INFORMATION TO USERS
This manuscript has been reproduced from the microfilm master. UMI
films the text directly from the original or copy submitted. Thus, some
thesis and dissertation copies are in typewriter face, while others may
be from any type of computer printer.
The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the
copy subm itted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality
illustrations and photographs, print bleedthrough, substandard margins,
and improper alignment can adversely affect reproduction.
In the unlikely event that the author did not send UM I a com plete
manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if
unauthorized copyright material had to be removed, a note will indicate
the deletion.
Oversize m aterials (e.g., maps, drawings, charts) are reproduced by
sectioning the original, beginning at the upper left-hand corner and
continuing from left to right in equal sections with small overlaps. Each
original is also photographed in one exposure and is included in
reduced form at the back of the book.
Photographs included in the original manuscript have been reproduced
xerographically in this copy. Higher quality 6" x 9" black and white
photographic prints are available for any photographs or illustrations
appearing in this copy for an additional charge. Contact UM I directly
to order.

U niv e rsity Microfilm s In te rn a tio n a l
A Bell & Howell In fo rm ation C o m p a n y
3 0 0 N o r t h Z e e b R o a d . A n n Arbor, Ml 4 8 1 0 6 - 1 3 4 6 US A
313/761-4700

800/521-0600

O rder N u m b er 9314638

A co m p a ra tiv e stu d y o f th e M ich igan E d u ca tio n a l A ssessm en t
P ro g ra m resu lts b etw e en selected tra d itio n a l ju n io r high schools
an d m id d le schools in th e s ta te o f M ich igan to d eterm in e th e
o rg a n iza tio n a l stru ctu re in w h ich grad e seven stu d en ts are m ost
su ccessfu l
Barris, Thomas Nickolas, Ph.D.
Michigan State University, 1992

300 N. ZeebRd.
Ann Arbor, MI 48106

A COMPARATIVE STU D Y OF THE MICHIGAN EDUCATIONAL
ASSESSMENT PROGRAM RESULTS BETWEEN SELECTED TRADITIONAL
JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOLS A ND MIDDLE SCHOOLS IN THE STATE OF
MICHIGAN TO DETERMINE THE ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE IN
WHICH GRADE SEVEN ST U D E N TS ARE MOST SUCCESSFUL

By
T hom as N . B a rris

A DISSERTATION

S u b m itted to
M ichigan S ta te U n iv e r s ity
in p a r tia l fu lfillm en t o f th e r e q u ir e m e n ts
fo r t h e d e g r e e o f

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

D epartm ent o f E d u ca tio n a l A d m in istration
1992

ABSTRA C T

A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF THE MICHIGAN EDUCATIONAL
ASSESSMENT PROGRAM RESULTS BETWEEN SELECTED TRADITIONAL
JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOLS AMD MIDDLE SCHOOLS IN THE STATE OF
MICHIGAN TO DETERMINE THE ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE IN
WHICH GRADE SEVEN STUDENTS ARE MOST SUCCESSFUL

By

T hom as N . B a rris

The

purpose

of

A ssessm ent Program

this

study

was

to c o m p a r e

Michigan E d u c a t i o n a l

(MEAP) r e s u l t s b e t w e e n t r a d i t i o n a l j u n i o r h i g h a n d

mi ddle s c h o o ls

and

seventh

grade

s t u d e n t s a r e most s u c c e s s f u l a n d c o n t i n u e to show t h e i r

success

in

high

from

grade

to d e t e r m i n e

ten.

t h e mi ddl e

Grade
school.

the

organizational

s t r u c t u r e in which

configurations

distinguished

A junior

sc h o o l was d e f i n e d

high

the junior
as a

s ch oo l t h a t was d e s i g n a t e d a s o n e b e t w e e n e l e m e n t a r y a n d h i g h sc h o o l,
and includes grades seven,

eight, and nine.

W h e r e a s , a middle school

w as d e f i n e d as a sc h oo l t h a t was d e s i g n a t e d as o n e b e t w e e n e l e m e n t a r y
a n d h i g h s c h o o l, a n d i n c l u d e d g r a d e s s i x , s e v e n , a n d e i g h t .
The
public

population
sc ho ol

sa m p l e d

districts

that

was

the

form

tw enty-seven
the

Middle

A ss o ci at i o n (MCEA) d u r i n g t h e 1985-86 sch ool y e a r .

Michigan

Citie s

urban

Educational

The Executive

Thom as N . B a r r is

D i r e c t o r o f MCEA w as e n l i s t e d
junior

high

MCEA

districts

as a n e x p e r t to s e l e c t a sample of f o u r

and

four

middle

sch ool

MCEA

districts.

C o m p a r i s o n s of t h e two sa m p l e d g r o u p s s h o w e d the m to b e t h e same o r
so m ew ha t

sim il ar

in

the

following

areas:

the

number

of

s c h o o ls

r e p r e s e n t e d at t h e s e v e n t h g r a d e l e v e l , c u r r e n t o p e r a t i n g e x p e n d i t u r e s
p e r p u p i l , a v e r a g e t e a c h e r s a l a r i e s , a n d r a c i a l / e t h n i c co m po si tio n of t h e
student body.
T h e s t u d y e m p lo y e d t h e c a u s a l c o m p a r a t i v e m e th o d with t h e j u n i o r
h i g h sa m p le as a c o n t r o l / c o m p a r i s o n g r o u p f o r t h e middle school s a m p l e .
T h e m id d le s c h o o l e x p e r i e n c e in g r a d e s six t h r o u g h e i g h t s e r v e d a s t h e
independent variable.
T h e MEAP r e s u l t s in r e a d i n g a n d m a t h e m a t i c s in 1985-86 ( s e v e n t h
grade)

and

The data
o ne

1988-89

were

(lowest)

(tenth

grade)

served

as

the

dependent

variable.

r e p o r t e d o u t in c a t e g o r i e s of a c h i e v e m e n t r a n g i n g from
to

four

(highest).

The

nominal

form

of

measurement

r e q u i r e d t h e u s e of a n o n - p a r a m e t r i c s t a t i s t i c to t e s t t h e f o u r r e s e a r c h
hypotheses.
T h e c h i - s q u a r e t e s t u s i n g a two b y f o u r c o n t i n g e n c y t a b l e m a t r i x
fo r

the

calculation

frequencies

was

results

sc ho ol

by

frequency
findings

count

of

em ployed.

of

were

at

The

equal
All

.05).

These

grades

seven

frequencies
observed

weighted

100.

(alp h a level

mathematics

expected

four

and

by

ten

category
assigning

hypotheses

significant
in

from

the
of

observed

achievement
ea c h

recorded

a

total

significant

f i n d i n g s in r e a d i n g

favor

of

the

mid dle

and

sc ho ol

g r o u p i n g o v e r t h e t r a d i t i o n a l j u n i o r h i g h c o u n t e r s t h e f i n d i n g s of o t h e r

T hom as N . B a rris

past

researchers

that

found

no

significant

difference

in

m a th e m a ti c s

and/or reading.
A single s tu d y
m id dle
study

schools
stands

s c h o o ls a r e

c a n n o t c o v e r t h e m u l t i t u d e of q u e s t i o n s r e l a t e d to

versus
as

one

junior
eausal

highs

and

com parative

a ca d em i c
study

s u p e r i o r in a c a d e m i c a c h i e v e m e n t

achievem ent.

suggesting

as m easured

that

This
middle

b y MEAP to

j u n i o r h i g h s in Middle C i t i e s E d u c a t i o n a l A s s o c i a ti o n (MCEA) d i s t r i c t s in
t h e S t a t e of M i c h i g a n .

C o p y r ig h t b y

T hom as N ick o la s B a rris

1992

TO MY WIFE MARGARET R . , MY
CHILDREN NICKOLAS T . AND JULIE H ., AND
MY FATHER NICKOLAS G . B A R R IS .

IN MEMORY OF MY MOTHER,

GEORGIA MILIONIS B A R R IS.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

It i s w it h s i n c e r e a p p r e c i a t i o n a n d a d e e p s e n s e of h u m il it y t h a t I
acknowledge

the

support

encouragement

and

many

individuals
mad e

w ho se

it

professional

possible

for

and

me

to

guidance,

I

personal

co m pl ete

this

study.
For

his

appreciation
middle

encouragem ent,
to my a d v i s o r ,

level

co m m it te e,

education

Dr.

is

Louis

G.

Romano,

unsurpassed.

D r s . Michael A. D o u lu s , C.

I wish t o e x p r e s s
patience,

s u p p o r t and

To

extend

deep

w h o s e d e v o t i o n to

the

members

of

Keith G r o t y a n d R . A r d e n Moon,

my g r a t i t u d e f o r t h e i r a s s i s t a n c e a n d c o u n c i l .

un d erstan d in g and

my

The

p r o f e s s i o n a l c h a r a c t e r of t h e s e i n d i v i d u a l s

h a s b e e n a n d will a l w a y s b e a n i n s p i r a t i o n to me.
A s i n c e r e t h a n k s to D r .

R i c h a r d N. C l a u s fo r h is c o n s u l t a t i o n a nd

p r o f e s s i o n a l a s s i s t a n c e in a n a l y z i n g t h e d a t a
t h a n k - y o u to
the original
and

Gwen

D ebr a F l o r e s - C o r t e z ,
dissertation

A.

Laszlo

drafts.

for

their

of t h i s s t u d y .

A

who g a v e c o u n t l e s s h o u r s to
My a p p r e c i a t i o n

professional

to T e r r y

assistance

as

L.

sp eci al
typing
Parland

typists

in

preparing the dissertation m anuscript.
Finally,
family a n d
nam ely ,

my

I wis h
friends.
wife

to e x p r e s s
I have

M argaret,

my d e e p

dedicated
without

and

this
her

sincere

g r a t i t u d e t o my

dissertation
support,

to my family:

endless

patience,

e n t h u s i a s m , a n d lo ve t h e c o m p le ti o n of my d o c t o r a l p r o g r a m would no t

have

been

appreciate
the

possible.
your

Son

N ic h o l a s

understanding

co u rse work and

w riting

and
the

and

daughter

Julie,

I

deeply

c o o p e r a t i o n while I was co m p le ti n g

m anuscript.

At a g e n i n e t y - o n e ,

my

f a t h e r N ic h o l as G. B a r r i s s ti l l p r o v i d e s t h e i n s p i r a t i o n a n d t h e s t r e n g t h
for

me to

losing

continue

sight

of

the

the

rigors

im portance

of b e i n g
of

my

a student,

fa m i ly .

working,

Lastly

to

and

not

my m o t h e r ,

w h o s e d e a t h d u r i n g t h e w r i t i n g of t h i s d i s s e r t a t i o n h a s h a d a p r o f o u n d
e f f e c t on my life;

nevertheless,

t h e s t r e n g t h of h e r lo ve h a s g i v e n me

t h e will a n d f o c u s to c o n t i n u e t h i s s t u d y .

TABLE OF CONTENTS
P age
LIST OF TA BLES ........................................................................................................
LIST OF FIGURES
CHAP TE R 1:

viii

.......................................................................................................

x

THE PROBLEM ..............................................................................

1

PURPOSE OF THE STUDY

................................................................................

IMPORTANCE AND BACKGROUND OF

THE STUDY

..............

2
3

DEFINITION OF TERMS .....................................................

7

Acad em ic A c h i e v e m e n t ........................................... ... ............................................
A r t i c u l a t i o n / T r a n s i t i o n . ...........
F e e d e r School R e p o r t s
................
Grade Configuration
.........................
J u n i o r Hi gh School
................
MCEA .......................................................................
MEAP T e s t ..................................
Middle School .................................................................
Pre or Early Adolescents
................
T r a n s e s c e n c e .......................

7
7
7
7
8
8
8
8
8
8

ASSUMPTIONS AND LIMITATIONS OF

9

THE STUDY

........................

HYPOTHESES ........................................................................................
SUMMARY AND ORGANIZATION OF THE D ISS ER TA TI ON
CHAPTER 2:

REVIEW OF L I TE R A T U RE

9
..........

AMDRESEA RCH ............

11
13

H I S T OR IC A L DEVELOPMENT OF THE AMERICAN J U N I O R
HIGH SCHOOL ...........................

13

HIS T OR IC A L DEVELOPMENT OF THE AMERICAN MIDDLE
SCHOOL .............................

22

v

TABLE OF CONTENTS (C O N T .)

P age
RESEARCH FINDINGS ON THE E F F EC TS OF GRADE
ORGANIZATION OR GRADE CO NFI GURATION ON
STUDENT'S ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT ...........

31

SUMMARY

41

........ . ..........................................................................................................

CH APT ER 3:

METHODOLOGY

POPULATION

..............................

...................... . ..........

SAMPLE SELECTION

44
44

...........

45

DESCRIPTION OF SAMPLE

.......................

47

HYPOTHESES .......................................................

52

DESIGN AND IN STRUMENTATION ................................................................

54

Design ..................................
I n s t r u m e n t a t i o n .............
Technical C h a ra c te ris tic s

54
55
60

..................

DATA GATHERING PROCEDURES
DATA ANALYSIS PROCEDURES
SUMMARY
CH APT ER 4:

................
.......................

.................................................................................................
ANALYSIS OF RESULTS ........................................................

INDEPENDENT VARIABLES
DEPENDENT VARIABLES

.........................
............................................................................

61
62
64
65
65
66

HYPOTHESES ................................

66

SUMMARY OF FINDINGS

74

OVERVIEW

.....................................

..............................

75

vi

TABLE OF CONTENTS (C O N T .)
Page
CH AP TE R 5: REVIEW OF THE STU DY, SUMMARY,
CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS .........................................
REVIEW OF THE STUDY
SUMMARY

....................................................................................

........................................................................................

CONCLUSIONS

.........

76
76
78
80

D is c u s si o n .....................................................................................................................

80

RECOMMENDATIONS

83

.......................................

R e c o m m e n d a ti o n s f o r P r a c t i c e .................................................
R e c o m m e n d a t i o n s f o r F u r t h e r R e s e a r c h ...................................................
APPENDIX A:

MEAP:

APPENDIX B:

P e r c e n t M a s t e r y in M at hem ati cs a n d
R e a d i n g b y C a t e g o r y of A c h ie v e m e n t
f o r S e l e c t e d Middle Schools a n d
J u n i o r U ig h s on t h e S e v e n t h G r a d e
1985-86 a n d T e n t h G r a d e 1988-89
Michigan E d u c a t i o n a l A s s e s s m e n t
P r o g r a m (ME'AP) ..............................................

BIBLIO GR APH Y

T h e Skill A r e a s A s s e s s e d

........................

...........................................................................................................

v ii

83
84
86

87
91

LIST OF TABLES

T a b le
3. 1

3.2

Page
C o u n t of J u n i o r H i g h / M i d d l e S c h o o ls a n d A g g r e g a t e
E n r o l lm e n t T a k i n g S e v e n t h G r a d e MEAP f o r t h e
S e l e c t e d J u n i o r Hig h a n d Middle Scho ol D i s t r i c t s ,
1985-86 School Y e a r .............................................................

48

C u r r e n t O p e r a t i n g E x p e n d i t u r e s (C O E) P e r P u p il
f o r S e le c te d J u n i o r H ig h School a n d Middle School
D i s t r i c t s 1982-86

49

T e a c h e r s ’ A v e r a g e S a l a r y f o r S e le c te d J u n i o r High
a n d Middle Sc hool D i s t r i c t s , 1982-86 ...................................

50

N u m b e r a n d P e r c e n t of J u n i o r / M i d d l e S t u d e n t s
in t h e S e l e c t e d J u n i o r High a n d Middle School
D i s t r i c t s b y R a c i a l / E t h n i c C a t e g o r y , 1985-86 ..........................

51

N u m b e r of O b j e c t i v e s a n d Ite m s U se d in t h e R e a d i n g
a n d M at he m at ic s M ich ig an E d u c a t i o n a l A s s e s s ment
P r o g r a m (MEAP) f o r G r a d e s S e v e n a n d T e n
.....................

58

R a n g e of Michigan E d u c a t i o n a l A s s e s s m e n t P r o g r a m
(MEAP) O b j e c t i v e A t t a i n m e n t s in R e a d i n g a n d M a th e ­
m a ti cs f o r Each C a t e g o r y of A c h i e v e m e n t , 1985-89

59

4.1

Chi-Square

Test

68

4.2

C hi-Square

T est R esult for

H y p o t h e s i s Two .................

4.3

C hi-Square

T est Result for

HypothesisT h ree

4.4

C hi-Square

T est R e su lt for

HypothesisFour

3. 3
3. 4

3. 5

3.6

4.5

A .l

R esult for

H y p o th e sis One

..............................

70

.........................

71

............................

73

S u m m a ry of C h i - S q u a r e R e s u l t s R e l a t e d t o F o u r
H y p o t h e s e s C o n t r a s t i n g Middle a n d J u n i o r High
School MEAP C a t e g o r i e s of A c h i e v e m e n t ...... .....................................

74

MEAP:

86

T h e Skill A r e a s A s s e s s e d

...................

v iii

LIST OF TABLES (C O N T .)

T a b le
B .l

B.2

B.3

B.4

P age
P e r c e n t M a s t e r y in M a t h e m a t i c s b y C a t e g o r y of
A c h i e v e m e n t f o r S e l e c t e d Middle Sch ool s a n d J u n i o r
H i g h s on t h e S e v e n t h G r a d e Michi gan E d u c a t i o n a l
A s s e s s m e n t P r o g r a m (M EA P) , 1985-86
...............................

87

P e r c e n t M a s t e r y in H e a d i n g b y C a t e g o r y of A c h i e v e ­
m e n t f o r S e l e c t e d Middle S c h o o ls a n d J u n i o r H i g h s
on t h e S e v e n t h G r a d e M ich ig an E d u c a t i o n a l A s s e s s m e n t
...........
“. . .
P r o gram (M EA P), 1985-86

88

P e r c e n t M a s t e r y in M a t h e m a ti c s b y C a t e g o r y of
A c h i e v e m e n t f o r S e l e c t e d Middle S ch oo ls a n d J u n i o r
H i g h s on t h e T e n t h G r a d e Michigan E d u c a t i o n a l
A s s e s s m e n t P r o g r a m (M E A P ) , 1988-89 ...........................................

89

P e r c e n t M a s t e r y in H e a d i n g b y C a t e g o r y of A c h i e v e ­
m e n t f o r S e l e c t e d Middle S c h o o ls a n d J u n i o r H ig h s
on t h e T e n t h G r a d e M ich ig an E d u c a t i o n a l A s s e s s m e n t
P r o g r a m (M EA P), 1988-89 .......................................................................

90

ix

LIST OF FIGURES

F ig u r e

Page

3.1

S t a t i c - G r o u p C o m p a r i s o n ..........................................................................

55

3 .2

C h i - S q u a r e C o n t i n g e n c y T a b l e L a y o u t U se d f o r Each
Hypothesis
....................................................................................................

62

O b s e rv e d an d (E x p e c te d ) F re q u e n c ie s for th e Con­
t i n g e n c y T a b l e R e l a t e d to H y p o t h e s i s O n e — S e v e n t h
G r a d e Math em ati cs
...........................................................................

68

O b s e r v e d a n d ( E x p e c t e d ) F r e q u e n c i e s for t h e C o n ­
t i n g e n c y T a b l e R e l a t e d to H y p o t h e s i s T w o — S e v e n t h
G rade Reading
....................................................................................

69

O b s e rv e d and ( E x p e c te d ) F re q u e n c ie s for the Con­
t i n g e n c y T a b l e R e l a t e d to H y p o t h e s i s T h r e e — T e n t h
G r a d e M at hem ati cs .........................................

71

O b se rv ed and (E x p e c ted ) F re q u en cie s for th e Con­
t i n g e n c y T a b l e R e l a t e d to H y p o t h e s i s F o u r — T e n t h
G rade Reading
.........................................................................

73

4.1

4 .2

4.3

4.4

CHAPTER 1:

The

most

appropriate

early

adolescents has

quite

so me ti me .

appropriate
in

sch ool

The

THE PROBLEM

grade

configuration

for

preadolescent

or

b e e n a s u b j e c t of d e b a t e am o n g r e s e a r c h e r s f o r
absence

of a g r e e m e n t

am o n g

researchers

o n an

g r a d e c o n f i g u r a t i o n is e v i d e n c e d b y t h e l a c k of c o n s i s t e n c y
organization

across

the

county.

Neither

in

theory

n o r in

p r a c t i c e h a v e e d u c a t o r s b e e n a b l e to a g r e e on t h e b e s t o r g a n i z a t i o n of
t h e m id dle g r a d e s .
The

attempt

configuration

for

to

find

the

preadolescents

best
and

or

early

most

adolescents

r ol e in t h e d e v e l o p m e n t of b o t h t h e j u n i o r h i g h
school.

The junior high

sc ho o l h a s e x i s t e d

t h e middle sch ool is now a s u r p r i s i n g

appropriate
played

school an d

for

grade
a major

t h e middle

some 80 y e a r s ,

30 y e a r s o l d .

while

R e s e a r c h on t h e

a t t r i b u t e s of b o t h t h e j u n i o r h i g h a n d m id dle sc ho ol c o n t i n u e s , a n d h a s
raised

as

questions
is,

many
raised

questions
about

as

mi dd le

it

has
-

answ ered.

grade

education,

However,
the

most

o f all

the

prevalent

"What i s th e b e s t o r m ost a p p r o p r ia te g r a d e c o n fig u r a tio n to a c h ie v e

optimum acad em ic r e s u lts ? "

1

2

PURPOSE OF THE STUDY
T h e p u r p o s e of t h i s s t u d y is to d e t e r m i n e if t h e r e is a d i f f e r e n c e
in t h e

M ich ig an E d u c a t i o n a l

students

A ssessm ent Program

in a t r a d i t i o n a l j u n i o r h i g h

grouping.

The

study

compares

the

grouping
MEAP

(MEAP) r e s u l t s among
versus

results

h i g h s c h o o l s with mi ddle s c h o o l s f o r g r a d e s e v e n .

a mi ddle school

of s e l e c t e d

T h e same c o m p a r i s o n

a r e to b e d o n e w h e n t h e s e s t u d e n t s a r e in g r a d e t e n .
findings

of

this

study,

a

recommendation

as

junior

to

Based upon the

the

organizational

s t r u c t u r e in w hic h g r a d e s e v e n is most a p p r o p r i a t e to a c h i e v e optimum
a ca d em i c r e s u l t s will be o f f e r e d .
A

review

of

the

literature

reveals

an

abundance

of

research

d e a l i n g w ith s t u d e n t p e r f o r m a n c e on s t a n d a r d i z e d t e s t s like t h e MEAP;
however,

t h e r e a p p e a r s to b e limit ed r e s e a r c h a v a i l a b l e d e a l i n g with t h e

optimum

or

best

grade

configuration

associated

with

students

taking

these te sts.
A

com parative

traditional junior

analysis

h ig h

of

the

results

of

students

grouping

and

a mid dle sc h o o l

in

grouping

b o th

a

should

gi v e a d d i t i o n a l s u p p o r t t o sc ho ol d i s t r i c t s in a s s e s s i n g a n d d e t e r m i n i n g
the

most

results.

appropriate

grade

configuration

to a c h i e v e optimum aca dem ic

3

IMPORTANCE AND BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY
The

Michigan

standardized

test

Michigan

1969,

MEAP

has

State

Board

of

s k il l s

students

have

provided

to

students

citizens,

on

the

Students

reading

m astered

information

Education,

education.

vocabulary,

yearly,

Program
students

(MEAP)
in

is

grades

a

four,

T h e MEAP is r e s p o n s i b l e f o r m e a s u r i n g t h e e x t e n t to

w hi ch

and

Assessment

adm inistered,

seven, and ten.

parents

E d u c a t i o n al

to

the

local

status

are

specified basic skills.

and

tested

com prehension,

G overnor,

sc h oo l

on

Legislature,

districts,

progress

of

Sin ce

teachers,

Michigan

basic

th e ir basic knowledge

E n gl is h

usage,

and

of

mathematics.

T h e MEAP is a s t a t e w i d e t e s t i n g p r o g r a m i n i t i a t e d b y t h e S t a t e B o a r d of
Education,

s u p p o r te d by th e G o v e rn o r and fu n d e d by the le g is la tu re .

According

to

the

Mi c h i g a n

E d u c a t i onal

A ssessm ent

Program

H an d b o o k ( 1 9 8 9 ) , t h e f i r s t f o u r y e a r s of t h e a s s e s s m e n t p r o g r a m (19691973)

used

students

standardized

from

(vocabulary,

highest

reading

norm -referenced
to

lo w e s t

in

com prehension,

T he information p ro v id e d

by

tests

each

of f o u r

E n g l is h

these tests

designed

usage,

to

subject
and

rank
areas

arithm etic).

did n o t a d e q u a t e l y

serve the

p u r p o s e of MEAP to p r o v i d e i n f o r m a t i o n on t h e s t a t u s a n d p r o g r e s s of
Michigan

basic

s k il l s

education.

An

alternative

me th o d

of a s s e s s i n g

s t u d e n t a c h i e v e m e n t was n e e d e d ( p . 1 ) .
Due
assessing

to

the

prevailing

student

achievem ent,

i n i t i a t i v e in t h e Fall of 1971.
the

Fall

of

1971,

need

referent

perform ance objectives

to

provide

an

MEAP o ff ici als

alternative
launched

m e th o d

the

of

following

A g a i n , a c c o r d i n g to t h e MEAP H a n d b o o k ,
groups

were

formed

in t h e b a s i c s k i l l s a r e a s .

to
The

develop
groups

specific
were

4

composed

of loc al,

state,

and

a n d t e a c h e r s from t h r o u g h o u t
approved

and

referenced

adopted

tests

by

were

higher

education

Michi gan

the

State

developed

...

The

Board

by

curriculum

specialists

final o b j e c t i v e s w e r e

of E d u c a t i o n .

M ich ig an

O bjective-

educators

to

measure

s p e c i f i e d b a s i c sk il l s a t t a i n m e n t .
For

the

purpose

of t h i s

stiidy,

the

single,

most

prevailing

and

d i s t i n g u i s h i n g f e a t u r e b e t w e e n t h e t r a d i t i o n a l j u n i o r h i g h a n d t h e middle
sch ool

is

their

grade

configurations.

Grade

d i s t i n g u i s h j u n i o r h i g h s from t h e mi dd le s c h o o l s .
is

defined

Whereas,

as

a

sc h oo l

a middle

that

sch oo l

is

includes

grades

defined

as

configurations

do

A j u n i o r h ig h sch oo l

seven,

eight,

a s ch oo l t h a t

and

includes

nine.
grades

six, seven, and eig h t.
The

most

appropriate

early adolescents

has been

quite

The

so me ti me .

grade

configuration

for

a s u b j e c t of d e b a t e am on g

absence

of a g r e e m e n t

am o n g

preadolescent

or

researchers

for

researchers

on

an

a p p r o p r i a t e g r a d e c o n f i g u r a t i o n is e v i d e n c e d b y t h e la ck of c o n s i s t e n c y
i n sch oo l o r g a n i z a t i o n a c r o s s t h e c o u n t r y .
in a

variety

educational,

of

grade

combinations

others that

to

S ch o ol s h a v e b e e n a r r a n g e d

meet

a

ap p ea r expeditious.

variety

of n e e d s — some

N e i t h e r in t h e o r y n o r in

p r a c t i c e h a v e e d u c a t o r s b e e n a b l e to a g r e e on t h e b e s t o r g a n i z a t i o n of
the

middle

A s s o c i a ti o n
S c h o ol

grades.
of

In

Secondary

Education,

they

1959,
School

as

educators

Principals'

endorsed

a

served

Committ ee

seventh

on
on

through

the

N ati ona l

Junior
ninth

High
grade

a r r a n g e m e n t a s t h e most, a p p r o p r i a t e c o m b in a ti o n f o r t h e middle y e a r s .
O ther educators,

s u c h a s William A l e x a n d e r , f a v o r e d e i t h e r t h e f i f t h o r

sixth th ro u g h eighth g ra d e combination.

Still o t h e r e d u c a t o r s ,

such as

5

Ja m e s

Conant,

believed

that

it

did

not

m atter

how

schools

were

o r g a n i z e d so l o n g as t h e y p r o v i d e d q u a l i t y p r o g r a m s .
This debate raised
have

tried

issue

that

to

a n u m b e r of i m p o r t a n t i s s u e s t h a t r e s e a r c h e r s

answ er.

research

C e n t r a l to

thediscussion,

co u ld

address,

alone

not

however,
for

it

was

involved

an
the

r e s p o n s i b i l i t y of t h e s c h o o l s a n d of s o c i e t y t o w a r d t h o s e y o u n g p e o p l e
undergoing the profound physical,
associated

with p u b e r t y .

Educators

t h e s c h o o ls h a v e a r e s p o n s i b i l i t y
too

fast.

Questions

configuration associated

em oti ona l, a n d p s y c h o l o g i c a l c h a n g e s
have raised

to p r o t e c t

d e a l i n g with
w it h

the issue

students

the

of w h e t h e r

from g r o w i n g u p

most a p p r o p r i a t e

t h e a c a d e m i c s u c c e s s of s e v e n t h

grade

graders,

will b e t h e s u b j e c t of f u r t h e r i n v e s t i g a t i o n in C h a p t e r 2.
The

attempt

configuration

for

to

fi n d

the b est

preadolescents

and

or
early

most a p p r o p r i a t e
adolescents

role in t h e d e v e l o p m e n t of b o t h t h e j u n i o r h i g h
school.

Both

Samuel P o p p e r ,

played

school and

who d e f e n d e d j u n i o r

high

grade
a major

t h e mid dle

schools,

and

William A l e x a n d e r ,

k n o w n a s t h e f a t h e r of t h e m id dle s ch o ol m o v e m e n t,

recognized

configuration

grade

as one

of t h e

j u n i o r h i g h s c h o o l s from mid dle s c h o o l s .
the

appropriate

Research indicates

that

for

the

program;

and

the

of

A l e x a n d e r saw a b r o a d e r d e b a t e ,

b u t one th a t

A lexander

public

grades are

organization.

i n g o p i n i o n s a r i s e a s to t h e

unit

f o c u s e d on w hic h
sc h o o l

b e g a n with g r a d e p l a c e m e n t .

this

separating

A c c o r d i n g to P o p p e r ( 1 9 6 7 ) ,

" p r o f e s s i o n a l d i a l o g u e " on t h i s i s s u e

functionally

basic issu e s

(1978) o b s e r v e d t h a t c o n f l i c t ­

y ears and grades,

relation

to

the

i f a n y t h e s p e c i f i c s of

existing

elementary, secondary, and teacher education.

establishm ents

Although o th e r is s u e s

in

6
im pinged

on

the

discussion,

the

subject

of

the

review

of

literature

( C h a p t e r 2) will r e v o l v e a r o u n d g r a d e c o n f i g u r a t i o n a n d o r g a n i z a t i o n .
Further,
respect

to

a

the

brief

review

effects

of

of

the

grade

literature

organization

and

on

research,

students,

with

indicates

g r a d e o r g a n i z a t i o n a p p e a r s to h a v e li ttl e o r no i n f l u e n c e o n a s t u d e n t ' s
academic ach iev em en t.

Research by

Donald S t o u t

(1962) c o n c l u d e d t h a t

o r g a n i z a t i o n a l f a c t o r s in a n d of t h e m s e l v e s did no t d i s c r i m i n a t e b e t w e e n
the

two

groups

of

schools.

Me f o u n d

that

attitudes,

services,

and

i n t e r p e r s o n a l r e l a t i o n s w i t h i n t h e school co m m u n it y w e r e more i m p o r t a n t
in d e t e r m i n i n g t h e a c h i e v e m e n t l e v e l of s t u d e n t s .
Stout

(1962)

between the
w hic h

the

further

two g r o u p s

staff had

stated,

t h e c e n t r a l f a c t o r in t h e d i f f e r e n c e s

of s c h o o l s

m o t iv a t io n a n d

f o r t h e n e e d s of p u p i l s .

w as o b s e r v e d
actively

to be th e e x t e n t

to

s o u g h t to ma ke p r o v i s i o n s

A s t u d y b y R i c h a r d Wolfe (1972) s u p p o r t s t h e

f i n d i n g s of S t o u t i n a s m u c h a s g r a d e p a t t e r n h a s no s i g n i f i c a n t e f f e c t on
achievem ent.
patterns

Wolfe c o n c l u d e d t h a t in p l a n n i n g t h e

for the in -b e tw e en y e a r s ,

grade arrangem ent

d e c i s i o n m a k e r s may u ti li z e a n y o n e

of t h e d e s i g n s which fit t h e i r local n e e d s .
Therefore,
research,

a

major

focus

of

is to d e t e r m i n e to w h a t

this

study,

as

measured

by

the

e x t e n t g r a d e o r g a n i z a t i o n may e x e r t

i n f l u e n c e on a s t u d e n t ' s a c a d e m i c a c h i e v e m e n t .

7

DEFINITION OF TERMS
T h e following t e r m s a r e d e f i n e d in t h e c o n t e x t in w hic h t h e y a r e
u s e d in t h i s d i s s e r t a t i o n .

A cadem ic A ch iev em en t
The
fields,

skill o r
as

knowledge attained

m easured

in

this

b y a n i n d i v i d u a l in o n e o r more

study

by

the

Michigan

Educational

A s s e s s m e n t P r o g r a m (MEAP) t e s t .

A r tic u la tio n / T r a n sitio n
Relationships
transition

to

relationship

with

the

mi dd le sc ho ol
with

the

h ig h

elementary

s c h o o l,

a n d / o r junior

high

school,

design
sch ool

to mak e t h e

to

sm oo th ;

transition

make

the

and

the

of s t u d e n t s

i n t o t h a t sc h o o l e f f e c t i v e .

F e e d e r S ch ool R e p o r ts
R e p o r t s t h a t a r e i n t e n d e d f o r u s e b y t h e j u n i o r h i g h s a n d middle
s c h o o ls w h i c h f e e d s t u d e n t s i n t o t h e h i g h

schools.

T h e F e e d e r School

R e p o r t s h o w s how all s t u d e n t s in a p a r t i c u l a r j u n i o r h i g h / m i d d l e school
performed

on

the

assessm ent

tests,

the

feeder

s ch ool

can

use

this

i n f o r m a t i o n t o a n a l y z e t h e s t r e n g t h s a n d w e a k n e s s e s of i t s i n s t r u c t i o n a l
p r o g r a m s ( Michi gan E d u c a t iona l A s s e s s m e n t P r o g r a m H a n d b o o k , 1985-86,
p . 23).

G rade C o n fig u ra tio n
T h e s p a n of g r a d e s t h a t c o m p r i s e a g i v e n s c h o o l .

8

J u n io r H igh Sch ool
A sch oo l t h a t

is d e s i g n a t e d

as one

between

elementary

and high

s c h o o l, i n c l u d e s g r a d e s s e v e n , e i g h t , a n d n i n e .

MCEA
T h e Middle C it ie s E d u c a t i o n a l A s s o c i a t i o n , a g r o u p of u r b a n school
d i s t r i c t s in t h e

S t a t e of M ic h ig an who came t o g e t h e r to s h a r e c o n c e r n s

a n d c o o r d i n a t e e f f o r t s to meet t h e n e e d s of u r b a n c h i l d r e n .

MEAP T e s t
T h e Michigan E d u c a t i o n a l A s s e s s m e n t P r o gr am t e s t , a s t a n d a r d i z e d
objective

referenced

test

adm inistered,

yearly,

to

students

in

grades

four, seven, and ten.

M iddle Sch ool
A s ch ool t h a t

is d e s i g n a t e d

a s o ne b e t w e e n e l e m e n t a r y

and high

s c h o o l, i n c l u d e s g r a d e s s i x , s e v e n , a n d e i g h t .

P re o r E arly A d o le s c e n ts
C h i l d r e n t h a t a r e 10 to 14 y e a r s of a g e a n d c o n s t i t u t e s a d i s t i n c t
stage

of d e v e l o p m e n t i n v o l v i n g

simi lar p h y s i c a l ,

em otion al,

social,

and

intellectual c h a r a c te r i s tic s .

T ran sescen ce
The

stage

of

development

w hi ch

begins

prior

to

the

p u b e r t y a n d e x t e n d s t h r o u g h t h e e a r l y s t a g e s of a d o l e s c e n c e .

onset

of

ASSUMPTIONS AND LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY
The

design

li m it at i o n .

of t h i s

study

is

based

on

certain

assum ptions

and

T h e y i n c l u d e t h e fo ll o wi n g:

1.

It will b e a s s u m e d in t h i s s t u d y , from t h e r e s e a r c h
t h a t h a s b e e n d o n e on t h e e f f e c t s of g r a d e o r g a n i ­
zat ion o r g r a d e c o n f i g u r a t i o n o n s t u d e n t s , t h a t
g r a d e o r g a n i z a t i o n o r g r a d e c o n f i g u r a t i o n h a s li t t l e
or no i n f l u e n c e on a s t u d e n t ' s a c a d e m i c a c h i e v e m e n t .

2.

T h e s t u d y is limited to t h e a p p r o p r i a t e p la c e m e n t
of g r a d e s e v e n a s e i t h e r p a r t of a j u n i o r h i g h o r
a middle s c h o o l g r o u p i n g .

3.

T h e sole p r e d i c t o r , w ith r e s p e c t to a c a d e m i c a c h i e v e ­
m e n t , will be t h e r e s u l t s of t h e 1.985-1986 s e v e n t h
g r a d e MEAP t e s t a n d t h e 1988-1989 t e n t h g r a d e MEAP
t e s t f o r s e l e c t e d j u n i o r h i g h a n d m id dl e s c h o o l s .

4.

T h e s t u d y is limited to ac a d e m i c a c h i e v e m e n t , a s
e v i d e n c e d b y t h e r e s u l t s of t h e MEAP t e s t , o t h e r
c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s s u c h a s b u t not li m it e d , to t h e
p h y s i c a l , social a n d e m o ti o n s n e e d s n o r m a l ly a s s o c i ­
a t e d with p r e o r e a r l y a d o l e s c e n t s , will n o t b e a
s u b j e c t of t h i s s t u d y .

HYPOTHESES
T h e p r i m a r y f o c u s of t h i s s t u d y
in a ca de m ic
grouping

achievement
as compared

among

was u p o n t h e d i f f e r e n c e ,

students

to s t u d e n t s

in

following h y p o t h e s e s w e r e f o r m u l a t e d

in

a traditional

a mi dd le s ch oo l
to g u i d e

if

any,

junior

high

grouping.

The

t h e a n a l y s i s of d a t a f o r

this stu d y .
First,

a

set

of

seventh

h y p o t h e s e s will b e p r e s e n t e d .

grade

and then a

set

of

tenth

grade

10

H y p o th e s e s R e g a r d in g S e v e n th G rade A ch iev em en t
H y p o th e s e s 1:
NuU H y p o th e s is : T h e r e is no d i f f e r e n c e b e t w e e n t h e
two g r o u p s (m i d d le sc ho o l a n d j u n i o r h i g h ) in t h e
p r o p o r t i o n of t h e m e m b e r s in ea c h of t h e f o u r MEAP
mathematics achievem ent c a te g o rie s .
A ltern a te H y p o th e s is : A g r e a t e r p r o p o r t i o n of t h e
middle sch oo l s t u d e n t s a r e in h i g h e r MEAP m a t h e m a t i c s
a c h i e v e m e n t c a t e g o r i e s t h a n i s t h e c a s e f o r t h o s e who
a r e in j u n i o r h i g h s c h o o l s .
H y p o th e se s 2 :
N ull H y p o th e s is : T h e r e is no d i f f e r e n c e b e t w e e n t h e
two g r o u p s (m i d d le s ch oo l a n d j u n i o r h i g h ) in t h e
p r o p o r t i o n of t h e m e m b e r s in e ac h of t h e f o u r MEAP
reading achievement categories.
A ltern a te H y p o th e s is : A g r e a t e r p r o p o r t i o n of t h e
mid dle sch ool s t u d e n t s a r e in h i g h e r MEAP r e a d i n g
a c h i e v e m e n t c a t e g o r i e s t h a n is t h e c a s e f o r t h o s e who
a r e in j u n i o r h ig h s c h o o l s .
H y p o th e s e s R e g a r d in g T en t h G rade A ch ievem en t
H y p o th e sis 3 :
N ull H y p o th e s is : T h e r e is no d i f f e r e n c e b e t w e e n t h e
two g r o u p s (m i d d le sc ho ol a n d j u n i o r h i g h ) in t h e
p r o p o r t i o n of t h e m e m b e r s in e ac h of t h e f o u r MEAP
mathematics achievem ent c a te g o rie s .
A ltern a te H y p o th e s is : A g r e a t e r p r o p o r t i o n o f th e
s t u d e n t s from t h e m id dle sch ool a r e in h i g h e r MEAP
m a t h e m a t i c s a c h i e v e m e n t c a t e g o r i e s t h a n is t h e c a s e
f o r t h o s e who a r e in j u n i o r h i g h s c h o o l s .
H y p o th e sis 4 :
N ull H y p o th e sis: T h e r e is no d i f f e r e n c e b e t w e e n t h e
two g r o u p s (m i d d le sc h o o l a n d j u n i o r h i g h ) in t h e
p r o p o r t i o n of t h e m e m b e r s in e ac h of t h e f o u r MEAP
reading achievement categories.
A ltern a te H y p o t h e s is : A g r e a t e r p o r t i o n of t h e s t u ­
d e n t s from t h e m i d d le sc ho o l a r e in t h e h i g h e r MEAP
r e a d i n g a c h i e v e m e n t c a t e g o r i e s t h a n is t h e c a s e f o r
t h o s e who a r e in j u n i o r h i g h s c h o o l s .

11

SUMMARY A ND ORGANIZATION OF THE DISSERTATION
The

most

appropriate

early

adolescents has

quite

s o m e t im e .

appropriate

grade

been

The

configuration

a s u b j e c t of d e b a t e

absence

of a g r e e m e n t

for

preadolescent

or

am ong r e s e a r c h e r s

for

am ong

researchers

on

an

g r a d e c o n f i g u r a t i o n is e v i d e n c e d b y t h e l a c k of c o n s i s t e n c y

in sc h o o l o r g a n i z a t i o n s a c r o s s t h e c o u n t r y .

In o r d e r to d e t e r m i n e t h e

most a p p r o p r i a t e o r g a n i z a t i o n a l s t r u c t u r e in which g r a d e s e v e n s t u d e n t s
a r e most s u c c e s s f u l ,

a c o m p a r a t i v e s t u d y of t h e r e s u l t s of t h e s e v e n t h

g r a d e a n d t e n t h g r a d e Mic h i g a n Ed u c at i o n a l A s s e s sm e n t P r o gra m (MEAP)
was u n d e r t a k e n .
grade

students

seventh

grade

in

The stu d y

compared

traditional

junior

students

in

mi ddle

the

high

1985-86 r e s u l t s
s c h o o ls

s c h o o ls

from

with

son

using

students,
This
contained

1988-89

feeder

sch ool

results

was

the

those

t h a t form t h e Middle Citie s E d u c a t i o n a l A s s o c i a t i o n .

of s e v e n t h
results

sch ool

The

of

districts

same c o m p a r i ­

done,

with

the

same

w h e n t h e y w e r e in g r a d e t e n .
dissertation
an

is

divided

introduction

im portance and

to

into

the

five

study,

b a c k g r o u n d of t h e s t u d y ,

tions and limitations,

and h y poth eses.

t h e l i t e r a t u r e r e l a t e d to t h i s

research.

chapters.
purpose

of

Chapter
the

d e f i n i t i o n s of t e r m s ,

1

study,
assump­

C h a p t e r 2 c o n t a i n s a r e v i e w of
T h e f o c u s is on t h e e f f e c t s of

g r a d e o r g a n i z a t i o n o r g r a d e c o n f i g u r a t i o n on s t u d e n t s ' a c a d e m i c a c h i e v e ­
me nt .
C hapter

3 provides a

d e s c r i p t i o n of t h e m e t h o d s

and

procedures

u s e d to d e t e r m i n e if t h e r e was a d i f f e r e n c e in t h e MEAP r e s u l t s am on g
students
grouping.

in a t r a d i t i o n a l j u n i o r
This

chapter

high
is

grouping

divided

versus
in t o

a middle s ch oo l

the

fo ll o wi n g:

12

population,
and

s am p l e s e l e c t i o n ,

instrum entation,

d e s c r i p t i o n of s a m p l e ,

data

gathering

hypotheses,

procedures,

data

design
analysis

p ro c e d u re s, and summary.
C h a p t e r 4 is d e v o t e d t o t h e p r e s e n t a t i o n a n d i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f t h e
data.

The

variables,

chapter

dependent

h ypotheses related
Chapter

5

the

further research.

divided

variables,

to t e n t h

includes

recom mendations.
concerning

is

a

into

the

hypotheses

grade,
review

fo ll ow in g:
related

to

independent
seventh

grade,

s u m m a r y of f i n d i n g s a n d o v e r v i e w .
of

the

study,

summary

and

A d d i t i o n a l s e c t i o n s of t h i s c h a p t e r c o n t a i n d i s c u s s i o n
summary

of

past

research

and

recom mendations

for

CHAPTER 2:

REVIEW OF LITERATURE AND RESEARCH

T h i s c h a p t e r p r o v i d e s t h e r e v i e w of r e l a t e d l i t e r a t u r e a n d r e s e a r c h
o n t h e e f f e c t s of

o r g a n i z a t i o n o r g r a d e c o n f i g u r a t i o n on s t u d e n t ' s

g ra d e

academic

achievem ent.

historical

d e v e l o p m e n t of t h e j u n i o r h i g h s c h o o l,

of t h e m i d d le sc h o o l,

The

and

chapter

research

is

divided

into

the

follo wing :

historical development

f i n d i n g s p e r t i n e n t to t h e e f f e c t s of

g ra d e o r g a n iz a tio n /c o n f ig u r a tio n on s tu d e n t 's academic achievem ent.

HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT OF THE AMERICAN JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL
In t h e la te 1800's a n d e a r l y 1900's, a n u m b e r of n a t i o n a l com mittees
and

co m mi ss io n s

charge

of

were

these

organized

c o m m it te e s

of

regarding

possible reo rg an izatio n .

grow th

of

Stournbis (1 970 )

high

secondary

schools

discovered

study

and

evaluation

rapid

existing

to

that

secondary

com mi ss ion s

education

and

education.

was

to

mak e

pattern

of

high

school.

While

conduct

an

recommendations

P o s t Civil War p e r i o d r e s u l t e d in a

in

the

United

States.

H ow a rd

and

some s e c t i o n s of t h e c o u n t r y o p e r a t e d

u n d e r a n 8-5 p la n - t h i s is e i g h t y e a r s of e l e m e n t a r y
years

The

other

systems

sch oo l a n d five

operated

under

an

8-4

with e i g h t y e a r s o f e l e m e n t a r y sc ho ol a n d f o u r of h ig h s c h o o l.

Still o t h e r s
s c h o o l.
nineteenth

had

The

six y e a r s
8-4

century

of e l e m e n t a r y

pattern
with

the

became

school a n d

popular

elementary

toward

school s e e n

s ix y e a r s in h i g h
the

end

of

the

as p r e p a r a tio n for

h ig h sc h o o l a n d t h e h i g h s c h o o l s e r v i n g a c o l l e g e - p r e p a r a t o r y f u n c t i o n
(p. 6).

13

14

Early

educators

secondary
housed

education

it.

co l le g e,

differed

Some

while

but

also

v ie w e d

others

on

not

on

the

secondary

advanced

only

the

sc h o o l

n o ti o n

purpose

organization

education

the

main

as

that

a

that

of
best

preparation

the

main

for

purpose

of

s e c o n d a r y e d u c a t i o n was t h e p r e p a r a t i o n f o r life o u t s i d e t h e c l a s s r o o m .
R esponding
were

to t h e

intended

years

of

early

to

re v ie w

schooling,

indicated

that,

preparing

thought

and

"it

students

what

was

the

that

had

been

8-4

w asted

the

seventh
taught

for c o l l e g e . "

that

com mi tt ees to e v a l u a t e e d u c a t i o n in t h e U n i t e d

the

pattern,

schools

Eliot's r e m a r k s

eighth

during

organizational

time

and

could

first

six

Eliot

(1888)

better

spend

launched

States.

grades

a s e r i e s of

The first,

and

said to b e t h e most fam ous was t h e Committee of T e n , c h a i r e d b y Eliot
him self in 1894.
in

T h e Committee of T e n was o n e of t h e most i n f l u e n t i a l

A me ric an e d u c a t i o n

and

stressed

that

high

sc ho ol s u b j e c t s

s u ch as

a l g e b r a a n d f o r e i g n l a n g u a g e s b e i n i t i a t e d in t h e l a s t y e a r s of t h e e l e ­
mentary
the

school.

secondary

s c h o o li n g

T h e Committee f u r t h e r r e c o m m e n d e d t h e e x p a n s i o n of
sch ool

program

to

sixth

grade,

and

a

( n a t i o n a l E d u c a t i o n a l Com mitte e on S e c o n d a r y

6-6

pattern

of

School S t u d i e s ,

1969, p . 24 9) .
F u r th e r su p p o rt for reo rg a n iz a tio n and for a s e p a ra te junior high
unit

was

s u m m a r iz e d

Secondary

Education

from

Seven

the

attempt

to

functions,
more

ch il d

identity

centered

by

(1918).

Cardinal

establish
an

well

an

Commission

Citing

the

Pr i n c i p l e s ,
educational

of i t s
than

the

own,
co ll ege

following

gives
unit

which,

on

paragraphs

further
w ith

Reorganization

a

insight
number

theoretically

preparatory

at

centered:

of

below,

into
of
least,

the
clear
was

15

The eight y e a r s h e r e to f o r e given to e lem en tary e d u ­
c a t io n h a v e n o t ,
as a ru le, been effectively utilized.
T h e l a s t two of t h e s e y e a r s in p a r t i c u l a r h a v e n o t b e e n
well a d a p t e d to t h e n e e d s of t h e a d o l e s c e n t . . . We
b e l i e v e t h a t m uc h of t h e d i f f i c u l t y will b e r e m o v e d b y
a new t y p e of s e c o n d a r y e d u c a t i o n b e g i n n i n g a t a b o u t
12 o r 13. F u r t h e r m o r e , t h e p e r i o d of f o u r y e a r s now
a l l o t t e d to t h e h i g h s c h o o l is too s h o r t a time in w h ic h
to ac c o m p li sh t h e w o r k o u t l i n e d a b o v e .
We, t h e r e f o r e , r e c o m m e n d a r e o r g a n i z a t i o n of t h e
s ch o ol s y s t e m w h e r e b y t h e f i r s t six y e a r s s h a ll be
d e v o t e d to e l e m e n t a r y e d u c a t i o n d e s i g n e d to meet t h e
n e e d s of p u p i l s a p p r o x i m a t e l y 6 t o 12 y e a r s o f a g e ;
a n d t h e s e c o n d s ix y e a r s to s e c o n d a r y e d u c a t i o n
d e s i g n e d o meet t h e n e e d s of p u p i l s a p p r o x i m a t e l y
12 to 18 y e a r s of a g e .
T h e six y e a r s to b e d e v o t e d to s e c o n d a r y e d u c a ­
tion may well b e d i v i d e d i n t o tw o p e r i o d s w h ic h may
be d e s i g n a t e d a s t h e j u n i o r a n d s e n i o r p e r i o d s .
In
th e ju n io r period em phasis should be placed u pon th e
a t t e m p t to hel p t h e p u p i l e x p l o r e h i s own a p t i t u d e s
a n d to mak e at l e a s t p r o v i s i o n a l c h o i c e of t h e k i n d s
of w o rk t o w hic h h e s h a l l d e v o t e h i m s e l f .
In t h e
s e n i o r p e r i o d e m p h a s i s s h o u l d be g i v e n to t r a i n i n g
in t h e f i e l d s t h u s c h o s e n .
T h i s d i s t i n c t i o n li e s at
t h e b a s i s of t h e o r g a n i z a t i o n of t h e j u n i o r a n d s e n i o r
high schools.
In t h e j u n i o r h i g h sc ho ol t h e r e s h o u l d b e
a g r a d u a l i n t r o d u c t i o n of d e p a r t m e n t a l i n s t r u c t i o n ,
some cho ic e of s u b j e c t s u n d e r g u i d a n c e , p r o m o t io n
by subjects, pre-vocational courses,
a n d a social
o r g a n i z a t i o n t h a t c al ls f o r t h i n i t i a t i v e a n d d e v e l o p s
t h e s e n s e of p e r s o n a l r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r t h e w e l f a r e
of t h e g r o u p ( p p . 1 2 - 1 3 ) .
A

closer

statem ents

that

e x a m in a t io n
seem

of

"middl e

the

Seven

C a r d i n al

s ch oo l" in n a t u r e ;

Principles

n a m e ly ,

"the

reveals
p u p i l to

e x p l o r e h i s own a p t i t u d e s , " a n d t h e call f o r "a social o r g a n i z a t i o n t h a t
calls f o r t h

initiative and

f o r t h e w e l f a r e of t h e

develops

gro u p ."

the

sense

of p e r s o n a l

responsibility

T h e s e s t a t e m e n t s may s u g g e s t t h a t t h e

p r o b le m w ith t h e j u n i o r h i g h s c h o o l w a s no t in i t s i n t e n t i o n b u t in it s
im plem entation.

16

While a s e p a r a t e j u n i o r h i g h was a d v o c a t e d in t h e e a r l y 1900's, it
was sim pl y t h o u g h t of a s a p a r t of th e h ig h s c h o o l .

Exactly when and

w h e r e t h e b i r t h of t h e j u n i o r h i g h sch oo l o c c u r r e d is s u b j e c t to d e b a t e ;
n o n e t h e l e s s , t h e j u n i o r h i g h m o v e m en t was u n d e r w a y .
It is k n o w n to r e s e a r c h e r s ,
7-8-9

was i n t r o d u c e d

first

sch ool

(1935)
two

district

reports

new

Columbus,

to

use

the

Ohio in

term

to t h e sc h o o l b o a r d

junior

established

in

t h a t t h e f i r s t j u n i o r h i g h w ith g r a d e s

high

schools

to r e d u c e

relieve o v ercro w d ed

the

or

high

conditions

1909.

"junior

high

(Berkeley,

(pp.

also t h e

school."

Bunker

C a l if o r n ia in 1910) t h a t

introductory
dropout

T h i s was

high

rate

s ch o o ls

in t h e

10-16).

high

B unker's

wo u ld

s ch o o ls

report

be
and

followed

r e s e a r c h s t u d i e s c o n d u c t e d b y Hall (1904) t h a t d r e w to t h e a t t e n t i o n of
educators

the profound

According

to Hall ,

various

stages

educational

changes adolescent underw ent during p u b e rty .

puberty

of

was

grow th.

literature

t h e most

Based

began

to

in

formative period

part

focus

on

on

the

meeting

during

research

the

needs

the

of

Hall,

of

early

a d o l e s c e n t s a n d a p p r o p r i a t e t r a i n i n g of t h i s a g e g r o u p .
The

junior

high

sc h o o l

mo ve m en t

was

well

rooted

by

1920,

a p p r o x i m a t e l y 400 j u n i o r h i g h s c h o o ls w e r e in e x i s t e n c e a n d t h e n u m b e r
was
than

grow ing.
7,00 0

That

grow th

junior

high

m a jo r it y

of j u n i o r

high

were

number

a

Ga um ni tz

of

pattern

schools
schools

other

in

continued

the

United

w e r e comp ose d

combinations

until th e re
States.

7- 8 ,

more

A lt h o u g h

of g r a d e s

including

were

7-8-9,

8- 9,

and

the

there
7 - 10 .

(1954) f o u n d t h a t o v e r 50 p e r c e n t of t h e s e v e n t h a n d e i g h t h

graders

in t h e

U n it e d S t a t e s

atte n d e d junior high schools.

percent

of t h e

school s y s t e m

in t h e c o u n t r y

co m p os ed of g r a d e s 7 - 8- 9 ( p . 7 1 ) .

Almost 75

u sed junior high

s c h o o ls

17

T h e j u n i o r h i g h s c h o o l mo ve m en t t h o u g h well e s t a b l i s h e d b e g a n to
d e v i a t e from i t s o r i g i n a l p u r p o s e .
of t h e

junior high

r a n g e of p u r p o s e s .

sc ho o l

T h e e a r l i e s t s t u d i e s on t h e f u n c t i o n s

revealed

For example,

that
In g li s

educators
(1918)

assigned

recognized

it

a wide

f o u r major

p u r p o s e s of t h e j u n i o r h i g h s c h o o l s :

0

B e tte r coordination an d articulation betw een ele­
m entary and seco n d ary education;

• T h e a d a p t a t i o n of t h e school to t h e p u p i l ' s i n d i ­
vidual needs and d ifferences;
• T h e r e c o g n i t i o n t h a t n o t all p u p i l s would r e m a in
in scho ol u n t i l g r a d u a t i o n , t h u s t h e y s h o u l d
r e c e i v e some v o c a t i o n a l e d u c a t i o n ; a n d
• T h e r e o r g a n i z a t i o n of " t e a c h i n g m a t e r i a l s a n d
te ach in g m ethods" to reflect "the capacities and
n e e d s of t h e p u p i l s w it h r e f e r e n c e t o t h e i r
a c t i v i t i e s in life a f t e r t h e s c h o o l" ( p p . 2 9 3 - 2 9 5 ).
B r i g g s ( 1 9 2 0 ) , a n d e a r l y r e s e a r c h e r s on j u n i o r h i g h s c h o o l s ,
extensively

on

the

need

to

bridge

the

gap

between

elementary

s e c o n d a r y p r o g r a m s s u g g e s t e d t h e foll ow in g:

• To c o n t i n u e i n s o f a r a s it may seem wise a n d p o s s i ­
b l e a n d in a g r a d u a l l y d i m i n i s h i n g d e g r e e , common,
in teg ratin g education;
• To a s c e r t a i n a n d r e a s o n a b l e to s a t i s f y p u p i l s '
i m p o r t a n t , im m ed ia te a n d a s s u r e d f u t u r e n e e d s ;
• To e x p l o r e b y m e a n s o f m a t e r i a l , in i t s e l f w o r t h ­
w hile , t h e i n t e r e s t s , a p t i t u d e a n d c a p a c i t i e s of
pupils;

w r o te
and

18

• To r e v e a l to th e m b y m a t e r i a l s o t h e r w i s e j u s t i f i ­
a b l e , t h e p o s s i b i l i t i e s in t h e major f i e l d s of
learning;
• To s t a r t each p u p i l on t h e c a r e e r , w hic h a s a
r e s u l t of t h e e x p l o r a t o r y c o u r s e s , h e a n d h is
p a r e n t s a n d t h e s c h o o l a r e c o n v i n c e d is most
l i k e ly to b e of p r o f i t to him a n d to t h e s t a t e
( p p . 1 8 2 - 17 5) .

Davis

(1924)

opportunity

saw

the

school."

Tie

junior
believed

aro u sin g th e s tu d e n t's ambitions,
a n d g u i d i n g th e m t o w a r d
(p.

451).

Research

high
that

as
its

"the

country's

major

purposes

great
lay

in

i n s p i r i n g th e m t o r e a c h full p o t e n t i a l

" i n d i v i d u a l s a t i s f a c t i o n a n d social w e l l - b e i n g s "

by

Koos

(1927)

supported

these

reasons

for

e s t a b l i s h i n g t h e j u n i o r h i g h sch o ol h e i n d i c a t e s , t h a t o v e r 73 p e r c e n t of
the
that

sc h o o l

docum ents

he r e v i e w e d

th e junior high

and

90

mentioned

school.

percent

retention

of

the

statem ents

by

educators

of p u p i l s a s a major f u n c t i o n of

More t h a n 63 p e r c e n t of t h e d o c u m e n t s a n d 85

p e r c e n t of t h e e d u c a t o r s r e f e r r e d t o e co no m y of time, while r e c o g n i t i o n
o f i n d i v i d u a l d i f f e r e n c e s w a s m e n t i o n e d in 53 p e r c e n t of t h e d o c u m e n t s
a n d b y 95 p e r c e n t of t h e e d u c a t i o n a l l e a d e r s ( p . 5 0 6 ) .
R e s e a r c h c o n d u c t e d b y H o w a rd a n d S t o u m b i s (1970) r e v i e w e d t h e s e
argum ents

in

support

of t h e

junior

high

sc ho ol

during

the

191.0 t o 1930 a n d s u m m a r i z e d t h e s e p o s i t i o n s a s foll ows:

•
•
•
o
e
•

To r e d u c e t h e n u m b e r of d r o p o u t s ;
To o f f e r e d u c a t i o n a l a n d v o c a t i o n a l g u i d a n c e ;
To imple me nt e c o n o m y of time;
To p r o v i d e e x p l o r a t o r y o p p o r t u n i t i e s ;
To r e c o g n i z e i n d i v i d u a l d i f f e r e n c e s in s t u d e n t s ;
To allow f o r t h e u n i q u e n e e d s a n d c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s
of e a r l y a d o l e s c e n t s ;
• To b r i d g e t h e g a p b e t w e e n e l e m e n t a r y a n d s e c o n ­
d a r y schools; and
« To e s t a b l i s h a n i n d e p e n d e n t e d u c a t i o n a l u n i t
b e t w e e n e l e m e n t a r y a n d h i g h s ch o o ls ( p . 6 ) .

period

of

19

Notice p a r t i c u l a r l y t h e r e c o g n i t i o n g i v e n t o " e x p l o r a t o r y o p p o r t u n i ­
ties",
needs

"individual
and

statements

differences

characteristics
seem q u i t e

in
of

students",
early

and

"allow f o r

adolescents."

"m iddle s c h o o l" a n d

the u n iq u e

Again,

fu rth e r supports

these

t h e n o ti o n

t h a t t h e p r o bl em with t h e j u n i o r h i g h was n o t in i t s i n t e n t i o n b u t in i t s
implementation.
T h e j u n i o r h i g h sc ho ol was n o t w i t h o u t i t s c r i t i c s a n d t h e r e w e r e
also a t t e m p t s to r e f o r m t h e p r o g r a m s a n d t h e o r g a n i z a t i o n of t h e j u n i o r
high

school.

G-ruhn

and

D o u g la s s

(1956)

conducted

a

study

of

the

j u n i o r h i g h s ch ool in t h e 1940's a n d d e v e l o p e d s i x b a s i c f u n c t i o n s of t h e
j u n i o r h i g h sc h o o l:
F u n ctio n O ne— I n te g r a tio n : T h i s is d e s i g n e d to he l p
s tu d e n ts use the skills, a ttitu d e s , and u n d e r s t a n d i n g
p r e v i o u s l y a c q u i r e d a n d i n t e g r a t e th e m i n t o e f f e c t i v e
a n d wholes ome b e h a v i o r .
F u n ctio n Tw o— E x p lo ra tio n : To allow s t u d e n t s t h e
o p p o r t u n i t y to e x p l o r e p a r t i c u l a r i n t e r e s t s so t h a t
t h e y can choose b e t t e r choices a n d ac tio n s, both
vocational and academ ic.
S t u d e n t s will d e v e l o p a wide
r a n g e of c u l t u r a l , ci v ic , so cial, r e c r e a t i o n a l , a n d
vocational i n t e r e s t s .
F u n ctio n T h r e e — G u id a n ce: To he l p s t u d e n t s make
b e t t e r decisions ab o u t vocational a n d educational
a c t i v i t i e s a n d h e l p s t u d e n t s ma ke s a t i s f a c t o r y so cial,
e m o ti o na ll y , a n d social a d j u s t m e n t s t o w a r d m a t u r e p e r ­
sonalities.
F u n ctio n F o u r— D iffe r e n tia tio n : To p r o v i d e d i f f e r e n ­
tial e d u c a t i o n a l o p p o r t u n i t i e s a n d f a c i li t ie s in
a c c o r d with v a r y i n g b a c k g r o u n d s , p e r s o n a l i t i e s ,
a n d o t h e r i n d i v i d u a l d i f f e r e n c e s of s t u d e n t s so t h a t
e a c h p u p i l c a n a c h i e v e most ec on om ica lly a n d com­
p l e t e l y t h e u l t i m a t e aims of e d u c a t i o n .

20

F u n ctio n F iv e — S o c ia liz a tio n : To f u r n i s h l e a r n i n g
e x p e r i e n c e s i n t e n d e d to p r e p a r e s t u d e n t s f o r e f f e c ­
t i v e a n d s a t i s f y i n g p a r t i c i p a t i o n in a c o m pl ex social
o r d e r a s well a s f u t u r e c h a n g e s in t h e social o r d e r .
F u n ctio n S ix — A r tic u la tio n : To p r o v i d e fo r a g r a d u a l
t r a n s i t i o n from p r e a d o l e s c e n t e d u c a t i o n t o a n e d u c a ­
ti on al p r o g r a m s u i t e d to t h e n e e d s of a d o l e s c e n t
girls and boys (p p . 31-32).

T h i s fin al p o r t i o n of t h e r e v i e w will e x a m i n e t h e d e f i c i e n c i e s of t h e
junior

high

school

mi ddle

sc h oo l a s

junior

high

and

an

sch ool

to

s ch oo l is
achieve

the

alternative
was

secondary education,
high

la y

to

seen

as

own

identity

The

The very

high
a

emergence
school.

downward

of t h e

S inc e t h e
extension

of

and

A m er ic an j u n i o r h i g h sc h oo l fail ed
recognition

in t e r m s

from

the

beginning.

t h e new e d u c a t i o n a l u n i t was s a d d l e d

with a la b el t h a t was t a k e n too l i t e r a l l y ,
it a n d

the

t h e c o m p l e t e a n d to t a l d o m i n a n c e of t h e t r a d i t i o n a l

L o u n s b u r y a n d V a r s ( 197 8) c i t e s ,

accorded

for

the junior

originally

not s u r p r i s i n g .

its

foundation

b o t h in t e r m s of t h e p r e s t i g e

of t h e e d u c a t i o n a l

practices

em plo yed

in i t .

w o r d j u n i o r in o u r c u l t u r e c a r r i e s s o m e t h i n g of a d e m e a n i n g

and su b serv ien t tone.

L o u n sb u ry and Vars f u r th e r states,

p r e s t i g e w as e x a c e r b a t e d

by

the attitu d e s

people

t h e l a c k of

held c o n c e r n i n g t h i s

new i n s t i t u t i o n ( p . 1 4 ) .
A n o t h e r major p r o b l e m a c c o r d i n g t o r e s e a r c h ,
the

junior

high

movement

institutions

and

state

courses
prepared

dealt

with

to

ga in

departm ents

pre-

te a c h e r for high

or

early

recognition
of

from

education.

adolescent

im i t a t e d t h a t of

teacher
Very

behavior,

schools not ju n io r h i g h s .

of t h e j u n i o r h i g h sch oo l al so

was t h e i n a b i l i t y of

few
most

training
co ll eg e
training

The organization

t h e h ig h s c h o o l .

The

21
e m p h a s i s w as on m a s t e r y of s u b j e c t m a t t e r with t h e p r o g r a m c a r r i e d o u t
through
proms,

departm entalization.
and

marching b a n d s

junior high s t u d e n t s .

Activities

such

as

varsity

athletics,

t e n d e d to e x e r t c o n s i d e r a b l e p r e s s u r e s on

T h e j u n i o r h i g h sc ho ol was in r e a l i t y

a "junior"

high

s c h o o l . T h e role of t h e C a r n e g i e u n i t of c r e d i t a s s i g n e d to g r a d e

nine

e x e r t e d a d d i t i o n a l i n f l u e n c e on t h e c o u r s e o f f e r i n g s of

the junior

high

school.Later,

c o u r s e s in

the ninth g ra d e ,

the

same a r g u m e n t f o r c o n t r o l l i n g t h e

was e x t e n d e d to g r a d e s e i g h t a n d s e v e n , r e s p e c t i v e l y .

L o u n s b u r y a n d V a r s (1 978) s u g g e s t s
unit

credits

high

school

applicable
never

to

really

high
cut

the

school
the

ninth

grade

graduation

high

school

carried

and

apron

thus

Carnegie
the junior

strings.

They

f u r t h e r c i t e d t h e new j u n i o r h i g h sch ool b e g a n o p e r a t i o n with v i r t u a l l y
no a p p r o p r i a t e
development.
procedures

standards,
State

regulations

departm ents

fo r s e v e n t h

and

often

eighth

or pol icies

to

guide

required

o ne

set

graders and another

it s

proper

of r e p o r t i n g
for t h e

ninth

grad e (p . 15).
Several o th e r a u th o ritie s hav e a r g u e d th a t th e real motivations for
t h e e s t a b l i s h m e n t of t h e j u n i o r h i g h s cho ol,
above,

were

problems

elem entary and

associated

high schools.

with

in a d d i t i o n to th o s e s t a t e d

overcrowded

R esearch by Lentz

proven educational values,

in

(1956) c o n c l u d e s ,

is a p p a r e n t t h a t in ma ny c a s e s it was e s t a b l i s h e d ,
strong and

conditions

the
"it

n o t b e c a u s e of a n y

b u t as an e x p e d i e n t ,

u s u a l l y to

solve a h o u s i n g p r o b l e m , a n d in m a n y c a s e s b e c a u s e it was t h e t h i n g to
do

in e d u c a t i o n a l

Loiinsbury

and

circles"
Vars

experienced by the

(p.

(1978)

j u n i o r h ig h

523).

In s u p p o r t

o f f e r s t h e fo ll o wi n g,

of L e n t z ' s

premise,

"the

difficulties

sch oo l w e r e f u r t h e r com pli ca ted b y t h e

22

f ac il it ie s
high

in

w hi ch

s ch oo l

buildings

c o m m u n it y 's
Here,

it o p e r a t e d .

new

when

pride

Lounsbury and

-

Typically,

the

the

Vars

favored

modern

suggests,

it s e t

up

shop

institution

senior

high

in t h e old

mov ed
sch oo l

the ju n io r high

into

the

building."

sch ool c o n t e n d e d

w ith t h e v e r y i n a d e q u a c i e s t h a t le d to t h e b u i l d i n g of a new h i g h sc h oo l
(p . 15).
A l e x a n d e r a n d Keal y (1969) a g r e e d .

"U nfortunately",

they wrote,

" t h e in i ti a l m o ve m en t t o w a r d t h e j u n i o r h i g h sch oo l w a s , in a c t u a l i t y , a n
attempt

to

alleviate

organizations

...

the

The

crowded

original

o v e r l o o k e d in t h e u r g e n c y

conditions

goal s

of

the

in

junior

existing
high

of a l l e v i a t i n g a d m i n i s t r a t i v e

sch ool

sch oo l

were

problems"

(pp.

151-163).
Thus,

the

handicaps,

and

last

junior
what

20 to 30 y e a r s

concludes,

"the

high

school,

Lounsbury

despite

refers

to

was a s u c c e s s s t o r y .

junior

high

story

is

n a t i o n in which t h e s t o r y to o k p l a c e .

a

as

all

of

its

"negative

adversities,

press"

in

the

L o u n s b u r y a n d V a r s (1978)
success

story,

befitting

the

I t s f a i l u r e s - a n d t h e r e a r e m a ny

s h o u l d n o t n e g a t e it s s u c c e s s e s " ( p . 1 6 ) .

HIST ORICAL DEVELOPMENT OF THE AMERICAN MIDDLE SCHOOL
T h e e m e r g i n g m id d le sc h o o l m o v e m e n t t h r o u g h o u t t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s
today

is,

in

part,

an

effort

to

rediscover,

redefine,

revamp,

and

r e i n t r o d u c e t h e b a s i c p e d a g o g i c a l p r i n c i p l e s of a d o l e s c e n t l e a r n i n g u p o n
w hi ch

the

junior

a g o (Kohut.,

1980,

high
p.

was
5).

originally estab lish ed

Many r e a s o n s h a v e b e e n a d v a n c e d

e x i s t e n c e of t h e mid dle s c h o o l .
the

following

as

extremely

almost s e v e n t y

years

for the

T r a u s c h k e a n d Mooney (1974) i d e n t i f y

im portant

organizational considerations:

23

• A mi dd le sc h o o l t a k e s full c o g n i z a n c e of t h e d y n a m ic
p h y s i c a l , s o c ia l , a n d i n t e l l e c t u a l c h a n g e s t h a t a r e
o c c u r r i n g in y o u n g p e o p l e d u r i n g t h e 10 t o 14 y e a r
old s p a n , a n d p r o v i d e s a p r o g r a m w it h t h e major
p u r p o s e of c r e a t i n g a f a c i l i t a t i v e clima te so t h a t
th e t r a n s e s c e n t can u n d e r s t a n d himself and the
c h a n g e s t h a t a r e o c c u r r i n g w it h i n a n d a r o u n d him.
• Middle s c h o o l s g e n e r a l l y l o c a t e t h e n i n t h g r a d e ,
w ith t h e aw es o m e i n f l u e n c e of t h e C a r n e g i e u n i t ,
in s e n i o r h i g h s c h o o l s e t t i n g s .
The rationale
s u p p o r t i n g t h i s d e c i s i o n is u s u a l l y t h a t n i n t h
g r a d e r s a r e mo re like t e n t h , e l e v e n t h , a n d t w e l f t h
g r a d e s t u d e n t s t h a n li k e s e v e n t h a n d e i g h t h g r a d e
students.
• Middle s c h o o l s p r o v i d e o p p o r t u n i t i e s f o r i n n o v a t i o n .
S u ch i n n o v a t i o n s m i g h t i n c l u d e team t e a c h i n g , i n d i ­
v i d u a l i z e d i n s t r u c t i o n , f le x i b le s c h e d u l i n g , a n d
some form of c o n t i n u o u s p r o g r e s s .
F le xi bl e
r e a r r a n g e m e n t s of time, s p a c e , m a t e r i a l , a nd
p e o p l e gi ve e v i d e n c e to t h e v a l u e of t h e t r u e middle
school.
• Middle s c h o o l s d e - e m p h a s i z e t h e s o p h i s t i c a t e d a c t i ­
v i t i e s t h a t a r e commonly f o u n d in t h e j u n i o r h i g h
s c h o o l, s u c h a s m a r c h i n g b a n d s , i n t e r s c h o l a s t i c
athletics, and sophisticated d an ce s.
The program
of a c t i v i t i e s w h ic h is p r o v i d e d p e r m i t s e a c h chi ld
to p a r t i c i p a t e a n d is b a s e d on t h e p e r s o n a l d e v e l o p ­
me nt of t h e s t u d e n t r a t h e r t h a n t h e e n h a n c e m e n t of
t h e sc h o o l' s p r e s t i g e .
• Middle s c h o o l s p r o v i d e o p p o r t u n i t i e s f o r e x p l o r a t o r y
s t u d y a n d e n r i c h m e n t a c t i v i t i e s e a r l i e r t h a n do
conventional elem entary schools.
• Middle sc h o o l i n s t r u c t i o n a l s t a f f s co m bin e t h e u s u a l
talents developed by te a c h e rs trained and oriented
in t h e e l e m e n t a r y sc ho ol w ith t h e a b i l i t y to s p e c i a l ­
ize in a g i v e n f i e l d , so o f t e n a " c h a r a c t e r i s t i c " of
a secondary teacher (p p . 9-12).

Dr.
s c h o o l"

William A l e x a n d e r in t h e e a r l y 1960's r e v i v e d t h e t e rm "middle
used

European
attributes.

in

schools.

some

A m e r ic a n

A lexander

private

schools

gave th e term

and

long

used

in

a new s e t of e d u c a t i o n a l

P r o p o n e n t s of t h e mi ddle sch ool s u p p o r t t h e r a t i o n a l e t h a t

24

children

10 to 14 y e a r s old c o n s t i t u t e a d i s t i n c t

involving

sim il ar p h y s i c a l ,

emotional/social,

and

s t a g e of d e v e l o p m e n t
m e n ta l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s .

E i c h h o r n (1 96 6) i n t r o d u c e d t h e te rm of " t r a n s e s c e n c e "
middle s ch oo l s t u d e n t .

"Transescence",

s t a g e of d e v e l o p m e n t which

begins

in p r o f i l i n g t h e

a c c o r d i n g to E i c h h o r n ,

p r i o r to t h e

onset

is t h e

of p u b e r t y

and

e x t e n d s t h r o u g h t h e e a r l y s t a g e s of a d o l e s c e n c e .
Research
rapid

by

Lounsbury

and

a c c e p t a n c e of t h e m id d le

was d u e

to at l e a s t

three

Vars

sc h o o l a s

(2)

the

it

obsession

with

ac ad em ic

m astery,

the

had

states
identify

to

that

h is
the

the

original
te rm

beliefs,

evolved;

recognition

m aturing physically earlier (p .
referring

educational approach

t h e d i s s a t i s f a c t i o n with

sc h o o l a s

(3)

a v a l id

the relatively

(1)

high

and

indicates,

major s o u r c e s :

the junior

sciences;

(1978)

16).

and

"middle

particularly

in

that

people

young

Whereas,

continuing

and

hopes

- induced

mathematics

and

were

indeed

A l e x a n d e r et al .

( 1 96 8) ,

concept

scho ol c o n c e p t "

proposals

Sputnik

has

of t h e

m id d le

sc h oo l

b e e n w id e l y u s e d

underlying

the

to

movement.

A l e x a n d e r ’s c o n c e p t of t h e m id dl e s ch oo l i n c l u d e s t h e following:

. . . a sc ho ol p r o v i d i n g a p r o g r a m p l a n n e d f o r a
r a n g e of o l d e r c h i l d r e n , p r e a d o l e s c e n t , a n d e a r l y
a d o l e s c e n t t h a t b u i l d s u p o n t h e e l e m e n t a r y sch oo l's
p r o g r a m f o r e a r l i e r c h i l d h o o d a n d in t u r n is b u il t
u p o n b y t h e h i g h sc ho ol 's p r o g r a m f o r a d o l e s c e n c e .
S p e c i f i c a l ly , it f o c u s e s o n t h e e d u c a t i o n a l n e e d s
of w h a t we h a v e t e r m e d t h e " i n - b e t w e e n - a g e r " ( p . 191) . . .
Research

indicates

that

the

New

York

Ci t y

P ub lic

Board

of

E d u c a t i o n (1965) w as o n e o f t h e e a r l i e s t to r e s p o n d t o t h e mid dle s ch ool
m ov e m en t a n d to a d o p t a formal s t a t e m e n t on g r a d e r e o r g a n i z a t i o n f o r

25

the em erging

middle s c h o o l s .

On

A p r il ,

1965 t h e

Board

of E d u c a t i o n

a d o p t e d a s t a t e m e n t of p o l i c y c o n c e r n e d w ith e x c e l l e n c e f o r t h e s c h o o ls
of New Y o r k w hic h s a i d :
• T h e r e n e e d s t o b e d e v e l o p e d a new p r o g r a m of
e d u c a t i o n in t h i s c i t y f o r t h e i n t e r m e d i a t e y e a r s
o f s c h o o l i n g . T h e e x a c t g r a d e s of t h i s new p r o ­
gram a r e not a s i m p o r t a n t a s a r e i t s n a t u r e a n d
content.
• One of t h e most i m p o r t a n t p h a s e s of t h e e d u c a t i o n
in t h i s p e r i o d f o r a p u p i l will b e his i n t r o d u c ­
t i o n to o t h e r c h i l d r e n who a r e d i f f e r e n t from
t h o s e with whom h e a s s o c i a t e d in h is e l e m e n t a r y
s c h o o l.
• B ut at o r a b o u t t h e f i f t h g r a d e
a d d e d to t h i s p r o g r a m a n e x t r a
s h a r i n g of l e a r n i n g e x p e r i e n c e s
with o t h e r c h i l d r e n of d i f f e r e n t
t i e s a n d econ om ic s t a t u s .

t h e r e m u s t be
in g re d ie n t — the
a n d life v a l u e s
ra c e s, nationali­

• T h e B o a r d of E d u c a t i o n , t h e r e f o r e , d i r e c t s t h e
S u p e r i n t e n d e n t of S ch oo ls to p r o d u c e w i t h i n t h e
coming school y e a r an i n t e r m e d i a t e p r o g r a m f o r
i n t r o d u c t i o n in S e p t e m b e r , 1966.
• T h e b a s i c d e s i g n f o r an i n t e r m e d i a t e sc h o o l was
c o n c e i v e d in D e c e m b e r , 1965.

From t h e o n s e t of t h e m id d le sc ho ol m o v e m e n t t h e r e a p p e a r e d to b e
a g r e e m e n t a b o u t t h e mi ddle le v e l sc h o o l' s f u n c t i o n .

A l e x a n d e r (1986) in

h is

High/Middle

address

to

the

N at i o n al

Council

on

Junior

Administration I n d . , sta te d th e situation q uite su ccin c tly :

An e x a m i n a t i o n of t h e w r i t i n g of e a r l y l e a d e r s in
t h e j u n i o r h i g h s c h o o l m o v e m e n t a n d of t h o s e in t h e
l a t e r middle o ne r e v e a l s mu ch u n a n i m i t y a s to w h a t t h e
r e s p e c t i v e middle l e v e l s c h o o l s s h o u l d b e , r e g a r d l e s s
o f g r a d e s i n c l u d e d a n d w h e t h e r called j u n i o r h i g h ,
i n t e r m e d i a t e , m id d le , u p p e r e l e m e n t a r y s c h o o l , o r j u s t
" sc h oo l in t h e m i d d l e " ( p . 1 ) .

School

26

A lexander's
junior

high

rem arks

school

wo uld

suggest,

development,

the

unlike
new,

m o v e m en t a n s w e r e d s e v e r a l p o s i t i v e n e e d s .

the

criticisms

em erging

mi ddle

of

the

school

Moss (1969) i d e n t i f i e d f iv e

a r g u m e n t s t h a t p r e s e n t e d m o r e p o s i t i v e r e a s o n s for a d v o c a t i n g a mi ddl e
s c h o o l.

T h e se positive rationales w ere:

1

0

T h e e a r l i e r o n s e t of p u b e r t y r e q u i r e d t h a t s i x t h
g r a d e r s h e h o u s e d w ith s e v e n t h a n d e i g h t h g r a d e r s .

0

Middle s c h o o ls w e r e not ti ed to col lege p r e p a r a t o r y
r e q u i r e m e n t s a n d c o u l d , t h e r e f o r e , e n g a g e in
g r e a t e r c u r r i c u l u m e x p e r i m e n t a t i o n f o c u s i n g on t h e
n e e d s of t h e 11—14 a g e g r o u p .

0

T h e d e v e l o p m e n t of middle school t e a c h e r c e r t i f i ­
c a t io n would c r e a t e a p r o f e s s i o n of t e a c h e r s
e s p e c i a l l y t r a i n e d f o r d e a l i n g with p r e a d o l e s c e n t
and early ad olescents.

0

E v e n t u a l l y , middle s c h o o l s would o f f e r a n o n - g r a d e d
s t r u c t u r e w h ic h wo u ld f a c i li t a te t h e t r a n s i t i o n
from e l e m e n t a r y to h i g h s c h o o l.

0

Middle s c h o o l s would e m p h a s i z e g u i d a n c e (p 283).

Moss' r e f e r e n c e to
the

transition

considerable
sch ool

the

mi dd le

sc h o o l s t r u c t u r e ,

from e l e m e n t a r y to h i g h

research.

organization

The transition
requires

" would f a c i li t a te

sc hool" h a s b e e n t h e s u b j e c t
from a

research,

junior

planning,

h i g h to
and

of

a middle

com mit men t.

B r a z e e (1987) d e s c r i b e s t h e e l e m e n t s of p l a n n i n g a s u c c e s s f u l t r a n s i t i o n
program :

0

F i r s t , it is e x t r e m e l y i m p o r t a n t t o e s t a b l i s h p u r ­
pose . . .

0

S e c o n d , sch oo l of f ic i a ls m u s t d e t e r m i n e r e s p o n s i ­
b il it i e s f o r v a r i o u s t a s k s t h a t m u s t b e c o m p l e t e d .
S pe ci fi c a s s i g n m e n t s may b e a s s u m e d b y t h e p r i n ­
c i p a l , while o t h e r s may b e d e l e g a t e d to t e a c h e r s
and counselors . . .

27

• T h ir d , tr a n s itio n s tra te g ie s must be th o ro u g h ly
planned . . .
• F o u r t h , p r o g r a m s m u s t b e d e v e l o p e d in a c c o r d a n c e
w ith e s t a b l i s h e d p u r p o s e s of t r a n s i t i o n ( p p . 5 7 - 5 8 ) .

The
activities

im portance
have

been

of

and

clearly

the

need

stated

by

for
the

well
NASSP

planned

transition

C ou nc i l o n

Middle

Level E d u c a t i o n (1 98 5) :

One of t h e main r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s of t h e middle
l e ve l sch ool is t o a s s u r e t h e smooth t r a n s i t i o n
f o r s t u d e n t s from e l e m e n t a r y sc ho ol to h i g h s c h o o l .
Most sch ool s y s t e m s m a in ta i n t h r e e d i s t i n c t , a u t o ­
n o m o u s , a n d s e p a r a t e u n i t s t h a t do l i t t l e t o c o o r ­
dinate th eir activities,
p ro g ra m s, or c u r r ic u la .
T h e c o o r d i n a t i o n t h a t e x i s t s u s u a l l y r e s u l t s from
i n fo rm a l a g r e e m e n t s a n d c o n v e r s a t i o n s b e t w e e n
a n d amo ng p r i n c i p a l s : it r a r e l y s t e m s from p l a n n e d
e f f o r t s to i n t e g r a t e t h e s ch oo ls ' p r o g r a m s a c r o s s
all g r a d e l e v e l s .
To a s s u r e t h a t t h e t r a n s i t i o n f u n c t i o n i s f u l ­
filled:
Schools co u ld c r e a t e a t r a n s i t i o n p a n e l ,
co m p o s e d of e l e m e n t a r y , s e c o n d a r y ,
a n d middle
l e ve l sc h o o l t e a c h e r s a n d p a r e n t s .
Panel members
s h o u l d d i s c u s s p r a c t i c e s t h a t i n t e r f e r e with smooth
t r a n s i t i o n from o n e l e v e l to a n o t h e r , i d e n t i f y w ay s
to f aci lit ate t h i s t r a n s i t i o n , a n d r e c o m m e n d to t h e
s c h o o l s o r t h e B o a r d of E d u c a t i o n m e t h o d s f o r
fu ll y i n t e g r a t i n g a n d a r t i c u l a t i n g t h e K-12 p r o ­
g r a m s in t h e d i s t r i c t ( p . 1 7 ) .

F u r t h e r s u p p o rt for w ell-planned tran sitio n p ro g ram s can be found
in t h e N at i o n al Middle School A s s o c i a ti o n 's p u b l i c a t i o n ,

T h i s We Believe

(1982).
D i s c o n t i n u i t i e s in l e a r n i n g
ev ident when s tu d e n t s tr a n s f e r
ti o n al s e t t i n g to a n o t h e r , s u c h
t a r y to mi dd le sc h o o l o r middle
s c h o o l.

a r e especially
from o n e e d u c a ­
a s from e l e m e n ­
school to h i g h

28

T herefore, curriculum , guidance program s,
social a c t i v i t i e s , a n d o t h e r a s p e c t s of e d u c a ­
tion should be care fu lly a rtic u la te d K-12.
T r a n s e s c e n t s , alre a d y highly sensitive and
v u l n e r a b l e b e c a u s e of t h e m a ny c h a n g e s t h e y
e x p e r i e n c i n g p e r s o n a l l y , a r e e s p e c i a l l y li k e ly
t o b e u p s e t b y a s h i f t from on e sc h o o l to
a n o t h e r a n d s h o u l d r e c e i v e s p e c ia l c o n s i d e r a ­
ti o n a t t h e t r a n s i t i o n p o i n t s .
Staff members
of a f f e c t e d s c h o o l s m u s t pl a n t o g e t h e r a n d k e e p
in touch co n c e rn in g s tu d e n t p r o g r e s s ,
and
r e s i s t t h e t e m p t a t i o n to blame s t u d e n t s ’ p r e v ­
ious te a c h e rs fo r a n y in a d eq u acies ( p p . 13-14).

Recent
Research
1990),

research

on

Elementary

the
and

Johns

Hopkins

U niversity

Middle

S ch o ol s

(Epstein

Center

and

for

Maclver,

f o u n d t h a t t h e t h r e e most common t r a n s i t i o n a c t i v i t i e s in middle

l e ve l w e r e :
having

by

h a v in g elem e n ta ry s t u d e n t s visit

the adm inistrators

t h e mid dle g r a d e sc ho ol;

of mid dle g r a d e a n d

e l e m e n t a r y s ch o o ls meet

t o d i s c u s s p r o g r a m s ; a n d h a v i n g m i d d l e - g r a d e c o u n s e l o r s meet w ith e l e ­
m entary counselors or staff m em bers.
In t h e i r
surveyed
the

provided

m id dle

Similar

national

level,

activities

survey,

Epstein

4.5 artic u la tio n
and

were

3.9

Maclver

activities

activities

found

and

to b e

for
most

for

those

f o u n d t h a t s ch o o ls

students
entering

popular

in

the

m ov i n g
high

into

school.

transition

of

s t u d e n t s to t h e h i g h s c h o o l .

Several p u rp o se s for transition artic u la ­

ti on

by

activities

were

described

Epstein an d

Maclver

(1990).

include:
• To a s s u r e t h a t c h i l d r e n a n d families a r e b e t t e r
i n f o r m e d a b o u t t h e scho ol p r o g r a m s r e q u i r e m e n t s ,
p r o c e d u r e s , o p p o rtu n itie s , and about s tu d e n ts '
a n d p a r e n t s ' r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s at t h e new le v el
of s c h o o l i n g .

They

29
• To a s s u r e t h a t c h i l d r e n a r e b e t t e r p r e p a r e d f o r
t h e c u r r i c u l a r a n d social d e m a n d s at t h e new
le v el of s c h o o l i n g .
• To a s s u r e t h a t mi ddl e g r a d e s e d u c a t o r s a r e b e t t e r
i n f o r m e d of t h e c o n n e c t i o n s b e t w e e n t h e i r p r o ­
g r a m s a n d t h o s e of t h e e l e m e n t a r y s c h o o l s t h a t
t h e i r c h i l d r e n come f r o m , a n d t h o s e of t h e h i g h
s c h o o l s t h a t t h e i r s t u d e n t s will a t t e n d ; a n d to
h e l p e l e m e n t a r y a n d h i g h sc h oo l e d u c a t o r s u n d e r ­
s t a n d t h e i r c o n n e c t i o n s w ith t h e m id d le g r a d e s .
• To a s s u r e t h a t m id dle g r a d e s e d u c a t o r s a r e
b e t t e r p r e p a r e d to h e l p s t u d e n t s a d j u s t to a n d
s u c c e e d in a new s c h o o l e n v i r o n m e n t ( p . 2 3 ) .

D u r i n g t h e 1980's e d u c a t o r s a n d t h e r e s e a r c h c o m m u n it y al so b e g a n
to f o c u s

on

Turning

Points:

the

the

Carnegie

n e e d s of e a r l y
Preparing

Co un ci l

recommendations
group.

Most

for
of

on

A m e r ic a n

Youth

Adolescent

im proving

the

adolescents.

and

The

1989 p u b l i c a t i o n of

for th e

21st C e n t u r y , b y

D e v e lo p m e n t,

transform ing

recom mendations

are

no t

provided

schools
new

or

for

specific
this

age

revolutionary;

ma ny d e s c r i b e t h e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of good mi ddl e s c h o o l s t h a t h a v e b e e n
e v o l v i n g s i n c e t h e la te 1960’s (T lra ze e, 1 99 1 ) .
Therefore,
outlined by

the

go al s

of

various a u th o rs ,

the

m i d d le

school,

as

they

have

been

r e f l e c t e d t h e b e l i e f t h a t t h e mi ddle school

c o ul d c u r e m a n y of t h e il ls f a c i n g e d u c a t i o n in t h e d e c a d e s t h e followed
t h e 1960's.
his

T h e aims of t h e new

coauthors

Lounsbury,
function

of

and

Vars,

later
and

humanizing

supported

Roma no
the

s c h o o l,

and

as d e f i n e d
by

m id dle

G eorgiady

education

of

by A lexander and
sc h o o l

attem pts

early

to

advocates
fulfill

adolescents.

C a r n e g i e C o r p o r a t i o n T a s k F o r c e o n E d u c a t i o n of Y o u n g A d o l e s c e n t s

the
The

30

(1989)

in

its

recommendation

v is io n

to

improve

the

for

transform ing

educational

experiences

m id dle
of

all

s c h o o ls a n d
m id dl e

s t u d e n t s calls f o r mid dle s c h o o l s t h a t :
• C r e a t e small c o m m u n it ie s f o r l e a r n i n g w h e r e s t a b l e ,
c l o s e , m u t u a l l y r e s p e c t f u l r e l a t i o n s h i p s w it h a d u l t s
and peers are considered fundam ental for intellect­
ual d e v e l o p m e n t a n d p e r s o n a l g r o w t h .
T h e k e y ele ­
m e n t s of t h e s e c o m m u n it ie s a r e s c h o o l s - w i t h i n - s c h o o l s
or houses, s tu d e n ts and te ach ers grouped to g e th er
a s te a m s , a n d small g r o u p a d v i s o r i e s t h a t e n s u r e
t h a t e v e r y s t u d e n t is k n o w n well b y a t l e a s t o n e
adult.
• T e a c h a c o r e a c a d e m i c p r o g r a m t h a t r e s u l t s in s t u ­
d e n t s who a r e l i t e r a t e , i n c l u d i n g in t h e s c i e n c e s ,
a n d who know how to t h i n k c r i t i c a l l y , l e a d a
h e a l t h y life, b e h a v e e t h i c a l l y , a n d a s s u m e t h e
r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s of c i t i z e n s h i p in a p l u r a l i s t i c
s o c i e t y . Y o u t h s e r v i c e to p r o m o t e v a l u e s f o r c i t i ­
z e n s h i p is an e s s e n t i a l p a r t of t h e c o r e ac a d e m i c
program .
• E n s u r e s u c c e s s f o r all s t u d e n t s t h r o u g h e l im i n a ti n g
of t r a c k i n g b y a c h i e v e m e n t le v e l a n d p r o m o t io n of
c o o p e r a t i v e l e a r n i n g , f l e x i b i l i t y in a r r a n g i n g
i n s t r u c t i o n a l ti me , a n d a d e q u a t e r e s o u r c e s ( ti me ,
space, equipm ent, and materials) for te a c h e rs .
e Emp ower t e a c h e r s a n d a d m i n i s t r a t o r s to mak e d e c i ­
s io n s a b o u t t h e e x p e r i e n c e s of mi ddle g r a d e s t u d e n t s
th ro u g h creative control by te ach ers over the
i n s t r u c t i o n a l p r o g r a m l i n k e d to g r e a t e r r e s p o n s i ­
bi l it i e s f o r s t u d e n t s ' p e r f o r m a n c e , g o v e r n a n c e com­
m i t t e e s t h a t a s s i s t t h e p r i n c i p a l in d e s i g n i n g a n d
coordinating school-wide p ro g ra m s, and autonomy
a n d l e a d e r s h i p with in s u b - s c h o o l s o r h o u s e s to
c r e a t e e n v i r o n m e n t s t a i l o r e d to e n h a n c e t h e i n t e l ­
l e c t u a l a n d em otional d e v e l o p m e n t of all y o u t h .
• S t a f f mid dle g r a d e s c h o o l s w ith t e a c h e r s who a r e
e x p e r t at t e a c h i n g y o u n g a d o l e s c e n t s a n d who h a v e
b e e n s p e c ia ll y p r e p a r e d f o r a s s i g n m e n t to t h e mid dle
grades.

it s

grade

31

• Improve academic perform a nce t h r o u g h fo sterin g
t h e h e a l t h a n d f i t n e s s of y o u n g a d o l e s c e n t s , b y
p r o v i d i n g a h e a l t h c o o r d i n a t o r in e v e r y middle
g r a d e s c h o o l, a c c e s s t o h e a l t h c a r e a n d c o u n s e l i n g
s e r v i c e s , a n d a h e a l t h p r o m o t i n g sch oo l e n v i r o n m e n t .
• R e e n g a g e families in t h e e d u c a t i o n of y o u n g a d o l e s ­
c e n t s b y g i v i n g families m e a n i n g f u l r o l e s in school
g o v e r n a n c e , c o m m u n i c a t i n g with families a b o u t t h e
sch oo l p r o g r a m a n d s t u d e n t ' s p r o g r e s s , " a n d o f f e r ­
i n g families o p p o r t u n i t i e s to s u p p o r t t h e l e a r n i n g
p r o c e s s at home a n d at t h e s c h o o l.
• C o n n e c t sch oo l with c o m m u n it ie s , w hic h t o g e t h e r
s h a r e r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r e a c h middle g r a d e s t u d e n t ' s
success, th ro u g h identifying service opportunities
in t h e c o m m u n i t y , e s t a b l i s h i n g p a r t n e r s h i p s a n d
c o l l a b o r a t i o n s t o e n s u r e s t u d e n t ' s a c c e s s tb h e a l t h
a n d social s e r v i c e s a n d u s i n g c o m m u n it y r e s o u r c e s
to e n r i c h t h e i n s t r u c t i o n a l p r o g r a m a n d o p p o r t u n i ­
ties for c o n s tr u c tiv e afte r-sch o o l activities ( p p .
9-10).
RESEARCH FINDINGS QM T H E EFFECTS OF GRADE ORGANIZATION OR
GRADE CONFIGURATION OH STUDENT'S ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT
The

most

appropriate

grade

preadolescent

or

b e e n a s u b j e c t of d e b a t e am ong r e s e a r c h e r s

fo r

early adolescents

has

quite

The absence

som et im e.

appropriate

grade

configuration

of a g r e e m e n t

am on g

c o n f i g u r a t i o n is e v i d e n c e b y

in s ch o ol o r g a n i z a t i o n a c r o s s t h e c o u n t r y .

for

researchers

on an

t h e lack of c o n s i s t e n c y

Sc ho ol s h a v e b e e n a r r a n g e d

in a v a r i e t y of g r a d e c o m b i n a t i o n s to meet an e q u a l v a r i e t y of n e e d s some

educational,

others

that

appear

expeditious.

N e i t h e r in t h e o r y

n o r in p r a c t i c e h a v e e d u c a t o r s b e e n ab le to a g r e e on t h e b e s t o r g a n i z a ­
ti o n of t h e mi ddle g r a d e s .
A s s o c i a ti o n
School

of

Secondary

Education,

they

In 1959 a s e d u c a t o r s s e r v e d on t h e N ati on al
School

Principals'

endorsed

a

Committee

seventh

on

through

Junior
ninth

High
grade

a r r a n g e m e n t a s t h e most a p p r o p r i a t e co m b in a ti o n f o r t h e middle y e a r s .

32

Other e d u c a to rs,

s u c h a s William A l e x a n d e r ,

sixth th r o u g h eig h th g ra d e com bination.
James

Conant,

believed

that

it

f a v o r e d e i t h e r t h e f if t h o r

Still o t h e r e d u c a t o r s ,

d id

not

matter

how

such as

s c h o o ls

were

o r g a n i z e d so lo n g a s t h e y p r o v i d e d q u a l i t y p r o g r a m s .
This debate
have

tried

issue

that

r a i s e d a n u m b e r of i m p o r t a n t i s s u e s t h a t r e s e a r c h e r s

to a n s w e r .
research

Central
al one

r e s p o n s i b i l i t y of t h e

to

co ul d

the
not

discussion,
address,

however,

for

it

was

involved

an
the

s c h o o l s a n d of s o c i e t y t o w a r d t h o s e y o u n g pe o p l e

u n d erg o in g the profound physical,

em otion al,

and psychological c h a n g e s

best

most

a s s o c i a t e d w it h p u b e r t y .
The

attempt

configuration
role in t h e
school.

for

to

preadolescents

Samuel

William A l e x a n d e r ,

junior high
the

grade

Popper,

and

or

early

adolescents

who d e f e n d e d

configuration

schools

as

from mi ddle

one

played

sc h o o l a n d

junior

of t h e

schools.

" p r o f e s s i o n a l d i a l o g u e " on t h i s i s s u e

378).

appropriate

high

grade
a major

t h e mid dle

schools,

and

kno w as t h e f a t h e r of t h e m id dle sch oo l m o v e m e n t,

functionally a p p r o p r ia te

that

the

d e v e l o p m e n t of b o th t h e j u n i o r h ig h

B o th

recognized

find

basic issues

separating

A c c o r d i n g to P o p p e r
f o c u s e d o n w hich

(1967)

grades

are

f o r t h i s u n i t of p u b l i c s ch oo l o r g a n i z a t i o n

(p.

R e s e a r c h i n d i c a t e s t h a t A l e x a n d e r saw a b r o a d e r d e b a t e , b u t o n e
began

conflicting

with

grade

opinions

placement.

arise

as

to

the

Alexander
years

and

(1978)

observed

grades,

if

any

that
the

s p e c i f i c s of t h e p r o g r a m ; a n d t h e r e l a t i o n to t h e e x i s t i n g e s t a b l i s h m e n t s
in e l e m e n t a r y ,

s e c o n d a r y a n d t e a c h e r e d u c a t i o n ( p p . 3, 1 9 - 2 0 ) .

33

A

review

of

the

literature

e f f e c t s of g r a d e o r g a n i z a t i o n o n

and

research,

students,

w it h

indicates

respect

to

the

grade organization

a p p e a r s to h a v e li t t l e o r no i n f l u e n c e on a s t u d e n t ' s ac a d e m i c a c h i e v e ­
ment.

Research by

factors

in

and

of

themselves

g r o u p s of s c h o o l s . "
relations

w ith in

Donald S t o u t
d id

(1962)

concluded

not

discriminate

fie f o u n d t h a t a t t i t u d e s ,
the

school

c o m m u n it y

"that organizational
between

the

two

services and interpersonal
were

more

im portant

in

d e t e r m i n i n g t h e a c h i e v e m e n t l e v e l of s t u d e n t s .
Stout
between

(1962)

t h e two

further
groups

which t h e s t a f f h a d

stated,

t h e c e n t r a l f a c t o r in t h e d i f f e r e n c e s

of s c h o o l s w a s o b s e r v e d

motivation and

f o r t h e n e e d s of p u p i l .

to b e t h e

actively sought

extent

to

to make p r o v i s i o n s

A s t u d y b y R i c h a r d Wolfe (1972) s u p p o r t s t h e

f i n d i n g s of S t o u t i n a s m u c h a s g r a d e p a t t e r n h a s no s i g n i f i c a n t e f f e c t on
achievem ent.

Wolfe c o n c l u d e d

t h a t in

p a t te r n s for the in -b e tw e e n y e a r s ,

planning the

grade arrangem ent

d e c i s i o n m a k e r s may u ti liz e a n y o n e

of t h e d e s i g n s w hic h fit t h e i r local n e e d s .
T h e p r o f e s s i o n a l d i a l o g u e c e n t e r i n g on w hi ch g r a d e o r g a n i z a t i o n is
best,

continues.

Returning

ad v anced by A lexander (1978),

to

and

expanding

the

earlier

n o ti o n

he saw t h e d e b a t e in a b r o a d e r s e n s e .

He s t a t e s :

T h e e m e r g e n t mi ddle s c h o o l is m o r e t h a n m e r e ly a
reo rg a n iz e d junior high school.
In f a c t , c o n s i d e r a b l e
i m p e t u s to a new t y p e of m i dd le s c h o o l com es from
d i s s a t i s f a c t i o n w it h t h e p r o g r a m , a n d o r g a n i z a t i o n of
t h e u p p e r y e a r s of t h e e l e m e n t a r y s c h o o l .
Too, th e re
is much s u p p o r t f o r a 4 y e a r h i g h sc h o o l i n c l u d i n g
the ninth grad e.
T h u s t h e new mi dd le s c h o o l s h o u l d
b e s e e n more a s an e f f o r t to r e o r g a n i z e t h e t o t a l
sc ho ol l a d d e r t h a n j u s t o n e of i t s d i v i s i o n s ( p . 2 1 ) .

34

A c l o s e r a n a l y s i s of A l e x a n d e r ' s r e s e a r c h may s u g g e s t t h a t " a n y o r
all" of t h e

recommended

Considering

the

development and
be

inclined

w hi ch

to

grade

wide

divergence

social i n t e r e s t s
suggest

is n o n - g r a d e d

an

and

achievement

of p r e o r

geared

early

of

a

levels,

adolescents,

pattern

of

physical
o n e may

organization

to s i m i l a r i t y of c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s

Eiehhorn

rather

(1965) f u r t h e r s t h i s c o n c e p t b y

in e f f e c t ,

s u g g e s t s t h a t t h e p o s s i b l e so lu ti o n lies

no t in a d j u s t e d g r a d e p a t t e r n s ,

b u t r a t h e r in a f u n c t i o n a l sc ho ol w hic h

takes

"This s t u d y ,

of

investigation

t h a n a s e q u e n c e of g r a d e s .
stating,

p a t t e r n s may n o t be t h e a n s w e r at all.

into finite

m aturation,

account

knowledge

the
of

psychological

c h i ld

growth

principles
and

of r e a d i n e s s a n d

development,

and

the

c u l t u r a l i n t e r a c t i o n of s t u d e n t s " ( p . 3 ) .
Early

research

organization

of

inconclusive.
substantial

efforts

grade

determ ine

configuration

Wiles

studies

to

and

for

Thompson

conducted

between

the

pre

m os t

or

appropriate

early

adolescents

a s p e c t of mi ddle s c h o o l i n g ,

were

(1975),

after

reviewing

the

1968 a n d

1974,

concluded

that

" r e s e a r c h on middle s c h o o l s w as o f r e m a r k a b l e low q u a l i t y .
t h e r e s e a r c h was c o n d u c t e d b y

grade

so meone who a d v o c a t e d

Most o f t e n ,

some p a r t i c u l a r

and u sed th e ir fin d in g s to p ro v e th a t th e y

w ere c o r r e c t " ( p . 4 2 2 ) .
O ther
conclusions.

reviews
Gerson

of

early

(1 988 )

research

believed

that

tended
"it is

to

reach

simi lar

d o u b t f u l if s u f f i c i e n t

d a t a will e v e r b e a v a i l a b l e w h i c h d e m o n s t r a t e s t h a t o n e t y p e of sch oo l
o r g a n i z a t i o n is s u p e r i o r to a n o t h e r
is c h a n g e d ,
will

he ad v ised ,

...

If o n l y t h e g r a d e o r g a n i z a t i o n

t h e r e is l i t t l e l i k e li h o o d t h a t t h e mid dle sc h oo l

b e an i m p r o v e m e n t o v e r t h e j u n i o r h i g h s c h o o l " ( p . 3 4 4 ) .

Ho wa rd

35

and

S to u m b i s

th e topic,

(1970) a f t e r e x a m i n i n g t h e limited a m o u n t of r e s e a r c h on

decided that th e re

w as

" lit tle b a s i s f o r s u p p o r t i n g a n y o n e

organizational p a tte rn over a n o th e r"

(p.

6).

G ate w ood 's (1972) r e v i e w

o f l i t e r a t u r e on t h e

s u b j e c t of d i f f e r e n c e s b e t w e e n middle s c h o o ls a n d

junior

suggested

m ig h t
and

high

s c h o o ls

no t b e p r o f i t a b l e ( p p .
Dils

(1 975)

determ ined

that

further

264-275).
that

inquiry

In r e l a t e d

"a s i g n i f i c a n t

in t o

the

research,

subject
G atewood

gap exists between

the

main t e n e t s of t h e t h e o r e t i c a l m id dle s ch ool c o n c e p t p r o p o s e d b y l e a d i n g
middle sch oo l a u t h o r i t i e s a n d a c t u a l e d u c a t i o n a l p r a c t i c e s in most middle
schools."

Middle

practices

of j u n i o r

sc ho ol

concept"

s c h o o ls
highs,

(p.

26).

previous re s e a rc h e rs,

had

"adopted

thus

not

the

successfully

Lip sit z ( 1 9 7 7 ) ,

states that

educational

programs

achieving

supporting

the

the

and

mid dle

findings

of

"sc hool o r g a n i z a t i o n as to g r a d e le v e l

d o e s n o t m a t t e r " ( p . 2 6 7 ).
K o hu t
concludes
grade
(p.

( 1 9 80 ) ,
from

a

h is r e v i e w

organization

5).

in

cannot

As l a t e as 1983,

Mational
of t h e
be

education
research

determined

Calhoun

A s s o c i a ti o n

that

from

Publication,

" t h e most a p p r o p r i a t e
the

available

research"

( 1 9 8 3 ) , a f t e r r e v i e w i n g all a v a i la b l e

comparative stu d ie s concluded:

. . . T h e r e i s l i t t l e d i f f e r e n c e in ac a de m ic
a c h i e v e m e n t b e t w e e n m id dl e a n d j u n i o r h i g h
pupils;
. . . G r a d e o r g a n i z a t i o n h a s no a p p a r e n t e f f e c t
on t h e o r g a n i z a t i o n a l climate of t h e s c h o o l s ;
. . . M a t u r a t i o n s t u d i e s show t h a t n i n t h g r a d e r s
a r e m o r e lik e t e n t h g r a d e r s a n d e i g h t h g r a d e r s
a r e mo re li k e s e v e n t h g r a d e r s ;

36

. . . T h e q u a l i t y of t h e s ch oo l p r o g r a m i s more
im portant th a n the g r a d e level organization;
. . . J u n i o r h i g h s a n d mid dle s c h o o l s a p p e a r
to b e m or e al ike t h a n d i f f e r e n t , a n d from a n
em p ir ic a l p e r s p e c t i v e t h e y seem to d i f f e r , s y s ­
t e m a t i c a l l y , in na m e o n l y ( p . 1 3 5 ) .

Though

the

preponderance

of

research

on

the

most

appropriate

g r a d e c o n f i g u r a t i o n for p r e a d o l e s c e n t o r e a r l y a d o l e s c e n t would s u g g e s t
t h a t it

appears

achievem ent,
contrary.

to

have little or

there

are

Trauschke

some

(1970),

no i n f l u e n c e on a s t u d e n t ' s a ca d em ic
research

studies

for example,

attitudes,

comparing

junior

mi ddle

school

to

one

conclude

the

t r i e d to d e t e r m i n e t h e b e s t

t y p e of sc ho ol in t e r m s of a c h i e v e m e n t ,
one

that

and

high

self-concept by
sc h oo l

and

two

e l e m e n t a r y s c h o o l s in Miami, F l o r i d a .

E v e n t h o u g h t h i s s t u d y is limited

to a c h i e v e m e n t ,

of mi ddle

not

a

subject

and
of

other

this

review ,

T rauschke's

study

scales

adm inistered

s c h o o l.

were

on

attributes
this

achievement
to

50

research

tests

students

and

school/junior
has

some

attitudinal

randomly

high

are

application.
measurement

selected

from

each

T h e r e s u l t s of t h e s e s e v e r a l t e s t s led T r a u s c h k e to f o r m u l a t e

t h e following s i x c o n c l u s i o n s :
• T h e " a b r u p t " i n t r o d u c t i o n i n t o t h e m id dl e sc ho o l of
f if t h a n d s i x t h g r a d e s from t h e s e l f - c o n t a i n e d c l a s s ­
ro oms of t h e e l e m e n t a r y sc h o o l a p p e a r e d to h a v e no
n e g a t i v e e f f e c t on a c h i e v e m e n t , a t t i t u d e t o w a r d
school, or th e s t u d e n t 's se lf-c o n c e p t.
e Sin ce t h e r e w as no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s f o r a n y
of t h e c o m p a r i s o n s a t a n y g r a d e l e v e l in f a v o r of
th e ju n io r high school an d the elem entary schools,
mi dd le sch ool p u p i l s w e r e "at l e a s t e q u a l " to t h e i r
c o u n t e r p a r t s in e l e m e n t a r y a n d j u n i o r h i g h school
in t e r m s of a c h i e v e m e n t , s e l f - c o n c e p t , a n d a t t i t u d e
tow ard school.

37

• S e v e n t h a n d e i g h t h g r a d e r s in t h e m id dl e school
"more o f t e n t e n d to e q u a l o r e x c e e d s t u d e n t s in
g r a d e s s e v e n a n d e i g h t in j u n i o r h i g h sch o ol t h a n
d o p u p i l s in g r a d e s f iv e a n d six in t h e mi ddle
sc h o o l w h e n c o m p a r e d to s t u d e n t s in g r a d e s five
a n d s ix in t h e e l e m e n t a r y s c h o o l s . " In a d d i t i o n ,
m iddle s c h o o l s t u d e n t s s h o w e d s i g n i f i c a n t g a i n s
i n all t e s t e d a r e a s a f t e r o ne y e a r in t h e new p r o ­
gr am .
• S e v e n t h a n d e i g h t h g r a d e r s , a f t e r a minimum of
two y e a r s in t h e m id d le sc hoo l, a c h i e v e d at h i g h e r
l e v e l s t h a n j u n i o r h i g h s c h o o ls p u p i l s ; t h e d i f ­
f e r e n c e was s i g n i f i c a n t in f a v o r of t h e mi dd le
sc h o o l on s ix o u t of e i g h t c o m p a r i s o n s .
In a d d i ­
t i o n , " t h e r e is no e v i d e n c e . . . t h a t fi f t h o r
s i x t h g r a d e p u p i l s in t h e middle s c h o o l do not
e q u a l t h e a c h i e v e m e n t of fifth a n d s i x t h g r a d e
s t u d e n t s in t h e e l e m e n t a r y s c h o o l s . "
9

At e a c h g r a d e l e v e l , middle sch ool s t u d e n t s
s h o w e d more f a v o r a b l e a t t i t u d e s t o w a r d s c h o o l,
more f a v o r a b l e a t t i t u d e s t o w a r d s c h o o l , t h e m ­
selves, other s tu d e n ts , and te a c h e rs .
O u t of
t h e 30 c o m p a r i s o n s ma de in t h e s e a r e a s , 29
f a v o r e d t h e m id dle s c h o o l , i n c l u d i n g e i g h t which
were sig nificant.

9 T h e s e l f - c o n c e p t of middle sc ho ol s t u d e n t s was
at l e a s t e q u a l t o t h e s e l f - c o n c e p t of t h e s t u ­
d e n t s in t h e c o n v e n t i o n a l s c h o o l s .
In g r a d e
s e v e n , th e re was a significant differe n ce
f a v o r i n g t h e m id dle s c h o o l in t h e s e l f - c o n c e p t
of s t u d e n t s ( p . 8 6 ) .
Fo llowing
and

his

self-concept

m iddle s c h o o l . "

research,
of

Trauschke

students

the

mi dd le

enhanced

in

the

simi lar c o n c l u s i o n s ,

sc h o o l c o n f i g u r a t i o n

may

en vironm ent th a n the ju n io r high school.
differences

by

that

"the

attitudes

programs

of

the

In a d d i t i o n t o t h e c o n c l u s i o n s r e a c h e d b y T r a u s c h k e ,

other re s e a rc h e rs have reached
that

are

concluded

academic

achievement

and

provide

w hic h may s u g g e s t
a better

educational

Smith (1975) i n v e s t i g a t e d t h e
self-concept

produced

m iddle s c h o o l i n s t r u c t i o n a n d t r a d i t i o n a l i n s t r u c t i o n at t h e j u n i o r h i g h

by

38

school.

A p p r o x i m a t e l y on e h u n d r e d s t u d e n t s from e ac h t y p e of p r o g r a m

participated

in

this

sch ool i n s t r u c t i o n
science.

Canton,

produced

In social s t u d i e s

Ohio

study.

significantly

Smith

found

that

middle

h i g h e r s c o r e s in r e a d i n g

a n d u s e of s o u r c e s ,

and

Smith f o u n d a " s t r o n g

t e n d e n c y " in f a v o r of t h e m i d d le school a p p r o a c h , in o t h e r s u b j e c t s , no
significant
findings,

differences

occurred.

Smith

it may b e c o n c l u d e d t h a t

ac a d e m i c a c h i e v e m e n t b e t w e e n
mid dle

s ch ool

instruction

"based

on

these

t h e r e was s u b s t a n t i a l d i f f e r e n c e in

p r e - a n d e a r l y a d o l e s c e n t s who r e c e i v e d
and

those

instruction."

F urther,

according

students

received

m i d d le

who

concluded,

to

who
Smit h,

school

received
"it

conventional

would

instruction

appear

attained

that

greater

a ca d em i c a c h i e v e m e n t t h a n t h o s e who r e c e i v e d c o n v e n t i o n a l i n s t r u c t i o n "
( p . 172).
A

simi lar

study

was

conducted

by

Brantley

(1982),

com paring

s t u d e n t s e n r o l l e d in a j u n i o r h i g h sc h oo l from 1973 to 1975 a n d s t u d e n t s
enrolled

in

mi dd le s

schools

e x a m i n e d math

and reading

that

reading

ma th

and

from

1976 to 1981.

achievement sco res.

achievement

scores

w e r e h i g h e r t h a n t h o s e of t h e j u n i o r h i g h .
appropriate

grade

continues.

The

Brantley's

configuration
aforem entioned

for

The resu lts indicated

for

mi ddl e

sch oo l

of t h e

early adolescents

literature

and

would co n fir m t h e a b s e n c e of a g r e e m e n t am on g r e s e a r c h e r s .
theory

not in p r a c t i c e h a v e e d u c a t o r s b e e n a b l e

organization

of

the

m i d dl e

grades.

students

T h e d e b a t e , a s to t h e most

preadolescent or

review

researched

research
N e i t h e r in

to a g r e e on t h e b e s t

However,

researchers

have

c o n c l u d e d a n d wo uld t e n d to a g r e e on t h e n e e d f o r f u r t h e r i n v e s t i g a t i o n
on t h i s i s s u e ( p . 2 6 ) .

39

Epstein
and

Trends,

(1990)

in h e r r e v i e w

conducted

by

the

of t h e
John

R e s e a r c h of E l e m e n t a r y a n d Middle,
K a p p a o f f e r s t h e following i n s i g h t s .
t h i s ti me ,

Na tion al

Hopkins

S u r v e y of P r a c t i c e s

U niversity

Center

for

f o r t h e F e b r u a r y i s s u e o f Phi Delta
"With t h e i n f o r m a t i o n a v a i l a b l e at

no one c a n s a y u n e q u i v o c a l l y t h a t o n e p a r t i c u l a r g r a d e s p a n

o r p r o g r a m i s ' b e s t ' f o r all m i d d l e - g r a d e s c h o o ls in t h e U . S . "
f u r th e r indicates that
complexities

that

a c c o r d i n g to t h i s s u r v e y ,

underlay

m iddle-grade

Epstein

t h e r e a r e a n u m b e r of

education

and

reform.

They

are:
• Most s c h o o l s t h a t c o n t a i n g r a d e 7 h a v e n o t ye t
d e v e l o p e d e d u c a t i o n a l p r o g r a m s b a s e d on r e c o m ­
m e n d e d p r a c t i c e s f o r t h e mid dle g r a d e s .
• Some p r a c t i c e s a r e more p r o m i n e n t in c e r t a i n
t y p e s of mid dle sc h oo l t h a n o t h e r s .
• R e g a r d l e s s of g r a d e s p a n , good p r a c t i c e s ma ke
stro n g er programs . . .
T h e y a r d w o r k of
d e v e l o p i n g e x c e l l e n t p r o g r a m s is no t a c c o m p l i s h e d
m e r e ly b y c h a n g i n g g r a d e s p a n s o r c o n s t r u c t i n g
s m al ler b u i l d i n g s , b u t b y a t t e n d i n g to p r a c t i c e s
t h a t a r e r e s p o n s i v e t o t h e n e e d s of e a r l y a d o l e s ­
cents.
• T h e r e is mu ch mo re to b e l e a r n e d .
In o r d e r to
p r o v i d e u s e f u l i n f o r m a t i o n to e d u c a t o r s w ho m u s t
make t o u g h d e c i s i o n s a b o u t middle g r a d e p r a c ­
t i c e s f o r t h e e a r l y a d o l e s c e n t s who a t t e n d t h e i r
s c h o o l s , we n e e d new d a t a on how s t u d e n t s '
le a rn in g , a ttit u d e s , and b eh av io rs a re influenced
b y d i f f e r e n t m i d d l e - g r a d e p r a c t i c e s in s c h o o l s of
d iffe re n t g ra d e s p a n s ( p p . 438-444).
M a c l v e r (1990) a n a s s o c i a t e to E p s t e i n in t h e C e n t e r f o r R e s e a r c h
on E l e m e n t a r y a n d Middle Sch ool s at J o h n s H o p k i n s U n i v e r s i t y a g r e e s .
In

his

Phi

Delta

Kappa

article,

"Me eting

the

Needs

of

Young

40

A dolescents:

A dvisory G ro u p s,

In te rd isc ip lin a ry Teaching Teams,

and

School T r a n s i t i o n P r o g r a m s , " h e r e f e r s to t h r e e c l e a r c o n c l u s i o n s :

• T h e r e a r e i m p o r t a n t b e n e f i t s a s s o c i a t e d w ith e s t a b ­
l i s h i n g e x t e n s i v e a n d w e l l - o r g a n i z e d im p l e m e n t a t i o n
of a d v i s o r y g r o u p s , i n t e r d i s c i p l i n a r y t e a c h i n g
team s, and school tr a n s i tio n p ro g ra m s .
• If a
tive
ment
still

major goal is to
implem entations
to r e s t r u c t u r e
h a s a lo n g w ay

s e e most s c h o o l s a d o p t e f f e c ­
of t h e s e p r a c t i c e s , t h e m o v e­
e d u c a t i o n in t h e mi ddle g r a d e s
to go .

• A d d i t i o n a l d a t a a r e n e e d e d to h e l p u s u n d e r s t a n d
a n d i m p r o v e e d u c a t i o n in t h e m id dle g r a d e s . . .
On ly b y c o l l e c t i n g a g r e a t d ea l more i n f o r m a t i o n
on t h e d i v e r s i t y o f e d u c a t i o n a l a p p r o a c h e s a n d
p r a c t i c e s in s c h o o l s f o r t h e middle g r a d e s a n d on
y o u n g adolescents' academic achievem ent and
a t t a c h m e n t to s c h o o l will we b e a b l e f u ll y to
d o c u m e n t a n d u n d e r s t a n d t h e e f f e c t s of d i f f e r e n t
p r a c t i c e s on t h e p r o g r e s s of s t u d e n t s ( p p . 4 5 8 -4 6 4 ) .
Therefore,
and

it c a n b e c o n c l u d e d ,

research

on

the

preadolescents

or

early

investigation
research

is n e e d e d .

of A l e x a n d e r ,

latest re s e a rc h

most

from t h e r e v i e w of t h e l i t e r a t u r e

appropriate

adolescents
It h a s b e e n

Popper,

by Epstein,

S tout,

grade

that

configuration

further

well d o c u m e n t e d ,
Wolfe a n d

M aclver and o th e rs ,

research

for
and

from t h e e a r l y

others,

through

the

t h a t more i n f o r m a t i o n ,

r e s e a r c h a n d d a t a a r e n e e d e d to ma ke i n f o r m e d d e c i s i o n s on middle le v el
education.

A l e x a n d e r a n d McEwin (1989) b e s t s u m m a r i z e s t h e s i t u a t i o n

when th e y w rite:

41

T h e major t a s k s of l e a d e r s h i p in m i dd le le v el
e d u c a t i o n m u s t f o c u s on t h e p e r s i s t e n t n e e d s of
early adolescents for health grow th and developm ent,
f o r m o t iv a t io n t o w a r d a n d a c q u i s i t i o n of e s s e n t i a l
s k i l l s of c o m m u n ic a ti o n a n d l e a r n i n g , f o r e x p l o r a ­
tio n a n d d e v e l o p m e n t of w o r t h w h i l e i n t e r e s t s , a n d
f o r an i n c r e a s i n g s t o r e of b a s i c k n o w l e d g e ( p . 8 ) .

Continued discussion,
agreement
grade

am ong

level

or

re s e a rc h and evaluation are essential before,

educators

grade

can

be

reached

configuration

to

on

serve

the

this

most

unique

appropriate
and

distinct

s t a g e of d e v e l o p m e n t ,

SUMMARY
T h e r e v i e w of l i t e r a t u r e c o v e r e d t h e h i s t o r i c a l d e v e l o p m e n t of th e
j u n i o r h i g h a n d middle sc h o o l a n d t h e r e s e a r c h r e l a t e d t o t h e e f f e c t s of
grade
The

organization/configuration
literature

on ly t h e

reviewed

main p u r p o s e s

early adolescents
it.

showed

on

students'

that

early

educators

of s e c o n d a r y e d u c a t i o n

b u t also on t h e

academic

achievem ent.

differed

on

not

for p re a d o le s c e n ts and

sch ool o r g a n i z a t i o n

that best housed

Some of t h e p u r p o s e s g i v e n f o r t h e j u n i o r h i g h s c h o o l s i n c l u d e d t h e

follo win g:

student

exploration

into

his

own

aptitudes

and

m a k in g

c h o i c e s i n t o t h e k i n d of w o r k to w h ic h to d e v o t e o n e s li f e; d e v e l o p m e n t
of p e r s o n a l r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r t h e w e l f a r e of t h e g r o u p ; c o o r d i n a t i o n a n d
articulation
v o c a t io n a l

between
education

elem entary
especially

and
for

secondary
those

education;

pupils

w ho would

provision
not

of

re m a in

unti l h i g h sc h oo l g r a d u a t i o n ;

s a t i s f a c t i o n of p u p i l s i m p o r t a n t , imm edi ate

and

recognition

assured

future

needs;

s t u d e n t s in d e v e l o p m e n t of e d u c a t i o n a l
of

the

junior

high

sc ho ol

in

early

of

individual

program s.
1900's

differences

in

Grade configuration

i n c l u d e d t h e following

42

variations:
high

w ith

7 - 8 , 8- 9,
grades

7-10, a n d 7 - 9 .

7 - 8 -9

S ince t h e j u n i o r h i g h
secondary

education

was

It was n o t e d t h a t t h e f i r s t j u n i o r

introduced

was o r i g i n a l l y
the

co m p le te

sc ho ol is n o t s u r p r i s i n g .

in

Columbus,

Ohio

seen as a downward
dominance

of

the

in

1909.

e x t e n s i o n of

traditional

high

T h e u l t im a te c o n c l u s i o n of t h e r e v i e w of t h e

Am er ic an j u n i o r h ig h sc h o o l is t h a t it failed to a c h i e v e i t s own i d e n t i t y
and
h ig h
for

recognition

from

the

sc h o o l c u r r i c u l u m
students

to

beginning

because

from s e e k i n g

offering

junior

of t h e

dominance

a s o lu ti o n

to t h e

teacher

training

high

space

of t h e

problems

programs

that

m i r r o r e d h i g h sc h o o l t e a c h e r t r a i n i n g p r o g r a m s .
T h e A m e r ic a n middle s ch oo l mo v e m en t a r o s e o u t of c o n c e r n s in t h e
1960's t h a t t h e j u n i o r h i g h sc h o o l h a d failed to meet all of i t s p u r p o s e s .
E s p e c i a ll y t h e
preadolescent

purposes
and

and high school.

of p r o v i d i n g

adolescent

youth

an o p p o r t u n i t y
in

the

period

for e x p l o r a t i o n of
between

Dr. William A l e x a n d e r was p r e s e n t e d as t h e f a t h e r of

t h i s move men t al on g with o t h e r e d u c a t i o n a l p r o p o n e n t s
Moss, L o u n s b u r y ,

elementary

(i.e.,

Eichhorn,

V a r s , Ro ma no, a n d G e o r g i a d y ) s o u g h t to d e f i n e a s e t

of w e l l - p l a n n e d t r a n s i t i o n a c t i v i t i e s b e t w e e n t h e e l e m e n t a r y y e a r s t o t h e
s t a r t of h i g h sch o ol e d u c a t i o n .

T h e c o n t i n u i n g aim of t h e m id dle sch ool

remains

of

to

fulfill

the

function

humanizing

the

education

of

early

adolescents.
T h e r e v i e w of r e s e a r c h f i n d i n g s on t h e e f f e c t of g r a d e o r g a n i z a ­
tion/configuration

on

mid dle

grade

students'

achievement

shows

that

t h e most a p p r o p r i a t e g r a d e le ve l o r g a n i z a t i o n c a n n o t b e d e t e r m i n e d from
the available r e s e a r c h .
be

flawed

in

term s

T h e r e s e a r c h t h a t c u r r e n t l y e x i s t s a p p e a r s to
of

technical

c o n c e r n s a n d / o r i n v o l v e s s u c h few

43

s t u d e n t s t h a t t h e r e s u l t s seem of limited a p p l i c a b i l i t y .
a few s t u d i e s

such as noted by

Trauschke,

Smi th ,

T h e r e d o es e x i s t
and

B rantley that

s u g g e s t mi ddl e sch oo l s t u d e n t s may o u t p e r f o r m on a c h i e v e m e n t a n d / o r
s e l f - c o n c e p t i n s t r u m e n t s t h a n t r a d i t i o n a l j u n i o r h i g h sc h o o l s t u d e n t s .
T h e u l t im a te c o n c l u s i o n of t h e r e v i e w of l i t e r a t u r e a n d r e s e a r c h is
that continued discussion,
agreement
grade

am o ng

level

or

research,

educators
grade

adolescent s tu d e n t.

can

be

configuration

and evaluation are essential before
reached
to

on

serve

the

most

the

pre-

appropriate
and

early

CHAPTER 3:

METHODOLOGY

T h i s c h a p t e r p r o v i d e s a d e s c r i p t i o n of t h e m e t h o d s a n d p r o c e d u r e s
u s e d t o d e t e r m i n e i f t h e r e w as a d i f f e r e n c e in t h e M ich ig an E d u c a t i o n a l
Assessment

Program

(MEAP)

results

am on g

students

in

j u n i o r h i g h g r o u p i n g v e r s u s a m id d le sc ho ol g r o u p i n g .
divided

i n t o t h e follo wing :

sa mp le ,

hypotheses,

procedures,

population,

design

and

a

traditional

T h e c h a p t e r is

sa m p le s e l e c t i o n ,

instrum entation,

d e s c r i p t i o n of

data

gathering

data analysis p ro c e d u re s , and summary.

POPULATION
The
public

population
sc ho o l

A sso ci at io n

to

be

districts

sampled

that

form

Beecher,

Highland
Monroe,
Port

the

the

tw enty-seven

Middle

C it ie s

(MCEA) d u r i n g t h e 1985-86 s c h o o l y e a r .

i n c l u d e d t h e following d i s t r i c t s :
City,

were

Benton

Park,

A lb io n ,

Harbor,

Jackson,

Buena

Kalamazoo,

Ann A r b o r ,
V is ta ,

Educational

MCEA m e m b e r s h i p
B a t tl e C r e e k ,

Flint,

Lansing,

Michigan

Grand

M arquette,

Bay

Rapids,
Midland,

M u s k e g o n , M u s k e g o n H e i g h t s , Nile s, P l y m o u t h - C a n t o n , P o n t i a c ,

Huron,

Saginaw,

Southfield,

Traverse

City,

Willow

Run,

and

Ypsilanti.
T h e MCEA h a d i t s b e g i n n i n g s in 1966 w ith a g r o u p of u r b a n school
d i s t r i c t s w h ic h came t o g e t h e r in o r d e r t o s h a r e c o n c e r n s a n d c o o r d i n a t e
efforts

to meet u r b a n

Citie s d i s t r i c t s
and

sp e c ia l

district

together

needs

were

children

needs.

The

forces th a t

a com mon ality in s e r v i n g

b r o u g h t Middle
poor,

minority

and th e recognition th a t th e fu n d in g for

44

45

educational

change

required

political

action

and co h esiv e n ess.

The

in fo rm al Middle Ci ti es g r o u p was i n s t r u m e n t a l in f o r m u l a t i n g t h e S t a t e ' s
com pensatory education p ro g ram .
In 1.973, MCEA was off ici all y f or m ed a s a n o n p r o f i t c o r p o r a t i o n with
a

membership

of

affected

at

that

included

27 u r b a n

approxim ately
Michigan

thirteen
ti m e.

During

center

300,000

State

districts.

A

formal

1985-86,

Middle

s ch oo l d i s t r i c t s a c r o s s

(18%)

U niversity

of t h e

and

a f f il ia ti on

students

in

Citie s

was

membership

Michigan w hich
the

in close p r o x i m i t y

state.

to t h e

also

serve

Based

at

State Capitol,

P4CEA w o r k e d t o c r e a t e b e t t e r u n d e r s t a n d i n g a n d s u p p o r t f o r t h e n e e d s
of c e n t r a l c i t y school d i s t r i c t s .
Middle

C it ie s

including:
and

the

research

data and

Legislature

district

a

number

professional development

teachers,

statistical

provided

and

and

adm inistrators

state

f o r c e s which met m o n t h l y ,

its

districts

support,

served

provided

coordination

to

f o r sc ho ol a d m i n i s t r a t o r s

development

dissemination,

agencies,

through

services

training

program

information

of

a

of

a s a li ai so n with

forum

15

relevant

for

s p e c ia l

m e m b er

area

task

a n d s p o n s o r e d c o n f e r e n c e s on c u r r e n t i s s u e s

in e d u c a t i o n .

SAMPLE SELECTION
As p a r t of t h e s a m p l e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s t h e p o p u l a t i o n of 27 MCEA
scho ol

districts

were

stratified

as

being either

h i g h sc ho ol d i s t r i c t o r mi dd le s ch oo l d i s t r i c t .
d e f i n e d a s a sch ool i n c l u d i n g g r a d e s s e v e n ,
sch oo l w as
eight.

defined

as

a

sc ho ol t h a t

predom inantly a junior

A j u n i o r h i g h sc h o o l was
eight,

included

and nine.

grades

six,

A mid dle
seven,

and

46

T h e c h a r t below g i v e s t h e 1985-86 MCEA sc h oo l d i s t r i c t s t h a t w e r e
junior

high

or

mi ddl e

school

in

their

grade

configurations

using

the

above definition.

J u n io r H igh

M iddle School

Ann A r b o r
Battle Creek
Benton Ilarbor
G rand Rapids
Jackson
Kalamazoo
M arquette
Midland
Mon roe
Muskegon
Plym outh-C anton
Sag ina w
T r a v e r s e Cit y
Ypsilanti

Albion
Bay City
Beecher
B u e n a Vis ta
Flin t
Highland P ark
Lansing
Muskegon Heights
Niles
P o nt ia c
Port Huron
Southfield
Willow Run

T h e E x e c u t i v e D i r e c t o r of MCEA w as u s e d a s t h e e x p e r t to s e l e c t a
sampl e

of

four

junior

high

sc ho o l

districts

d i s t r i c t s to b e t h e f o c u s of t h i s s t u d y .

and

four

mi ddle

s ch oo l

T h e MCEA e x p e r t e m p lo y e d t h e

f ollowing c r i t e r i a in s e l e c t i n g t h e two n o n - r a n d o m s a m p l e s :

• Similar n u m b e r of s c h o o ls from e a c h s e t of f o u r
sch ool d i s t r i c t s ,
• Comparable o p e ra tin g e x p e n d i t u r e s p e r pupil,
• Approximately equal av e ra g e te a c h e r salaries, and
• L i k e n e s s b e t w e e n t h e r a c i a l / e t h n i c co m p os it io n
of s t u d e n t s g e n e r a l l y b e t w e e n t h e two s a m p l e s .

47

Applying

the

above

criteria,

the

Executive

Director

selected

the

school d i s t r i c t s l i s t e d bel ow to b e p a r t of t h e sa m p l e d MCEA d i s t r i c t s .

• J u n i o r High S cho ol D i s t r i c t s
— P>attle C r e e k
--Jackson
— Muskegon
— S ag in a w
• Middle Scho ol D i s t r i c t s
— Bay Ci t y
— Flint
—Lansing
— Willow B u n

DESCRIPTION OF SAMPLE
The

Executive

Director

of MCEA s e l e c t e d

four junior high

scho ol

d i s t r i c t s a n d f o u r mi ddl e s c h o o l d i s t r i c t s a s s t a t e d in t h e p r i o r s e c t i o n .
T h e two n o n - r a n d o m s a m p l e g r o u p s ,
t h e following c r i t e r i a :
tu re s p e r pupil,
of s t u d e n t
(for

the

Department

of

n u m b e r of s c h o o l s ,

c u rre n t operating expendi­

a v e r a g e t e a c h e r s a l a r i e s , a n d r a c i a l / e t h n i c c o m p os it io n

body.
first

h o w e v e r , v a r i e d to some d e g r e e on

In t h i s
three

section,

criteria

Education

(for

tabular

data

c o l le c t e d

presented

above)

the

criterion)

final

and

from

the

records

MCEA

Michigan
will

be

r e p o r t e d to c o n t r a s t t h e tw o s a m p l e s .
T a b l e 3.1 below p r e s e n t s t h e n u m b e r of j u n i o r h i g h / m i d d l e s c h o o l s .
T h e s ch o o ls i n c l u d e d h a d e n r o l l m e n t s in e x c e s s of 20 s t u d e n t s t e s t e d on
t h e s e v e n t h g r a d e MEAP f o r 1985-86 s ch o ol y e a r .

48

TABLE 3 . 1 . COUNT OF JUNIOR HIGH/MIDDLE
AGGREGATE ENROLLMENT TAKING SEVENTH
FOR THE SELECTED JUNIOR HIGH AND
SCHOOL D IST R IC T S, 1985-86 SCHOOL

D istrict T y p e /
D istrict

SCHOOLS AND
GRADE MEAP
MIDDLE
Y EA R .

A g g r e g a te S e v e n th
G rade Enrollm ent
T a k in g 1985-86 MEAP

N um ber o f J u n io r H igh /
M iddle School*

J u n i o r High D i s t r i c t s
Battle C reek
Jackson
Muskegon
S ag in a w
Tot al

5
2
3
5

495
519
426
1,057

15

2,497

3
5
4
1

793
1,687
1,241
212

15

3,933

Middle Scho ol D i s t r i c t s
Bay City
F li n t
Lansing
Willow R u n
T ot al

^S ch oo ls w it h more t h a n t w e n t y s t u d e n t s t e s t e d on t h e s e v e n t h g r a d e
1985-86 MEAP.

A r e v i e w of T a b l e 3.1 a b o v e i n d i c a t e s t h a t t h e j u n i o r h i g h d i s t r i c t
and

the

mi ddle

school

district

were

T h e a g g r e g a t e n u m b e r of s e v e n t h
wit h

2,497

districts
from
each.

each

and

3,933

being

respectively.

The

set

of

four

by

15 s ch o ol s

each.

g r a d e r s t a k i n g t h e 1985-86 MEAP was

tested

sc h o o l

represented

for junior

criterion
districts

of

a

was

high

s im il ar
met

and

middle

number

with

of

sch oo l
s c h o o ls

15 s ch o o ls

from

49

T h e i s s u e of c u r r e n t o p e r a t i n g e x p e n d i t u r e s
t h e samp le d i s t r i c t s is g i v e n in T a b l e 3. 2 b e l o w .

(C O E )

p e r pupil for

COE p e r p u p i l d o l l a r

f i g u r e s f o r sch ool y e a r s 1982-33 t h r o u g h 1985-86 a r e p r e s e n t e d f o r e ac h
d i s t r i c t a s well a s a n a v e r a g e f o r t h e f o u r d i s t r i c t s co m b in ed f o r e ac h
sample.

TABLE 3 . 2 . CURRENT OPERATING EXPENDITURES (C O E) PER PUPIL
FOR SELECTED JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL AND MIDDLE SCHOOL
D IST R IC T S, 1 9 8 2 -1 9 8 6 .
C u r ren t O p era tin g E x p e n d itu r e s (C O E )
P er P u p il

D istrict T y p e

1982-83

1983-84

1984-85

1985-86

Battle Creek
Jackson
Muskegon
S ag in a w

$2,896
$2,657
$3,049
$2,595

$3,071
$2,828
$3,317
$2,674

$3,337
$2,929
$3,573
$3,056

$3,627
$3,127
$3,826
$3,312

Average

$2,799

$2,972

$3,224

$3,473

Bay Cit y
F lin t
Lansing
Willow B u n

$2,328
$3,003
$2,752
$2,501

$2,441
$3,103
$2,962
$2,813

$2,683
$3,328
$3,128
$3,045

$2,769
$3,636
$3,619
$3,594

Average

$2,646

$2,830

$3,046

$3,404

J u n i o r Hi gh D i s t r i c t s

Middle Scho ol D i s t r i c t s

A p e r u s a l of T a b l e 3. 2 s h o w s t h a t t h e COE p e r p u p i l was s l i g h t l y
g r e a t e r f o r j u n i o r h i g h d i s t r i c t s r a n g i n g from $2,799 to $3,473 c o m p a r e d
t o middle s ch o ol
the

COE

per

districts
pupil

ranging

dollar

from $2,646

advantage

to $ 3 , 4 0 4 .

shows

that

Calculating
junior

high

50

d i s t r i c t s a r e o u t s p e n d i n g m id dl e sch ool d i s t r i c t s on a v e r a g e $153, $142,
$178,

a n d $68 f o r s c h o o l y e a r s 19 82-83,

respectively.
varied

1983-84,

1984-85,

Overall, c u r r e n t o p eratin g e x p e n d itu re s

slightly

but

always

w it h

the

advantage

a n d 1985-86

(C O E ) p e r p u p il

given

to j u n i o r

high

districts.
The
displayed

average

teacher

in

3. 3

Table

y e a r s 1982-83 t h r o u g h

salaries

below.
1 985 -8 6.

for

A g a in ,

the
figures

selected
are

districts

given

for

are

school

A v erage salaries for the four selected

d i s t r i c t s b y t y p e a r e also d i s p l a y e d .

TABLE 3 . 3 . TEACHERS' AVERAGE SALARY FOR SELECTED JUNIOR
HIGH AND MIDDLE SCHOOL D IST R IC T S, 1 9 8 2 -1 9 8 6 .

A v e r a g e T e a c h e r S alary

D istr ic t T y p e /
D istrict
1982-83

1983-84

1984-85

1985-86

Battle Creek
Jackson
Muskegon
S ag in a w

$25,709
$29,503
$25,043
$26,205

$27,210
$29,052
$26,001
$29,869

$28,536
$30,355
$27,483
$29,343

$28,591
$31,417
$29,426
$30,341

Average

$26,615

$28,033

$28,929

$29,944

Bay Cit y
F lin t
Lansing
Willow R u n

$28,254
$26,428
$27,099
$25,954

$29,294
$29,152
$27,171
$25,655

$32,500
$30,343
$29,368
$28,587

$31,385
$32,361
$31,030
$31,753

Average

$26,934

$27,818

$30,200

$31,632

J u n i o r Hi gh D i s t r i c t s

Middle Scho ol D i s t r i c t s

51

A review

of t h e

s h o w s t h a t m id d le
for th r e e
middle

of t h e

sch oo l

$319 ( m o r e ) ,

average

teacher

school d i s t r i c t s
four

district

years.

figure

by

district

type

p a i d more t h a n j u n i o r h i g h d i s t r i c t s

Calculating

teachers

-$215 ( l e s s ) ,

salary

the

on a v e r a g e

difference

wou ld

have

showed
brought

that
home

$1,27 1 ( m o r e ) , a n d $1,68 8 ( m o r e ) f o r school

y e a r s 1982 -83 , 1983-84, 1984-85, a n d 1985-86 r e s p e c t i v e l y .
The

racial/ethnic

background

of

the

seventh

grade

students

for

t h e 1985-86 scho ol y e a r is p r e s e n t e d i n T a b l e 3 . 4 .
TABLE 3 . 4 . NUMBER A ND PERCENT OF J U N IO R /M ID D LE STUDENTS
IN THE SELECTED JUNIOR HIGH AND MIDDLE SCHOOL
DISTRICTS BY R AC IAL/ETH N IC CATEGORY, 1 9 8 5 -1 9 8 6 .

R a c ia l/E th n ic C a te g o r y o f J u n io r/M id d le S tu d e n ts
D istrict T y p e /
D istrict

N a tiv e
A m er.

A sian
A m er.

B lack

#

%

#

Battle C reek
Jackson
M u sk e g o n
S agi na w

15
20
30
34

0.7
1.1
1.5
1 .0

Total

99

50
76
87

%

#

%

636
495
708
1,940

30.2
27 .5
35.8
54.3

14
15
13
12

1 .0

3,779

39.9

46
3,565
1,375
282

2.3
65.6

1

2.5
1.4
1 .8
0.1

214

1 .6

5,26 8

#

L atino

White

%

#

'

0.7
0 .8
0.7
0.3

47
53
75
447

2 .2
2.9
3.8
12.5

1,395
1,221
1,151
1,139

66.2
66.7
58.2
31.9

54

0 .6

622

6.6

4,906

51.9

0. 4
0. 4
2.3
0.7

130
122
543

32.8

9
21
115
6

2

6. 4
2.2
1 1 .0
0 .2

1,796
1,654
2,818
569

88.4
30.4
57.1
66.2

39.7

151

1.1

797

6 .1

6,837

51.5

J u n i o r High D i s t r i c t s

Middle School D i s t r i c t s

c

Total

CO

Bay City
Flint
Lansing
Willow R u n

52

A p e r u s a l of t h e r a c i a l / e t h n i c d a t a p r e s e n t e d in

Table

3.4 a b o v e

i n d i c a t e s t h a t t h e same r a c i a l / e t h n i c g r o u p v a r i e d b y 1.8% o r l e s s w h e n
t h e j u n i o r h i g h a n d mid dle s c h o o l t o t a l s w e r e c o m p a r e d .
the

junior

high

produced

the

A m er ic an

at

minus

the

following
1.0

-

mid dle

percentage

1.6

=

-0.6,

A merican at 0. 6 - 1.1 = - 0 . 5 ,
51.9 - 51.5 = 0 . 4 .

school

racial/ethnic

differences,

Black

at

Specifically,
group

respectively:

39 .9

-

39.7

totals
N a ti v e

= 0.2,

L at in o at 6. 6 - 6. 1 = 0 . 5 ,

Asian

a n d White at

T h e s e p e r c e n t a g e d i f f e r e n c e s show t h a t t h e t o t a l s of

t h e s e l e c t e d j u n i o r h i g h a n d middle sch ool d i s t r i c t s v a r i e d l i t t l e ( 0 . 2 for
B l a c k s to 0 . 6 fo r N a ti v e A m e r i c a n s ) .
to t h e

minority

( N a t i v e A m e r ic a n

In a d d i t i o n , t h e m a jo r it y (White)

+ B la c k

+ Asian

A me ric an + L a t in o )

r a t i o s w e r e 51.9% to 48.1%, r e s p e c t i v e l y f o r t h e t o t a l of t h e j u n i o r h i g h s
and

51.5% to

Thus

the

48.5% r e s p e c t i v e l y

ratio

of

the

majority

for

the

total

student

of

the

population

middle
to

the

schools.
minority

s t u d e n t p o p u l a t i o n was al so q u i t e similar ( v a r i e d b y 0.4% b e t w e e n j u n i o r
h i g h a n d mi ddl e s c h o o l s ) .
Overall,

it a p p e a r s t h a t

the

similar in t e r m s of t h e fol lo wi ng :

samples

selected by the e x p e r t were

n u m b e r of s ch o o ls r e p r e s e n t e d at t h e

s e v e n t h g r a d e le v e l , c u r r e n t o p e r a t i n g e x p e n d i t u r e s p e r p u p i l , a v e r a g e
t e a c h e r s a l a r y , a n d r a c i a l / e t h n i c b a c k g r o u n d of t h e s t u d e n t b o d y .
T h e n e x t s e c t i o n d e a l s w it h t h e h y p o t h e s e s e v a l u a t e d in t h e s t u d y .

HYPOTHESES
The

prim ary

difference
junior

high

in

focus of

ac ad em ic
grouping

this

study

achievement
as

was to d e t e r m i n e if t h e r e

am ong

c o m p a r e d to

students

students

in

is a

in

a

traditional

a

middle s ch ool

53

grouping.

The

following

hypotheses

were

formulated

to

guide

the

a n a l y s i s of d a t a f o r t h i s s t u d y .
F irst,

a

set

of

seventh

grade

and

then

a

set

of

tenth

h y p o t h e s e s will h e p r e s e n t e d .

H y p o th e s e s R eg a r d in g S e v e n th G rade A ch iev em en t
Hy p o t h e s e s 1 :
N ull H y p o th e s is : T h e r e is no d i f f e r e n c e b e t w e e n t h e
two g r o u p s ( m id dl e s ch oo l a n d j u n i o r h i g h ) in t h e
p r o p o r t i o n of t h e m e m b e r s in e a c h of t h e f o u r MEAP
mathematics achievem ent c a te g o rie s .
A ltern a te H y p o th e s is : A g r e a t e r p r o p o r t i o n of th e
mi ddle school s t u d e n t s a r e in h i g h e r MEAP m a t h e m a ti c s
a c h i e v e m e n t c a t e g o r i e s t h a n is t h e c a s e f o r t h o s e who
a r e in j u n i o r h i g h s c h o o l s .
H y p o th e se s 2 :
N ull H y p o th e sis: T h e r e is no d i f f e r e n c e b e t w e e n t h e
two g r o u p s ( m id dl e sc ho ol a n d j u n i o r h i g h ) in t h e
p r o p o r t i o n of t h e m e m b e r s in e ac h of t h e f o u r MEAP
reading achievement categories.
A ltern a te H y p o th e s is : A g r e a t e r p r o p o r t i o n of t h e
mi ddle school s t u d e n t s a r e in h i g h e r MEAP r e a d i n g
a c h i e v e m e n t c a t e g o r i e s t h a n is t h e c a s e f o r t h o s e who
a r e in j u n i o r h i g h s c h o o l s .
H y p o th e se s R e g a r d in g T en th G rade A ch iev em en t
H y p o th e sis 3 :
N ull H y p o th e sis: T h e r e is no d i f f e r e n c e b e t w e e n t h e
two g r o u p s ( m id dl e s ch oo l a n d j u n i o r h i g h ) in t h e
p r o p o r t i o n of t h e m e m b e r s in e ac h o f t h e f o u r MEAP
mathematics achievem ent c a te g o rie s .
A ltern a te H y p o th e s is : A g r e a t e r p r o p o r t i o n of t h e
s t u d e n t s from t h e mi ddle sc ho ol a r e in h i g h e r MEAP
m a t h e m a ti c s a c h i e v e m e n t c a t e g o r i e s t h a n is t h e c a s e
f o r t h o s e who a r e in j u n i o r h i g h s c h o o l s .

grade

54

H y p o th e s is 4 :
N ull H y p o th e s is : T h e r e is no d i f f e r e n c e b e t w e e n t h e
two g r o u p s ( m i d d le sc h o o l a n d j u n i o r h i g h ) in t h e
p r o p o r t i o n of t h e m e m b e r s in e a c h of t h e f o u r MEAP
reading achievem ent categories.
A ltern a te H y p o th e s is : A g r e a t e r p o r t i o n of t h e s t u ­
d e n t s from t h e m i d d le s ch oo l a r e in t h e h i g h e r MEAP
r e a d i n g a c h i e v e m e n t c a t e g o r i e s t h a n is t h e c a s e f o r
t h o s e who a r e in j u n i o r h i g h s c h o o l s .

DESIGN A N D INSTRUM ENTATION
This

s t u d y e m p lo y e d t h e

b y B o r g a n d Gall ( 1 9 7 1 ) .

causal-com parative

m e th o d

as

presented

C a u s a l - c o m p a r a t i v e s t u d i e s h a v e b e e n s a i d to

b rid g e th e span betw een d e s c rip tiv e and experim ental re s e a rc h when a
comparable control
has

produced

group

results

experim ent.

The

w as u s e d

that

reason

a s in t h i s

approach
that

the

the

research.

precision

of

T h i s m e th o d

a w ell-designed

causal-com parative

m e th o d

was

em p lo y e d is t h a t in e d u c a t i o n m a n y ti me s t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p s u n d e r s t u d y
do n o t p e r m i t e x p e r i m e n t a l m a n i p u l a t i o n ( p p . 2 9 7 - 3 1 6 ) .
The

next

subsection

deals

specifically

in

how

the

causal-

c o m p a r a t i v e m e t h o d w as t r a n s l a t e d i n t o t h e d e s i g n of t h e s t u d y .

D esign
The

s t u d y e m p lo y e d

treatm ent

g ro u p compared

control

group.

experience.

The
The

A ssessm ent Program

four
to

m i dd le

four junior

independent

dependent

sc h oo l MCEA

districts

as

the

h i g h MCEA

districts

as

the

variable

variable

was

w as
the

the

middle

Michigan

sc ho ol

E d u c a t i o n al

(MEAP) r e s u l t s in r e a d i n g a n d m a t h e m a t i c s .

Using

C am p b e ll a n d S t a n l e y ( 19 63 ) t e r m i n o l o g y , t h e d e s i g n s h o u l d b e t e r m e d a
" s t a t i c - g r o u p c o m p a r i s o n " w it h time s e r i e s t e s t i n g a f t e r a p p r o x i m a t e l y

55

h a l f of t h e t r e a t m e n t a n d
12-13).

The

figure

then

bel ow

a f t e r co m p le ti o n of t h e t r e a t m e n t

sy m b o li ca l ly

depicts

the

specifics

(pp.

of

the

"static-g ro u p com parison."

F ig u r e 3 . 1 .

S ta tic -G r o u p C o m p a riso n .

Middle School

X

X Og

J u n i o r High

X

= Middle s c h o o l t r e a t m e n t .
= S e v e n t h g r a d e MEAP o b s e r v a t i o n .
Og = T e n t h g r a d e MEAP o b s e r v a t i o n .
In F i g u r e

3.1 t h e b r o k e n

m e a n s of m a t c h i n g

or

random

mid dle sc ho o l a n d j u n i o r h i g h
no t

been

for

mi ddle

school

line r e p r e s e n t s
selection

were

the
used

fact

t h a t no fo rmal

to c e r t i f y

that

th e

MCEA would h a v e b e e n e q u i v a l e n t h a d it
experience

(X ).

Earlier

in

this

chapter

t a b u l a r d a t a w e r e p r o v i d e d to sh ow how t h e two g r o u p s c o m p a r e d on a
n u m b e r of f a c t o r s .
T h e n e x t s e c ti o n d e s c r i b e s t h e i n s t r u m e n t a t i o n u s e d in t h i s s t u d y
in g r e a t e r d e t a i l .

In stru m en ta tio n
This

section

P r o g r a m (M EA P) .

focuses

on

the

M ich ig an

Educational

Assessment

T h i s s t a n d a r d i z e d m e a s u r e m e n t i n s t r u m e n t s e r v e d as

t h e m e a s u r e of ac ad em ic p e r f o r m a n c e in t h e c x i r r e n t s t u d y .
The

specifics

of MEAP will be d e a l t

with in t h r e e a r e a s .

First,

t h e h i s t o r i c a l b a c k g r o u n d of t h e d e v e l o p m e n t of MEAP from 1969 to 1989
will b e r e v i e w e d .

N e x t , a t e s t d e s c r i p t i o n of MEAP i n t h e s u b j e c t a r e a s

56

of r e a d i n g a n d m a t h e m a t i c s will b e o f f e r e d .
merits

of

MEAP

in

term s

of

reliability

In a d d i t i o n ,

and

validity

the technical

will

be

briefly

discussed.
B ack grou n d .
yearly,

to

all

seven,

and

m easuring
s p e c if i e d
the

extent

basic

skills.

their

of

basic

usage,
initiated

basic

the

State

standardized

education

all

1969,
State

test

students

program

Michigan

in

was

students

MEAP h a s p r o v i d e d
Board

parents,

of

and

Education,

students

sk il l s e d u c a t i o n .

of v o c a b u l a r y ,

mathematics.

by

w h ic h

S in c e

knowledge

and

to

teachers,

a

assessment

Legislature,

Michigan

was

regular

This

the

districts,

process

MEAP

Michigan

ten.

Governor,

scho ol

The

on

Students

reading

adm inistered,
grades

four,

responsible
have

for

mastered

i n f o r m a t i o n to
citizens,
the
were

local

status
tested

com prehension,

and
on

E n g l is h

T h e MEAP was t h e s t a t e w i d e t e s t i n g p r o g r a m

B o a r d of e d u c a t i o n ,

su p p o rted by the G overnor

and funded by the leg islatu re.
T h e h i s t o r y of t h e v e r s i o n of MEAP b e i n g u s e d in t h i s s t u d y was
explained

in

the

M ich ig an

Educational

Assessment

Program

Handbook

(1985).
T h e f i r s t f o u r y e a r s of t h e a s s e s s m e n t p r o g r a m
(1969-1.973) u s e d s t a n d a r d i z e d n o r m - r e f e r e n c e d t e s t s
d e s i g n e d to r a n k s t u d e n t s from h i g h e s t to lo w e s t in
e a c h of f o u r s u b j e c t a r e a s ( v o c a b u l a r y , r e a d i n g com­
p re h e n s io n , English u s a g e , and arithm etic) . . .
In
in t h e Fall 1971, r e f e r e n t g r o u p s w e r e f o r m e d t o
d e v e l o p s p e c i f i c p e r f o r m a n c e o b j e c t i v e s in t h e b a s i c
s k il l s a r e a s . T h e g r o u p s w e re co m po sed of local,
s ta te , and h ig h e r education curriculum specialists
a n d t e a c h e r s from t h r o u g h o u t M ic hi ga n. G r o u p s s u b ­
mitted d r a f t objectives for statew ide review b y g ra d e
le v el com missions a n d t h e E l e m e n t a r y a n d S e c o n d a r y
E d u c a t i o n Co un ci l . . . When t h e e s s e n t i a l p e r f o r m a n c e
o b j e c t i v e s w er e d e v e l o p e d in 1972, no em p ir ic a l e v i ­
d e n c e on t h e o b j e c t i v e s was a v a i l a b l e a n d D e p a r t m e n t

57

staff a g re e d th a t a periodic review and revision
wo uld b e n e e d e d .
R e v i s i o n o f t h e o b j e c t i v e s was
u n d e r t a k e n in 1976 w it h t h e a s s i s t a n c e of t h e
M ich ig an Cou nci l of T e a c h e r s of M at h e m a ti c s (MCTM)
a n d t h e M ich ig an R e a d i n g A ss o ci at i o n ( M R A ) .
As t h e
s e t s of sk il l s w e r e r e v i e w e d , it b e c a m e a p p a r e n t
t h a t c e r t a i n new a r e a s of e m p h a s i s ( f o r e x a m p l e ,
metric m easurem ent) n e e d e d to be ad d e d an d o th e r
a re a s (for exam ple, th e differe n ce betw een in f e r e n ­
tial a n d l i t e r a l c o m p r e h e n s i o n ) n e e d e d to b e c l a r i ­
fied.
The rev ised objectives were adopted by the
S t a t e B o a r d of E d u c a t i o n in 1980. T h e r e v i s e d s e t s
of o b j e c t i v e s r e p r e s e n t an e x t e n s i o n of t h e o r i g i ­
nal s et b a s e d on t h e e x p e r i e n c e of u s i n g th e m in
t h e Michigan Ed u c a t i o n a l A s s e s s m e n t P r o g r a m . T h e
n e e d f o r r e v i s e d t e s t s was t h e d i r e c t r e s u l t of
t h e a d o p t i o n of t h e r e v i s e d o b j e c t i v e s ( p . 1 ) .

T h e r e v i s e d 1980 MEAP o b j e c t i v e s in r e a d i n g a n d m a t h e m a t i c s s e r v e
a s t h e b a s i s f o r t h e 1985-86 s e v e n t h g r a d e a n d t h e 1988-89 t e n t h g r a d e
MEAP a d m i n i s t r a t i o n s .
T est D e s c r ip tio n .

T h e MEAP a s s e s s m e n t t e s t s u s e d in t h i s s t u d y

w e r e o b j e c t i v e r e f e r e n c e d s e t s of items m e a s u r i n g e s s e n t i a l p e r f o r m a n c e
o b j e c t i v e s in t h e
seventh

and

s u b j e c t a r e a s of r e a d i n g a n d

ten.

Each

m ul tip le ch o i ce i t e m s .
w hi ch

a s tu d e n t's

objective

w as

mathematics for g ra d e s

measured

by

a

set

of

three

T h e item's s t i m u l u s was a q u e s t i o n o r pr o bl em to
is a

c h o i c e of mu lt ipl e p r e s e n t e d o p t i o n s ,

with o n e b e i n g t h e b e s t

answ er.

O b j e c t i v e a t t a i n m e n t was d e f i n e d as

answ ering

or

of

objective.
t h e i r own

response

correctly
The tests
pace.

two

more

were untimed

The school

the

thus

districts

three

it em s

measuring

all ow ing s t u d e n t s

involved

each

to w o r k at

adm inistered

the

tests

in t h e fall of t h e s ch ool y e a r from a p p r o x i m a t e l y m i d - S e p t e m b e r t h r o u g h
m i d - O c t o b e r a s s p e c i f i e d b y s t a t e g u i d e l i n e s f o r t h e 1985-86 a n d 1988-89
sch ool y e a r s .

58

T a b l e 3.5 below s h o w s t h e n u m b e r of o b j e c t i v e s a n d i t e m s \i se d in
r e a d i n g a n d m a t h e m a t i c s f o r g r a d e s 7 a n d 10 in t h e c o g n i t i v e s k i l l s / c o r e
t e s t r e p o r t e d in t h e p r o p o r t i o n s d a t a .

TABLE 3 . 5 . NUMBER OF OBJECTIVES AND ITEMS USED IN THE
READING A ND MATHEMATICS MICHIGAN EDUCATIONAL
ASSESSMENT PROGRAM (MEAP) FOR GRADES
SEVEN AND T E N .

S u b ject A rea
T est

The

N um ber o f
O b je c tiv e s

G rade

N um ber ol
T e s t Item s

Reading Cognitive
Skills T e s t

7
10

23
24

69
72

Ma th em at ic s C o r e
Test

7
10

28
28

84
84

objectives

enum erated

above

in

Table

3. 5

are

further

d e s c r i b e d in A p p e n d i x A b y skill a r e a s .
Local e d u c a t o r s
reports
teachers.
ten:

were

received

returned

to

various

T h e following r e p o r t s

(includes
district;

report

(includes

proportions

were

test

for

grades

district

analysis

MEAP.

principals,

listing

data);

item

to

provided

cl as s r o om

proportions

data);

paren t pam phlet,

from t h e

superintendents,

individual s tu d e n t r e p o r t ;

summary

reports

-

These
and

to

seven and

report;

school

summary

report

classroom,

s cho ol,

f e e d e r sch oo l r e p o r t ( o p t i o n a l ) - g r a d e s e v e n

and g rad e ten; and r e s e a r c h code r e p o r t (optio n al).
This

study

used

the

seventh

grade

school

summary

report

with

p r o p o r t i o n s d a t a f o r 1985-86 a n d t h e t e n t h

g r a d e 1988-89 f e e d e r school

report.

especially

The feeder

s ch ool

reports

were

useful for this

59

r e s e a r c h at t h e t e n t h g r a d e l e v e l b e c a u s e t h e y r e p o r t e d r e s u l t s of o n l y
past ju n io r h ig h /m id d le s t u d e n t s as th e y were fed in to th e high school.
Thus

the

feeder

s ch ool r e s u l t s

screen ed out any

new e n t r i e s b e t w e e n

seventh and ten th g rad es.
The
this

MEAP p r o p o r t i o n s

research.

pupils

in

The

ea ch

of

information

proportions
four

was

section

categories

of

the

specific d ata

presented

the

achievement

for

used

in

percentage

of

the

school.

C a t e g o r y 4 ( h i g h e s t ) c o n t a i n e d t h e p e r c e n t a g e of s t u d e n t s who a t t a i n e d
approxim ately

3/4 o r more of t h e o b j e c t i v e s ;

percentage

of

objectives;

Category

attained

about

students

who

2

attained

contained

1/4 to 1/2

the

C ategory 3 contained the

roughly

1/2

percentage

of t h e o b j e c t i v e s ;

to
of

3/4

of

students

the
who

while C a t e g o r y 1 ( l o w e s t )

c o n t a i n e d t h e p e r c e n t a g e o f s t u d e n t s who a t t a i n e d a p p r o x i m a t e l y 1/4 o r
l e s s of t h e o b j e c t i v e s .

T a b l e 3 . 6 s h o w s t h e r a n g e of o b j e c t i v e s in e a c h

c a t e g o r y of a c h i e v e m e n t .
TABLE 3 . 6 . RANGE OF MICHIGAN EDUCATIONAL ASSESSMENT
PROGRAM (MEAP) OBJECTIVE ATTAINMENTS IN READING
AND MATHEMATICS FOR EACH CATEGORY OF
ACHIEVEMENT, 1 9 8 5 -1 9 8 9 .

N um ber o f O b je c tiv e s
C a te g o r y o f
A ch iev em en t

R ea d in g
G rade 7
G rade 10

M athem atics
G ra d es 7 and 10

4
(H ighest)

17-23

18-24

22-28

3

12-16

12-17

15-21

2

6-11

6-11

8-14

1
(Lowest)

0- 5

0- 5

0- 7

60

T h e fi n al s u b s e c t i o n b r i e f l y r e v i e w s t h e t e c h n i c a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of
t h e MEAP e m p lo y e d in t h i s s t u d y .

T ech n ic a l C h a r a c te r istic s
As

explained

norm -referenced
objective

above

objectives

achievement

(O PT)

(usually

information

MEAP

has

changed

(MPT) achievem ent te st

referenced

referencedtest

the

can

be

is

reflecting
gathered

(196 9-1 973 )

test

keyed
actual

to

from

(1973-1989).
a

set

a

standardized

to a s t a n d a r d i z e d
The

objective

of s p e c i f i c e d u c a t i o n a l

curriculum

about certain task s

emphasis)

such

(as describ ed

by

that
the

educational objectives) a s tu d e n t can and cannot do.
OUT p r o c e d u r e s

th u s re p re se n t a recent

a l t e r n a t i v e to t r a d i t i o n a l

norm -referenced testing pro ced u res.

OUT s y s t e m s do p o s s e s s p o s i t i v e

c h a r a c te r is tic s as

problematic

construction.

well a s

also

posing

im p li c at io n s

for te st

T h e s e i m p l i c a t i o n s i d e n t i f i e d b y Poph am a n d H u s e k (1969)

a n d r e p o r t e d b y S h a k r a m i (1973) i n c l u d e t h e following a r e a s :

1.

V a r i a b i l i t y . Many w r i t e r s h a v e n o t e d t h a t v a r i ­
a b i l i t y is no t e s s e n t i a l to q u a l i t y c r i t e r i o n referenced testing.
In f a c t , v a r i a b i l i t y is
i r r e l e v a n t in t h a t t e s t s c o r e s d e r i v e m e a n in g
from t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p b e t w e e n i t e m s a n d t h e i r
c r i t e r i o n r a t h e r t h a n from a c o m p a r i s o n with
other scores.

2.

R e l i a b i l i t y . R e l ia b i li t y is a t e c h n i c a l q u a l i t y
i m p o r t a n t to c r i t e r i o n - r e f e r e n c e d t e s t i n g .
Its
e s t i m a t i o n , h o w e v e r , e s p e c i a l l y w ith r e s p e c t
to i n t e r n a l c o n s i s t e n c y , is d i f f i c u l t y to i d e n ­
ti f y s in c e c l a s s i c a l r e l i a b i l i t y p r o c e d u r e s r e l y
on v a r i a n c e .

61

3.

V a l i d i t y . V a l i d i t y is al so an i m p o r t a n t t e c h n i ­
cal q u a l i t y .
Many v a l i d a t i o n p r o c e d u r e s i n v o l v e
t h e d e r i v a t i o n of c o r r e l a t i o n s w h ic h in t u r n a r e
b a s e d on v a r ia n c e .
To m a n y w r i t e r s , s u c h p r o ­
c e d u r e s b a s e d o n v a r i a n c e a r e of q u e s t i o n a b l e
o r r e s tr ic te d use for ORT's.
In g e n e r a l , ORT
v a l i d i t y m u s t d e p e n d u p o n t h e c o r r e s p o n d e n c e of
t h e t e s t i t e m s w ith t h e o b j e c t i v e s to w h ic h t h e
t e s t is r e f e r e n c e d ( p p . 2 6 - 2 9 ) .

T h u s t h e t e c h n i c a l s t a n d a r d s of t h e ORT a p p e a r s to b e much more
subjective

than

NRT

which

bases

it s

psychom etric . theory

on

v a r i a b i l i t y of t h e n o r m a l c u r v e a n d how well t h e t e s t e x p l a i n s i t .
precise

researched

details

Michigan E d u c a t i o n a l
(1980)

and

Report,
given,

M ich ig an

Volume

II

of

validity

f o u n d in

A s s e s s m e n t P r o g r a m : __T e c h n i c a l R e p o r t ,

Volume I

(1981).

reliability

As s e s s m e n t

W hatever

technical

can

The

be

Educational

and

the

P r o g r a m : _____ T e c h n i c a l
details

on

MEAP w e re

t h e y w e r e s u f f i c i e n t t h a t e d u c a t o r s a c r o s s t h e S t a t e of Michigan

c o n t i n u e d to u s e t h i s t e s t to m e a s u r e a c a d e m i c o u t c o m e s of s t u d e n t s in
r e a d i n g and m a t h e m a t i c s in g r a d e s s e v e n a n d t e n o v e r t h e time c o v e r e d
in t h i s s t u d y .

DATA GATHERING PROCE DURES
The
tenth

MEAP p r o p o r t i o n

graders

results

feeder resu lts

for

for the

w e r e o b t a i n e d from MCE A r e c o r d s .
the

MEAP

proportion

data

D e p a r t m e n t of E d u c a t i o n .

for

seventh

graders

former se v e n th

(198 5- 86)

graders

and

(1 98 8- 8 9)

MCEA on a y e a r l y b a s i s r e q u e s t e d
its

own

records

from

the

Michigan

T h e MEAP p r o p o r t i o n s d a t a w e r e b y b u i l d i n g

a s well a s b y sch ool d i s t r i c t .
T h e n e x t s e l e c t i o n d e a l s w it h how t h e s e d a t a w e r e a n a l y z e d .

62

DATA ANALYSIS PROCEDURES
The
test

9

chi-square

the

four

study

( *9CT) t e s t

was t h e

hypotheses.

The

statistical

procedure

non-param etric

chi-square

w as c h o s e n b e c a u s e it is t h e o n l y a v a i l a b l e s t a t i s t i c a l t e s t
the

particular

set

of

hypotheses

dealing

w ith

a

used

to
test

to e v a l u a t e

nominal

s c a le

of

m e a s u r e m e n t ( S i e g e l , 1956, p p . 3 0 - 3 4 ) .
S p e c i fi c a l ly ,
The

total

setting

each

number

the

count

hypothesis

of
at

students
100

State r e p o r te d f i g u r e s ) .

(99.8

was t e s t e d in t h e
per

to

sch oo l

100.2

was

following m a n n e r :

equally

allowing

for

weighted

rounding

in

by
the

The o b serv ed equally weighted frequencies by

sch oo l w e r e a d d e d f o r ea c h of t h e f o u r c a t e g o r i e s of a c h i e v e m e n t a c r o s s
all

schools

summed

for

the

observed

mi ddl e

sch ool

frequencies

an d

were

displayed

of

the

four

and

contingency

table

middle sc h o o l a n d j u n i o r h i g h d ow n t h e s i d e f o r t h e MEAP
e ac h

3,

a

These

crossed by

to

2,

in

samples.

of a c h i e v e m e n t

relating

( 1,

high

constructed

data

categories

junior

hypotheses.

4) a c r o s s t h e to p

Figure

p r e s e n t s the co n tin g e n c y ta b le layout u sed for each item .

F ig u r e 3 . 2 .

C h i-S q u a r e C o n tin g e n c y T a b le L ayout
U sed fo r Each H y p o th e s is .

C a te g o r y o f A ch iev em en t
S ch ool T y p e

T otal
1

Middle School
J u n i o r High
TOTAL

2

3

4

3. 2

below

63

C hi-square
frequencies
contingency

values

were

calculated

determ ined

from

marginal

table.

The

general

on

the

basis

observed

chi-square

of

totals

fo r m u l a

expected

from

given

below

each
was

e m p lo y e d in t h e c a l c u l a t i o n of t h e c h i - s q u a r e r e l a t e d to e a c h of t h e f o u r
null h y p o t h e s e s :

VL2 =
M
where

X ? (Qij - b ij ) 2
j=l
Eij

w ith d f = ( r - l ) ( k - l )

Oij = e q u a l l y w e i g h t e d c a s e s c a t e g o r i z e d
t h e i t h row of t h e j t h column

in

Eij = n u m b e r of c a s e s e x p e c t e d u n d e r II to
b e c a t e g o r i z e d in it h row of t h e j t h column
rt
JT* /
i=l j=l

d i r e c t s o ne to sum o v e r all ( r ) r o w s
anc*
( k ) c o l u m n s , i . e . , to sum o v e r
all cells

r = t h e n u m b e r of r o w s in c o n t i n g e n c y t a b l e
k = t h e n u m b e r of col um ns in c o n t i n g e n c y t a b l e

To f i n d

the expected

two m a r g i n a l t o t a l s

common

frequency

f o r ea c h

to a p a r t i c u l a r

cell

cel l,

(Eij),

and

multiply the

then

divide th is

p r o d u c t b y t h e to t a l n u m b e r of c a s e s ( N ) .
The

.05

significance.

confidence

level

To d e t e r m i n e t h e

was

as

the

criterion

for

s i g n i f i c a n c e of t h e jC ^ c a l c u l a t e d from

t h e a b o v e f or m ul a with d f = ( r - l ) C k - l )
c h i - s q u a r e wereconsulted (Seigel,

selected

= 3 the tabled critical values of

1956, p . 2 4 9 ) .

64

SUMMARY
T h i s c h a p t e r c o n t a i n e d a n e x p l a n a t i o n of t h e r e s e a r c h d e s i g n a n d
methods

followed

in

conducting

the

study.

The

population

sampled,

p r o c e d u r e s used to select th e samples,

and th e r e s u lt in g samples were

described

the

study

some d e t a i l ,

hypotheses

format.
study

in

were

as

restated

The measurement
w as

discussed

well a s ,
in

the

instrum ent
in

term s

study's

null

used
of

and

design.
alternate

to col lec t t h e
its

The

four

hypothesis

data for the

historical/developm ental

b a c k g r o u n d , a d e s c r i p t i o n of t h e p a r t i c u l a r form of t h e i n s t r u m e n t u s e d
in

this

study,

instrum ent.
discussed.

and
The

a

brief

data

Chapter

overview

gathering

4 contains

co l le c t e d f o r t h i s s t u d y .

of

and
the

the

technical

analysis

results

of

merits

techniques
the

of

were

analyses

of

the
also
data

CHAPTER 4:

the

In t h i s

chapter,

m id d le

sc ho ol

presented

and

Assessment
1988-89

sampled.

The

variables,

the

traditional

discussed.

(tenth
for

r e s u l t s of t h e c a u s a l c o m p a r a t i v e a n a l y s i s of

versus

Program

contrasted

the

ANALYSIS OF RESULTS

the

four

chapter

dependent

results

students
m i d dl e
is

high

the

Michigan

Educational

(seventh

grade)

and

reading

are

Specifically,

(MEAP)

grade)

junior

for
in

school

divided

variables,

1985-86

mathematics
and

into

four

the

hypotheses

grouping

and

junior

high

follo win g:

related

to

are

districts

independent
seventh

grade,

h y p o t h e s e s r e l a t e d to t e n t h g r a d e , s u m m a r y of f i n d i n g s , a n d o v e r v i e w .

INDEPENDENT VAR IABLES

Subjects

in

this

1985-86 a s s e v e n t h
graders.
and

study

were

g ra d e rs and

T h e two g r o u p s

2) j u n i o r h i g h g r o u p .

students

who

were

MEAP

tested

in

r e t e s t e d o n MEAP in 1988-89 a s t e n t h

of s t u d e n t s

were:

1) mid dle sc h o o l g r o u p

Sin ce t h e u n i t of a n a l y s i s was t h e sc hoo l,

s t u d e n t r e s u l t s w e r e e q u a l l y w e i g h t e d b y s e t t i n g t h e size of e a c h sch ool
at a p p r o x i m a t e l y

tenth

pl a ce

a n d r o u n d i n g c a u s e d t h e a c t u a l s iz e to v a r y from 99. 8 t o 1 0 0 . 2 ) .

For

the s ev en th

100 ( f r a c t i o n a l

grade

results

units

th e re were

h i g h s c h o o ls r e p r e s e n t e d in t h e s a m p l e .
were

13 b u i l d i n g s

representing

the

were

allowed t o t h e

15 mid dle s c h o o ls a n d

At t h e t e n t h g r a d e l e v e l t h e r e

m i d dl e

s ch ool

buildings re p re s e n tin g the junior high g ra d u a te s .

65

15 j u n i o r

g rad u ates and eight

66

DEPENDENT VARIABLES
Ac ademic a c h i e v e m e n t in m a t h e m a t i c s a n d r e a d i n g w as m e a s u r e d b y
the

MEAP.

category

The
of

percentage

objective

achievem ent.

of s t u d e n t s

objectives;

attainm ent

Category

attained roughly

Category

who a t t a i n e d
3

data

contained

was

4

reported

(highest)

approxim ately
the

term s

of

contained

the

3/4 o r more of t h e

percentage

1/2 to 3/4 of t h e o b j e c t i v e s ;

in

of

students

who

C ategory 2 contained the

p e r c e n t a g e of s t u d e n t s who a t t a i n e d a b o u t 1/4 to 1/2 of t h e o b j e c t i v e s ;
while

Category

1

(lowest)

attained

approxim ately

obtained

from t h e Michigan

contained

the

percentage

1/4 o r l e s s of t h e o b j e c t i v e s .

of

students

who

T hese data were

D e p a r t m e n t of E d u c a t i o n b y t h e way of t h e

Middle C it ie s E d u c a t i o n A s s o c i a t i o n (MCEA) t h a t m a k e s a y e a r l y r e q u e s t
from t h e d e p a r t m e n t to r e c e i v e t h e d a t a .

HYPOT HESES
The

study

organizational
successful.

addressed

structure
The

in

the

question

w hi ch

stu d y compared

of

grade

the

seven

most

appropriate

students

w er e

most

t h e 1985-86 MEAP r e s u l t s of s e v e n t h

g r a d e s t u d e n t s in MCEA t r a d i t i o n a l j u n i o r h i g h s c h o o l s with t h e r e s u l t s
of

seventh

Michigan.

grade
The

students
same

in

MCEA

comparison

mi ddle

using

schools

1988-89

in

MEAP

the

State

feeder

of

sch ool

r e s u l t s was c o n d u c t e d with t h e same MCEA s t u d e n t s w h e n t h e y w e r e in
grade ten .

Two s u b j e c t a r e a h y p o t h e s e s w e r e d e v e l o p e d to c o m p ar e t h e

tw o

of

groups

grades

seven

students.
and

ten.

Two

hypotheses

C hi-square

was

each
used

were
as

specified

the

test

for
of

67

significance.
statistical

What

follows

results and

then

is
the

the

seventh

tenth

grade

hypotheses

grade hypotheses and

and

statistical

results.

H y p o th e s e s R e g a r d in g S e v e n th G rade A ch iev em en t
T h e r e s u l t s f o r m a t h e m a t i c s a n d t h e n r e a d i n g will b e p r e s e n t e d f o r
s e v e n t h g r a d e r s in t h i s s t u d y .

H y p o th e sis 1
II :

T h e r e is no d i f f e r e n c e b e t w e e n t h e two g r o u p s
( mi dd le sc h o o l a n d j u n i o r h i g h ) in t h e p r o p o r ­
tion of m e m b e r s in e a c h of t h e f o u r MEAP
mathematics achievem ent c a te g o rie s .

H^:

A g r e a t e r p r o p o r t i o n o f t h e m id dle s c h o o l s t u ­
d e n t s a r e in h i g h e r MEAP m a th e m a ti c s a c h i e v e ­
me nt c a t e g o r i e s t h a n is t h e c a s e f o r t h o s e who
a r e in j u n i o r h i g h s c h o o l.

The ch i-sq u are test
sc ho ol a n d
the
(See

junior high

observed
Appendix

m atics.)

and

was u s e d t o c o m p a r e t h e f r e q u e n c y of middle
stu d en ts.

expected

counts

13 for o b s e r v e d

Figure

4.1

presents

P r i o r to c a l c u l a t i o n
had

values
the

to

tabulated

tabulated

observed and

p l u s m a r g i n a l t o t a l s r e l a t e d to h y p o t h e s i s o n e .

by

of t h e s t a t i s t i c
and

calculated.

sch oo l f o r m a t h e ­

expected

frequencies

68
F ig u r e 4 . 1 . O b s e r v e d an d ( E x p e c te d ) F r e q u e n c ie s fo r th e
C o n tin g e n c y T a b le R ela ted to H y p o th e s is O ne—
S e v e n th G rade M ath em atics.

C a te g o r y o f A ch iev em en t
S ch ool T y p e

T otal
1

2

3

4

Middle School

1 8. 8
88.1
403 .3
989. 4
(19.65)(108.75)(414.84)(956.37)

1,499.6

J u n i o r High

20.5
12 9 .4
426 .4
923 .4
(19.65)(108.7 5)(414.86)(956.43)

1,494.7

TOTA L

39.3

217.5

829.7 1 , 9 1 2 . 8

2,999.3

T a b l e 4.1 below d i s p l a y s t h e r e s u l t from t h e u s e of t h e f r e q u e n c i e s
in

Figure

4. 1

in

the

chi-square

for mul a

to

determ ine

the

status

of

hypothesis one.

TABLE 4 . 1 .

C H I-SQ UARE TEST RESULT FOR HYPOTHESIS ONE.

H y p o th e sis

1.

Grade 7
M at hem ati cs

10.52 *

♦Significant finding p
T a b l e 4,1 a b o v e
significant beyond the

D eg rees
o f Freedom

C h i-S q u a r e

3

P ro b a b ility

.015

.05.

shows that
.05 l e v e l .

the

c a l c u l a t e d c h i - s q u a r e of 10.52 is

Therefore,

t h e n u ll h y p o t h e s i s of no

d i f f e r e n c e s in m a t h e m a t i c s f o r g r a d e s e v e n a t OC = .05 c a n b e r e j e c t e d .

69

H y p o th e s is 2
H :

T h e r e is no d i f f e r e n c e b e t w e e n t h e tw o g r o u p s
( mi dd le s c h o o l a n d j u n i o r h i g h ) in t h e p r o p o r ­
tio n of m e m b e r s in e a c h of t h e f o u r MEAP
read in g achievement categories.

Hg:

A g r e a t e r p r o p o r t i o n of t h e mi dd le s c h o o l s t u ­
d e n t s a r e in h i g h e r MEAP r e a d i n g a c h i e v e m e n t
c a t e g o r i e s t h a n is t h e c a s e f o r t h o s e a r e in
junior high schools.

A ga in t h e c h i - s q u a r e t e s t w a s u s e d to t e s t t h e h y p o t h e s i s .

Prior

to t h e c a l c u l a t i o n of t h e s t a t i s t i c t h e o b s e r v e d a n d e x p e c t e d c o u n t s h a d
to

be

values

tabulated

and

tabulated

observed

and

by

calculated.
school

expected

for

(See

A ppendix

reading.)

frequencies

plus

B for

Figure
marginal

the o b serv ed

4. 2

displays

totals

related

h y p o th e s i s two.

F ig u r e 4 . 2 . O b s e r v e d an d ( E x p e c te d ) F r e q u e n c ie s fo r th e
C o n tin g e n c y T a b le R ela ted to H y p o th e s is T w o—
S e v e n th G rade R e a d in g .

C a te g o r y o f A ch iev em en t
S ch ool T y p e

T otal
1

2

3

4

Middle School

19.4
95.8
195. 7
1,189.4 1,500.3
(2 6 .9 0 ) ( 1 1 7 .6 6 ) ( 2 4 5 .7 2 ) ( 1,110.2)

J u n i o r High

34. 4
139.5
295.7
1,030.5
1 , 5 0 0 .1
(26.90)(117.64)(245.68)(1,109.88)

TOTA L

53.8

235.3

491. 4

2,219.9

3,000.4

the
to

70

Table

4.2

presents

the

resulting

statistic

from

the

use

of

the

f r e q u e n c i e s in F i g u r e 4. 2 in t h e c h i - s q u a r e f o rm u l a f o r h y p o t h e s i s t w o .

TABLE 4 . 2 .

CHI-SQ UARE TEST RESULT FOR HYPOTHESIS TWO.

H y p o th e s is
2.

C h i-S q u a r e

Grade 7
Reading

D eg rees
o f Freedom

4 4 .0 3 *

P ro b a b ility

3

<.001

^ S i g n i f i c a n t f i n d i n g p <_ . 0 5 .

A

perusal

of

the

calculated c h i - s q u a r e
n u ll

data

in

Table

4. 2

above

indicates

of 4 4. 0 3 is s i g n i f i c a n t well b e y o n d t h e

Therefore,

the

hypothesis

of no d i f f e r e n c e

s e v e n at ^

= .05 ca n b e r e j e c t e d .

in r e a d i n g

that

th e

.05 l e v e l .
for

grade

H y p o th e s e s R e g a r d in g T e n th G rade A ch ievem en t
T h e r e s u l t s to e v a l u a t e m a t h e m a t i c s a n d t h e n r e a d i n g a c h i e v e m e n t
l e v e l s will be g i v e n below f o r t e n t h g r a d e r s in t h i s s t u d y .

H y p o th e sis 3
H :
o

T h e r e is no d i f f e r e n c e b e t w e e n t h e two g r o u p s
( m id dl e sc h o o l a n d j u n i o r h i g h ) in t h e p r o p o r ­
t i o n of m e m b e r s in e ac h o f t h e f o u r MEAP
mathematics achievem ent c a te g o rie s.

Hg-'

A g r e a t e r p r o p o r t i o n of t h e s t u d e n t s from t h e
mi dd le s ch oo l a r e in h i g h e r MEAP m a t h e m a t i c s
a c h i e v e m e n t c a t e g o r i e s t h a n is t h e c a s e f o r
t h o s e who a r e in j u n i o r h i g h s c h o o l s .

As at t h e s e v e n t h g r a d e l e v e l t h e c h i - s q u a r e t e s t w as u s e d t o t e s t
the ten th grade h y p o th e se s.

P r i o r to t h e c a l c u l a t i o n of t h e s t a t i s t i c t h e

71

o b s e r v e d a n d e x p e c t e d c o u n t s h a d to b e t a b u l a t e d a n d c a l c u l a t e d .
A ppendix

R for

m atics.)

Figure

the
4. 3

observed
presents

values

tabulated

the ob serv ed

by

and

sc h o o l

expected

for

( S ee
mathe­

frequencies

plus marginal totals re la te d to h y p o t h e s i s t h r e e .

F ig u r e 4 . 3 . O b s e r v e d a n d (E x p e c te d ) F r e q u e n c ie s fo r th e
C o n tin g e n c y T a b le R ela ted to H y p o th e s is T h r e e —
T e n th G rade M ath em atics.

C a te g o r y o f A ch iev em en t
Sch ool T y p e

T otal
1

2

3

4

Middle School

804.8
49.1
142. 2
304.0
1 ,3 0 0 .1
( 5 2 . 3 8 K 1 5 5 . 6 4 X 328.49) (763.59)

J u n i o r High

428.6
35.5
109 .2
226.6
(32.22) (9 5 .7 6 )(2 0 2 .1 1 ) (469.81)

TOTA L

8 4 .6

25 1 . 4

1 ,233.4

530.6

799.9

2 , 1 0 0 .0

T a b l e 4 . 3 below d e p i c t s t h e r e s u l t from t h e u s e of t h e n u m b e r s
Figure

4.3

in

the

chi-square

formula

to

evaluate

the

status

hypothesis th ree .

TABLE 4 . 3 .

CHI-SQ UARE T EST RESULT FOR HYPOTHESIS THREE.

H y p o th e sis
3.

G r a d e 10
Math em ati cs

C h i-S q u a r e
14 .1 7*

* S i g n i f i c a n t f i n d i n g p <_ . 0 5 .

D egrees
o f Freedom
3

P ro b a b ility
.005

72

A r e v i e w of T a b l e 4 . 3 i n d i c a t e s
14.17

is

significant

beyond

the

t h a t t h e c a l c u l a t e d c h i - s q u a r e of

.05

h y p o t h e s i s of no d i f f e r e n c e in t e n t h

level.

Therefore,

the

null

g r a d e m a t h e m a t i c s a t cC = .05 c a n

be rejected.

H y p o th e sis 4
II :
°

T h e r e is no d i f f e r e n c e b e t w e e n t h e tw o g r o u p s
(m id dle s c h o o l a n d j u n i o r h i g h ) in t h e p r o p o r ­
ti o n of m e m b e r s in e a c h of t h e f o u r MEAP
reading achievement categories.
A g r e a t e r p r o p o r t i o n of t h e s t u d e n t s from t h e
middle sc h oo l a r e in h i g h e r MEAP r e a d i n g
a c h i e v e m e n t c a t e g o r i e s t h a n is t h e c a s e f o r
t h o s e who a r e in j u n i o r h i g h s c h o o l s .

Ag ain
middle

the c h i-s q u a re

and

statistic

of

junior

interest

tabulated

and

tabulated

by

and
four.

high

expected

test

was u s e d

school

students.

the

calculated.

observed
(See

plus

Prior

Figure

m arginal

to

expected

Appendix

sc ho ol f o r r e a d i n g . )
frequencies

and

to c o m p a r e t h e f r e q u e n c y of

B for
4.4
totals

calculation
counts

the

had

observed

presents
related

the
to

of t h e
to

be

values

observed
hypothesis

73

F ig u r e 4 . 4 . O b s e r v e d and (E x p e c te d ) F r e q u e n c ie s fo r th e
C o n tin g e n c y T a b le R ela ted to H y p o th e sis F o u r—
T e n th G rade R ea d in g .

C a te g o r y o f A ch iev em en t
S ch ool T y p e

T otal
1

2

3

4

Middle School

31.7
98.3
203.7
966.1
1,299.8
( 3 9 . 8 6 ) ( 1 2 6 . 5 4 ) ( 2 0 5 . 7 8 ) ( 9 2 7 .6 1 )

J u n i o r High

32.7
106.1
128.7
532.3
( 2 4 . 5 4 ) ( 7 7 . 8 6 ) ( 1 2 6 . 6 2 ) ( 5 7 0 .7 9 )

TOTA L

6 4. 4

204.4

332.4

1,498.4

799.S

2,099.6

T a b l e 4 . 4 below d e p i c t s t h e r e s u l t from t h e u s e of t h e f r e q u e n c i e s
in

Figure

4.4

in

the

chi-square

f or m u l a

to

evaluate

hypothesis

four

r e l a t e d to t e n t h g r a d e r e a d i n g .

TABLE 4 . 4 .

CHI-SQUARE TEST RESULT FOR HYPOTHESIS FO U R .

H y p o th e s is
4.

D eg rees
o f Freedom

C h i-S q u a r e
2 5.17*

G r a d e 10
Reading

3

P ro b a b ility

< .001

^ S i g n i f i c a n t f i n d i n g p _<_ . 0 5 .

Table

above

shows

significant beyond the
d i f f e r e n c e in t e n t h
results
show

lend
a

achievement

the

.05 l e v e l .

calculated
Therefore,

g rad e re a d in g at

support

greater

that

to

the

portion

categories

of

than

alternate
their
the

chi-square

of

25.1 7

t h e n u ll h y p o t h e s i s of no

= .05 c a n b e r e j e c t e d .
hypotheses
students

junior

is

in

that
the

mi dd le
higher

These
s c h o o ls
MEAP

s ch o o ls with t h e i r s t u d e n t s .

74

SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
U s i n g a c o n t i n g e n c y t a b l e of o b s e r v e d a n d e x p e c t e d f r e q u e n c i e s , a
c h i - s q u a r e t e s t was u s e d to e v a l u a t e t h e s t a t u s of t h e f o u r h y p o t h e s e s .
A s u m m a r y of t h e s e r e s u l t s is g i v e n in T a b l e 4 . 5 be l o w .

TABLE 4 . 5 . SUMMARY OF CHI-SQUARE RESULTS RELATED TO FOUR
HYPOTHESES CONTRASTING MIDDLE AND JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL
MEAP CATEGORIES OF ACHIEVEMENT.

H y p o th e s is

D eg rees
o f Freedom

C h i-S q u a r e

Probability

1.

Grade 7
M at hem ati cs

10.52*

3

.015

2.

Grade 7
Reading

4 4. 03 *

3

<.001

3.

G r a d e 10
M at h e m a ti c s

14.17*

3

.005

4.

G r a d e 10
Reading

25 .17*

3

< .001

^Significant finding p < .05.

A s t u d y of t h e s u m m a r y
chi-squares

are

r e s u l t s in T a b l e 4. 5

significant beyond

h y p o t h e s e s of no d i f f e r e n c e at
These

results

lend

the

.05 l e v e l .

shows th a t
Therefore,

t h e null

= .05 c a n b e r e j e c t e d in all f o u r c a s e s .

support

to

the

alternate

hypotheses

that

a

g r e a t e r p r o p o r t i o n of t h e m id d le s ch o ol t h a n j u n i o r h i g h s c h o o l s t u d e n t s
are

in

the

4.1-4.4
category)

higher

consistently

MEAP a c h i e v e m e n t
show

that

in

categories.
Category

4

A study
(highest

of F i g u r e s
achievement

t h a t more mi dd le s ch oo l s t u d e n t s a r e o b s e r v e d t h a n e x p e c t e d

i n t h i s c a t e g o r y a n d t h e o p p o s i t e is t r u e f o r t h e j u n i o r h i g h s t u d e n t s .

75

Comparing

mi dd le

Category

sc h o o l

4 am o n g

students

observed

m id dle s c h o o l p a r t i c i p a n t s ,

versus
the

expected

for

re a d in g achievement

r e s u l t s sh ow s t r o n g e r g a i n s t h a n m a t h e m a t i c s .

OVERVIEW
Chapter
defined
the

1 provided

the operational

study,

research

conceptual

hypotheses

literature.
hypotheses
design,

a

n u ll

procedures,

contained
discussions

the
of

stated.

3

contained

and re se a rc h .

and

C hapter

alternate

a

findings

and

the

2 contained

restatem ent

format

methodology u sed
This

concerning

p r o b le m a n d
p u r p o s e of

a n d l i m it a ti o n s w e r e i n c l u d e d .

were

and

to t h e r e s e a r c h

Information

framework,

findings.
the

introduction

term s.

CViapter
in

an

and
in t h i s

study

concludes

their

i m p li c a ti o n s

of

a

a

review

the

in
for

of

research

discussion
study.

Four

of

the

Chapter 4

Chapter
future

5

with

practice

CHAPTER 5:

In

this

difference
results

chapter,

in

the

am on g

grouping

REVIEW OF THE S T U D Y , SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS,
AM D RECOMMEN DATIONS

is

the

entire

M ich ig an

students

in

study

to

Educational

determine

Assessment

a traditional junior

summarized,

including

the

if

there

Program

versus

results.

w as

(MEAP)

a mid dle

In

a

school

addition,

this

c h a p t e r c o n t a i n d i s c u s s i o n c o n c e r n i n g t h e s u m m a r y of p a s t r e s e a r c h a n d
recom mendations.

REVIEW OF THE STUDY
T h e p u r p o s e of t h i s
traditional

junior

organizational
successful

and

high

study
and

w as to c o m p a r e MEAP r e s u l t s b e t w e e n

mi ddl e

structure

in

which

continue

to

sh ow

s ch o o ls

seventh
their

and

grade

success

to

determine

students

in

grade

are

ten.

the
most

Grade

c o n f i g u r a t i o n s d i s t i n g u i s h e d t h e j u n i o r h i g h from t h e m id dle s c h o o l .
junior high

sch oo l was d e f i n e d as a school t h a t was d e s i g n a t e d a s on e

betw een elem entary a n d high school,
and nine.

Whereas,

designated

as

g rad e s six,
The
public

on e

and in cludes g ra d e s sev en ,

eight,

a m i d dl e sch oo l was d e f i n e d a s a sch ool t h a t was

between

elementary

and

high

school,

and included

se v e n , and e i g h t, or g r a d e s five, six , s e v e n , and e i g h t.

population
sc ho ol

A s s o c i a ti o n

A

sampled

districts

(MCEA)

was

that

during

the

the

form

tw enty-seven
the

1985-86

Middle

s ch oo l

Michi gan

C it ie s

year.

The

urban

Educational
Executive

D i r e c t o r of MCEA was e n l i s t e d a s a n e x p e r t to s e l e c t a samp le of f o u r

76

77

junior

high

MCEA

districts

and

four

m id d le

sc h o o l

MCEA

districts.

C o m p a r i s o n s of t h e two s a m p l e d g r o u p s s h o w e d th e m t o b e t h e same o r
somew hat

sim il ar

in

the

following

areas:

r e p r e s e n t e d at the s e v e n th g ra d e level,

the num ber

of

s c h o o ls

c u rre n t operating expenditures

p e r p u p i l , a v e r a g e t e a c h e r s a l a r i e s , a n d r a c i a l / e t h n i c co m p os it io n of t h e
student body.
T h e s t u d y em p lo y ed t h e c a u s a l c o m p a r a t i v e m e th o d with t h e j u n i o r
h i g h sa m p le as a c o n t r o l / c o m p a r i son g r o u p f o r t h e mid dle sch ool s a m p l e .
The

mi ddl e

sc ho ol

experience

in

grades

six

through

eight

or

f iv e

thro u g h eight served as the in d e p en d en t variable.
T h e MEAP r e s u l t s in r e a d i n g a n d m a t h e m a t i c s in 1985-86 ( s e v e n t h
grade)

and

1988-89 ( t e n t h

The

data

w as

one

(lowest)

grade)

reported out
to

four

served

in c a t e g o r i e s

(highest).

The

as

the d ep en d e n t

of a c h i e v e m e n t
nominal

form

variable.

ranging

of

from

measurement

r e q u i r e d t h e u s e of a n o n - p a r a m e t r i c s t a t i s t i c to t e s t t h e f o u r r e s e a r c h
hypotheses.
The c h i-s q u a re test
for

the

calculation

frequencies

was

results

school

by

frequency
findings

count

of

at

expected

employed.
were

of

( a l p h a le v el

mathematics

u s i n g a two b y f o u r c o n t i n g e n c y t a b l e m a t r i x

grades

The

equal

100. All
.05).
seven

f r e q u e n c i e s from
observed

weighted

category

by

hypotheses

These

significant
ten

in

of

observed

achievement

assigning

four

and

the

each

recorded

a

to t a l

significant

f i n d i n g s in r e a d i n g

favor

of

the

mi ddl e

and

sch oo l

g r o u p i n g o v e r t h e t r a d i t i o n a l j u n i o r h i g h c o u n t e r s t h e f i n d i n g s of o t h e r
past

researchers

and/or reading.

that

found

no

significant

difference

in

mathematics

78

SUMMARY
T h e r e v i e w of l i t e r a t u r e c o v e r e d t h e h i s t o r i c a l d e v e l o p m e n t of t h e
j u n i o r h i g h a n d m i dd le s ch oo l a n d t h e r e s e a r c h r e l a t e d to t h e e f f e c t s of
grade
The

organization/configuration
literature

only th e
early
it.

reviewed

main p u r p o s e s

adolescents

on

showed

students'

that

early

a ca d em i c

educators

achievem ent.

differed

on

not

of s e c o n d a r y e d u c a t i o n f o r p r e a d o l e s c e n t s a n d

b u t al so o n t h e

school o r g a n i z a t i o n

that best housed

Some of t h e p u r p o s e s g i v e n f o r t h e j u n i o r h i g h s c h o o l s i n c l u d e d t h e

fo ll ow in g:

student

exploration

into

his

own

aptitudes

and

m a k in g

c h o i c e s i n t o t h e k i n d of w o r k to which t o d e v o t e o n e s life; d e v e l o p m e n t
of p e r s o n a l r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r t h e w e l f a r e of t h e g r o u p ; c o o r d i n a t i o n a n d
articulation
vocational

between

elementary

education

especially

and
for

secondary
those

education;

pupils

p r o v i s i o n of

who would

not

r e m a in

u n t i l h i g h sch oo l g r a d u a t i o n ;

s a t i s f a c t i o n of p u p i l s i m p o r t a n t , immediate

and

recognition

assured

future

needs;

students

in d e v e l o p m e n t

of

junior

the

variations:
high
S in ce

w ith

high

sc h o o l

7-8,

8 - 9 , 7 -1 0 ,

grades

7 - 8- 9

the junior high

secondary

of e d u c a t i o n a l

education

in

w as

s ch o o l is n o t s u r p r i s i n g .

1900's

introduced

c o m p le te

differences

in

Grade configuration

included

th e

following

It was n o t e d t h a t t h e f i r s t j u n i o r

w as o r i g i n a l l y
the

individual

programs.

early

and 7-9.

of

in

Columbus,

Ohio

in

1909.

s e e n a s a d o w n w a r d e x t e n s i o n of
dominance

of

the

traditional

high

T h e u l t i m a t e c o n c l u s i o n of t h e r e v i e w of t h e

A m e r i c a n j u n i o r h i g h sc ho ol is t h a t it f ai le d to a c h i e v e i t s own i d e n t i t y
and

recognition

from

the

beginning

h i g h s c h o o l c u r r i c u l u m from s e e k i n g a

because
s o lu ti o n

of

the

d o m i na nc e

of the

to t h e s p a c e p r o b l e m s

79

for

students

to

offering

junior

high

teacher

training

programs

that

m i r r o r e d h i g h sc h o o l t e a c h e r t r a i n i n g p r o g r a m s .
T h e A m er ic an m id d le s c h o o l mo ve me n t a r o s e o u t of c o n c e r n s in t h e
1960's t h a t t h e j u n i o r h i g h s c h o o l h a d fail ed to meet all of i t s p u r p o s e s .
E s p e c i a ll y

the

purposes

preadolescent

and

of p r o v i d i n g a n o p p o r t u n i t y f o r e x p l o r a t i o n of

adolescent

and high school.

youth

in

the

period

between

elementary

Dr. William A l e x a n d e r was p r e s e n t e d as t h e f a t h e r of

t h i s mo ve me nt a l o n g w ith o t h e r e d u c a t i o n a l p r o p o n e n t s
Moss, L o u n s b u r y ,

Vars,

(i.e.,

Eichhorn,

Rom an o, a n d G e o g i a d y ) s o u g h t to d e f i n e a s e t

o f w e l l - p l a n n e d t r a n s i t i o n a c t i v i t i e s b e t w e e n t h e e l e m e n t a r y y e a r s to t h e
s t a r t of h i g h sch oo l e d u c a t i o n .

T h e c o n t i n u i n g aim of t h e mid dle sch ool

remains

of

to

fulfill

the

function

review

of

research

humanizing

the

education

of

early

adolescents.
The

organization/configuration

on

findings

middle g r a d e

on

the

effect

of

grade

s tu d e n t s ' achievem ent shows

t h a t t h e most a p p r o p r i a t e g r a d e l e v e l o r g a n i z a t i o n c a n n o t b e d e t e r m i n e d
from

the

appears

available
to

be

research.

f la w ed

in

term s

The
of

research

technical

that

concerns

currently

a n d / o r involves

s u c h few s t u d e n t s t h a t t h e r e s u l t s seem of limited a p p l i c a b i l i t y .
does

exist

Brantley

a

few

that

studies

suggest

such

mid dle

as

noted

sch oo l

by

Trauschke,

students

may

exists

out

There

Smith,

and

perform

on

achievement a n d / o r se lf-co n c ep t in s tru m e n ts th a n traditional junior high
school s t u d e n t s .
T h e u l t i m a t e c o n c l u s i o n of t h e r e v i e w of l i t e r a t u r e a n d r e s e a r c h is
that continued discussion,
agreement
grade

am on g

level

or

research,

educators
grade

adolescent s tu d e n t.

can

and evaluation are essential before

be

configuration

reached
to

on

the

most

serve

the

pre-

appropriate
and

early

80

CONCLUSIONS
The

specific

organizational
successful

purpose

of

this

structure

in

which

continue

to

s h ow

and

study

seventh
their

was

to

determ ine

grade students

success

in g r a d e

are

the
most

ten.

The

following a r e t h e major f i n d i n g s of t h i s r e s e a r c h .

1.

A g r e a t e r p r o p o r t i o n of t h e s e v e n t h g r a d e middle
sc hoo l s t u d e n t s a r e in h i g h e r MEAP m a t h e m a t i c s
a c h i e v e m e n t c a t e g o r i e s t h a n is t h e c a s e f o r t h o s e
who a r e in j u n i o r h i g h s c h o o l s .

2.

A g r e a t e r p r o p o r t i o n of t h e s e v e n t h g r a d e middle
sch ool s t u d e n t s a r e in h i g h e r MEAP r e a d i n g
a c h i e v e m e n t c a t e g o r i e s t h a n is t h e c a s e f o r t h o s e
who a r e in j u n i o r h i g h s c h o o l s .

3.

A g r e a t e r p r o p o r t i o n of t h e t e n t h g r a d e s t u d e n t s
from t h e m i d d le s c h o o l s a r e in h i g h e r MEAP
m a t h e m a t i c s c a t e g o r i e s t h a n is t h e c a s e f o r t h o s e
junior high schools.

4.

A g r e a t e r p r o p o r t i o n of t h e t e n t h g r a d e s t u d e n t s
from t h e m i d d le s c h o o l s a r e in h i g h e r MEAP r e a d i n g
c a t e g o r i e s t h a n is t h e c a s e f o r t h o s e from j u n i o r
high schools.

All f o u r of t h e nu ll h y p o t h e s e s r e g a r d i n g a c a d e m i c a c h i e v e m e n t , as
evidence

by

the

MEAP r e s u l t s

in

reading

and

mathematics

in

1985-86

( s e v e n t h g r a d e ) a n d 1988-89 ( t e n t h g r a d e ) , w e r e r e j e c t e d a s a r e s u l t of
the statistical a n a ly se s.

S i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s w e r e f o u n d at t h e

.05

a l p h a l e v e l , in f a v o r of t h e a l t e r n a t i v e h y p o t h e s e s .

D iscu ssio n
The
appropriate

research

on

structure

grade
in

which

organization
seventh

centered
grade

s u c c e s s f u l a n d c a n a c h i e v e op ti mu m a c a d e m i c r e s u l t s .

on

the

most

students

are

most

T h e r e v i e w of

81

p r e v i o u s s t u d i e s w h e n c o m p a r i n g t h e t r a d i t i o n a l j u n i o r h i g h sc ho ol with
the

m id dl e

sc h oo l

appeared

to

suggests

have

li ttl e

that

the establishm ent

negative

R e s e a r c h e r s who e x a m i n e d

effect

on

of a m id dle sc ho ol

student

achievem ent.

t h e m id dl e sch oo l a n d j u n i o r h i g h

s ch o ol to

d e t e r m i n e w hic h was b e s t f o r s t u d e n t s in t e r m s of ac a d e m i c a c h i e v e m e n t
found

little

significant

differences

between

the

tw o .

However,

some

s t u d i e s of s ch o o ls i n d i c a t e d t h a t t h e mi ddle scho ol c o n t r i b u t e d to h i g h e r
achievem ent,
Early

the

conclusions

researchers

found

presented

that

middle

above

s ch o o ls

support
and

junior

w e r e more alike t h a n d i f f e r e n t in r e g a r d s to c u r r i c u l u m ,
structure,

instructional

activities.
junior

There

highs,

scheduling,
advisor

practices,

patterns

was some i n d i c a t i o n t h a t

used

differentiated

individualized

program.

staffing

Based

on t h e s e

and

team

findings,

research.

high

schools

organizational
co-curricular

mi dd le s c h o o l s ,

staffing,

instruction,

that

more t h a n

b lo c k

and

f le xi bl e

teaching

and

teacher-

it c a n b e c o n c l u d e d

that

t h e middle sc ho ol o r g a n i z a t i o n of g r a d e s 6 - 7- 8 is most li k e l y to p r o v i d e
t h e k e y c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o r p r o g r a m f e a t u r e s commonly a d v o c a t e d a s most
a p p r o p r i a t e to t h e n e e d s of e a r l y a d o l e s c e n t
are

m uc h

transition
and

more
and

block

li k el y

to

articulation

schedules,

and

use

a

activities,
furnish

students.

teacher-advisor

Middle s c h o o ls

program,

provide

employ i n t e r d i s c i p l i n a r y

teaching

staff

development

activities

that

e x t e n d t h e r a n g e of t e a c h i n g s t r a t e g i e s a p p r o p r i a t e to t h e i r s t u d e n t s .
T h e major f i n d i n g s of t h i s r e s e a r c h

s u p p o r ts the positive re a so n s

f o r e s t a b l i s h i n g mi ddl e s c h o o l s :

9

A g r a d e p a t t e r n b e g i n n i n g with t h e s i x t h g r a d e a n d
e n d i n g w ith t h e e i g h t h g r a d e ;

82

•

A willing a t t i t u d e on t h e p a r t of t h e s t a f f t o w a r d
instructional experim entation,
team t e a c h i n g
a n d u t i li z a ti o n of m u l ti - m e d ia t e a c h i n g t e c h n i q u e s ;

•

An e m p h a s i s on i n d i v i d u a l i n s t r u c t i o n a n d g u i d a n c e
for each s tu d e n t ;

•

A f o c u s on t h e e d u c a t i o n of t h e w hole c h i l d ; a n d

•

A program to help ease the tra n sitio n
childhood a n d adolescence.

These

findings

researchers
and

have

humanistic
advanced
learning

that
a

support

teachers

more

in

positive

and

advance

mi ddl e

s c h o o ls

attitu d e toward

tow ard s t u d e n t s . The conclusions
by

researchers

that

environm ent w here

middle

student

the

between

no ti on

tended

to

teaching
further

s ch o o ls

by

previous

perform
and

better

were

more

s u p p o r t th e idea

foster

and te a c h e r tend

an

improved

to h a v e p o s i t i v e

attitudes.
The

ma jor f i n d i n g s

of t h i s

study

gives

additional

support

to th e

r e s e a r c h a n d s t u d i e s m e a s u r i n g t h e h o m o g e n e it y of p u p i l s w i t h i n v a r i o u s
g r a d e c o m b i n a t i o n s t h a t f o u n d t h e g r a d e c o u p l e t s of s i x t h a n d s e v e n t h
graders and
of

similar

ninth and

maturation

tenth
levels.

graders

were b e s t for g r o u p in g s t u d e n t s

These findings

further

associated

with t h e le ve l of m a t u r i t y of n i n t h g r a d e r s ,

that

grade

ninth

students

more

closely

resemble

c o n f ir m

tenth

studies

w hich i n d i c a t e s
graders

than

e i g h t h g r a d e r s a n d b e l o n g in a 9-12 school c o n f i g u r a t i o n .
The

u l t im a te c o n c l u s i o n ,

supported

by

t h e major f i n d i n g s o f t h i s

r e s e a r c h s u s t a i n s t h e f u n d a m e n t a l r a t i o n a l e f o r s c h o o l i n g a t t h e mi ddl e

33

sch ool l e v e l ,

w h ic h i s ,

to f o s t e r h e a l t h y p e r s o n a l a n d a ca d em ic g r o w t h

a n d d e v e l o p m e n t of s t u d e n t s d u r i n g t h e i r y o u n g a d o l e s c e n t y e a r s .

RECOMMENRATIONS
The findings and

c o n c l u s i o n s o f t h i s s t u d y le ad i n t o a n u m b e r of

recommendations

aimed

recommendations

focused

at
on

educational

avenues

of

practice

further

and

research.

other

Thus

the

n e x t two s u b s e c t i o n s d e a l w ith t h e s e i s s u e s .

R ecom m endations fo r P r a c tic e
The

significant

findings

of

this

stu d ie s review ed n a tu ra lly lead into

study

and

conclusions

of o t h e r

r e c o m m e n d a t i o n s f o r t h o s e who a r e

r e s p o n s i b l e f o r t h e e d u c a t i o n of p r e a d o l e s c e n t s a n d e a r l y a d o l e s c e n t s .

1.

Middle s c h o o l g r a d e c o n f i g u r a t i o n s ( g r a d e s 5-8
o r 6-8 ) s h o u l d be s o u g h t as o p p o s e d to t h e
c u r r e n t j u n i o r h i g h g r a d e c o n f i g u r a t i o n s in
MCEA d i s t r i c t s .
T his should be especially
u n d e r t a k e n b y MCEA d i s t r i c t s e x p e r i e n c i n g
low l e v e l s of a c h i e v e m e n t o n t h e MEAP. How­
e v e r , a d e q u a t e i n s e r v i c e t r a i n i n g of s t a f f
a n d t h e c o m m u n it y a b o u t t h e n a t u r e a n d
p r a c t i c e s of mi ddl e s ch oo l is i n d i c a t e d b y
the re s e a rc h review ed.

2.

Middle s ch o ol c l a s s r o o m s s h o u l d b e s t a f f e d
w ith t e a c h e r s who h a v e a s t r o n g e d u c a t i o n a l
p r e p a r a t i o n in p r e a d o l e s c e n t s a n d e a r l y
adolescents.

3.

E d u c a t o r s c o n t e m p l a t i n g m o v i n g from a j u n i o r
h i g h to m i d d le sc ho ol o r g a n i z a t i o n a l c o n f i g u ­
r a t i o n m u s t s e e k to e d u c a t e t h e c o m m u n it y to
t h e a d v a n t a g e s of t h e middle sc h o o l g r o u p i n g
a n d s e e k t h e i r s u p p o r t in i t s i m p l e m e n t a t i o n .

84

4.

All s c h o o l s , e s p e c i a l l y t h o s e s e r v i n g s t u d e n t s
d u r i n g t h e m id dl e y e a r s b e t w e e n e l e m e n t a r y
a n d h i g h s c h o o l s h o u l d s e e k to do n e e d s
a s s e s s m e n t of t h e s t a t u s of sc h o o l f u n c t i o n ­
i n g in t e r m s of a c a d e m i c a c h i e v e m e n t , s t u d e n t
a t t i t u d e s / b e l i e f s , c o m m u n it y p e r c e p t i o n of
t h e s c h o o l s , e t c . , t o d e t e r m i n e w h e r e , if a n y ,
p r o b l e m s m ay b e l u r k i n g .
T h e m i dd le s ch ool
con fig u ra tio n and its associated p ra c tic e s
h a v e t h e p o t e n t i a l of m e e t i n g a n u m b e r of
i d e n t i f i e d p r o b l e m s r e l a t e d to e d u c a t i n g p r e ­
adolescents or early adolescents.

R ecom m endations fo r F u r th e r R e se a r c h
T h e s i g n i f i c a n t f i n d i n g s of t h i s s t u d y p l u s t h e c o n c l u s i o n of o t h e r
r e s e a r c h r e v i e w e d s u g g e s t s a d d i t i o n a l a v e n u e s to s t u d y .

T hey include

t h e follo wing :

1.

A c o n t i n u a t i o n of t h i s s t u d y i n t o o t h e r a ca de m ic
a r e a s m e a s u r e d b y MEAP s u c h a s s c i e n c e to
d e t e r m i n e if t h e c u r r e n t f i n d i n g s hold u p
in o t h e r a c a d e m i c a r e a s a s well f o r MCEA school
districts.

2.

T h e p r e s e n t s t u d y s h o u l d b e r e p l i c a t e d with a
l a r g e r s am p l e of Michi gan sc ho ol d i s t r i c t s t h a t
go b e y o n d t h e c o n f i n e s o f MCEA d i s t r i c t s .

3.

F u r t h e r c o n t r o l l e d e x p e r i m e n t a l r e s e a r c h e m p lo y ­
i n g i*andomly s a m p l e d o r m a t c h e d s t u d e n t s is
s u g g e s t e d t h a t a d d r e s s e s more c o n c l u s i v e l y t h e
i s s u e s of w h e t h e r m i d dl e s c h o o l o r j u n i o r h i g h
sc hoo l e x p e r i e n c e s r e s u l t s in g r e a t e r a ca d em ic
perform ance.

4.

T h e u s e of d i f f e r e n t i n s t r u m e n t a t i o n t h a t
f o c u s e s o n a c a d e m i c p e r f o r m a n c e with g r e a t e r
r a n g e of s k i l l s t h a n MEAP a n d u s e s m e a s u r e ­
ment th a t a p p r o a c h e s in te rv a l scaling s u ch
as th e California Achievement T e s t s (C A T ),
Iowa T e s t s of B a s i c Skills ( I T B S ) , M et r o p o l ii t a n A c h i e v e m e n t T e s t s (M A T ) , e t c . , may b e
interesting and fruitful.

5.

S t u d i e s s h o u l d b e u n d e r t a k e n to d e t e r m i n e
w h e t h e r t h e r e is a s i g n i f i c a n t ac a d em ic
achievement d iffere n c es between re a d in g and
m a t h e m a ti c s b e t w e e n middle a n d j u n i o r h i g h
schools. The c u r r e n t s tu d y s u g g e s ts that a
g r e a t e r e f f e c t was s e e n in r e a d i n g ( l a r g e r
calculated c h i - s q u a r e v alues) th a n m athe­
m at ics ( s m a l l e r b u t still s i g n i f i c a n t c h i square values).

6.

F u r t h e r r e s e a r c h is s u g g e s t e d t o d e t e r m i n e if
a c h i e v e m e n t in r e a d i n g p e a k s in t h e mid dle
sch oo l at t h e e n d o f s i x t h o r b e g i n n i n g of
s e v e n t h g r a d e a n d t h e n d e c l i n e s in r e l a t i o n ­
ship to ju n io r high schools o v er th e c o u rse
of g r a d e s s e v e n a n d e i g h t .

7.

F u r t h e r r e s e a r c h is s u g g e s te d to determ ine
if t h e t r e a t m e n t ( t e a c h e r - a d v i s o r p r o g r a m s ,
transition and articulation activities, i n t e r ­
d i s c i p l i n a r y team t e a c h i n g a n d f le x i b le a n d
b l o c k s c h e d u l e s ) e x i s t s in all m id dle s c h o o ls
sampled.
Also to d e t e r m i n e if t h i s t r e a t m e n t
c a u s e d t h e d i f f e r e n c e b e t w e e n t h e r e s u l t s of
middle s c h o o l s a n d j u n i o r h i g h s c h o o l s .

8.

S t u d i e s s h o u l d b e u n d e r t a k e n to d e t e r m i n e
w h e t h e r t h e m id dl e scho ol e x p e r i e n c e i n c r e a s e s
o r d e c r e a s e s t h e a c a d e m i c a c h i e v e m e n t of t h o s e
s t u d e n t s p e r f o r m i n g in t h e lo w e r tw o c a t e g o r i e s
o n MEAP.

9.

The p r e s e n t s tu d y should be rep licated u sin g
t h e new MEAP.

A single s tu d y
middle
study

schools
stands

s c h o o ls a r e

c a n n o t c o v e r t h e m u l t i t u d e o f q u e s t i o n s r e l a t e d to

versus
as one

junior
causal

highs

and

com parative

a ca d em i c
study

achievem ent.

suggesting

s u p e r i o r in a c a d e m i c a c h i e v e m e n t a s m e a s u r e d

that

This
m id dle

b y MEAP to

j u n i o r h i g h s in Middle C it ie s E d u c a t i o n a l A s s o c i a t i o n (MCEA) d i s t r i c t s in
t h e S t a t e of M ic h i g a n .

APPENDICES

APPENDIX A

TABLE A . I .

MEAP:

THE SKILL AREAS A SSESSED

GRADE 7
S k ill A rea

GRADE 10
# of
Objec

S k ill A rea

READING TEST

READING TEST

C o g n itiv e S k ills

C o g n itiv e S k ills

V o c a b u l a r y Me aning
Literal Com prehension
Inferential Comprehen­
sion
C r i t i c a l R e a d i n g Skills
R e l a t e d S t u d y Skills
S u b -T o ta l

5
5
7
2
4
23

Vocabulary
Literal C om prehension
Inferential C om prehen­
sion
C r i t i c a l R e a d i n g Skills
R e l a t e d S t u d y Skills
S u b -T o ta l

MATHEMATICS TEST

MATHEMATICS TEST

C ore

C ore

Numeration
Whole N u m b e r s
Decimals
Fractions
Metric M e a s u r e m e n t
Non-Metric Measurement
Geometry
Probability & Statistics

S u b -T o ta l

2
8
3
6
4
2
2
1

28

Whole N u m b e r s
Decimals
Fractions
Rat io / P r o p o r t i o n s / P e r c e nt
M etric M e a s u r e m e n t
Mon-Metric M e a s u r e m e n t
Geometry
Probability & Statistics
Equations, E xpressions &
Graphs
S u b -T o ta l

# of
Objec

5
5
8
3
3
24

2
6
8
2
2
3
1
2
2

28

S o u r c e : M ic hi g an E d u c a t i o n a l A s s e s s m e n t H a n d b o o k , 1985-86 a n d 1988-89,
Michi gan S t a t e B o a r d of E d u c a t i o n , p . 3.

APPENDIX B
TABLE B . I . PERCENT MASTERY IN MATHEMATICS BY CATEGORY OF
ACHIEVEMENT FOR SELECTED MIDDLE SCHOOLS AND JUNIOR
HIGHS ON THE SEVENTH GRADE MICHIGAN EDUCATIONAL
ASSESSMENT PROGRAM (M E A P), 1 9 8 5 -1 9 8 6 .

DISTRICT TYPE
D istrict / School

MI DDLE SCHOOL
B a y C ity
- Weste rn
- W a s h in g t o n
- Kolb
F lin t
- Bryant
- Holmes
- Lowell
- F li n t Academy
- Wh ittier
- McKinley
- Longfellow
L a n sin g
- O tto
- Pattengill
- Rich
- G ardner
Willow Run
- E d m on son
TOTAL
JUNIOR HIGH
B a ttle C reek
- N orthw estern
- Southeastern
- Southw estern
- Springfield
- Kellogg
J a ck so n
- Parkside
- Jackson
M uskegon
- Bunker
- Nels on
- Stee le
Saginaw
- Eddy
- Central
- North
- S o u th
- We bb e r
TOTAL

C a te g o r y o f A ch iev em en t
N um ber
T e s te d

1

2

3

4

192
262
212

0.5
1.5
1. 4

7. 3
4.6
7.5

18.2
22.9
25.9

74. 0
7 1. 0
65.1

269
365
323
142
409
355
351

0. 4
0 .8
3.1
0 .0
0.7
0.3
2 .6

4.8
7.1
10.5
0 .0
2.4
4. 2
2 .6

40.1
37.5
34.1
22.5
23.0
27.3
24.8

54.6
54.5
52.3
77.5
73.8
6 8 .2
70.1

352
331
399
428

2 .8
1.2
0 .8
1.4

1 0 .2
3.0
5.8
9. 8

26. L
17.3
19.8
30.4

60 .8
78.2
7 3. 7
58 .4

229

1.3

8.3

33.2

57.2

4,619

18.8

8 8 .1

403.3

989.4

166
84
89
69
187

3. 0
2.4
1 .1
0 .0
0.5

7. 2
2 1 .4
12.4
8. 7
5.3

23.5
38.1
33.7
36.2
24. 6

66 .3
38.1
52.8
55.1
69.5

490
28

2.7
3.6

15.5
14.3

31 .2
39.3

50 .6
4 2 .9

65
119
242

0 .0
0 .0
1 .2

4. 6
0 .8
3.3

13.8
16.0
19.4

81.5
83.2
76.0

87
173
245
296
256

0 .0
2.9
0 .8
0.7
1 .6

8 .0
5.2
9.0
4. 7
9.0

2 1 .8
43 .9
27.3
23. 6
34.0

70.1
4 8 .0
62.9
70 .9
55 .5

2,596

20.5

129.4

426.4

923.4

87

88
TABLE B . 2 . PERCENT MASTERY IN READING BY CATEGORY OF
ACHIEVEMENT FOR SELECTED MI DDLE SCHOOLS AND JUNIOR
HIGHS ON THE SEVENTH GRADE MICHIGAN EDUCATIONAL
ASSESSMENT PROGRAM (M E A P), 1 9 8 5 -1 9 8 6 .

DISTRICT TYPE
D istrict / S ch ool

MI DDLE SCHOOL
B ay C ity
- Western
- W a s h in g t o n
- Kolb
F lin t
- Bryant
- Holmes
- Lowell
- F lin t Academy
- Wh it ti er
- McKinley
- Longfellow
L a n sin g
- Otto
- Pattengill
- Rich
- G ardner
Willow Run
- Ed m o n so n
TOTAL
JUNIOR HIGH
B a ttle C reek
- N orthw estern
- Southeastern
- Southw estern
- Springfield
- Kellogg
J a ck so n
- P ark side
- Jackson
M uskegon
- Bunker
- Nels on
- S te e le
S agin aw
- Eddy
- Central
- North
- S o u th
- W eb b e r
TOTAL

C a te g o r y o f A ch iev em en t
N um ber
T e s te d

1

2

3

4

192
262
212

1 .0
0 .8
0 .0

5. 2
4. 2
5.7

9.4
11.5
8.5

84 .4
83. 6
85 .8

267
355
326
142
406
355
359

3.4
0 .6
4.3
0 .0
1 .2
0.3
1 .1

15. 0
1 1 .0
12. 3
0 .0
2. 5
3.1
1.7

23 .6
2 0 .6
15.6
4. 9
10. 3
11.3
11.1

58.1
6 7 .9
67. 8
95.1
8 6 .0
8 5. 4
8 6 .1

353
331
399
432

1.4
0.9
1. 5
1 .6

7.6
7. 6
5.5
6.5

14.7
15 .4
13.5
13. 9

76 .2
76.1
79 .4
78 .0

229

1. 3

7.9

11. 4

79 .5

4,6 20

19 .4

95.8

166
84
89
69
187

1 .8
3. 6
3.4
1.4
2.7

13 .9
1 7. 9
7. 9
5. 8
7. 5

19.3
1 7 .9
25 .8
18 .8
14 .4

65.1
6 0 .7
62.9
73. 9
75 .4

490
28

4. 1
3.6

13.1
10.7

16.3
2 8. 6

66. 5
57.1

65
119
242

0 .0
2. 5
0 .8

4.6
3. 4
8. 3

1 0 .8
18.5
1 9. 0

84. 6
7 5. 6
71. 9

87
173
245
296
256

2.3
5.2
0 .0
0. 3
2.7

8 .0
1 1 .0
7. 3
6. 4
13. 7

33.3
30.1
13 .5
9.5
19.9

56.3
53 .8
79 .2
8 3 .8
63 .7

2,596

3 4 .4

139. 5

195.7 1 , 1 8 9 . 4

295.7 1 , 0 3 0 . 5

89
TABLE B . 3 . PERCENT MASTERY IN MATHEMATICS BY CATEGORY OF
ACHIEVEMENT FOR SELECTED MIDDLE SCHOOLS A ND JUNIOR
HIGHS ON THE TENTH GRADE MICHIGAN EDUCATIONAL
ASSESSMENT PROGRAM (M E A P), 1 9 8 8 -1 9 8 9 .

DISTRICT TYPE
D istrict / S ch ool

C a te g o r y o f A ch iev em en t
N um ber
T e s te d

1

2

3

4

MI DDLE SCHOOL
B ay C ity
- Central
- Handy
- Western

287
237
269

1.7
0. 4
0 .0

7.7
5.1
3.0

13.9
17.7
14.9

76.7
76.8
82 .2

F lin t
- Central
- Southw estern
- N orthw estern
- S ch oo ls of Choice
- N orthern

410
282
375
173
431

2. 7
1.4
5. 9
2.3
1.4

7. 8
2 .8
8 .8
17.3
7.0

24. 6
15.2
25.6
39.3
31.1

64.9
80.5
59.7
41 .0
60 .6

L a n sin g
- A lternative Ed.
- Eastern
- Everett
- Sexton

23
439
385
384

17. 4
4. 6
3.1
4. 9

26.1
1 1 .2
16.1
11.7

21.7
2 2 .6
24.4
2 0 .6

34.8
61.7
56 .4
62.8

Willow Run
- Willow R u n

210

3.3

17.6

32.4

46 .7

3,905

49.1

142.2

304.0

804.8

B a ttle C reek
- Central
- Springfield

375
85

3. 2
1 0 .6

10.7
14.1

2 0 .0
36.5

66 .1
38.8

J a c k so n
- Jackson
- J a c k s o n A lt.

435
28

9.0
3.6

14.0
21 .4

14 .0
39.3

63.0
35.7

M u sk egon
- Muskegon
- M u s k e g o n Alt.

352
41

0 .6
2. 4

3.4
14.6

18.5
43.9

77 .6
39.0

S agin aw
- A r t h u r Hill
- S a g in a w

509
318

1.4
4.7

9.0
2 2 .0

2 0 .8
33.6

88 .8
39.6

2,1 43

35. 5

109.2

226.8

428.6

TOTAL
JUNIOR HIGH

TOTAL

90
TABLE B . 4 . PERCENT MASTERY IN READING BY CATEGORY OF
ACHIEVEMENT FOR SELECTED MI DDLE SCHOOLS AND JUNIOR
HIGHS ON THE TENTH GRADE MICHIGAN EDUCATIONAL
ASSESSMENT PROGRAM (M E A P), 1 9 8 8 -1 9 8 9 .
DISTRICT TYPE
D istrict / S ch ool

C a te g o r y o f A ch iev em en t
N um ber
T e s te d

1

2

3

4

MI DDLE SCHOOL
B ay C ity
- Central
- Handy
- Western

287
237
269

0. 3
0.4
0 .0

3.5
4. 6
2 .6

1 2 .2
13.9
7.8

8 4 .0
8 1. 0
8 9. 6

F lin t
- Central
- Southw estern
- N orthw estern
- Sc h oo ls of Choice
- N orthern

410
289
384
173
431

0.7
1 .0
0 .8
1 .2
0.9

7.3
2 .8
6. 5
17.3
5. 8

15.4
8.3
26.3
26 .0
2 1 .6

7 6 .6
87 .9
66.4
55.5
7 1 .7

L a n sin g
- A lternative Ed.
- Eastern
- Everett
- Sexton

23
446
385
387

17. 4
2.7
0 .8
1.3

8.7
8.1
9.9
7.5

13.0
15.2
16.6
14.7

6 0 .9
7 4. 0
72.7
76.5

Willow R un
- Willow R u n

212

4.2

13.7

12.7

6 9. 3

3,933

31.7

98.3

203.7

966.1

B a ttle C reek
- Central
- Springfield

375
87

2 .1
6. 9

10.1
13.8

1 2 .8
14.9

74.9
6 4. 4

J a ck so n
- Jackson
- J a c k s o n A lt.

437
29

5 .0
1 3. 8

11.4
20.7

10.3
13.8

73. 2
5 1 .7

M uskegon
- Muskegon
- M u s k e g o n A lt .

353
41

0 .0
0 .0

1.1
2 2 .0

14.2
19.5

84. 7
58 .5

S agin aw
- A r t h u r Hill
- S a g in a w

510
318

1.4
3.5

8 .8
18.2

15.5
27. 7

7 4. 3
5 0 .6

2,150

32.7

106.1

128.7

532 .3

TOTAL
JUNIOR HIGH

TOTAL

BIBLIOGRAPHY

BIBLIOGRAPHY

A l e x a n d e r , W. M. ( 1 9 7 8 ) .
How f a r e s t h e middle s c h o o l m o v e m e n t ?
Middle School J o u r n a l , 9^ ( 3 ) , 3, 19-21.
A l e x a n d e r , VV. M. ( 1 9 8 6 ) .
Middle l e v e l s ch o o ls a s t h e y s h o u l d a n d
c o u l d b e ( I S S N 0 2 7 6 4 4 8 2 ) . n a t i o n a l A s s o c i a t i o n of S e c o n d a r y
School P r i n c i p a l s .
A l e x a n d e r , W. M. & K ea ly , R . P . ( 1 9 6 9 ) . From j u n i o r h i g h sch ool
to mi dd le sc h o o l.
T h e Hi gh School J o u r n a l , 53 ( 3 ) , 151-163.
A l e x a n d e r , W. M. & McEwin, C . K. ( 1 9 8 9 ) . S c h o o l s in t h e m i d d le :
P r o g r e s s 1968-1988 ( I S S N 0 2 7 6 4 4 8 2 ) . N at io n al A s s o c i a t i o n of
S e c o n d a r y School P r i n c i p a l s .
A l e x a n d e r , W. M. h O t h e r s ( 1 9 6 8 ) . T h e e m e r g e n t m i d d le s c h o o l .
Hew Y o r k :
Holt, R i n e h a r t , a n d Win st on, I n c .
B o r g , W. R.. & Gall, M. D. ( 1 9 7 1 ) .
duction (2nd e d . ) .
Mew Y o r k :

Educational r e s e a r c h :
An i n t r o ­
David McKay C o m p a n y , I n c .

B r a n t l e y , W. E. ( 1 9 8 2 ) . West C h e s t e r a r e a sch oo l d i s t r i c t mi ddle
sc ho ol s u r v e y . U n p u b l i s h e d r e p o r t .
B r a z e e , E. N . ( 1 9 8 7 ) . Moving i n t o a n d o u t of t h e mi ddle le v el s c h o o l .
Sch oo ls in t h e m i d d le :
A r e p o r t on t r e n d s a n d p r a c t i c e s .
R e s t o n , VA: N at io n al A s s o c i a ti o n of S e c o n d a r y Scho ols P r i n c i p a l s .
B r a z e e , E. N. ( 1 9 9 1 ) . T o m o r r o w ' s s c h o o l s : Y e s t e r d a y , t o d a y a n d
t o m o r r o w . Middle School J o u r n a l , M a r c h , 1991, 57 -5 9.
B r i g g s , T . II. ( 1 9 2 0 ) .
Mifflin C o m p a n y .

The junior high school.

B u n k e r , F . (1935). The ju n io r high movement:
W ashington, B . C .:
Roberts.

New Y o r k :

Houghton

Its b e g in n in g .

C a l h o u n , F . D. ( 1 9 8 3 ) . O r g a n i z a t i o n of t h e m id dl e g r a d e s :
A
s u m m a r y of r e s e a r c h . A r l i n g t o n , VA: E d u c a t i o n a l R e s e a r c h
Service, Inc.
Ca m p b el l , D. T . & S t a n l e y , J . C . ( 1 9 6 3 ) .
Experimental and quasiexperim ental d e sig n s for r e s e a r c h . Chicago:
R a n d McNally &
Company.

91

92

BIOLIOGRAPHY ( C O N T .)

C a rn eg ie C orporation (1989). T u r n i n g points: P r e p a r in g american
y o u t h f o r t h e 21 st c e n t u r y . New Y o r k :
A uthor.
Commission on t h e R e o r g a n i z a t i o n of S e c o n d a r y E d u c a t i o n ( 1 9 1 8 ) .
C a r d i n a l p r i n c i p l e s of s e c o n d a r y e d u c a t i o n ( B u l l e t i n No. 3 5 ) .
W ashington, D .C .:
U n i t e d S t a t e s D e p a r t m e n t of t h e I n t e r i o r ,
B u r e a u of E d u c a t i o n .
C o u n c i l on Middle Le ve l E d u c a t i o n ( 1 9 8 5 ) .
An a g e n d a f o r e x c e l l e n c e
a t t h e middle l e v e l . R e s t o n , VA: N at io n al A s s o c i a t i o n of
S e c o n d a r y School P r i n c i p a l s .
Davis, C. O. ( 1 9 2 4 ) . J u n i o r h i g h sc h o o l e d u c a t i o n .
H u d s o n , New Y o r k :
World Book C o m p a n y .

Y onkers-O n-

E i c h h o r n , D. II. ( 1 9 6 5 ) . N o n g r a d e d middle s c h o o l:
Supporting theory
and conceptualized functional model. U npublished doctoral
d i s s e r t a t i o n , U n i v e r s i t y of P i t t s b u r g h .
E i c h h o r n , D. H. ( 1 9 6 6 ) . T h e mi ddl e s c h o o l .
f o r A pp lie d R e s e a r c h in E d u c a t i o n .

New Y o r k :

The Center

E p s t e i n , J . L. ( 1 9 9 0 ) .
What m a t t e r s in t h e m id dle g r a d e s :
Grade
s p a n o r p r a c t i c e s ? Phi Delta K a p p a n , 71 ( 6 ) , 43 8- 44 4.
E p s t e i n , J . L . , & M a c l v e r , D. J . ( 1 9 9 0 ) .
Ed u c a t i o n in t h e mid dle
grades:
O v e r v i e w of a n a t i o n a l s u r v e y of p r a c t i c e s a n d t r e n d s .
B a l ti m o r e , MD: C e n t e r f o r R e s e a r c h on E l e m e n t a r y a n d Middle
S c h o o ls , T h e J o h n H o p k i n s U n i v e r s i t y .
G a t e w o o d , T . ( 1 9 7 2 ) . What r e s e a r c h s a y s a b o u t t h e j u n i o r h i g h
v e r s u s t h e middle s c h o o l . N o r t h C e n t r a l A s s o c i a t i o n Q u a r t e r l y ,
46, 26 4- 275 .
G a te w o o d , T . & Dils, C. ( 1 9 7 5 ) . T h e mid dle s c h o o l we n e e d .
A
r e p o r t from t h e A SC D w o r k i n g g r o u p on e m e r g e n t a d o l e s c e n t
l e a r n e r . W ashington, B .C .:
A ss o ci at io n f o r S u p e r v i s i o n
a n d C u r r i c u l u m D e v e lo p m e n t.
G a u m n i t z , W. II. a n d Committe ( 1 9 5 4 ) . J u n i o r h i g h sc ho ol f a c t s :
A g r a p h i c a n a l y s i s ( U . S . Office of E d u c a t i o n M is ce ll an eo u s
No. 2 1 ) . W a s h i n g t o n , D . C . :
Governm ent P rin tin g Office.

93

BIBLIOGRAPHY ( C O N T .)

G e o r g i a d y , II. P . , R ie g le , J . , & Roma no, L. G. ( 1 9 7 4 ) . What a r e
t h e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of t h e mid dle sc h o o l? NASSP B u l l e t i n ,
58 ( 3 8 1 ) , 72 -7 7.
G e r s o n , R . J . ( 1 9 6 8 ) . P r o p o s a l s f o r t h e mid dle sc h o o l c u r r i c u l u m .
U n p u b l i s h e d d o c t o r a l d i s s e r t a t i o n , Columbia U n i v e r s i t y .
G la s s , G. V . & H o p k i n s , K. D. ( 1 9 8 4 ) .
S t a t i s t i c a l m e t h o d s in
education and psy ch o lo g y .
E n gl ew oo d C li ff s, N J : P r e n t i c e II al l.
G r u h n , W. & D o u g l a s s , H . ( 1 9 5 6 ) .
Hew Y o r k :
Ro nal d P r e s s .

The modern ju n io r high sch o o l.

I-Iall, G. S. ( 1 9 0 4 ) .
Adolescence, its psychology a n d its relations
to p h y s i o l o g y , a n t h r o p o l o g y , so c io l o g y , s e x , cr im e , r e l i g i o n ,
a n d e d u c a t i o n ( V o l s . I a n d I I ) . New Y o r k :
D. A p p le t o n
Company.
H o w a r d , A. W. & S t o u n b i s , G. C. ( 1 9 7 0 ) .
m id dle s c h o o l :
Issues and p ractices.
In tex t Educational P u b lis h e rs .
H u n t , J . M. ( 1 9 6 1 ) .
Ronald P r e s s .

The ju n io r high and
S c r a n t o n , PA:

Intelligence and e x p e r i e n c e .

Hew Y o r k :

I n g l i s , A. ( 1 9 1 8 ) .
P r i n c i p l e s of s e c o n d a r y e d u c a t i o n .
H o u g h t o n Mifflin C o m p a n y .

New Y o r k :

K o h u t , S . , J r . ( 1 9 8 0 ) . T h e mi dd le sc h o o l:
A b r id g e between ele­
m e n tary an d se c o n d a ry sc h o o ls . W ashington, D .C .:
N at io na l
Education Association.
Koos, L . V . ( 1 9 2 7 ) .
and Company.

The ju n io r high school.

B o s t o n , MA:

Ginn

L e n t z , D. W. ( 1 9 5 6 ) . H i s t o r y a n d d e v e l o p m e n t of t h e j u n i o r h i g h
school.
T e a c h e r s Co llege R e c o r d , 57 ( 8 ) , 522-530.
Lipsitz, J . S. (1977). Growing up fo rg o tte n :
A r e v i e w of r e s e a r c h
a n d p r o g r a m s c o n c e r n i n g e a r l y a d o l e s c e n c e . L e x i n g t o n , MA:
Lexington Books, D .C . Heath and Company.
L o u n s b u r y , J . a n d V a r s , G. ( 1 9 7 8 ) .
A c u r r i c u l u m f o r t h e mi ddle
sc ho ol y e a r s .
Hew Y o r k :
H a r p e r a n d Row P u b l i s h e r s .

94

BIBLIOGRAPHY (C O N T .)

M a c l v e r , D. J . ( 1 9 9 0 ) . M ee ti n g t h e n e e d s of y o u n g a d o l e s c e n t s :
A d v i s o r y g r o u p s , i n t e r d i s c i p l i n a r y t e a c h i n g t e a m s , a n d school
transition program s.
P h i Delta K a p p a n , 71 ( 6 ) , 458-464.
Mic hi ga n D e p a r t m e n t of E d u c a t i o n ( 1 9 8 5 ) . Michi gan e d u c a t i o n a l a s s e s s ­
m e nt p r o g r a m h a n d b o o k . L a n s i n g , MI: Michi gan S t a t e B o a r d of
Education.
Michig an D e p a r t m e n t of E d u c a t i o n ( 1 9 8 9 ) . Michi gan e d u c a t i o n a l
a s s e s s m e n t p r o g r a m h a n d b o o k . L a n s i n g , MI: Michigan S t a t e
B o a r d of E d u c a t i o n .
Moss, T . C. ( 1 9 6 9 ) .
Middle S c h o o l .
Mifflin C o m p a n y .

B o s t o n , MA:

Houghton

N ati ona l E d u c a t i o n A s s o c i a t i o n Committee on S e c o n d a r y School S t u d i e s
(1969).
R e p o r t of t h e co m mi tt ee on s e c o n d a r y sch oo l s t u d i e s .
New Y o r k : A r n o P r e s s a n d t h e New Y o r k Tim es ( R e p r i n t of 1894
E d i t i o n of t h e Com m itt ee of T e n ) .
N at io n al Middle S cho ol A s s o c i a t i o n ( 1 9 8 2 ) .
C o lu r n b u s , OH: Omni P r e s s .

T h i s we b e l i e v e .

New Y o r k C i t y B o a r d of E d u c a t i o n ( 1 9 6 5 ) . New Y o r k Ci t y b o a r d of
e d u c a t i o n m i n u t e s . New Y o r k :
Author.
P h e l p s , J . L . , D o n o v a n , D. L . , R o e b e r , E. 1)., C a r r , R . A. & Coswell,
M .S. (1980).
Technical r e p o r t:
Vol. I . L a n s i n g , MI:
D e p a r t m e n t of E d u c a t i o n , Michi gan E d u c a t i o n a l A s s e s s m e n t
Program .
P h e l p s , J . L . , D o n o v a n , D. L . , R o e b e r , E. D . , C a r r , R . A. & Co swell,
M .S. (1981). T echnical r e p o r t :
Vol. I I . L a n s i n g , MI:
D e p a r t m e n t of E d u c a t i o n , Michi gan E d u c a t i o n a l A s s e s s m e n t
Program .
P o p h a m , IV. J . & H u s e k , T . R . ( 1 9 6 9 ) .
I m p l ic a t io n s of c r i t e r i o n r e f e r e n c e d m e a s u r e m e n t . J o u r n a l of E d u c a t i o n a l M e a s u r e m e n t , 6,
1-9.
P o p p e r , S. H. ( 1 9 6 7 ) . T h e a m e r i c a n mi ddle s c h o o l :
An o r g a n i z a t i o n a l
a n a l y s i s . Waltham, MA: Bl ai sd ell P u b l i s h i n g C o m p a n y .

95

BIBLIOGRAPHY ( C O N T .)

Romano, L . G. ( 1 9 8 2 ) . T h e mi dd le s c h o o l a n d i t s i s s u e s .
Michigan
E l e m e n t a r y a n d Middle S cho ol P r i n c i p a l s A s s o c i a t i o n , 58 ( 1 ) ,
2 9- 3 0 .
Romano, L. G. & G e o r g i a d y , N. P . ( 1 9 7 7 ) .
Growth c h a ra c te ristic s
of middle sch oo l c h i l d r e n :
C u r r i c u l u m i m p l i c a t i o n s . Mid die
School J o u r n a l , _8 ( 1 ) , 12 -1 5 .
S h a k r a m i , M. S. ( 1 9 7 3 ) .
A f o r m a t i v e e v a l u a t i o n of t h e m a t h e m a ti c s
c o m p o n e n t of a n e x p e r i m e n t a l e l e m e n t a r y t e a c h e r e d u c a t i o n p r o g r a m
a t Michigan S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y . U n p u b l i s h e d d o c t o r a l d i s s e r t a t i o n ,
Mic hi gan S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y .
Sie ge l, S. ( 1 9 5 6 ) . H o n p a r a m e t r i c s t a t i s t i c s f o r t h e b e h a v i o r a l
s c i e n c e s . Hew Y o r k :
M cGraw-H ill Book C o m p a n y .
Smi th , J . ( 1 9 7 5 ) .
A C o m p a r i s o n of mi dd le sch oo l i n s t r u c t i o n a n d
c o n v e n t i o n a l i n s t r u c t i o n with r e s p e c t to t h e a c a d e m i c a c h i e v e ­
men t a n d s e l f - c o n c e p t of p r e a n d e a r l y a d o l e s c e n t s . U n p u b l i s h e d
d o c t o r a l d i s s e r t a t i o n , U n i v e r s i t y of A k r o n .
S t o u t , D. J . ( 1 9 6 2 ) .
Some c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s a n d p r a c t i c e s in j u n i o r h i g h
sc h o o ls in five r n i d w e s t e r n s t a t e s . U n p u b l i s h e d d o c t o r a l d i s s e r t a ­
t i o n , U n i v e r s i t y of Io w a.
T r a u s c h k e , E . M. ( 1 9 7 0 ) .
An e v a l u a t i o n of a m id dle s ch o ol b y a com­
p a r i s o n of t h e a c h i e v e m e n t , a t t i t u d e s , a n d s e l f - c o n c e p t of
s t u d e n t s in a mi dd le s c h o o l w ith s t u d e n t s in o t h e r school
org an iz atio n s. U npublished doctoral d issertatio n , U niversity
of F l o r i d a .
T r a u s c h k e , E. M. & Mooney, P . ( 1 9 7 4 ) . Middle sch ool a c c o u n t a b i l i t y
middle sc h oo l in t h e m a k i n g . W a s h i n g t o n , D . C . :
A s s o c i a ti o n
f o r S u p e r v i s i o n a n d C u r r i c u l u m D e v e lo p m e n t.
Van T il , C. F . , V a r s , G. F . , & L o u n s b u r y , J . K. ( 1 9 6 7 ) . M od ern
education for the junior high y e a r s . Indianapolis, IN :
B o b b s M e rr ill .
Wesley, E. ( 1 9 5 7 ) .
NEA:
The first h u n d re d y e a r s .
Harper and B rothers.

New Y o r k :

Wiles, J . W. & T h o m p s o n , J . ( 1 9 7 5 ) .
Middle s c h o o l r e s e a r c h 19681974: A r e v i e w of s u b s t a n t i a l s t u d i e s .
Educational L e a d e r s h i p ,
32 ( 6 ) , 421-423.

96

BIBLIOGRAPHY ( C O N T .)

S ch o ol s f o r t h e mid dle y e a r s :
A comparative
Wolfe , R . O. ( 1 9 7 2 ) .
s t u d y of o r g a n i z a t i o n a l c l i m a t e . U n p u b l i s h e d d o c t o r a l d i s s e r t a t i o n ,
U n i v e r s i t y of P e n n s y l v a n i a .
Z i g le r , E. F . & F i n n - S t e v e n s o n , M. ( 1 9 8 7 ) .
C hildren,
a n d social i s s u e s . L e x i n g t o n , MA:
B .C . H eath.

development