7 Chapter Page Conclusions . . - 102 Recommendations for Further Study. 103 Reflections . . . . . . . . 105 ISIHLDJGHAPHY. . . . . . . . . . . . . 107 AIWWHHJICES . . . . . . . . . . . . . 116 LIS” OF APPENDICES Appendix A. The Questionnaire B. Demographical Data on Michigan's Middle Schools C. Hoteling's Transformations on the Dependent Variables of Each General Hypothesis vi Page 116 139 147 CHAPTER I THE PROBLEM Introduction The reorganization of the grade structure of Ameri— can public education at the intermediate school has emerged as a composite of traditionally elementary school grades and traditionally junior high or secondary school grades. Exhibiting numerous grade grouping patterns, the new inter- mediate, (or middle), school may contain the fifth grade at one end of the spectrum and the eighth grade at the other. This reorganization trend is reaching the proportions of a movement. There are roughly 1,200 middle schools in the United States. In Michigan, there are 82 such schools with a modal organization of grades six through eight. Presently, variation is the hallmark of thought and practice; no single organizational pattern is predominate. Modes of operations and objectives are beginning to pre— cipitate, and with the convergence of a standard organ- izational structure, the middle school will assume a unique identity. That identity will be affected by many factors, not the least of which will be the principal and his background of experience. Statement of the Problem Programs to train teachers specifically to teach at the junior high school level have long been needed and are almost non—existent. Legal certification to teach at any level in the public education system gen- erally qualifies a person to teach at the junior high school level. The new middle schools are no different. They are usually staffed with both elementary—trained and secondary-trained teachers. Just as middle school teachers are not specially trained for this organization, neither are the princi- pals. The principals' orientation is likely to be polar— ized toward either the elementary or the secondary grades. Does this polarization affect the instructional policies of the principals? If so, how? Which group, if either, is more closely attuned to the theoretical model of the middle school? The purpose Of this study is to determine if there are differences in instructional policies between elementary-oriented and secondary- oriented middle school principals. E229. Near the turn of the 20th Century, a concern of educators with the problems of early adolescent youth gained nationwide recognition. The early adolescent had unique problems, and the organizational structure of six years of elementary and six years of secondary schooling failed to provide a matrix in which special attention could be given to his problems. The child of this concern was the junior high school, and what could have been a prodigy never fulfilled its promise. The cry for academic excellence and the prepara- tion of college bound students soon cast this new inter- mediate school in a model of a miniature high school. Gaining momentum in the 1960's, new organizational patterns for the intermediate school are receiving wide- spread attention. Reasons for the organization of mid- dle schools have ranged from "to eliminate crowded con- ditions" to "to aid desegregation." But many theorists such as William M. Alexander and Emmett L. Williams,1 as well as many middle school principals, argue that the basic objective is programmatic, that the emergent middle school organization can and must meet the needs of trans— escent youth. Implicit in their works is a common tie -- the fear that the middle school will be molded by the aberra- tion of another organizational premise, that perhaps the high school simply will be moved downward for one or two grades, or that the problem features of the elementary school will be moved up. lWilliam M. Alexander and Emmett L. Williams, "Schools for the Middle Years," Educational Leadership, XXIVI(December, 1965), 217-223. A It is significant and urgent that basic practices be examined now. "The movement continues to grow, very rapidly. . . . It is already late to halt its natural imitation of prior forms. But not too late."2 While the principal can accelerate the proposal toward prior forms, he is in a singular position to direct the middle school movement toward an educationally sound rationale. Research findings on the differences in instructional policies as practiced by elementary- oriented and secondary-oriented middle school principals should help to veer this organizational movement toward an educationally defensible rationale. Definition of Terms The definitions of terms which follow are presented so that this study may be understood explicitly, accu— rately interpreted, and replicated at some future time. I. Articulation — The degree to which the inter— locking and interrelation of successive levels of the educational system facilitate the con- tinuous educational progress of pupils or stu- dents. 2. Elementagy—Oriented Middle School Principa1 - Any middle school principal who has been 9 “William M. Alexander, "The New School in the Mid— dle," Phi Delta Kappan, L (February, 1969), 356. U7 employed as a public school teacher solely with the status of an elementary teaching certifi— cate, and whose prior principalships have not been at the senior high school level. Exploratory Experiences - As distinguished from the basic learning skills, exploratory experi- ences are the encounters pupils have in programs designed to make them more attuned to themselves and their environment, including interest acti— vities and subjects such as art, music, home economics, etc. Facilitation - The augmentation of the effi- ciency of an educational performance. Flexible Schedule — A schedule that permits periods to be lengthened, shortened, combined, or shifted in time to meet the varying demands of activity. Independent Study — Study carried on with a minimum or a complete absence of external guidance. Instructional Policy - The planned course of all the directed educational experiences of pupils during their school day. Interscholastic Athletic Competition - A pro- gram of athletics which provides for contests between teams or individuals of different schools. 9. 10. ll. 12. 13. 1A. Intramural Athletic Competition - A program of self—contained athletics provided for a student body or grade level within a student body, in- volving only pupils of the same institution. Middle School - A school administrative unit giving a full course of study in grades over four but below nine. Multidisc1plinary Team Teaching - Instruction in which two or more teachers formally combine their teaching resources to meet the common instructional objectives of two or more sub- jects with common groups of pupils. Secondary-Oriented Middle School Principal - Any middle school principal whose prior princi- palships have not been at the elementary school level and who has been employed as a public school teacher only with the status of a secon- dary teaching certificate or its equivalent. Social Activities - Grade-wide or school—wide activities which reflect social needs and be- havior of youth, such as dances and parties. Transescent Youth - Youngsters whose physical and mental development fall on the maturation interval which has the end of childhood as a lower limit and the beginning of the arrival of adolescence as the upper limit. 15. Unidisciplinary Team Teaching - Instruction in which two or more teachers formally combine their teaching resources to meet the instruc- tional objectives of a common subject with com— mon groups of pupils. Assumptions of the Study The study assumes that the questions prepared and organized were appropriate to measure the differences between the instructional policies of secondary- oriented and elementary-oriented principals, and that these are policies that significantly affect the edu— cational climate of the school. It assumes that the individual will respond to the questionnaire with his true perceptions in regard to the school's instructional policies. It further assumes that the dependent vari- ables in the eXperimental design are normally distributed and that the variance within one population is equal to that within the other population. Limitations of the Study This study is limited to the State of Michigan; the quality of the instructional staffs is not considered in this study. Although the terms are carefully defined, lack of consistent responses might result because of the wide training and eXperience of the administrators. The questions on which the analysis is based are only those that either elicit a direct quantitative response or a Pvnpuunv that can be rank ordered in terms of flexibility of practice. Spurious instructional policies were not tested. Hypotheses The dimensions of the problem as it has been out- lined can best be conceptualized in the following hypoth- eses which will be tested in this study. General Hypothesis 1 Hozl Provisions for subject matter facilitation for pupils differ significantly between secondary-oriented and elementary-oriented middle school principals. Ho:la 'Provisions for courses of study differ signi- ficantly between secondary-oriented and elementary-oriented middle school principals. Ho:lb Provisions for multidisciplinary team teaching programs differ significantly between secondary-oriented and elementary-oriented middle school principals. Ho:lc Provisions for unidisciplinary team teaching programs differ significantly between secondary—oriented and elementary—oriented middle school principals. Ho:ld Provisions for the flexible scheduling of class period time modules differ significantly between secondary—oriented and elementary—oriented middle school principals. Ho:le Provisions for exploratory experiences differ significantly between secondary-oriented and elementary- oriented middle school principals. Ho:lf Provisions for independent study programs differ significantly between secondaryroriented and elementary—oriented middle school principals. Genera I II},/pothr::: I L} 1‘ 1h) :;’ I'l‘hlV i2; I'lIILS [‘«Ir- t)llt)i_l :3<)<:i.tll f:l(:i liiI.:li.i till differ significantly between secondary-oriented and elementary—oriented middle school principals. Hoz2a Provisions for school dances differ signifi— cantly between secondary—oriented and elementary-oriented middle school principals. Ho:2b Provisions for activity clubs differ signi- ficantly between secondary-oriented and elementary— oriented middle school principals. General Hypothesis 3 Hoz3 Provisions for pupil identification facili— tation differ significantly between secondary—oriented and elementary—oriented middle school principals. Hoz3a Provisions for each pupil to be known well by at least one teacher differ significantly between secondary-oriented and elementary-oriented middle school principals. Ho:3b Provisions for sex education programs differ significantly between secondary-oriented and elementary~ oriented middle school principals. Hoz3c Provisions for peer group interaction differ significantly between secondary-oriented and elementary- oriented middle school principals. Ho:3d Provisions for parent—pupil-teacher integra— tion differs significantly between secondary-oriented and elementary—oriented middle school principals. General Hypothesis A Hozu Provisions for pupil transition facilitation differ significantly between secondary—oriented and elementary—oriented middle school principals. Hozua Provisions for grade level articulation with— in the school differ significantly between secondary- oriented and elementary—oriented middle school principals. Hozub Provisions for grade level articulation with the elementary school differ significantly between 10 secondary—oriented and elementary—oriented middle school principals. Ho:Uc Provisions for grade level articulation with the secondary school differ significantly between secondary— oriented and elementary—oriented middle school principals. General Hypothesis 5 Ho:5 Provisions for motor facilitation differ sig— nificantly between secondary-oriented and elementary— oriented middle school principals. Hoz5a Provisions for interscholastic athletic com— petition differ significantly between secondary-oriented and elementary-oriented middle school principals. Hoz5b Provisions for intramural athletic competi- tion differ significantly between secondary-oriented and elementary-oriented middle school principals. Hoz5c Provisions for physical education programs differ significantly between secondary-oriented and elementary—oriented middle school principals. Procedures for Analysis of Data This study is concerned with exploring the differ- ences in instructional policies between two groups of principals. Statistically, a sample from each of these two populations was drawn. The numerical transformations from the data were analyzed for each hypothesis to deter— mine if there was a significant difference between the mean scores of the two groups of principals. Since more than one question was used to test each hypothesis, a multivariate analysis of data technique was used. A list was secured from the Michigan State Depart- ment of Education of all middle schools functioning in Michigan at the end of the 1968—69 school year. Because ll of confounding variables, schools in their first year of operation were not sampled. From the schools on the list, those schools of grade levels appropriate to this study were identified. A small number of middle schools in Michigan have grade patterns other than 5-8 or 6-8. These schools were not included in the sample. All of the principals of schools with a 5-8 or 6-8 grade organiza- tion pattern were queried. A questionnaire was constructed by the writer and validated by leading authorities in the field. The questionnaire was structured to reflect the aforementioned facilitations. Questions concerning special- ized functions such as guidance were included as an inte- gral part of the instrument. The questionnaire with cover letter, directions, and a stamped, addressed envelope, was mailed to the principal of each school. A follow-up letter and ques- tionnaire were sent one month later to each principal from whom no reply had been received. The data were programmed and processed by the Con— trol Data Corporation (CDC) 3600 Computer at Michigan State University. At 90 per cent level of confidence, each set of minor hypotheses was tested with its major hypothesis using Hoteling's T2 test, a multivariant analysis of variance. 12 Overview A frame of reference for the entire study is devel- oped in Chapter i. An introduction to the middle school and its broadly defined problems are given along with the specific problem on which this study is based. The hypotheses are stated and the important terms are defined. The methods for collecting and analyzing the data are discussed. A review of the related literature is presented in Chapter [1. A rationale for the existence of the middle school is developed through its history, philosophy and practice. The nature of middle school pupils is examined. These two sections are synthesized by eXploring and estab— lishing the objectives of the middle school. A discussion of how these objectives can be met concludes Chapter II. The research design and procedures are described in Chapter III. This chapter contains details relative to the subjects, instrument construction and administration, data collection, and analysis procedures. The analysis of the data is presented in Chapter IV. An appropriate T2 value is stated, along with the consequent decision for each hypothesis. A summary of the study, the significant findings, conclusions and implications are presented in Chapter V. CHAPTER II REVIEW OF THE RELATED LITERATURE The breadth of the term instructional policies, the key issue under scrutiny here, dictates a literature review over a wide domain of an integral organization. The review begins with a brief history of the middle school. Then the case for establishing a new intermedi- ate organization with its concomitant problems is examined. Because the middle school is not a unanimously acclaimed concept, a voice is given to the opponents of the move- ment. Since the subjects of this study are middle school principals, the first section closes by exploring some of their reactions to the school. The assumption in the remainder of the review is that the middle school is a defensible organizational entity and the study proceeds to develop the key factors that influence instructional policies. Section two deals with the nature of the transescent youth and his emotional, social, physical, and mental development. The third section examines programs and objectives to meet the needs of the early adolescent. The final section deals with strategies to establish and accomplish these programs and objec— tives. l3 1A This ro-évicw attempts to establish the theme that almost nothing in the structure and function of a middle school can be accepted as an established principle. Most concepts should be viewed as hypotheses to be tested. History of the American Intermediate School About 60 years ago, seventh and eighth graders were removed from predominately eight—year elementary schools and placed in either the (then) four-year high schools, or grouped with the ninth graders to form a new organi- zational unit, the junior high school. Charles w. Elliot, President of Harvard University, issued an initial call for reorganization in a speech before the National Education Association in 1886. His concern was to graduate pupils from high school at an earlier age, a goal never realized. Interest grew and the NEA appointed a "Committee of Ten on Secondary School Studies." Its recommendation, aimed at improving programs for college preparatory pupils, was to establish a six year program in secondary schools or to begin the teaching of secondary school studies two years earlier in the elementary school. During the early years of the 20th Century, the 6-6, 6-3-3, 6-2-A organiza- tional patterns came into existence.1 lTheodore 0. Moss, "The Middle School Comes and Takes Another Grade or Two," National Elementary Princi— pal, XLVIII (February, 1969), p. 38. 15 Factors other than economy of time and better prep- aration of pupils for college influenced the movement. Age 12 was regarded by many psychologists as the beginning of adolescence; it was believed that youngsters of this age should be housed with pupils in the later years of adolescence. The course of study in the upper grades of the elementary schools generally consisted of penmanship, grammar, reading, spelling, geography, history and arith- metic, a program considered sterile and repetitious when viewed from the vantage point of the high school programs with their vocational courses and extra curricular activi- ties. In theory, the earlier introduction of high school programs should also have reduced the pupil dropout rate, an idea to gain wide acceptance as a valid objective in support of the reorganization movement. In 1907 Thorndike substantiated this claim. John Dewey2 gave considerable prestige to the movement. Although influential educators supported the move- ment, acceptance of the junior high school did not come as a result of convincing research. Studies were made to compare the achivement of pupils in eight year ele— mentary schools with that of pupils in the new junior high schools. Generally, the findings of these studies showed "no significant differences." Those favoring the junior high school began to point out that fundamentals were 2Ibid. .—_——.— 16 equally well achieved by their pupils, although sub— stantially less time was spent studying them. Subjective evaluations favored the junior high school.3 In 1909 and 1910 the first three—year junior high schools were opened in Columbus, Ohio, and Berkeley, California. The schools were opened to relieve over- crowded conditions, a serious problem as the enrollment in .public secondary schools between 1890 and 1920 rose from 3.8 per cent to 2A per cent of the normal high school age group. By 1919 there were 387 such schools.“ By 1920 most states had accepted compulsory atten- dance 1aws and the emphasis in junior high school became one of providing a complete unit of training for those who would be leaving school at an early age. But in the 20 years following 1920, the emphasis on the junior high school changed sharply from that of preparing pupils for college and reducing the dropout rate to one which focused on the immediate needs of the early adolescent. The foundation of its existence rested on the nature of youth in transition. Since 19A0, much of the work on the intermediate school has been to refine this position,5 3Stanley S. Sanders, "Challenge of the Middle School," Educational Forum, L (January, 1968), p. 191. ”Moss, op. cit., p. 39. 5Nelson L. Bassing and Roscoe V. Cramer, The Junior High School (Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1965), p. 9“. 17 although many junior high schools reflected the structure of the senior high school. By mid—century the arguments for the 6-3-3 organ— ization pattern had begun to lose their impact. Many forces were directed toward the schools.6 A minimum leaving age of 16 or higher was the law in most states. Adult social patterns and puberty were being reached at increasingly earlier ages. Dating, dancing parties, and excessive emphasis on competitive athletics denied the junior high school the distinction of being a unique institution. Parents echoed a common complaint: the junior high school was forcing their children to grow up too fast.7 These concerns indicated that perhaps the 5-3-4 plan of grade organization would be superior to any organ— izational scheme which had the early-adolescent housed with pupils in grade nine or higher. Beginning in the early 1950's with a limited number of schools in the East and 6Franklin Patterson, The Adolescent Citizen (Glencoe, Illinois: The Glencoe Free Press, 1960), p. 3. 7Paul Woodring, "The New Intermediate School," Social Foundations of Education, ed. by Dorothy Westley- Gibson (New York: The Free Press, 1967), p. 235. 18 Southwest, the popularity of the middle school concept grew until in 1967—68, over 1,200 middle schools could be identified in America. A 10 per cent random sample from this population showed that 60 per cent of the schools had a 6-8 grade organization pattern, with enrollments ranging from below 100 to more than 1,300. Self-contained plants housed 80 per cent of these schools. Only 3.8 per cent of the schools were established before 1955, and 10.4 per cent were established prior to 1960. Almost half were established during 1966 and 1967.8 The Case for Establishing A New Middle School The middle school concept is complex and there is danger that it will be misinterpreted or oversimplified. The middle school has not solidified into a single pat- tern of operation.9 But this difference is a function of practice rather than of theory. The basic ideas for the establishment of a new intermediate organization can be partitioned into three mutually exclusive sets. First, problems of modern acculturation are a basic reason to support removal of grade eight from the higher grades. Perhaps the greatest problem and challenge for 8William M. Alexander, "Middle School Movement," Theory Into Practice, VII (June, 1968), p. 115. 9Neil P. Atkens, "Rethinking Education in the Mid- dle," Theory Into Practice, VII (June, 1968), p. 119. 19 schools today is that of c0ping with the desire for early sophistication. This is particularly true of the middle class urban pupil; many ninth graders are already dis- dainful of the ways of childhood. While the adolescent is ready for new ideas and new experiences, he is less easy to teach, less willing to play the role of the learner, and less likely to accept the teacher as an authority figure.10 In a study of 320 physical, mental, emotional and social characteristics, the organization of K-A, 5-8 and 9-12 offered the patterns of greatest similarity. Ninth graders are more closely related to twelfth graders than they are to seventh graders. They have interests in doing most of the things the seniors do, and they are ready to begin doing them.11 Second, similar arguments can be made that the fifth or sixth grade youngster should not be housed at the elementary level. Regarding social, emotional and physical maturity and opposite-sex choices of intermediate age pupils, the fewest differences were found between pupils in grades six and seven, and between pupils in grades nine and ten.12 If they do not fit at the lOJames Coleman, "Social Change-Impact on the Adolescent," National Association of Secondary Principals' Bulletin, XLIX (April 1965), lIelfl. 11David w. Meade, "Seventeen, No, Thirteen," Minne- sota Journal of Education, XLVII (November, 1966), p. 12. 12 Ibid. 2O elementary level now, they will be even more out of place in the future. That two-year-olds can be taught to read is an example of the evidence that supports the case for public education at an earlier age. Very young child— ren will enter school when the early-adolescents are even more sophisticated. The transescent youth will be even further divorced from the elementary school organization.l3 Third, assuming that the partitioning of the early— adolescent from the upper and lower grades is valid, there remains a fundamental question of whether the new intermediate organization can offer a program to justify its existence. The proponentslu of the middle school movement are emphatic in their positive response. Brod15 has summarized many of the theoretical advantages they cite: 1. It gives this unit a status of its own, rather than a "junior" classification. 2. It facilitates the introduction in grades five and six of some specialization and team teach- ing in staff patterns. 3. It also facilitates the reorganization of teacher education which is sorely needed to l3Glen H. Darling, "The Changing Junior High School," Minnesota Journal of Education, XLVII (November, 1966), p. 12. 1“See, as examples: Judith Murphy, Middle School (New York: Educational Laboratories, Inc., 1965), and William M. Alexander, The Emergent Middle School (New York: Holt, Binehart and Winston, Inc., 1968). 15Pearl Brod, "The Middle School: Trends Toward Its Development,” The Clearing House, XL (February, 1966), p- 332. 10. ll. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 21 provide teachers competent for the middle school: since existing patterns of neither the elementary nor the secondary teacher training programs would suffice, a new pattern must be developed. Developmentally, children in grades 6-8 are probably more alike than children in grades 7-9. Since they are undergoing the common experi- ence of adolesence, sixth-eighth graders should have special attention, special teachers, and Special programs, which the middle school per- mits. It provides an opportunity for gradual change from the self-contained classroom to complete departmentalization. Additional facilities and specialists can be made available to all children one year earlier. It permits the organization of a program with emphasis upon continuation and enrichment of basic education in the fundamentals. It facilitates extending guidance services into the elementary grades. It helps to slow down the "growing up" process from K-8 because the oldest group is removed from each level. It puts children from the entire district to— gether one year earlier, aiding sociologically. Physical unification of grades 9-12 permits better coordination of courses for the senior high school. It eliminates the possibility of some students and parents not being aware of the importance of the ninth grade as part of the senior high school record, particularly in terms of college admission. It eliminates the need for special programs and facilities for one grade and eliminates the problems created by the fact that the ninth grade is functionally a part of the senior high school. It reduces duplication of expensive equipment and facilities for the one grade. The funds can be spent on facilities beneficial to all grades. It provides both present and future flexibility in building planning, particularly when it comes to changing school population. Later, Brod surveyed over 1,000 middle schools. The survey indicated that the middle school is a success in practice. While the survey indicated that the 6—8 22 grade organization was preferred to a 5—8 grade Organ- ization, the list of advantages of the middle school was a recapitulation of the aforementioned theoretical claims.16 It would seem, then, that to remedy the weaknesses of the junior high school would be the most defensible reason for establishing a middle school. Yet more than 17 1967-68 sur- 50 per cent of the respondents in Alexander's vey indicated other reasons including the need to elim- inate crowded conditions, to try out various innovations, to aid desegregation, and to try out plans that had been successful in other school systems. He18 examined these schools to determine the number that offered interscholastic athletic programs, which are generally viewed as a weakness in the middle school con— cept. The numbers were not significantly different between the schools established to remedy the weaknesses of the junior high school and schools established for other reasons. Similarly, he tested these schools for 16Pearl Brod, "Middle Schools in Practice," The Clearing House, XLII (May, 1968), p. 531. 17William M. Alexander, "The New School in the Mid- dle," Phi Delta Kappan, L (February, 1969), p. 355. 18William M. Alexander, "Middle School Movement," Theory Into Practice, VII (June, 1968), p. 11“. 23 differences between the two groups in the number of departmentalized programs. Again the differences were not significant. Alexander stated that these traits, in fact, were not considered as weaknesses, or that they were no more remedied in one segment of the sample than the other.19 It should be pointed out that the reason for the establishment of a middle school is not neces- sarily concerned with the program development of that school. There is little reason to expect significant differences in the above. Alexander2O concluded that instructional organization of new middle schools reflected the organizational patterns of the schools from which they were synthesized, although many of these schools had certain features distinctive of the middle school move- ments, including variable and modular schedules and independent study programs. Those educators fostering the middle school move- ment realize that many organizational problems must be surmounted. They feel that its merits transcend the limitations. But all educators do not share this point of view. 19Ibid. 20Ibid., p. 115. 2A The Case Against the Middle School Cestreich readily admits that the junior high school does not meet adequately the need of early adolescent pupils. Since the problem is clearly identified, it would be reasonable to expect to find a number of alternative solutions under test. Such is not the case, and almost without exception, the middle school is the convergent solution.21 In the early reorganization of secondary education from which the junior high school grew, reliance on the elimination of the four year high school for great educational improvements was a pivotal stance. Today, middle school advocates expect equally great educational improvement with the reinstatement of the four year pro- gram. Seemingly, reorganization has received too much attention in this century for its own significance, and it has not been established that the goals espoused by middle school advocates could not be met by introducing certain practices into the elementary school.22 Many of the ideas and terms expressed in the Octo— ber, 1963, issue of the Bulletin23 of the NASSP, an issue ClArthur H. Oestreich, "Middle School in Transition," The Clearing House, XLIV (October, 1969), p. 91. ’) 2"Mauritz Johnson, "Research and Secondary Educa- tion," Educational Forum, XXXI (March, 1967), p. 295. 23See, for example: Freeman N. Case, "Curricular Changes in the Junior High Schools," National Association of Secondary School Principal's Bulletin, L (October, 19637} p. 89. 25 devoted entirely to the subject of the junior high school, are the terms and ideas now being expressed in describing the purpose of program in the middle school. The assump— tion that the middle school differs from a good 7—9 junior high school should be supported by organizational plans which are unique to the middle school. ". [A] perceptive school patron might well ask the follow- ing question: If the middle school will somehow deal more adequately with the needs of the early adolescent, why are not these same procedures now effective since two-thirds (grades seven and eight) of the school pop— ulatiOn is already to be found in the present junior high school? If the present junior high school is not as effective as it could be, just how will the new middle school be more effective?"2u 5 Vars2 believes educational goals for early adoles- cent youngsters have not changed and that the evidence of physiological and psychological differences in today's youth is not totally substantiated. He reports the opinion of junior high school principals is that the 7—8-9 school is more likely to attract and hold competent guidance counselors, subject matter specialists, and male teachers. Under such conditions, the releasing 2A Oestreich, loc. cit. 25Gordon F. Vars, "Junior High or Middle School? Which Is Best for Education of Young Adolescents?" High School Journal, L (December, 1966), p. 113. 26 (M'lJH) ninth rfimuh> may rmxhux: the qualijgz<3f the interu- mediate teaching staff. He hastens to add that more evidence is needed before this conclusion can be sub- stantiated. Jennings argues that the likenesses of pupils in grades six and seven and again in grades nine and ten are reasons Egg retaining the 6-3-3 organization. Moving from one school to another during a time when a pupil's personal growth changes are more stable would be less traue matic than would be the case in a middle school organiza- tion pattern.26 Jennings offered no evidence to support his position, but he receives corollary support from Johnson. Johnson argues that the organizational movement seems to rest on the undesirability of a single social program for the early and late adolescent and that be— cause of the individual variation in the development of youth during these years, the upper and lower limits of the middle school cannot be established with scientific precision.27 The theoretical claims have been delineated. The truth of these claims will be validated in the field. The success or failure of the movement will rest with the principals, teachers, pupils and communities that 26Wayne Jennings, "Middle School? No!" Minnesota Journal of Education, XLVII (January, 1967), p. 73. 27 Johnson, pp, cit., p. 296. 27 compose the school. The subjects of this study, middle school principals, already have expressed reactions. Daily Concerns of Middle School Principals According to the survey of "Middle Schools in Action,"28 reactions of principals to the middle school ranged from favorable to mixed to unfavorable. Favorable reactions included: (a) the middle school better provides for continuity of program, (b) the community is solidly sold on the approach, (c) the middle school eliminates the problem of having the ninth grade at the intermediate level, and (d) the middle school is not a miniature high school. Reactions from other principals in the survey were mixed. They reported that (a) while teachers are enthusi- astic about the middle school concept, it was started because of economical rather than educational considera- tions; (b) what the school views as minor problems are a recurring concern of parents: sixth grade pupils are unable to function well in a large school setting; (c) while teachers seem more secure in their subject matter area, much of the former teacher guidance no longer exists; and (d) while more departmentalization seems to improve 28National Education Association Research Bulletin, Middle Schools in Theory and Fact (Washington: NEA Press, May, 1969), pp. 12—13. 28 the academic climate of the school, some teachers tend to think of the school as a secondary school.29 Some principals' reactions were unfavorable. They state that (a) pupils do not like the term "middle school," (b) the sixth grade belongs with the elementary school, (c) unfavorable parent reaction has resulted from 1 AH .erh' .‘ _ g the curtailment of extracurricular athletics, and (d) the maturity spread of grades five through eight is too 30 great to be of sound educational purpose. Emphasis should be placed on the fact that each a a of the above reactions represents the viewpoint of an individual principal as hecviews his school. While these reactions serve to vignette unique problems and perceptions of individual schools, this alone should not be the basis for any generalizations.31 Some of the problems of middle school principals were reported in the same survey. They represent the individual problems of individual principals and should not be interpreted as representing the problems of all middle schools, or even a majority of them. The princi- f r." Jan-9.1!.- pals reported problems arise because (a) they have no prece- dent to follow, (b) teachers with the proper training and 291bid., p. 13. 3Olbid. Bllbid. 29 certification are difficult to secure, (0) the rigidity of the districts' programs and material does not reflect the true concept of the middle school, (d) accrediting associations' old policies do not freely allow for experi— mentation and innovation, (e) sixth graders do not feel like full members of the middle school, (f) teachers resist the change needed to implement the middle school concept, (g) lack of personnel and inadequate plants make for dif- ficulty in providing a program of individualized instruc— tion, (h) the changing of certain classes disturb self- contained or block-time classes, (1) differentiated pro- grams between the grade levels make scheduling difficult, and (j) compared to a self-contained program, departmental- ized classes have more discipline problems.32 But many concerns of middle school principals trans- cend the specific problems of the organizational pattern. Principals in the Los Angeles area responding to a survey of interest form listed the following topics as current and important: sex education; innovations; labor rela- tions; teacher, community and student militancy; curricu— lum for deprived students; student government; educational technology; the evolving role of the prinCipal; personnel for middle schools; schools in transition; narcotics; 32Ibid., pp. lu—ls. 30 the evolving—youth culture; staff orientation; and com- . - 3? munlty relations. J Middle schools have many concerns and problems. What program offers the maximum likelihood estimate of meeting the educational needs of the early adolescent? This is the central issue. The nucleus of the solution rests with the uniqueness of these youngsters. , Transescent Youth : The organizational integrity upon which the middle ll school is conceptualized is that middle school pupils have certain distinct mental, emotional, social and phys— ical characteristics. The developmental stages of the years between child— hood and adolescence are called transescence. There is no discrete differential between these ages, but, rather there is a gradual change involving physical, mental and social elements. Physically, the young adolescent has a growth spurt and becomes sexually mature. Mentally, he moves from a level of concrete operations to an ability S to interact in the abstract. Socially, the reliance on “a 33Gerald R. Rasmussen, "Meaningful In-Service Pro— gram for the Neglected School Administrator," Journal of Secondary Education, XLIV (March, 1969) pp. 129-135. 31 family for interests, attitudes, and values transfers to the peer group subculture.3u With the many changes of puberty, views toward schooling often change as well. For many youths, the oppor- tunity to be with friends is the salient feature of the school. The school provides a setting in which they can reassure themselves regarding their competence in dealing with others, peers and adults alike. It offers a stage where each sex may practice the respective role of becoming manly or becoming womanly. These roles over- lap, of course, but for most students, school remains the place where they learn to get ahead. Yet for a few, school is the reflection of a nasty fact, that for them the future holds little brightness.35 Not only is the transescent youth faced with a flux of personal growth changes, but also his ecology demands of him a practice of a higher standard of ethics than it did of the early—adolescent when the junior high school first made its appearance on the educational scene. Typically, today's youth is a city boy living in the 3“Donald H. Eichhorn, "Teacher Education for the Middle School, A Framework," Theory Into Practice, VII Clune, 1968), p. 12A. 35William Wattenberg, "Youth Education: A Psycho- Ihogical Perspective," Youth Education: Problems, Per- §gyective, Promise, ed. by Raymond H. Muessig (Washington: .Asscmiation for Supervision and Curriculum Development, IV.E.A. Press, 1968), p. 53. LA) (‘0 inner city, suburbia or a large town. There is an absence of strong family ties from which stems an earlier inter— est in the opposite sex. Today's youth lives in a sub-culture encouraged by the mass media and plays an important role as a consumer.36 He is faced with the forces of the 20th Century. Along with the population explosion has come a concomitant surge in communication and transportation. These developments,coup1ed with economic prosperity, have forced increased socialization and interdependence on everyone. The role of today's early-adolescent is a demanding one. What passed as a prank in his grandfather's day, would now be considered a criminally delinquent act.37 Transescence is a time of turmoil. The growth pat- terns that accentuate transition will now be examined. 1 Intellectual Characteristics of Transescent Youth Changes of mental productivity that occur between childhood and early-adolescence can be conceptualized by looking at the relative differentiation of subject-object interaction, which Piagetian theory defines as egocen- trism.38 When a child formulates a hypothesis or builds a strategy, he does so strictly from the available data, 36Darling, 9p. cit., p. 12. 371bid., p. 10. 38David Elkind, "Egocentrism in Adolescence," Child Development, XXXVIII (December, 1967), p. 1,025. 33 without giving consideration to possibilities which arise from the interaction of the data with his mental activities. The egocentric process here is that he cannot differentiate between available data and his mental activities.39 With early-adolescence comes the ability to conceptualize all of the combinations of data and the ability to construct contrary-to-fact hypotheses. The adolescent, for example, f6 can deal with the statement, "Suppose that coal is white," 3 a supposition to which the child would reply, "But coal i is black." The early—adolescent sees the difference 3 between his data and his mental activities using these data. The child does not.“0 Cognitively, the conquest of thought is the major task of the early-adolescent. He can conceptualize his own thoughts, accept these thoughts as objects, and can reason about them. Clinical evidence of the shift from concrete to abstract thinking processes of youth is given by Adelson, Green and O'Neil”l in a study of the growth of the idea of law. From interviews with youngsters aged 11 to 18, answers were coded regarding their concrete-abstractness and were tested by chi square statistics. Not only was 39 uoIbid., p. 1,029. Ibid., p. 1,028. ulJoseph Adelson, Bernard Green and Robert O'Neil, "Growth of the Idea of Law in Adolescence," Developmental Psychology, L (July, 1969), p. 327. 3A the concrete—abstract transition borne out, but this growth in the years between 13 and 15 was unusually quick. Specifically, the younger pupils made their judgments of law without much concern for the social needs that the law serves while older adolescents seldom lost Sight of this.“2 The authors state that, " . [I]t would be misleading to attribute the youngster's growth in sophistication solely to his increased knowl- edge, or to his greater capacity in handling the abstrac- tions inherent in political thought.”3 The authors also noted a fundamental change in outlook, in temper and quality of discourse. Wattenberglm states that the rate of this transi- tion varies widely between pupils. Some pupils' mental growth was stable throughout early-adolescence. For others, the rate of growth changed sharply upward, Some youngsters' growth rate became slower, while for others, growth was erratic. They have a broad spectrum of intellectual adeptness and have developed a wide variety of cognitive styles, expressing various degrees of fluency, “5 seriousness of purpose, and achievement motivation. “21bid., p. 331. ”31bid., p. 332. uuWattenberg, gp. cit., p. 50. “51bid., pp. u7—u8. I .nufldg ”no.4... '1’- 35 A great variance in growth rates also is common in the physical development of transescent youth. Physical Characteristics of Transescent Youth Generally, wellénourished children mature faster than poorly nourished ones, with girls maturing one to one and a half years earlier than boys. Ten per cent of the girls are mature sexually at 11, 50 per cent at 13, and 90 per cent at 15; while with boys 10 per cent are mature sexually at 13, 50 per cent at 15, and 99 per cent at 17.“6 The beginning of puberty is noted by increase in the growth rate of the breasts, ovaries and uterus in girls. In boys there is an increased rate of growth in the size of the testes, scrotum and penis. For both sexes, shoulders, hips, arms, legs, height and total body mass increase in rate of growth. By and large, these changes occur a full two years earlier for girls than for boys. The different changes do not follow the same sequence for all individuals, and any particular change may vary by as much as five years between indi- viduals.147 The adolescent spurt in body height for the typi- cal girl begins just after 10 years of age and peaks at u6lbid., p. U7. u7Howard V. Meredith, "Synopsis of Puberal Changes 5J1 Youth," Journal of School Health, XXXVII (April, 1967), P- 171. 36 about age 12. Following the peak of the growth rate, the velocity sharply falls. Girls are still growing in height at age 1”, but at a much slower rate.~ Differen- tiated spurts in trunk length, hip width, common girth, leg girth and body height are similarly timed. The change commences between ages 8 and 13, and rarely, both earlier and later. The average age for the beginning of F? breast enlargement is 10.5 years,falling on a high prob- i ability five year interval, with full development being E reached in about three years.“8 {*4 For girls the first appearance of pigmented hair in the pubic region occurs at an average age of 11, plus or minus one and one-half years. Pigmented hair in the axillary regions first occurs at about age 12. From the appearance of pubic hair to full density generally requires three years. The first appearance of pubic hair is not closely correlated with the beginning of breast enlargement. The figures given by Meredith are for West- ern white girls and are approximately those of American Negroes.“9 1 0f adolescent changes, the age of menarche has been closely studied. A century ago the average first occurrence of the menstrual cycle was 1A.5 years. Today it is 13 years. Fifty per cent of today's girls reach menarche between I *BIhig., p. 171. ”9lhid., p. 172. —u—-——-—- 37 ages 2 and 1“ years. A girl may be in any stage of puberal breast or hair development when the first men— strual cycle begins. Menarche has been quite strongly associated with the age of the beginning of breast enlargement, with the beginning of pigmented pubic hair, and with the time of the maximum rate of height and weight increase. Following menarche, the r6 girl typically grows in height another 2.5 inches, although one girl in seven may grow in height four *q-‘T—‘r? . 1.1 inches or more. The onset of menarche does not neces- rsarily mean that the girl has the ability to become pregnant. Commonly, there is a period of three or more years of puberal sterility.50 In boys,the earliest observable Sign of puberal 'change is an increase in the size of the testes. The increased growth rates commonly occur at age 12 for the testes and about age 12.5 for the penis. The high prob— ability interval for these two changes is 9.5 years to 3 1A.5 years for the testes and 10 years to 15 years for E the penis. Generally, between ages 12.5 years and 17 1 years the average length of the penis almost doubles, and from 12 years to 19 years there is a tenfold increase in the volume of the testes. Meredith's findings are for white boys.51 50Ibid., p. 173. 51Ibid. 38 As with girls there is a period of rapid growth in height which typically begins at age 12.5 and reaches a crest at age 1A. Thereafter,the rate of increase declines (greatly. Ten and one—half years to 16 years is the inter- val during which this growth spurt generally begins. During a l2—month period, a boy may grow five inches in height. The differentiated growth spurts of the trunk and limb size are Similar to those of girls, except they are shifted to two years later.52 The interval in which 80 per cent of the boys first have observable pigmented pubic hair is between ages 10 years and 16 years, with 13 years being the average. The average time from the beginning of pigmented pubic hair to a dense growth is about three years. The appear- ance of axillary hair follows pubic hair by about one year.53 Moderate amounts of breast enlargement accompany puberal changes in boys. A node of firm tissue develops under each nipple. The nodes generally are present between ages 11 years and 15 years. Frequently, they are too small to palpate in late adolescence.5u 52Ibid., p. 17A. 53lbid. Cl )‘lbid. 39 That a boy may be in any stage of pubic and axillary hair development when spermatazoa are first discharged in the urine,characterizes the wide range and often broken sequences of pubic development in boys. One 14-year old may have no puberal increase in penis size, while for another the organ may be near maximum size. For some boys the full development of testes, scrotum, penis, pubic 1;? and axillary hair may not fully be reached until age 20, while for others full development may be reached at age 15.55 Social and Emotional Charac- teristics of Transescent Youth Psychologically, the greatest change of puberty is that young people learn how to receive gratification of needs from each other. As a reinforcer for conduct, peer approval begins to overshadow the need for adult approval. This change is accompanied by model identity changes. While the young child models his identity after parents, teach- ers or other important adults, the adolescent finds his ' source of models in the mass media or literature, wherein buts-4.2m I- '.u ‘ I I .. his identity model is the athlete, the young television hero, or any other young person with an immediacy of appeal.56 A clinical example of peer influence is given in a case study of a socially-oriented, underachieving, Sixth r- 95Ibid., p. 175. 56Wattenberg, op. cit., p. 51. A0 grade boy conducted by Greenbaum, Harris and Schaeffer.57 The experimental program for this socially—oriented underachiever—-one who will work, not for achievement, but rather for social approval-~consisted of rewarding the classmates, as well as the underachiever, for appro- priate behavior which was any improvement in his aca- demic performance. For every improvement, the class and subject were rewarded one minute of free time from com- pulsory calisthenics in physical education. After two months the pupil was in the upper half of his class in reading, mathematics, spelling, social studies and Span- ish. The researcher felt that the sharing of reinforcers throughout the social system greatly enhanced modified behavior. An interesting follow-up to this study would be one which would measure the variance of behavior modi- fication between different age.groups. This could be a measure of the need for peer acceptance. Hill and Kochandorfer58 further experimentally demon- strated peer influence by showing that among 60 sixth grade subjects, incidence of cheating was more closely 57Marvin Greenbaum, Alice Harris and Benson Schaef— fer, "The Treatment of Socially Oriented Underachievers," Journal of School Psychology, IV (Winter, 1968), p. 70. 58John P. Hill and Roy C. Kochancoefer, "Knowledge of Peer Success and Risk of Detection as Determinates of Cheating," Developmental Psychology, I (May, 1969), p. 231. L r; . I Al related to pupils with knowledge of how peers had per- formed on the test than to pupils who had no such knowl- edge.l39 Peer influence manifests itself in social situations. The early adolescent is conscious of sex-identification. Early in adolescence, free social life revolves around single sex groups: the boys play vigorous games, dream- ing of adventure; the girls giggle and start using lip— stick. Early interest in the opposite sex is clumsily handled and often is parallelled by a scholastic slump. When boy-girl relationships are mastered, concomitant improvements in scholarship are likely to occur.60 For parents and other adults, the youth's behav- vior is often perplexing and seemingly unexplainable. Elkind61 offers an interesting theory to explain these extremes in behavior. Although the youngster now is freed from the egocentrism of childhood which prevented him from differentiating between his thought processes and the external data with which he was dealing, new egocen— tric patterns arise. While he can conceptualize his own 59Donald H. Eichhorn, The Middle School (New York: The Center for Applied Research in Education, Inc., 1966), p. A8. 6OWattenberg, QB- cit., p. 50. 61 Elkind, 9p. cit., p. 1,030. \_ *— ~ . . t ._..‘...i‘.\.a . J‘- , Q . I I A2 thoughts and the thoughts of other people, he cannot differentiate between his own preoccupations and the mental processes of others. Consequently, he be— lieves that others also are preoccupied with his appear— ance and behavior. He feels that he is the primary object of everyone's attention. He acts on the premise that others are as admiring or critical of him as he is of himself. He constructs an imaginary audience,62 an audience because he sees himself as the focus of atten— tion and imaginary because this is not often the case. The idea of an imaginary audience can explairlthe self- consciousness so characteristic of this age. Since this audience is a construct of his imagination, it likewise has access to all of his perceptions of his inadequacies. The imagined audience knows just where to look'for cos— metic and behavioral sensitivities. The early adolescent feels that he is under constant and critical scrutiny of others. He reacts by becoming shy.63 Often this failure to differentiate can explain loudness, faddish dress and boorishness. Since he can be self-admiring as well as self-critical, he feels that the calling of attention to himself is admired by others.6u 62lbid. 631oid. 6ulbid. A3 While he does not differentiate the objects of his thought from those of others, he over—differentiates his own feelings. He feels that certain intense feelings are reserved only for him: agony, rapture, love. He may become convinced that he will not die and that God is his personal confidant. Elkind65 refers to this belief in the uniqueness of his feelings as a personal fable. The imaginary audience and personal fable reach their peaks in adolescence. Gradually, he realizes that the thought processes of others are as unique as his own. With the passing of adolescence, realistic differentia— tions are made.66 The transition from childhood to adolescence is complex. The educational goals and objectives to accommo— date these changes are no less so. Goals and Objectives of the Middle School Havinghurst67 has identified three major develop- mental tasks for transescent youth, around which the school's goals and objectives revolve. The first involves the organization of the knowledge of social and physical reality. The preadolescent is selective of what he 65Ibid., p. 1,031. 66Ibid. 67Robert J. Havinghurst, "Middle School Children in Contemporary Society," Theory Into Practice, VII (June, 1968), pp. 120—122. AA wishes to learn. One youngster may like math, another music, but a need common to almost all is to systemati- cally organize their concepts. The second developmental task is that of learning to work well in the peer group. The transescent youth is concerned with his ability to get along with his peers and is closely attuned to the personalities of his age—mates. It follows that this is an excellent time to develop favorable socio-cultural attitudes. Third, the transescent pupil needs to develop independence. A youngster of this age should be able to stand alone. For pupils to achieve their goals and objectives in these tasks, the middle school program must be com— prehensive. A c0gnitive skills program is not enough. Likewise, efforts directed only at the social and emo- tional phases of schooling will be inadequate. Eichhorne, Meade, Alexander and Williams68 identi— fied three components of a middle school curriculum. The first is an analytical facet, including mathematics, science, social studies and language. These should be characterized by logical, sequential and cognitive learn- ing in which individual attention can be given to the pupil's progress. The second facet should be programs 68 Meade, 100- Cito“Eichhorne o . cit. . 123' , ilIIam choo ’ William M Alexander and Emmett L. W S:'“ l for the Middle Years," Controversy In American Education, ed. by Harold Full (New York: The MacMillan Company, 1967), pp. 11A-12l. -. R .1 (T ‘w-f3" _.\.\J——-‘w I: AVAIL, 4‘ v A5 designed to help the pupils learn to know themselves. There should be programs in growth and development, social dynamics, and physical activities. Appropriate experi- ences in this area would include friendship with members of their own sex, realization that the other sex can be interesting, admiration of adult models, and an opportu- nity to explore their own identity. The third ourricu— 363 lum facet would be designed for self-expression, helping to develop divergent mental processes. This would in- ! clude arts, fine arts, composition, literature and the r a performing arts. Compton is specific and has stated the goals and programs from an organizational framework: 1. Articulation with the elementary school to assure easy transition for youngsters. This may necessitate a pseudo self-contained classroom approach during a portion of the school day for the first year of middle school education. 2. Team teaching by subject-matter specialists in areas of general knowledge which are closely related—~English language, literature, history, geography, economics, anthropology, science, art, and music. 3. Skills laboratories staffed by technologists with subject-matter competencies to provide remedial, developmental, and advanced instruction in such skills as reading, listening, writing, mathematics, science, foreign language, art, music and physical education. A. Independent study for all students, commen- surate with the tOpic selected for study and the students' needs, interests and abilities. 5. A home-base group assigned to a teacher with special training in guidance and counseling, as well as the time and the opportunity to aid children with personal and academic problems on a regularly scheduled basis. .1. 3* ’mz'm4 m“ w :7 J A6 6. A program of activities in which each student will be able to participate——based on the personal development of students rather than on enhancement of the school's prestige or the entertainment of the public. 7. A plan of vertical school organization provid- ing for continuous progress of students. 8. Evaluative techniques in light of individual progress, rather than the prevalent punitive sys- tem of assigning grades in terms of some elusive "average" for a particular chronological age group. 9. A program tailored to the needs of each stu— dent with individualized student schedules. 10. An instructional and administrative staff with an understanding of the in-between-ager, competence in teaching at least one subject area, and a genuine desire to provige the best possible program for these youngsters. 9 Gersen summarizes the middle school program well. Transescent youths should have a program to meet the physical, intellectual, emotional and social development which are crucial at this stage of their life develop— ment. They should have a co-curricular and intramural program designed to these developmental areas, and each pupil Should be known well by at least one teacher. The pupils should have a common program consisting of the English language, arts, social studies, unified arts and a strong physical education program.70 69Mary F. Compton, "Middle School: Alternative to the Status Quo,“ Theory Into Practice, VII (June, 1968), p. 109. 7ORaymond Joseph Gerson, "Proposals for Middle School Curriculum" (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Columbia University, 1968), p. 3. i .. ind-“Hang” . . 5" j .. “7 Knowledge About How To Achieve These Goals ' The past few years have seen an accelerating increase in the instructional strategies used to imple- ment both the traditional and recent innovations in our- riculum. This section. will give a critical overview of the most significant strategies. Many theorists advocate the flexible scheduling of classes. The Carnegie Unit or any other rigidly scheduled periods of time applied indiscriminately to all courses over one or more grade levels fail to meet the individual needs of students. Flexible scheduling is an alternative to this organization and falls into several categories. The most common is perhaps modular schedules in which the school day is built around modules of time.' Usually each module is 20 minutes in length. Two or more modules generally constitute a class. The length of a class can be adjusted to meet its individual needs. The fluid block program represents another alternative to a rigid schedule. In this program, six to eight teachers are assigned to 150 to 200 pupils. Teachers work cooperatively to schedule class time and other activities for the pupils. 71 Such schedules can be changed weekly. 71Duane J. Mathesis, "Flexible Requirements Stimu— lates Innovations," Minnesota Journal of Education, XLIX (September, 1968), p. 39. T4 .4... .-_ fill- 3w - _E A8 One widely-supported flexible scheduling plan calls for A0 per cent of the pupil's time in large group instruc- tion, 20 per cent of the time in small group instruction and A0 per cent of the time in independent study.72 In practice, many educators feel that A0 per cent of a pupil's time should not be spent in large group instruc— tion; that in fact, it would be difficult to establish any single activity that would be of equal educational value to 150 students. That no more than ten per cent of a pupil's time should be spent in large group instruc— tion is the claim of many educators. Obviously, a teacher's planning time varies inversely with the amount of time spent in large group instruction.73 This format places value not only on flexible scheduling, but on team teaching and independent study as well. Yet basic issues can be raised concerning either of these strategies. "Are the educational accomplishments of the students improved through the use of team teaching?" is a vital question. Answers to this question are far from conclusive and are often contradictory. Assuming that the teacher 72William Van Til, Gordon F. Vars and John H. Louns- bary, Modern Education for the Junior High School Years (Indianapolis, Indiana: The Bobbs-Merril Co., Inc., 1967), p. 211. 73David E. Shawner, "Team Teaching: How Successful Is It?" The Clearing House, XLVII (September, 1968), p. 22. f: “glut 4'0“.“ l‘. “hf-n . A'Hb H9 is relichd of secretarial tasks, she should have more time to plan and execute creative teaching. The team allows the teacher to specialize, and an excellent oppor- tunity is created for the individualization of instruc- tion.714 But team teaching is not designed for the answer-centered curriculum. The entire concept is posited upon open and sustained communication among all staff 75 [Puma-at, . , 1 members, often a difficult objective to achieve. Three basic questions should guide the decision of 4-_" ‘ In“ -‘ CI 2- u whether to adopt team teaching: (a) Does the school e:l recognize that a child is unique? (b) Does the school recognize the uniqueness of the teacher? (0) IS there acknowledgement that instructional practice should not be rigidly bound by arbitrary time schedules? If the answers to these questions are positive, team teaching could be a valid alternative to present practice.76 The concept of independent study is widely endorsed. For an individual to be responsible for his own learning and for his continuing education. has long been identified as the ultimate goal of education. Independent study 1 l ....... should foster that goal. But it appeals only to a limited 7”lbid., p. 2A. 75George J. Funaro, "Team Teaching," The Clearing House, XLIII (March, 1969), p. A03. 76 Ibid., p. u01. 50 range of students, including the very bright, the highly motivated and the academically inclined.77 The attainable objectives of independent study include: (a) the activity is inherently good, (b) faculty time is conserved, (c) enrichment, (d) acceler— ‘ation, (e) pupils work at their own rate, (f) creativity is fostered, and (g) it helps pupils to discover their own best techniques for learning. No greater mental capabilities are needed for successful independent study than for success in traditional classes.78 A successful independent study program must have content that will attract and maintain the pupil's inter— est, must have adequate resources, and must have content with recognizable limits and a difficulty level such that the pupil can study it in depth with a high probability of success.79 The teacher who directs the independent study must have certain special qualities. She must be able to recognize and acknowledge the potential of the learner. She must be able to ask provocative questions while encouraging the questions of her pupils. She must be able to recognize and value originality, develop creative 77Fredrick R. Cyphert, "Independent Study: The Dilemma," Theory Into Practice, V (December, 1966), p. 205. 78 Ibid., p. 206. 791bid., p. 207. 51 readers and predict behavior accurately. Finally, she must be able to develop the skills of research and cre- ative problem-solving.80 It would appear that any pupil could have a suc- cessful experience in independent study provided that it is under the direction of a very capable teacher. Programs of flexible scheduling, team teaching and independent study only recently have received general popularity, but programs of social activities have been part of the intermediate school for years. Howard81 writes of problems in junior high school activities. Generally, his comments apply to the middle school. In the best of times, school activities are sen— sitive to criticism,and under duress there is always the cry to get rid of the frills. A common complaint is that intermediate school activities tend to take on the sophis- tication of the high school program. Instances of exces- sive emphasis do exist. This is particularly true with interscholastic activities, pep bands, drill teams, majorettes and coverage of certain events by the news media. The school band may be released periodically from 80Paul E. Torrance, "Independent Study As An Instruc- tional Tool," Theory Into Practice, V (December, 1966), p. 220. 81Alvin W. Howard, "Problems in Junior High School Activities," School Activities, XL (January, 1969), p. 2. non—music classes to prepare for a marching program and instruction may be slowed for weeks while the cast pre— pares for the school play. On the other hand, some intermediate schools have very limited activity programs which are autocratic and adult directed. Over—emphasis or under—emphasis, there remain the claims that certain activities receive dis- proportionate support in funds, support, meeting places and meeting times.82 Regardless of ubiquitous criticism, activity programs are essential. It is essential that these pro— grams have the real concern of the student as their focal 83 point of operation. It is suggested that for elemen- tary school activities, and hence, with application, at least in part to the middle school, much of the activity program should be conducted within the classroom. Here many opportunities are available if the staff will allow such experiences. Often a lack of confidence in the pupils' abilities and sense of responsibility is revealed by the discouragement of such participation.8“ 82Ibid. 83 8“R. D. Greanlee, "Encouraging More Club Activities in Very Large Schools," Instructor, LXXVII (April, 1969), P. 35. Ibid. 53 Although an activity program can satisfy many of the identity needs of the early adolescent, there remain many problems that call for adult guidance. But much research is needed for the establishment of a good guidance program involving counselor educators for the middle school. Many elementary schools have no 85 has indicated that secondary- P3 counselors, and Barr school—oriented counselors have failed to identify with the intermediate school. Often a junior high guidance E program is only an adaptation of a senior high program, Lné although the counseling needs of the two groups differ greatly. A pupil's sense of self-esteem is formed by the important adults in his life and their opinions of him. He must be loved and permitted to love. If the teacher can provide this, then she can help a student learn to meet his needs in socially acceptable ways.86 It has been demonstrated that self—concept and adjustment are 87 significantly related to each other. Good programs are 85Donald J. Barr, "Look at Junior High School Coun- seling," Michigan Education Association Journal, XLV (November, 1967), p. 17. 86Sister Mary L. Studer, "Role of the Teacher in Developmental Guidance in an Elementary School," NCEA Bulletin, LXIV (November, 1967), p. 187. 87Hamed A. S. Zahran, "Self-Concept in the Psycho- _1ogical Guidance of Adolescents," Britan Journal of Edu— cational Psychology, XXVII (June, 1967), p. 239. 5A needed but are not available. Suffice it to say that all teachers are involved in guidance.88 There is no neutral ground. A teacher may damage a self—concept, intensify frustrations and increase a pupil's feeling of inade- quacy. She may help a pupil provide solutions to his problems. Here,as in perhaps no other role, the teacher must know her limitations. On the one hand, she cannot afford to do nothing; on the other, she must not fulfill the role of a psychotherapist if she is not so trained.89 To this point most of the discussion has centered around the internal affairs of the middle school, but the very term "middle" implies that consideration must be given to the educational domain of the pupil before he enters and again after he leaves the school. What happens to boys and girls at one grade level should not be dictated by what is to come later at another grade level. But consideration must be given to the pupil experiences yet to come so that the pupils will 90 gain the greatest profit. Effectiveness in reading, writing, and arithmetic is a universal need, and emphasis should be placed on an elementary program to foster these skills. Another need to provide for a smooth articulation 88Leslie W. Kindred, The Intermediate Schools (Englewood Cliffs, N. J.: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1968), p. 312. 89Studer, loc. cit. 90Van Til and others, gp. cit., p. 3A. ‘TWW’W , AM - ’3 '”‘I LTH . £31m i...— . I 2.1 55 from the elementary school to the secondary school would include a quality of awareness. The pupils should be able to perceive the wide spectrum of opportunities avail- able to them. The pupils should have an ability to explore, a spirit of inquiry. They Should be able to learn by discussion and should be able to handle freedom and work independently. Articulation of program for the transescent youth should not be based upon specific pro- grams but rather upon the cultivation of certain kinds of personal traits. Summary The American intermediate school came into existence about 60 years ago. Charles W. Elliot called for a reor— ganization so that pupils could graduate earlier from high school, a fact never realized. Other factors influenced the movement,including claims by psychologists that the early adolescent had Special needs for which special housing was needed. That the intermediate school organ- ization would reduce the dropout rate, a claim to be sub- stantiated by research, was a significant rallying point for the leaders of the reorganization movement. By mid—century many of these early arguments had begun to lose their force. So many of the junior high schools had adopted senior high school programs 56 inappropriate for intermediate grades that the organiza- tion had lost its uniqueness. The junior high was simply a scaled-down high school. 6 Today's middle schools with a predominate 5—8 or 6—8 grade organization pattern began to emerge in the early 1950's. The trend became a movement. In 1967-68 over 1,200 middle schools were identified in the United States. The theoretical foundation for the middle school organization rests on the nature of the transescent youth. Transescence is a time of turmoil for the pupil who is typically from a large town, city or urban area, and whose family ties are weakened. Physically larger, he lives in a sub-culture permeated by the mass media and peer groups, and he plays an important role as a consumer. From this vantage point, he faces the sweep- ing impact of intellectual, physical, social and emotional change. A Intellectually,this period brings great growth in the ability to deal with abstractions. He learns to do more than just compile data in order to obtain a syn— thesis solution. For example, he can arrive at a rational conclusion by beginning with a hypothesis that is con- trary to fact. This intellectual growth spurt has been substantiated with clinical evidence and accelerates at 57 a faster rate than one would predict by using chronologi- cal age growth as a standard. Physically, early-adolescents do not all grow at the same rate. Growth spurts can begin at any place on a wide chronological interval and are of widely varying duration. Ten per cent of the girls are sexually mature at ll,and 90 per cent are mature by age 15. Sexual " "’41-‘35? maturity in boys lags by two years. L3.— Psychologically, learning to receive gratification IL .uifiw. . Or“ .— -?—- A‘1’ ' 7' . t—s from each other represents the greatest change. Peer group values often replace those of the family. The curriculum of the middle school should be built around the needs of the transescent pupil. The program should have a strong analytical facet,including instruc- tion in the English language, arts, social studies, unified arts and physical education. The transescent youth Should have the opportunity to have value—laden experiences with peers and Signifi— cant adults. From this premise it is argued that there should be a strong co—curricular and intramural program and that every pupil should be known well by at least one teacher. These programs should also be designed to provide experiences designed to help each pupil find his unique identity, the third major facet of the middle school curriculum. 58 A wide range of teaching strategies can be identi— fied as appropriate to implement the middle school our— riculum. These generally include team teaching, flexible scheduling, independent study, appropriate social activi- ties, and guidance programs. CHAPTER III DESIGN OF THE STUDY Introduction The major objective of this study was to analyze the instructional policies of middle school principals who had either an elementary school or a secondary school background. This chapter is concerned with the composi— tion of the sample, the development of the statistical instrument, the methods used for collecting the data, and the procedures for the analysis of the data. Source of the Data The Michigan State Department of Education listed 97 middle schools which were in operation at the end of the 1968-69 school year. Eighty-two of these schools had ‘a grade organization pattern of 5—8 or 6—8. These two patterns are predominant in the United States and are the patterns to which this study is limited. A wide range of patterns were identified in the remaining ll schools, including 5-9 and 3-7. A questionnaire was sent to each of the 82 schools. Data for the study were gathered from the questionnaires that were completed and returned by the principals. 59 6O Instrument Employed The original questionnaire included 62 multiple choice questions which were designed to measure 23 hypotheses, Ideas for the questions were gathered from the literature in the field of the middle school. To write questions with quantifiable responses was a basic criterion used in developing the questionnaire. For most questions, the principals could describe the practices of their schools in terms of "How many," "What per cent," or "How often.” Such answers are objec- tive and tend to increase the validity of the instrument. Certain bits of crucial data did not lend themselves to quantitative assessment. For this information, a second criterion was established: responses were rank ordered according to the flexibility of the instructional policy. The most inflexible practice listed in the responses was coded with a one. As the flexibility of a practice increased, so did its code number assignment. These questions, along with the hypotheses that they were to measure, were sent to three leading propon— ents of the middle school movement: Dr. Emmett Williams, lhiiversity of Florida; Dr. M. Ann Grooms, University of Cijicinnat13and Dr. Nicholas P. Georgiady, University of IWiami (Ohio). Dr. Williams responded that his come Initments prevented him from being able to give the (Tuestionnaire a thorough review. Dr. Grooms 61 and Dr. Georgiady commented favorably and offered sug— gestions for its improvement. The instrument was field tested by three local middle school principals. The questionnaire was revised. Some questions were rewritten. Certain questions were expanded. Particularly, many questions designed to use one response to measure a variable operating at two grade levels, were expanded such that a response could be made for each grade level. For example, a question beginning, "For grades seven and eight, . . ." might have been rewritten into two questions, the first being, "For grade seven, ." The final questionnaire contained 80 questions. An understanding of the structure and the inter-relationship of the hypotheses is necessary to understand the struc— ture of the questionnaire. The questions were designed to measure five major hypotheses. There were 18 corollary hypotheses, each of which was closely related to a major hypothesis. For example, General Hypothesis 1 tested the area of subject matter facilitation. Each of the five hypotheses that were corollaries to this major hypothesis tested for differences in specific areas of ffllbject matter facilitation. A major hypothesis could 1N3 conceptualized as a house with each of the related hypotheses represented as a room within the house. Thus it was possible to explore a broad area within the 62 framework of instructional policies, and at the same time examine specific instructional policies. In the same manner, a series of questions was written to test each general hypothesis. From this ser- ies an appropriate subset of questions was used to test a corollary hypothesis. Thus each specific question was used twice in the analysis procedures. First, it was used as part of a battery of questions to test a general hypothesis. Second, it was used with a limited number of other questions from the battery to test a specific hypothesis. For example, General Hypothesis 2 was mea- sured by questions 35 through “I. This hypothesis had two corollary hypotheses. The first was measured by questions 35 through 37; the second by questions 38 through “1. In the actual construction of the questionnaire, questions to test the corollary hypotheses were built first. As these subsets of questions were combined, they were examined for their likelihood of accurately measuring the major hypothesis. Adjustments were made when needed. Hopefully, the questions that were combined from the corollary hypotheses provided for a cynergistic analysis of their respective major hypotheses. Along with a cover letter, the questionnaire was Ihailed on January 20, 1970, to each of the 82 principals. 63 The next step in the construction of the question- naire was to establish its reliability. Was it stable and-trustworthy? Was there an inherent weakness in the ciuestionnaire itself which would cause a principal to be tinable to choose the response which most nearly reflected tine instructional policies of his school? One method to ”measure the reliability of an instrument is to test a gnroup of subjects and then at a later date, retest the seime group with the same instrument. If the test is rweliable, the responses of each subject on the second tezst should correspond closely to his responses on the fj.rst test. The goodness of reliability can be measured byr correlating the respective responses. The coefficient of“ correlation is an index of the reliability of the test. Tide reliability of this questionnaire was determined in SllCh a manner. Three weeks after the first wave of ques- taionnaires returned, :10 of the 30 schools that had rwaturned questionnaires were selected by use of random nLunbers. These 10 schools constituted the sample to "measure the statistical reliability of the instrument. cQuestionnaires were sent again to the principals of each <3f‘ these schools. Once more they were asked to complete arm: return the questionnaire. Eight principals did so. 1* 13wo column matrix was constructed,in which the numeri— 0511 value of the response to each question of the first qLNestionnaire by a principal was coupled with the 6“ corresponding response on the second questionnaire sub- mitted by the same principal. Using the standard for— mula for the calculation of the coefficient of correla- tion from raw scores whose deviations are taken from zero, the responses from the first set of questionnaires were correlated with the responses from the second set of questionnaires. The index of reliability was 0.89, a satisfactory value. At the same time that reliability indices were established, validity indices were also established. A test is valid if it measures what it purports to measure. Was there an inherent weakness in the questionnaire which would prevent a principal from selecting the response which most accurately represented the policies of his school? (A test can be reliable without being valid. For example, if a subject consistantly selects response A to a particular question, then that question is reliable. If, however, response B is the correct response, the question is not valid.) Assuming that two groups of sub- jects have the same knowledge of a field of inquiry, a test is valid if the responses made by one group corres- pond closely to the responses made by the other. The validity of the questionnaire was determined by correlating the responses made by a small sample of'principals to the respective responses made by their assistant principals. As with the reliability sample, 10 schools from those 65 that had returned questionnaires were randomly selected. Questionnaires were mailed to their assistant principals. Nine questionnaires were returned. The responses of the assistant principals were correlated with those of their respective principals to give a validity index of 0.82. The responses to the questions were labeled on the questionnaire with letters of the alphabet. The numeri- cal value of a response was not assigned until the ques- tionnaire had been returned. Information regarding the coding procedure was not provided for the respondents, and responses to some questions were deliberately arranged such that the numeric code value was not sequential. (See Appendix A.) Procedures By March I, 1970, 53 qUestionnaires had been returned. Three questionnaires were discarded because the principals had such a wide background in both elemen- tary education and secondary education that no criteria existed which definitely established them as members of one camp or the other. Four other questionnaires were dis— carded because one school had reorganized into the traditional 7-9 junior high school, and three never had been middle schools. Apparently an error had been made when their names wexwe listed as middle schools by the State Department of 66 Education. The effective sample size was A3. The responses from A3 questionnaires were coded for the sta- tistical analysis. Of these, 11 questionnaires were incompletely marked. For example, a respondent inadvert— ently may nave failed to mark an entire page. These principals were contacted by telephone for completion of their questionnaires. As the questionnaires were returned, two sample groups were formed. Sample group one included all those principals who were elementary-oriented, and sample group two included all those principals who had a secondary school orientation. The decision to include a principal with a particu- lar group was based on his answers to the questions: How many years have you been a secondary school principal? How many years have you been an elementary school princi- pal? How many years have you taught under a secondary school certificate? How many years have you taught under gnu elementary school certificate? The decision rule samples, one representing elementary-oriented princi- Dalss, and the other representing secondary—oriented prin— CiKLals. Hoteling's T2 test was the formula used to test fOr‘ differences between means of the two populations. 72 The data were treated by the Control Data Corporation (CDC) 3600 Computer. Significance was recognized at the 90 per cent level of confidence. CHAPTER IV ANALYSIS OF THE DATA The findings of the analysis are presented in this chapter. For each hypothesis, a corresponding null hypothesis is stated. Along with the degrees of freedom, an F or T2 value is stated for each null hypothesis. ‘Vhese values were generated by Hoteling's T test. The 90 per cent level of confidence was used as the threshold C)f significance and was the decision rule upon which the riull hypotheses were either rejected or not rejected. General Hypothesis 1 General Hypothesis 1 was measured by the first 32 (uiestions on the questionnaire. Each questionnaire yi;elded 19 bits of data. Hoteling's T2 test requires tliat there must be two subjects, i.e., two principals, fCJP each dependent variable. For the majority of the hslpotheses in this study, the questions were each treated as the dependent variable. In the analysis of Major HYpothesis 1, each question could not be treated as a dePendent variable because there were not enough subjects to zallow for the analysis. Consequently, the scores of Cer’tain closely related questions were combined by 73 7A multiplication such that, in effect, the number of dependent variables would not exceed 20. The numerical values of responses to questions 1, 2, 6, 7, 8, 12, 13, 1A, 15, 2A, 25 and 26 were transferred directly to the computer coding sheet. Seven composite scores were obtained by taking the products of the numerical values associated with questions 3, A and 5; 9, 10 and 11; 17 and 19; 20 and 22; 21 and 23; 27 and 30; 28, 31 and 32. Although General Hypothesis 1 was tested by 32 questions, these questions yielded only 19 numerical scores. Hypothesis: Provisions for subject matter facili- tation for pupils differ significantly between secondary— oriented and elementary-oriented middle school principals. “l I “2 Null Hypothesis: Provisions for subject matter facilitation do not differ significantly between secondary- oriented and elementary-oriented middle school principals. U1=U2 ul: Provisions by elementary—oriented middle school principals for subject matter facilitation. u2: Provisions by secondary-oriented middle school principals for subject matter facilitation. The test of the null hypothesis yielded an F or T2 value of 0.6770. The degrees of freedom were 19 and 22. At the 90 per cent level of confidence, the null hypothe— sis was not rejected. YU Hypothesis la Hypothesis la was measured by the responses to questions one and two on the questionnaire. Hypothesis: Provisions for courses of study differ 'significantly between secondary—oriented and elementary- 'oriented middle school principals. u3 ¢ “A Null Hypothesis: Provisions for courses of study do not differ significantly between secondary—oriented and elementary—oriented middle school principals. U3 = “A u3: Provisions by secondary-oriented middle school principals for courses of study. “A: Provisions by elementary-oriented middle school principals for courses of study. The test of the null hypothesis yielded an F or T2 value of 0.8009. The degrees of freedom were 2 and 39. At the 90 per cent level of confidence, the null hypothe- sis was not rejected. Hypothesis lb One score from each questionnaire was obtained by taking the products of the numerical responses to ques- tions three, four and five. These composite scores and the numerical values associated directly with questions six, seven and eight represented the data for the four dependent variables used to test Hypothesis 1b. 76 Hypothesis: Provisions for multidisciplinary team teaching programs differ significantly between secondary- oriented and elementary—oriented middle school principals. U5 # U6 Null Hypothesis: Provisions for multidisciplinary team teaching programs do not differ significantly between secondary—oriented and elementary—oriented middle school principals. up = “6 ’ p5: Provisions by elementary-oriented middle school I principals for multidisciplinary team teaching programs. “6: Provisions by secondary-oriented middle school principals for multidisciplinary team teaching programs. The test of the null hypothesis yielded an F or T2 value of 0.2336. The degrees of freedom were A and 37. At the 90 per cent level of confidence, the null hypothe- sis was not rejected. Hypothesis 1c Hypothesis lc was measured by questions nine through 1A on the questionnaire. It was measured by four dependent variables. The numerical values to the respon- ses to questions l2, l3 and 1A were transferred directly to the data coding form. One composite score from each questionnaire was obtained by taking the products of the numerical values associated with questions 9, 10 and 11, 77 Hypottmnzhsz Provisions [In'innhihsciplinary Linun teaching programs differ significantly between secondary- oriented and elementary-oriented middle school principals. L17 75 “8 ‘ Null Hypothesis: Provisions for unidisciplinary team teaching programs do not differ significantly between secondary—oriented and elementary-oriented middle school principals. u7 = “8 U7: Provisions by secondary—oriented middle school principals for unidisciplinary team teaching programs. “8: Provisions by elementary—oriented middle school principals for unidisciplinary team teaching programs. The test of the null hypothesis yielded an F or T2 value of 2.3536. The degrees of freedom were A and 37. At the 90 per cent level of confidence, the null hypothe— sis was rejected. Hypothesis ld The dependent variable used to measure Hypothesis 1d was question 15 on the questionnaire. Hypothesis: Provisions for the flexible schedul- ing of class period time modules differ significantly between secondary-oriented and elementary-oriented middle school principals. “9 # ulO Null Hypothesis: Provisions for the flexible scheduling of class period time modules do not differ 78 significantly between secondary—oriented and elementary- orientcd middle school principals. p9 = “10 H9! Provisions by secondary—oriented middle school principals for the flexible scheduling of class period time. ”10: Provisions by elementary—oriented middle school principals for the flexible scheduling of class period time. The test of the null hypothesis yielded an F or T2 value of 0.1AA7. The degrees of freedom were 1 and A0. At the 90 per cent level of confidence, the null hypothe— sis was not rejected. Hypothesis 1e The dependent variables used to test Hypothesis le were the responses to questions 2A through 26 and the three composite variables formed by taking the product of the numerical values of the responses to questions 17 and 19; 20 and 22; 21 and 23. Hypothesis: Provisions for exploratory experiences differ significantly between secondary-oriented and elementary-oriented middle school principals. “ll # “l2 Null Hypothesis: Provisions for exploratory experi- ences do not differ significantly between secondary- oriented and elementary—oriented middle school principals. “ll “12 79 “ll: Provisions by secondary—oriented middle school principals for exploratory experiences. “12: Provisions by elementary-oriented middle school principals for exploratory eXperiences. The test for the null hypothesis yielded an F or T2 value of 0.AA26. There were 6 and 35 degrees of freedom. At the 90 per cent level of confidence, the null hypothe- sis was not rejected. Hypothesis 1f The composite scores obtained from the products of the numerical values to the responses to questions 27 and 30, and to questions 28, 31 and 32 constituted the depend- ent variables against which Hypothesis 1f was tested. Hypothesis: Provisions for independent study pro— grams differ significantly between secondary—oriented and elementary—oriented middle school principals. U13 # “1A Null Hypothesis: Provisions for independent study programs do not differ significantly between secondary- oriented and elementary—oriented middle school principals. L1l3 = U1A “l3: Provisions by secondary-oriented middle school principals for independent study programs. “1A: Provisions by elementary-oriented middle school principals for independent study programs. The test of the null hypothesis yielded an F or T2 value of 0.0800. There were 2 and 39 degrees of freedom. 80 At the 90 per cent level of confidence, the null hypothe- sis was not rejected. General Hypothesis 2 Questions 35 through Al were the dependent vari— ables in the design to measure General Hypothesis 2. The numerical values of the responses were transcribed directly to the data coding sheet. Hypothesis: Provisions for pupil social facili- tation differ significantly between secondary~oriented and elementary—oriented middle school principals. ”15 I Ul6 Null Hypothesis: Provisions for pupil social facilitation do not differ significantly between secondary- oriented and elementary-oriented middle school principals. “lr ' “16 ) “15: Provisions by secondary-oriented middle school principals for pupil social facilitation. “l6: Provisions by elementary-oriented middle SCh001 prinCipals f0? pupil social facilitation. The test of the null hypothesis yielded an F or T2 value of 0.539A. The degrees of freedom were 7 and 35. At the 90 per cent level of confidence, the null hypothe— sis was not rejected. 81 Hypothesis 2a The dependent variables for the measure of Hypothe- sis 2a were questions 35 through 37 on the quesionnaire. The numerical values of the responses were transcribed directly to the data coding form. Hypothesis: Provisions for school dances differ significantly between secondary-oriented and elementary— oriented middle school principals. “l7 # “18 Null Hypothesis: Provisions for school dances do not differ significantly between secondary—oriented and elementary-oriented middle school principals. “17 = “18 p17: Provisions by secondary—oriented middle school principals for school dances. “18: Provisions by elementary—oriented middle school principals for school dances. The test of the null hypothesis yielded an F or T2 value of 1.0823. The degrees of freedom were 3 and 39. At the 90 per cent level of confidence, the null hypothe— sis was not rejected. Hypothesis 2b Questions 38 through Al constituted the dependent variables in the design to measure Hypothesis 2b. The chita were composed of the numerical values assigned to the responses to these questions. 82 Hypothesis: Provisions for activity clubs differ significantly between secondary-oriented and elementary— oriented middle school principals. ”l9 # U20 Null Hypothesis: Provisions for activity clubs do not differ significantly between secondary-oriented and elementary-oriented middle school principals. U19 = U20 U19: Provisions by secondary-oriented middle school principals for activity clubs. u20: Provisions by elementary-oriented middle school principals for activity clubs. The test of the null hypothesis yielded an F or T2 value of 0.036“. There were H and 38 degrees of freedom. At the 90 per cent level of confidence, the null hypothe- sis was not rejected. General Hypothesis 3 The design for the test of General Hypothesis 3 in_ cluded 12 dependent variables. The data for each vari— able came,respectively,from questions ”3 through 55, except 50. (Question 50 related specifically to grade 5 and was not used in the analysis.) Hypothesis: Provisions for pupil identification facilitation differ significantly between secondary— oriented and elementary-oriented middle school principals. ““1 ¢ “22 L. 83 Null Hypothesis: Provisions for pupil identifica- tion facilitation do not differ significantly between secondary—oriented and elementary—oriented middle school principals. “21 = u22 “21: Provisions by secondary-oriented middle school principals for pupil identification facilitation. u22: Provisions by elementary-oriented middle school principals for pupil identification facilitation. The test of the null hypothesis yielded an F or T2 value of 1.8263. There were 12 and 30 degrees of free— dom. At the 90 per cent level of confidence, the null hypothesis was rejected. Hypothesis 3a Hypothesis 3a was evaluated by the responses to questions U3 through A6. Each question represented a dependent variable. Hypothesis: Provisions for each pupil to be known well by at least one teacher differ significantly between secondary-oriented and elementary-oriented middle school principals. u23 # “2M Null Hypothesis: Provisions for each pupil to be known well by at least one teacher do not differ signifi— cantly between secondary-oriented and elementary-oriented middle school principals. u23 = “2A «a . {17'1" no. HM 8a u23: Provisions by secondary-oriented middle school principals for each pupil to be known well by at least one teacher. I 02“: Provisions by elementary-oriented middle school principals for each pupil to be known well by at least one teacher. The test of the null hypothesis yielded an F or T2 value of 1.3916. There were A and 38 degrees of freedom. At the 90 per cent level of confidence, the null hypothe— sis was not rejected. Hypothesis 3b The numerical responses to questions 47 through M9, the dependent variables, represented the data used to test Hypothesis 3b. Hypothesis: Provisions for sex education programs differ significantly between secondary-oriented and elementary-oriented middle school principals. u25 # ”26 Null Hypothesis: Provisions for sex education programs do not differ significantly between secondary- oriented and elementary-oriented middle school principals. “25 = “26 U25: Provisions by secondary-oriented middle school principals for sex education programs. “26: Provisions by elementary-oriented middle school principals for sex education programs. ‘n .mwu;m ‘ .Jm-_~__ _ n .4 . ' a ‘1‘"? . 1L. . Fl" .. 85 ’3 The test of the null hypothesis yielded an F or TL score of 2.503%. There were 3 and 39 degrees of freedom. At the 90 per cent level of confidence, the null hypothe- sis was rejected. Hypothesis 3c Three dependent variables were used in the design to measure Hypothesis 3c. Data for each dependent vari- able were taken, respectively, from questions 51 through 53. Hypothesis: Provisions for peer group interaction differ significantly between secondary-oriented and elementary-oriented middle school principals. u27 # ”28 Null Hypothesis: Provisions for peer group inter— action do not differ significantly between secondary- oriented and elementary-oriented middle school princi- pals. u27 = “28 u27: Provisions by secondary—oriented middle school principals for peer group interaction. p28: Provisions by elementary-oriented middle school principals for peer group interaction. The test of the null hypothesis yielded an F or T2 value of 0.6121. There were 3 and 39 degrees of freedom. At the 90 per cent level of confidence, the null hypothe- sis was not rejected. 86 Hypothesis 3d Data from the responses to the dependent variables, questions 5A and 55, were used to evaluate Hypothesis 3d. Hypothesis: Provisions for pupil-parent-teacher integration differ significantly between secondary- oriented and elementary—oriented middle school principals. u29 # U30 Null Hypothesis: Provisions for pupil—parent- teacher integration do not differ significantly between secondary-oriented and elementary-oriented middle school principals. u29 = “30 u29: Provisions by secondary-oriented middle school principals for pupil-teacher-parent orientation. HBO: Provisions by elementary-oriented middle school principals for pupil-teacher-parent interaction. The test of the null hypothesis yielded an F or T2 value of 0.03A9. There were 2 and “0 degrees of freedom. 57 At the 90 per cent level of confidence, the null hypothe— 1., sis was not rejected. General Hypothesis u The statistical design of General Hypothesis u included 11 dependent variables,which were questions 57 through 68, excluding 60. The data were the numerical values of the reponses to those questions. (Question 60 related specifically to grade 5.) 87 Hypothesis: Provisions for pupil transition facil- itation differ significantly between secondary-oriented and elementary-oriented middle school principals. # U32 Null Hypothesis: Provisions for pupil transition “31 facilitation do not differ significantly between secondary- oriented and elementary-oriented middle school principals. { = 3 “31 “32 i U31: Provisions by secondary—oriented middle 3 school principals for transition facilitation. i u22: Provisions by elementary—oriented middle school principals for transition facilitation. The test of the null hypothesis yielded an F or T2 value of 1.U8A7. There were 11 and 31 degrees of free» dom. At the 90 per cent level of confidence, the null hypothesis was not rejected. Hypothesis Na The numerical values of the responses to questions 57, 58, 59, 61, 62 and 63, the dependent variables in this design, were the data for the test of Hypothesis Ha. Hypothesis: Provisions for grade level articula- tion within the school differ significantly between secondary-oriented and elementary-oriented middle school principals. U33 ¢ U3“ Null Hypothesis: Provisions for grade level articu- Ihition within the school do not differ significantly - . ”:75! 88 between secondary-oriented and elementary-oriented mid- dle school principals. u33 = U34 U33: Provisions by secondary—oriented middle school principals for grade level articulation within the school. U3“: Provisions by elementary—oriented middle school principals for grade level articulation within the school. The test of the null hypothesis yielded an F or T2 value of 0.7968. There were 6 and 36 degrees of freedom. At the 90 per cent level of confidence, the null hypothe- sis was not rejected. Hypothesis Ab Hypothesis Ab was measured by numerical values of the responses to questions 6” and 65, the dependent vari— ables in this design. Hypothesis: Provisions for grade level articula- tion with the elementary school differ significantly between secondary—oriented and elementary-oriented middle school principals. u35 # “36 Null Hypothesis: Provisions for grade level articu- lation with the elementary school do not differ signifi— cantly between secondary-oriented and elementary-oriented middle school pr1001p813- “35 = u36 89 U35: Provisions by secondary—oriented middle 3 school principals for grade level articulation with the elementary school. u36: Provisions by elementary-oriented middle school principals for grade level articulation with the elementary school. a I" .. 3 The test of the null hypothesis yielded an F or T2 g value of 5.0MU8. The degrees of freedom were 2 and “0. At the 90 per cent level of confidence, the null hypothe- rue sis was rejected. Hypothesis Uc Questions 66 through 68 comprised the dependent variables in the design to test Hypothesis He. The numeri- cal values of the responses to these questions were the data. Hypothesis: Provisions for grade level articulation with the secondary school differ significantly between secondary-oriented and elementary-oriented middle school principals. u37 # “38 Null Hypothesis: Provisions for grade level.articu- lation with the secondary school do not differ signifi— cantly between secondary-oriented and elementary-oriented middle school principals. u37 = “38 u37: Provisions by secondary-oriented middle school llrincipals for grade level articulation with the secondary school. 9O “38: Provisions by elementary-oriented middle school principals for grade level articulation with the secondary school. A test of the null hypothesis yielded an F or T2 value of 2.2773. There were 3 and 39 degrees of freedom. At the 90 per cent level of confidence, the null hypothe- sis was rejected. General Hypothesis 5 Questions 69 through 80, excluding 77, constituted the dependent variables in the design to test General Hypothesis 5. The numerical values of the responses constituted the raw data. (Question 77 related specifi- cally to grade 5.) Hypothesis: Provisions for motor facilitation differ significantly between secondary—oriented and elementary-oriented middle school principals. u39 # “HO Null Hypothesis: Provisions for motor facilitation do not differ significantly between secondary-oriented and elementary-oriented middle school principals. “39 = “No U39: Provisions of secondary-oriented middle school principals for motor facilitation. “U0: Provisions of elementary-oriented middle school principals for motor facilitation. The test of the null hypothesis yielded an F or T2 value of 1.6107. There were 11 and 25 degrees of freedom. ’ 3 new...” .e—w 3} Mn“... __ V; '1‘... t . ' h f _ i , ’ A" r.-.“ J I“- 91 At the 90 per cent level of confidence, the null hypothe- sis was not rejected. Hypothesis 5a Hypothesis 5a was evaluated by the numerical re- sponses to questions 69 through 71, the dependent vari— ables in the design. Hypothesis: Provisions for interscholastic ath— letic competition differ significantly between secondary- oriented and elementary-oriented middle school principals. “Ml ¢ “A2 Null Hypothesis: Provisions for interscholastic athletic competition do not differ significantly between secondary-oriented and elementary-oriented middle school principals. ”A1 = “A2 “M1: Provisions by secondary-oriented middle school principals for interscholastic athletic competi— tion. A. ’1 -----~ “U2: Provisions by elementary—oriented middle school principals for interscholastic athletic competi— tion. The test of the null hypothesis yielded an F or T2 value of 1.1626. There were 3 and 3“ degrees of freedom. At the 90 per cent level of confidence, the null hypothe— sis was not rejected. New! ‘1 S~mllé no w... I | a ‘i V .— .._ _‘ ‘4 92 Hypcflfliesiis 5b The design used the numerical values of the responses to questions 72 through 74, the dependent variables, to test Hypothesis 5b. Hypothesis: Provisions for intramural athletic competition differ significantly between secondary— oriented and elementary—oriented middle school princi- Pals- “A3 ¢ Hun Null Hypothesis: Provisions for intramural ath- letic competition do not differ significantly between secondary-oriented and elementary-oriented middle school principals. “A3 = “AA “A3: Provisions by secondary-oriented middle school principals for intramural athletic competition. “AA: Provisions by elementary-oriented middle school principals for intramural athletic competition. The test of the null hypothesis yielded an F or T2 value of 1.A089. There were 3 and 3“ degrees of freedom. At the 90 per cent level of confidence, the null hypothe- sis was not rejected. Hypothesis 5c Hypothesis 5c was measured by the numerical responses to questions 75, 76, 78, 79 and 80, the depend— ent variables in this design. Hypothesis: Provisions for physical education programs differ significantly between secondary-oriented I a k‘hfi—*3’ _:r0r"nl..f w n. ‘ . )..l n'.“.‘ - . ..: ,,U ‘. 93 and r:lomentary—oriented middle school principals. “up # “A6 Null Hypothesis: Provisions for physical education programs do not differ significantly between secondary— oriented and elementary—oriented middle school princi- pals. “U5 = “A6 U45: Provisions by secondary-oriented middle school principals for physical education programs. Uuéz Provisions by elementary-oriented middle school principals for physical education programs. The test of the null hypothesis yielded an F or T2 value of 1.5278. There were 6 and 31 degrees of freedom. At the 90 per cent level of confidence, the null hypothe- sis was not rejected. Summary Generally, the null hypotheses showed that no dif- ferences existed in the instructional policies of the two groups of principals; and therefore the null hypoth- eses could not be rejected. Statistically significant differences were established concerning policies of uni- disciplinary team teaching programs, pupil identification facilitation, sex education programs, and programs of middle school grade level articulation with both the elementary and the secondary school. The meanings of this analysis are discussed in Chapter V. CHAPTER V CONCLUSIONS Summary There are over 1,200 middle schools in the United States, a trend reaching the proportions of a movement. While the related literature well establishes that trans- escent youth have unique needs that dictate certain broad courses for educational action, variation in instructional policies presently is the hallmark of thought and practice. Few school principals have been trained specifi- cally for middle school programs. Generally, their back— grounds reflect either an elementary school or a secon- dary school orientation. A knowledge of the relationship of the instructional policies to the organizational orientation of the principal will be instrumental in set- ting the emergent middle school on an educationally EKNJnd foundation. The purpose of this study was to deterwdne if these instructional policies differ between elementary—oriented and secondary—oriented middle school Principals. Five major hypotheses were established to test for differences in policies regarding the (a) subject matter 9“ programs, (b) articulation, (0) social activities, (d) motor development programs, and (e) self-concept identity programs. Each major hypothesis was augmented by two or more of 18 corollary hypotheses. Data were gathered from 80 multiple choice items on a questionnaire constructed by the writer. Face valid- ity for the questionnaire was established by sending it for review to leading proponents of the middle school movement: The validity and reliability indices were 0.82 and 0.89, respectively. The questionnaire was mailed to the principal of each of Michigan's 82 middle schools with either a 5-8 or 6-8 grade organization. Fifty-eight per cent of the questionnaires were returned. They were divided into two sample groups, one representing the population of elementary—oriented middle school principals and the other representing the secondary-oriented principals. The number of returns favored the secondary-oriented group by a ratio of three to one. Hoteling's T2 test, a multivariant test of analy- zxis, was the statistical instrument used to test these (Rita. The mathematical transformations were performed by the Control Data Corporation (CDC) 3600 Computer at Ifiiehigan State University. The threshold of significance was established at the 90 per cent level of confidence. 96 Cenerally,no significanct differences were found between the educational policies of the two groups of principals. The exceptions were discussed in the spe- cific findings and conclusions. Significantly, most of the policies of the two samples were so similar that the data could be combined for a discussion of specific pro— grams or practices. By and large, the practices of the ‘l‘n‘sfi ,u,.p two groups were indistinguishable. 1|»: 1 Findings ,. Subject Matter Facilitation All schools responding to the questionnaire offered a wide variety of basic skills courses and exploratory learning experiences. Provisions for both multidisciplinary and unidis— ciplinary team teaching programs did not differ greatly between the two groups of principals. For both popula— tions,approximately 55 per cent of the schools had team teaching programs. Generally, schools with unidiscipli- nary team teaching programs also had multidisciplinary teams. Hultidisciplinary teams were found predominately in the lower grades,while unidisciplinary teams were more common at the upper grade levels. Practices of independent study programs were indis— tinguishable between the two groups of principals. Approxi- mately 55 per cent of the combined repondents reported 97 independent study programs. These programs provided for independent study, either at all grade levels or only at the upper grade levels. Pupil participation formed a discrete dichotomy: involvement was limited to less than 25 per cent of the pupils, or it exceeded 75 per cent. For departmentalized courses, the structure of class period time modules was essentially the same for both groups of principals. Eighty per cent of the com— bined respondents reported that the time length of a departmentalized class was fixed and the same for all classes. The remainder reported that the time length was determined by the nature of the class, but once deter— mined it remained fixed for the duration of the program. There was no evidence of any fluid-block scheduling pro- cedures for departmentalized structures. Articulation Facilitation Grouping practices for elementary—oriented princi- pals closely approximated those of the secondary-oriented principals. There was no clear pattern of practice with either group. Perhaps the most significant finding in grouping patterns was the lack of differentiation of practice over successive grade levels. By and large, the pattern at grade five remained unaltered through grade eight. While the general hypothesis of differences in gyrade level articulation between the two populations was .. "Pu-r .. nl away 98 not :nippordmni, sijnyificain, <1/2) <3/u> (1) Comments: What per cent of the eighth grade pupils receives weekly instruction in all exploratory experiences? a. 0—25% b. 26-50% c. 51-75% d. 76—100% (1/u) (1/2) (3/4) (1) Comments: Circle the following exploratory courses in which pupils may receive instruction over the course of a semester or year: For grade five For grade six Art Art rs Foreign languages Foreign languages 5 Vocal music Vocal music m Unified arts Unified arts M Instrumental Music Instrumental Music 0 Dramatics Dramatics g Journalism Journalism 9 Typing Typing 31 Others (specify) Others (specify) Comments: Circle the following exploratory courses in which pupils may receive instruction over the course of a semester or year: For grade seven For grade eight Art Art Foreign language Foreign language Vocal music Vocal music Practical arts Practical arts Instrumental Music Instrumental Music (Mean of Sum) 27. 29. Dramatics Dramatics Journalism Journalism Typing Typing Others (specify) Others (specify) Comments: The amount of time provided for exploratory experi- ences: a. Increases with each successive grade. ( b. Decreases with each successive grade. ( c. Remains constant over all grade levels. ( 3 2 ) ) l) _. __-__ .,._ a?!» , .1 Comments: Independent study is provided: a. Only for grade five. (A) b. Only for grade six. (8) c. For both grades five and six. (16) d. For neither grade level. (0) Comments: Independent study is provided: a. Only for grade seven. (A) E b. Only for grade eight. (8) F c. For both grades seven and eight. (16) . d. For neither grade level. (0) ; Comments: 2 What per cent of the pupils in grade five partici- pates in independent study programs? a. 0-25% b. 26—50% c. 51-75% d. 76—1oo% (l/A) (1/2) (3/A) (1) Comments: 30. 31. 3“. 126 What per cent of the pupils in grade six partici— pates in independent study programs? a. 0—25% h. 26-50% c. 51-75% d. 76-100% (l/U) (1/2) (3/u) (1) Comments: What per cent of the pupils in grade seven partici— pates in independent study programs? a. 0-25% b. 26—50% c. 51-75% d. 76—1oo% (l/N) (1/2) (3/“) (1) Comments: What per cent of the pupils in grade eight partici- pates in independent study programs? a. 0—25% b. 26—50% c. 51-75% d. 76—1oo% (l/A) (1/2) (B/M) (1) Comments: Independent study consumes what per cent of a pupil's instructional week? a. 0-25% b. 26-50% c. 51-75% d. 76-ioo% (1) (2) (3) (u) Comments: The amount of time provided for team teaching pro- grams: a. Decreases with each successive grade. (1) b. Remains constant over the grade levels. (2) c. 'lncreases with each successive grade. (3) Comments: 1‘" ._ a-‘TT‘fjtilm‘mn! F‘J " :r-‘u .1737 - .. ‘4 at: 4 ‘33:; 36. 37. 38. MO. 127 School dances: a. Are not held at this school. (1) b. Are held only for lower grade levels.(state grades) (2) c. Are held for pupils of all grade levels. (3) d. Are held only for upper grade levels. (state grades) (A) Comments: School dances: a. Are not held at this school. (1) b. Are held only during the regular school day.(u) c. Are held during the regular school day and dur- ing the evening. (3) d. Are held only during the evening. (2) Comments: During the year the school holds: a. No school dances. (A) b One to three school dances. (3) c. Four to six school dances. (2) d More than six school dances. (I) An activity club program: a. Is not available at this school. (1) b. Is available only for grades five and six. (2) C. Is available only for grades six and seven. (3) d. is available for all grade levels. (A) The amount of time per pupil allotted each month to activity clubs mentioned above is: None (1) Less than one hour ((2) Between one and three hours (3 Between three and five hours ( More than five hours (5) Q0693 ) U) n 5...; 0 Activity clubs have an enrollment of: a. O (No program is available at the school) (I) b. Less than 25 per cent of the total pupil enroll- ment. (2) Al. “3. 128 Twenty-five to 50 per cent of the total pupil enrollment. (3) Fifty to 75 per cent of the total pupil enroll— ment. (A) 7 More than 75 per cent of the total pupil enroll- ment. (5) Comment 5 : Activity clubs are sponsored by: a. No staff members. (1) b. Less than 25 per cent of the staff members. (2) c. Twenty-five to 50 per cent of the staff members. (3) d. Fifty to 75 per cent of the staff members. (A) e More than 75 per cent of the staff members. (5) Comments: For fifth grade pupils, the maximum amount of time daily in which each child is involved in instruction with an individual teacher is: a. Less than an hour (1) b. One hour (2) c. Two hours (3) d. Three hours (4) e. More than three hours (5) Comments: For sixth grade pupils, the.maximum amount of time daily in which each child is involved in instruction with an individual teacher is: (000609 Less than an hour (1) One hour (2) Two hours (3) Three hours (A) More than three hours (5) Comments: ti‘udlih-M’ I: t u 3‘1". ‘- I 5 :‘FJ-‘ruu (1.-.): - 1 _ as. . 129 NH. For seventh grade pupils, the maximum amount of time daily in which each child is involved with an individual teacher is: Less than an hour One hour Two hours Three hours More than three hours AAA/\A U1 «EL/O m H vvvvv (DO-.0693 Comments: ”5. For eighth grade pupils, the maximum amount of time daily in which each child is involved with an indi- vidual teacher is: Less than an hour One hour Two hours Three hours More than three hours AAA/\A U1 f—‘LJU N H vvvvv (DQCO‘QJ Comments: U6. As a general policy, in the pupil-teacher relation- ship: a. No formal provisions are made for the teacher to provide specified guidance services. (1) b. Teachers are expected to provide guidance ser- vices for all of their pupils. (3) c. Teachers are expected to provide guidance ser- vices to only a limited number of pupils. (2) Comments: U7. Instruction in sex education: Is not provided, (I) (l) b. Is provided for grade five. (2) c. Is provided for grade six. (3) d. Is provided for grade seven. (4) e. Is provided for grade eight. (5) f. Is provided for all grade levels. (7) More than one of the above.(specify) (6) '1‘ ”J ‘1 O “uh-WT DWETI‘ 7'!“ am: mum U8. “9. 50. 51. 130 (3()InIH(‘Ill,{3 : Instruction in sex education: a. Is not provided. (1) b. Is offered as a unit for less than two weeks. (2) c. Is offered as a unit for more than two weeks. (3) d. Is not offered as a unit but as an integrated part of a broader field of study. (A) Comments: Instruction in sex education: a. Is given by specially trained lay people such as physicians. (2) b. Is given exclusively by the teaching staff. (3) c. Is given by both the teaching staff and special- ly trained lay people such as physicians. (A) d. Is not provided. (1) Comments: The amount of unstructured time such as recesses and socialization periods provided daily for fifth graders is: a. None (I) b. Fifteen minutes (2) c. Thirty minutes (3) d. Sixty minutes (A) e. More than sixty minutes (5) Comments: A. The amount of unstructured time such as recesses and socialization periods provided daily for sixth graders is: a. None (1) b. Fifteen minutes (2) c. Thirty minutes (3) I .im‘bfi ‘I‘IFT;£—'" '2 I f I. I . '_.i"! ,1 . I55 53. 131 d. Sixty minutes (N) e. More than sixty minutes (5) Comments: B. The amount of unstructured time such as recesses and socialization periods provided daily for seventh graders is: a. None (I) b. Fifteen minutes (2) c. Thirty minutes (3) d. Sixty minutes (A) e. More than sixty minutes (5) Comments: B. The amount of unstructured time such as recesses and socialization periods provided daily for eighth graders is: a. None (I) b. Fifteen minutes (2) c. Thirty minutes (3) d. Sixty minutes (u) e. More than sixty minutes (5) Comments: What per cent of the parents of the student body attends regularly scheduled programs designed to integrate parent, pupil and school? a. 0 (There is no regularly scheduled program of this nature) (1) up to 25% (2 26 to 50% (3 51 to 75% (4 76 to 100% ( 0900‘ Comments: l‘.‘ '- . '2 A; 4.1‘ .' v.33! '7 56. 57. Conferences with parents to discuss their individual 132 children: a. Are scheduled as needed. (1) b. Are regularly scheduled once a year. (2) c. Are regularly scheduled twice a year. (3) d. Are regularly scheduled three times a year. (A) e. Are regularly scheduled more than three times a year. (5) Comments: Which statement represents the instructional struc- ture for grade five? a. The structure is non-graded for those pupils who would traditionally be fifth graders. (H) b. Grade five is self-contained, although certain exploratory experiences such as art and music are taught by subject matter specialists. (3) c. lrade five is self-contained and the self- contained teacher is responsible for the total program. (2) d. Grade five is departmentalized. (1) Comments: Which statement represents the instructional struc- ture for grade six? a. The structure is non-graded for those pupils who would traditionally be sixth graders. (A) b. Grade six is self-contained, although certain exploratory experiences such as art and music are taught by subject matter specialists. (3) c. Grade six is self-contained and the self- contained teacher is responsible for the total program. (2) d. Grade six is departmentalized. (1) Comments: Which statement represents the instructional struc- ture for grade seven? 8.. The structure is non—graded for those pupils who would traditionally be seventh graders. (A) Wu. Anni-chi. MIT-‘1 Mitzi-3‘.” w" _ ”,2” J {V '3.“ Jo- .Ahm -. -_ '- it: 60. 61. 133 b. Grade seven is self-contained, although certain exploratory experiences such as art and music are taught by subject matter specialists. (3) c. Grade seven is departmentalized. (2) d. Grade seven is self-contained and the self- contained teacher is responsible for the total program. (1) Comments: Which statement represents the instructional struc- ture for grade eight? a. The structure is non-graded for those pupils who would traditionally be eighth graders. (A) b. Grade eight is self—contained, although certain exploratory experiences such as art and music are taught by subject matter specialists. (3) 0. Grade eight is departmentalized. (2) d. Grade eight is self-contained and the self— contained teacher is responsible for the total program. (1) Comments : Which statement represents the grouping practice of the school for grade five? a. The structure is non-graded for those pupils who would traditionally be fifth graders. (3 b. Pupils are randomly assigned to groups. (2 c. Pupils are assigned to groups according to social or ability factors. (1) vv Comments: Which statement represents the grouping practice of the school for grade six? ' a. The structure is non-graded for those pupils who would traditionally be sixth graders. (3) b. Pupils are randomly assigned to groups. (2) c. Pupils are assigned to groups according to social or ability factors. (1) v '\ n 13th 'I ' I u‘fl'“ ti." ' r' “J swam? 63. 6M. 65. 13“ C omme nt 3 : Which statement represents the grouping practice of the school for grade seven? a. b. (I. The structure is non-graded for those pupils who would traditionally be seventh graders. (3) Pupils are randomly assigned to groups. (2) Pupils are assigned to groups according to social or ability factors. (1) Comments: Which statement represents the grouping practice of the school for grade eight? a. b. c. The structure is non—graded for those pupils who would traditionally be eighth graders. (3) Pupils are randomly assigned to groups. (2) Pupils are assigned to groups according to social or ability factors. (1) Comments: The orientation program for elementary school classes provides for: a. No pupil visitations to the'middle school. (1) b A visit to the school for one-half day. (2) c. A visit to the school for one full day. (3) d Multiple visits to the school. (A) Comments: For parents of incoming pupils: a. b. C . No orientation program is provided. (1) An orientation program is provided after the opening of school. (2) An orientation program is provided prior to the Opening of school. (3) Comments: 66. 67. 68. 69. 135 The orientation program for out-going pupils pro— vides for: a. No visitation to the secondary schools. (I) b. A half-day visitation to the secondary schools. (2) c. A full day visitation to the secondary schools. (3) d. Multiple visits to the secondary schools. (A) Comments: The orientation program for out-going pupils includes: a. No formal guidance sessions. (I) b. Large group guidance sessions. (2) c. Small group guidance sessions. (3) d. Teacher initiated individual conference sessigns. e. More than one of the above or other activities. (specify) (5) Comments: The orientation program for out-going pupils pro- vides: No formal contact with parents. (1) Large group sessions for parents. (2) Small group sessions for parents. (3) Staff initiated individual conferences with parents. (A) e. More than one of above (specify) (5) (100'?!) Comments: A program of interscholastic athletics: a. Is not available. (A) b. Is available only for pupils in the upper grades.(specify grade levels) (3) c. Is available for pupils in all grade levels. (2) d. Is available only for pupils in the lower grades.(specify grade levels) (1) ‘W..upu4u tuna“.- . “32.-'11th .4._ .4_._‘.-.‘ -,_4 70. 71. 73. 136 Conmunits: How many interscholastic sports are generally avail- able at this school? a. O b. l c. 2 d. 3 e. A f. 5 (7) (6) (5) (A) (3) (2) g. More than 5 (1) Comments: What per cent of the boys in this school partici- pates in interscholastic sports? a. 0-25% b. 26-50% c. 51-76% d. 76—100% (A) (3) (2) . (1) Comments: A program of intramural athletics: Is not available. (1) Is available for pupils in grade five. (2) Is available for pupils in grade six. (3) Is available for pupils in grade seven. (A) Is available for pupils in grade eight. (5) Is available for pupils in all grade levels.(6) More than one of the above (specify) (6) OQHJQQJOU‘D’ Comments: How many intramural sports are available at this school? - a. O b. l c. 2 d. 3 e. A f. 5 (1) (2) (3) (A) (5) (6) g. More than 5 (7) Comments: f‘m 7U. 76. 77. 137 What per cent of the boys and girls participates in intramural athletics? Boys Girls a. 0—25% (1) a. 0-25% (1) b. 26-50% (2) b. 26-50% (2) c. 51-75% (3) C. 51—75% (3) d. 76-100% (u) d 76—100% (A) (Sum of Column Values) Comments: 3 program of physical education: A a. Is not provided in this school. (I) ; i b. Is provided for pupils in grade five. (2) c Is provided for pupils in grade six. (3) d Is provided for pupils in all grade levels. (5) e More than one of the above (specify) (A) Comments: A program of physical education: a. Is not provided in this school. (1) b. Is provided for pupils in grade seven. (2) c. Is provided for pupils in grade eight. (3) d. Is provided for pupils in all grade levels. (5) a e. More than one of the above (specify) (U) 1 Comments: For pupils in grade five, the amount of time spent weekly in physical education is: O (1) One hour (2) . Two hours (3) . Three hours (A) Four hours(5) More than four hours (6) "tx’DQQU‘W 138 Comments: 78. For pupils in grade six, the amount of time spent weekly in physical education is: 0 (1) One hour (2) Two hours (3) Three hours (A) Four hours (5) More than four hours (6) WQQOU’W Comments: 79. For pupils in grade seven, the amount of time spent weekly in physical education is: 0 (1) One hour (2) Two hours (3) Three hours (A) Four hours (5) More than four hours (6) *‘JmQOD‘fi-l Comments: 80. For pupils in grade eight, the amount of time spent weekly in physical education is: a. O (l) b. One hour (2) c. Two hours (3) d. Three hours (A) e. Four hours (5) f. More than four hours (6) Comments: PLEASE ATTACH ANY PRINTED MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON YOUR SCHOOL AND ITS PROGRAMS, INCLUDING FLOOR PLANS, NEWS- PAPER AND MAGAZINE ARTICLES, ETC. ‘nmtfl mum...‘mw. ni'dlfi ‘ .g , . _ , . l I: . APPENDIX B DEMOGRAPHICAL DATA ON MICHIGAN'S MIDDLE SCHOOLS 139 ' ~1~fm in. 1,1,, TABLE 1 MIDDLE SCHOOLS OPERATING IN MICHIGAN District Algonac Bad Axe Battle Creek (Lakeview) Battle Creek (Lakeview) Battle Creek (Springfield) Say City Bay City Bay City Bay City Bay City Big Rapids Birch Run Brighton Bronson Cedar Springs Charlotte Chelsea Chesaning Clio Coleman Coloma Coopersville Davison DeWitt Dexter Durand Eaton Rapids Frankenmuth Garden City Garden City Garden City Garden City Gladwin Grand Blanc Grand Blanc Grand Rapids (Kentwood) Grand Rapids (Northview) DURING 1968-69 SCHOOL YEAR School Junior High School Intermediate School Highland School Woodrow School Springfield School Kalb School Lindsay School MacGregor School McAlear-Sawdon School Washington School Junior High School Intermediate School Intermediate School Junior High School Junior High School Junior High School Harrison Street School Junior High School Carter School Junior High School Junior High School Junior High School Junior High School Furstenau School Wiley Intermediate School Lucas School Junior High School Main Street Middle School Burger School Cambridge School Radcliff School Vogel School Intermediate School Central School McGrath School Hamilton School Junior High School lUO C Range L. '"3 ‘13 CL (D 0\ U1 mmzmmmmmmmmmmtmmmmmmmmmwmmmmmmm O\ O\ UTU‘. llllllllllllllll CD \1 ocooomoxokoxooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo CD CD (1300 I . u‘ V1253.) W 'r—f ‘ .. ' ‘n l \ ‘s' . -. District Grant Greenville Haslett Highland Park Highland Park Hillsdale Howard City (Tri-County) Ida Imlay City Ishpeming Jackson (East Jackson) Lake Odessa (Lakewood) Leslie Linden Lowell Marysville Michigan Center Monroe (Jefferson) Montague Mt. Clemens (Chippewa Valley) Muskegon (Mona Shores) Muskegon (Orchard View) New Baltimore (Anchor Bay) Newaygo Niles (Brandywine) North Adams North Branch Northville Norway (Norway-Vulcan) Okemos Oscoda Otisville (Lakeville) Parchment Parma (Western) Plymouth Port Hope Port Huron Port Huron lUl Schools Junior Junior Junior Ferris High School High School High School School Ford School Davis Intermediate School Junior High School Intermediate School Junior Phelps Junior Junior Junior Junior Junior Junior Junior Junior High School School High School High School High School High School High School High School High School High School Chisholm School Clinton Valley School Maple Grove School Middle Junior Junior Junior Junior Junior Junior Vulcan School High School High School High School High School High School High School School Central School Richardson School Otisville School Intermediate School Junior High School West School Junior High School Chippewa School Fort Gratiot School Grade Range O\O\O\O\O\U1 I I I I I I I I I I CDCIDGDCDCDCDCD CD030) CDGDCDCD 0000 CD (I) (I) (DO CDCIDODCDCDCD oo CDCDCDCD CDGJCDCIDCDCD O\O\O\C\C\U'IJ=’ O\C\U'I O\O\O\O\ :ON 0\ ON 0\ U'IUl \DO\0\O\UIO\ ON O\U'IO\J:' I 1A2 Grade District School Range Port Huron Garfield School 6-8 Port Huron Howard School 6-8 Port Huron Kimball School 6—8 Port Huron Washington School 6—8 Quincy Junior High School 5—8 Richland (Gull Lake) Richland School u_7 Rogers City Junior High School 6-8 Saginaw (Carrollton) Junior High School A~8 Saginaw (Saginaw Twp.) Chippewa School 5-8 Saginaw (Saginaw TWp.) Mackinaw School 5—8 Saginaw (Saginaw Twp.) Ottawa School 5-8 St. Clair (East China) Marine City School 6-8 St. Clair (East China) St. Clair School A-8 Sandusky Intermediate School 5-8 Sanford (Meridian) Junior High School 6-8 Saranac Junior High School 5-7 South Lyon Junior High School 6—8 Sparta Junior High School 6-8 Stanton (Central Montcalm) Sheridan School 6—8 Stanton (Central Montcalm) Stanton School 6-8 Sturgis Central School 6-8 Zeeland Middle School 6-8 TOTAL SCHOOLS BY GRADE RANGE Range Number A-Y 1 U—8 7 5-7 2 5—8 22 5-9 A 6-8 60 6—9 1 a 3] w . N 4'.A-a .D‘ 1183 Atari-.11.. .1 Li's-5...: s. , .. -. a .. .. 1151...? Llr m N\H H m: H somH smm anm poHcsn paw: . I u H osmH mom mpmHemspmch couwchmmz o m MH 0 sSOH Hmm >mzpozucm0Hs> H 0 am 0 mmmH mmm onHchHHam H o mH o ssmH . om» :osH nusom H o mH o smmH He: was spam 0 0 SH 0 :mmH mom . suHo msmom o m mH o momH OH: socHsa H 0 mm o msaH sow soH> eumnowo H 0 am 0 awaH mos oHHH>mHHmz o a ma H ammH sso.H saconmz Hams H 0 mm o momH . mmo HHmon o N :m o ommH omm smemcHH o m NH O asaH mam mmmmuo mama span NW . HHsc N o a: H as,H ems msmcHx H o om o msaH om: auH puma m\mw HHsc H 0 mm H HsaH so» ecaHanm puma H m NH O I I mam . usage m o m: o weaH ooo.H HoHHmpu .Hs puma H o om o seaH ems consume swam used HHza WW .0 mm o momH mam noamm.uzmH3o, Hams H H mm o memH mmm mH>mo when H HHac Hw H mm H - on» oxooo m 0 mm o memH cos smoaaHno H 0 am 0 msOH com mpmHomewmucH Hmpucoo H H mm H SeaH mom Hmsucmo =\m m Hm o I mom moHamm paste 0 H mH o msmH om: concowm H N\H ON 0 msmH omm . . meHamm mHm o o Hm o HsmH as: mx< cam H o om H msaH com mmosa unease m m mm H seaH omm sum Lonoca thHomCSOO wvfid mhwnnwmh Hmccombmm Coaumkmmo wucmnsum H0020“ no 0862 no hmcommB ho m>HuMcHumHCHEfi¢ no Lao.» «HO .02 gonadz mo LmnE32 Locuo uwpfim amnesz HmHmQHnCHHm omucmeoumHmecooomv .wHoomom m.m<0H:uHs ozHa.«mmm HpmermHCHEU< .HO Emmy MO .02 . .HmDEHHZ . mo MODESZ . MO .02 umhfim .HmDESZ Hmamawocaem cmucmHHOImHmucmsmHmv .mqoomom m.zOcmnm mH I OH mm mHmz nme 3mH< HmmHocHHm HmmwocHHm cocmHHmme mwd xmm Hoocom mo mama Hooeom Hoonom mcHeoooe OHOOHE memecoomm mo mummy mm memo» mm memo» mq¢mHoszm amezmHmOIwm¢Hszmdm .wqoomum MAODHE m.Z¢CHmOHE ozHQm.O mHmm.O OOO0.0 OOON.: mwmm.o HOO0.0 smam.o O:O0.0 :HN0.0 mmsm.o mmmm.o smos.o szaH.O HOmo.O :HO0.0 wmws.m OSO0.0 HmHm.s. mmzH.m Hmm:.O mmom.O mmwm.o stm.O FOO0.0 mmmH.O :me.H mmom.O mmz:.O :mo=.O Hmm0.0 mmsw.m msz.O :Omm.m :Hmm.H mawm.o zOO0.0 HOO~.O smO0.0 :HN0.0 mamm.o smmm.o mmOO.o HOOH.O emmH.c mwsm.o nam0.0 wmms.o HOO0.0 smmo.o mmmm. NHm0.0 mwmm.o OON0.0 wmms.s omsm.o mmmm.H sHsm.O mmzm.H Hmmm.O mm:m.o meem.o mm:m.o mesm.o seHH.o m B wmmq m m czoo mmum cane mmcH m a oumHsm>HcO mpmzvm :moz ccczumm cHanHm> Hmow.o cmzu mmmH m oooo.mm vcm ma n .m.o osee.o n meoooo> some co HHHHesoo co Home oooHeo>HoHoe Hoe oHoemIm H mHmmmBOmwm A Bzmozmmmm mm% 20 mZOHBch seesaw coca cmmzumm OHanHm> smms.o coca mmcH O OOO.mm was s u .L.O 30mm.o u neouoo> come no szHmswo so Hmmu mumHHm>HOHOE Hoe oHpmmIm mHmmzaomwx H¢mMZflO mo O HH Em mmb 20 mze 2mm OLQz F4 9 L4 2150 H: u posse How Eopmcpu mo newsman H a mHmcnpoqmz pom Eooccpu mo mocewoo Oeom.o HHmO.H asom.o NOO0.0 Homo.o NH mmos.o HN:H.O Noem.o Heoo.o OOOO.o HH HNNN.O somm.H mHmo.o mmmN.o OHo:.o OH mNss.o OOHH.o smmm.o omoo.o. HOHo.o m OHsm.o mHoo.o . . OON0.0 omNH.o moom.o m HHHo.o HN:H.N momm.o Hooo.o Nooo.o N NHH0.0 momm.= ammo.o OHea.m mmmm.m O smmm.o Nses.o Hoom.o Hom:.o emem.m m mmHm.o MOHo.o . Nmmm.o mHNo.o mmHO.o H Hssa.o mmHm.o wemo.o Oon.m ossm.= m NONH.O seem.H msmo.o OOHO.m os:m.= N Omso.o omNN.m mmso.o owNN.m NmmN.O H cane mmmH m m 2309 deem cone mwmq m m OOOHHO>HCD seesaw new: :cczuom mHanpm> Homo.o coco mmoH a oooo.OH one NH u .m.n momm.H u mpoHom> some Oo HHHHNOOO do pmmp mumHLw>Hsze Lou OHpmmIm 'I m mHummEOmwm H 0H :NH0.0 mwMH.0 mm:m.o howm.o mHmN.0 mm:o.o me:.: 0m00.o mwmo.oH mmmz.m w mNOm.o eHem.o NmmH.o :Nmo.N msom.H s Hmmm.0 000:.0 :mHm.0 wmwm.H bmHm.0 o mmmw.m m:mo.0 Hmmm.0 00mm.H mmwz.o m mmHm.O mem.H OMNH.0 2m>:.m 0050.0 3 :NwH.o :mwm.H zoom.o ozHo.o mm00.o m wwmw.o Nmmo.0 onwm.o momm.0 Homo.0 m mmwm.0 30mm.o wmwm.o :0mm.0 mea.0 H cage mmmn m m sacs moum cone wwcH a m cpmHLm>Hc2 oemsdm :moz coozuom .MMMMMMMN mmmH.o :mnu mmmH m oooo.Hm 02m HH u .m.o szmz.H u mHOHoo> cams no mHHHmsoo 00 Owen mumHHm>HHHOE Hon oHpmmIm I .. A14 mmqm BZMDZMme r. H: a House How Eonmmpm no mmcpwmo H u mHmmnuoqzm pom Between 00 mocpmoo 3152 mmmH.0 mme.H mamm.0 0H30.0 mm00.0 HH mem.0 NNMO.H :Hmm.0 wm00.o 0000.0 meH.0 ammo.m mmm=.0 mmmm.0 mmmm.0 msms.o mom0.0 mmmm.o Hmmw.o awhH.H w mHNN.0 ramm.H OmH0.0 0000.m N000.H N HmmH.o MHom.N mm3=.o smmm.o mmme.o O mwsz.o mem.O msHm.O mHm0.0 hzmm.o m some.o ommm.o mom=.o mNmm.o szee.m H mmaz.0 wmmw.0 0H00.0 :wwm.0 0mmH.0 m :NmH.0 Hmom.H mmmm.0 mmmw.o Hmm=.H N pzmm.o msmm.o szmm.O msmm.o somH.O cmce mmmH m m 2300 mvum cone mmcH m m mumHHm>Hca cummwm coo: cmmzpmm mwmmmmmw mNmH.0 Ems» wmmH m 0000.0m 0cm HH u .m.Q FOHm.H u weepoo> came no zuHHmOOo mo Hmmu mOmew>HpHss Hoe OHummIm m mHWMIEOmwm usmmzmo m0 mmqdem<> BzmQHmmma mmb 20 m23HP¢EmOmm2¢mb w.02quBQx