Schools to Watch: HighPerforming Middle
Grades Schools for the
21st Century
Middle Grades—At the Crossroads
•Recognition that too many schools are middle schools in
“name or grade configuration” only
•When middle grades reform recommendations are
implemented with consistency, over time we know middle
grades schools can be powerful communities of learning
•Comprehensive middle grades reform yields higher
achievement
•“Structural” changes are necessary but not sufficient to
accomplish all that needs to be done
•Need to focus on rigorous curriculum, effective
instruction, and multiple forms of assessment
•Need for targeted, ongoing professional development and
preservice teacher preparation for middle level educators
What is the National Forum?
The National Forum is a group of
sixty-five educators, researchers,
state and regional school leaders,
national education associations and
foundations dedicated to improving
education for middle-grades students
across the country.
Some of the organizations who are
members of the National Forum Include...
The Work of the Forum
•
Establish a common vision and language for
speaking about middle-grades school improvement
among stakeholders
•
Forge sustainable partnerships among state agencies
and organizations seeking to improve middle-grades
schools
•
Train leaders at the state, district, and school levels to
assess school performance using a set of rigorous
criteria
•
Provide exemplars and inspiration for schools
seeking to improve their performance.
Schools to Watch History
n1994-1995 - Program officers of Carnegie, Edna McConnell
Clark Foundation, W.K. Kellogg Foundation, Lilly Endowment
and others meet to discuss middle grades reform issues
n1997 - Joan Lipsitz, Tony Jackson, Hayes Mizell, and Leah
Meyer Austin write, Speaking With One Voice, published in
Kappan. National Forum convenes
n1999 - Following development of criteria, first four pilot Schools
to Watch selected and recognized
 2002 - Schools to Watch national recognition moves to the
state level—California, Georgia, and North Carolina are
selected & trained at NMSA Headquarters by the Forum’s
STW Committee
 2003 - Colorado, Illinois, Kentucky, & Virginia join Schools to
Watch effort & are trained in Indianapolis by STW co-chairs
and new state leaders. 14 STW recognized
Schools to Watch History
n 2004 – National Forum incorporates and becomes an
independent 501(c)(3) organization. New York & Ohio join
Schools to Watch. As governance issues develop, state
leaders work with Forum leadership to create an oversight
committee to further the work. 40 Schools are recognized.
n 2005 – Arkansas & Michigan become STW states and are
trained in Indianapolis by Forum & state leaders. 55 schools
recognized. The first state STW go through re-certification,
with three schools retired. The first national STW conference
draws over 400 participants to Washington, DC. States identify
“archivists” to collect data about the impact of STW.
n 2006 – Pennsylvania, South Carolina & Utah join STW. 50% of
the nation’s middle schoolers in STW states. 86 STW.
n 2007 – New Jersey & Oregon become STW states. 126 STW
across the nation.
The Vision
Academic
Excellence
STRUCTURES
NORMS
PROCESSES
Academic Excellence
High-performing schools with middle grades are
academically excellent. They challenge all students to
use their minds well, providing them with the curriculum,
instruction, assessment, support and time they need to
meet rigorous academic standards. They recognize that
early adolescence is characterized by dramatic cognitive
growth, which enables students to think in more abstract
and complex ways. The curriculum and extra-curricular
programs in such schools are challenging and engaging,
tapping young adolescents' boundless energy, interests,
and curiosity. Students learn to understand important
concepts, develop essential skills, and apply what they
learn to real-world problems. Adults in these schools
maintain a rich academic environment by working with
colleagues in their schools and communities to deepen
their own knowledge and improve their practice.
Developmental Responsiveness
High-performing schools with middle grades are developmentally
responsive. Such schools create small learning communities of
adults and students in which stable, close, and mutually respectful
relationships support all students' intellectual, ethical, and social
growth. They provide comprehensive services to foster healthy
physical and emotional development. Students have opportunities
for both independent inquiry and learning in cooperation with
others. They have time to be reflective and numerous opportunities
to make decisions about their learning. Developmentally
responsive schools involve families as partners in the education of
their children. They welcome families, keep them well informed,
help them develop their expectations and skills to support learning,
and assure their participation in decision making. These schools
are deeply rooted in their communities. Students have
opportunities for active citizenship. They use the community as a
classroom, and community members provide resources,
connections, & active support.
Social Equity
High-performing schools with middle grades are socially
equitable. They seek to keep their students' future
options open. They have high expectations for all their
students and are committed to helping each child
produce work of high quality. These schools make sure
that all students are in academically rigorous classes
staffed by experienced and expertly prepared teachers.
These teachers acknowledge and honor their students'
histories and cultures. They work to educate every child
well and to overcome systematic variation in resources
and outcomes related to race, class, gender and ability.
They engage their communities in supporting all
students' learning and growth.
Academic Excellence
Vision Statement
“The school challenges all
students to use their minds
well, providing them with the
curriculum, instruction,
assessment, support and
time they need to meet
rigorous academic
standards.”
STW Criteria
• All students are expected
to meet high academic
standards.
• Curriculum, instruction,
assessment, and appropriate
interventions are aligned with
standards and are rigorous.
Developmental Responsiveness
Vision Statement
“The school creates small
learning communities of
adults and students in which
stable, close, and mutually
respectful relationships
support all students’
intellectual, ethical, and
social growth.”
STW Criteria
•The school creates a
personalized environment that
supports each student’s
intellectual, ethical, social, and
physical development.
•The school provides access to
comprehensive services to
foster healthy physical, social,
emotional, and intellectual
development.
Social Equity
Vision Statement
“The school has high
expectations for all their
students and is committed
to helping each child
produce work of high
quality.”
•
STW Criteria
To the fullest extent possible,
all students, including
English learners, students
with disabilities, gifted and
honors students, participate
in heterogeneous classes with
high academic and
behavioral expectations.
Organizational Structures &
Processes
Vision Statement
STW Criteria
• A shared vision of what a highperforming school is and does
“These are the norms,
structures, and organizational drives every facet of school change.
arrangements that support
and sustain school’s
trajectory toward excellence
in all areas.”
• The principal has the responsibility
and authority to hold the schoolimprovement enterprise together,
including day-to-day know-how,
coordination, strategic planning,
and communication.
Schools to Watch States 2002
Number of
STW States:
3
California
Georgia
North Carolina
Nation’s
Middle Level
Students in
STW States
19%
Schools to Watch States 2003
Number of
STW States:
7
Nation’s
Middle Level
Students in
STW States
29%
California
Colorado
Georgia
Illinois
North Carolina
Kentucky
Virginia
Schools to Watch States 2004
Number of
STW States:
9
Nation’s
Middle Level
Students in
STW States
39%
California
Colorado
New York
Georgia
Illinois
Ohio
North Carolina
Kentucky
Virginia
Schools to Watch States 2005
Number of
STW States:
11
Nation’s
Middle Level
Students in
STW States
43%
California
Colorado
New York
Arkansas
Georgia
Illinois
Ohio
Michigan
North Carolina
Kentucky
Virginia
Schools to Watch States 2006
Number of
STW States:
14
Nation’s
Middle Level
Students in
STW States
50%
California
Colorado
New York
Arkansas
Pennsylvania
Georgia
Illinois
Ohio
Michigan
South Carolina
North Carolina
Kentucky
Virginia
Utah
Schools to Watch States 2007
Number of
STW States:
16
Nation’s
Middle Level
Students in
STW States
53%
California
Colorado
New York
Arkansas
Pennsylvania
New Jersey
Georgia
Illinois
Ohio
Michigan
S. Carolina
Oregon
N. Carolina
Kentucky
Virginia
Utah
Nationwide-- Schools to Watch
There are currently 126 Schools to Watch
State
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Georgia
Illinois
Kentucky
Michigan
New Jersey
New York
North Carolina
Ohio
Oregon
Pennsylvania
South Carolina
Texas
Utah
Virginia
# of STW
1
18
5
11
12
10
4
1
7
26
14
1
3
1
1
3
9
Common Threads
While each school faces different challenges related to its
location, student demographics, levels of district support, and
other factors, we have seen common themes emerge.
Our Schools to Watch:
•Know and articulate the academic outcomes they seek. In
some cases, the outcomes are prescribed by the state or
district; in others the faculty have adopted the outcomes
recommended by their various disciplines.
•Are taking deliberate steps to help students achieve those
outcomes by making strategic changes in curriculum,
teaching, and school services.
•Enjoy a high degree of family & community involvement (but
are never satisfied with their current levels).
•Demonstrate a high level of faculty commitment.
Common Threads
•Have set benchmarks for implementing their strategies,
and hold themselves accountable for specific results. We
cannot stress too much the importance of data in the lives
of these schools.
•Strategically concentrate their energies on important focus
areas. As a result, the changes in each school are
burrowing deeply into its culture.
•Have strong, visionary leaders who can articulate
challenging goals, and motivate faculty and staff to reach
those goals.
•The schools are filled with happy, positive, and involved
students and adults who are all actively learning!
How can I get involved in STW?
•Visit www.schoolstowatch.org
•Take a virtual tour of a current School to Watch
•Join the visitation team
•Discuss STW criteria with your school community
•Complete an application this fall
Oregon STW Criteria
Must have at least 2 grade levels, including 7th grade
Must have 3 years of State Report Card data for current configuration
Can not be in School Improvement w/sanctions
Must be designated as Strong or Exceptional on State Report Card for
the most recent school year
OR
Must have above the state average in math, reading/language arts,
science, and writing in all grades tested within the school's middle level
program for the most recent school year
Oregon STW Commitment
Present at the OMLA Annual Conference (March 2009)
Open school doors for site visits from other Oregon
schools
3 year authorization and commitment
Attend National STW Conference in Washington D.C.
(June 2009)
Is our school ready?
Consider the following statements.
Is your school there or are you still progressing?
1. Our school meets the minimum requirements.
2. Our school’s programs are replicable by schools with challenging and
diverse populations.
3. Our school has an operational, school wide progressive discipline plan. All
students receive consistently fair and equitable treatment. The suspension
data reflects that no subgroup is being unreasonably suspended.
4. Our school actively supports the mental, physical, emotional, and social
health, welfare and safety of our students with counseling, health services,
adult advocacy, developmentally responsive activities, and positive
incentives. Cognitive and non-cognitive programs are designed and
implemented to encourage, motivate, resolve conflict, and build character,
resiliency, attendance, and achievement for all students.
Is our school ready?
Consider the following statements.
Is your school there or are you still progressing?
5. The district (superintendent and school board) provides strong support for its middle
schools to meet the needs of young adolescents with financial resources, highly
qualified teachers, administrators, and counselors, curriculum and instructional
materials, and professional development for its teachers
6. The school has an operational and formalized structure of distributed leadership that
embraces a clear and current vision and mission for the school. Groups meet
independently and regularly with a clearly articulated system of norms, collaborative
purpose, communication, and ability to make meaningful decisions.
7. The school is an integral part of the community. It seeks support from the
community (universities, colleges, businesses, non-profits) and provides support to
the community in terms of student volunteer services, facilities, and joint projects.
Is our school ready?
Consider the following statements.
Is your school there or are you still progressing?
8. The master schedule of the school is a reflection of students’ needs and school
mission. It is flexible and innovative in providing time and opportunity for coherent,
rigorous, standards-based instruction for all students within the school day. It
provides students with curricular opportunities in core subjects, targeted intervention
opportunities, electives, and physical education. It provides common planning time
for teacher teams in the school to work collaboratively on the behalf of their
students. It creates smaller, closer learning communities for students.
Is our school ready?
Consider the following statements.
Is your school there or are you still progressing?
9. Students are heterogeneously placed on teams and in classrooms to the fullest
possible extent. Instruction is differentiated for interventions and enrichment
opportunities. Resource specialists collaborate or co-teach. Additional intervention
or content specific classes are provided for students with specialized needs that
cannot be met in the regular classroom (i.e. math intervention, beginning and early
English language development, remedial reading). Enrichment and leadership
opportunities are accessible by all and not determined on the basis of IQ and test
scores. Advanced content classes (algebra, geometry) may have prerequisite
standards and support classes for student success. All classes have high expectations
and high levels of student engagement.
Is our school ready?
Consider the following statements.
Is your school there or are you still progressing?
10. Curriculum, instruction, school-wide strategies, pacing, assignments, homework,
assessment, grading and reporting, enrichment projects and activities (i.e. History
Day, Science Fair, field trips) in each subject area is consistent and coherent across
the school.
11. By the time application is submitted, the entire administration and faculty will
have participated in an extensive and ongoing discussion of the Schools To WatchSelf-Rating and the development of the application. If selected, we will be prepared
to honorably fulfill the obligation of sharing with others statewide and nationally
what it takes to be a high performing, high impact middle school that is on its own
continuous journey of improvement.
Timeline
 August 2008
Applications Available
 Nov. 8, 2008
Applications Due
 Dec. 2008
Reading of Applications
 Jan. 2009
Site Visits
 Feb. 2009
Announcement of Oregon STW
 Mar. 2009
STW Presentations at OMLA Annual
Conference in Bend
Research supporting the National Forum’s Vision
Lee & Smith, 1993
Purpose: To evaluate impact of school restructuring on
student achievement and related outcomes
Sample: Data from over 8,800 8th grade students in 377
schools
Results: Elements of restructuring were positively
associated with academic achievement &
engagement.
►Modest increases in academic achievement (e.g.,
reading & mathematics)
►Increase in student engagement (e.g., homework,
feeling bored, prepared for class)
►Greater equity of student outcomes
Felner et. al, 1997
Purpose: Assess & evaluate impact of Turning Points’
recommendations on middle grades reform
(achievement, social-emotional, and behavioral)
Sample: Survey and achievement data from 31 Illinois
schools.
Results: Students in more highly implemented schools had
higher achievement and better adjustment
►Higher achievement in more highly implemented schools
(language arts, reading, and math)
►Lower levels of behavior problems in more highly
implemented schools.
►Students in highly implemented schools had higher levels
of self-esteem and lower levels of worry and fear.
Pattern of Impact of Levels of Turning Points
Implementation for Economically and Socially
Disadvantaged Students
Chicago Consortium Studies, 1990’s
Purpose: To study the relationships of student social support
& academic press to gains in student achievement.
Sample: Survey and achievement data from 6th & 8th grade
students and teachers in 304 Chicago schools in 1997.
Results: Levels of both social support and academic press
are positively related to gains in achievement.
►Social support & academic press impact student
achievement (reading & math); combined effect produces
greatest achievement gains
►Students attending the least racially integrated, lowestachieving, economically poorest, and largest schools are
least likely to experience the combined impact of support and
press known to impact student achievement
CPRD –University of Illinois
Purpose: Assess & evaluate impact of comprehensive
school reform elements on middle grade schools
Samples: Survey and achievement data from hundreds
of middle grade schools in several states (AR, IL,
LA, MA, MI, MS)
Results: Implementation of middle school reform
elements impacts student learning & achievement
►Achievement scores are higher for students in schools
that are teaming with high common planning time
►Team size and length of time teaming also affect
student achievement scores
►Teachers with middle-grades certification engage more
frequently in “best practices,” which impacts achievement
Other Studies
►Backes, Ralston, & Ingwalson (1999) examined impact of
middle school practices on student achievement in 6
BRIDGES schools in North Dakota
•Found that most achievement scores were higher in
BRIDGES school implementing Turning Points
recommendations
►Lee & Smith (2000) examined impact of school size on
student achievement
•Found that students in small schools (<400 students)
perform better and teachers have a more positive attitude
about responsibility for student learning
Other Studies
►Sweetland & Hoy (2000) studied relationship between
school characteristics and educational outcomes
•Found that teacher empowerment (decision making) was
linked to student achievement (reading & math)
Citations
•Backes, Ralston, & Ingwalson (1999). Middle level reform:
The impact on student achievement. Research in
Middle Level Education Quarterly, 22 (3), 43-57.
•CPRD publications available at www.cprd.uiuc.edu
•Felner, Jackson, Kasak, Mulhall, Brand, & Flowers (1997).
The impact of school reform for the middle years:
Longitudinal study of a network engaged in Turning
Points-based comprehensive school transformation.
Phi Delta Kappan, 78(7), 528-532, 541-550.
•Lee & Smith (1993). Effects of school restructuring on
achievement and engagement of middle-grade
students. Sociology of Education, 66, 164-187.
Citations
•Lee, Smith, & Smylie (1999). Social support, academic
press, and student achievement: A view from the
middle grades in Chicago. Chicago: Consortium on
Chicago School Research, University of Chicago.
•Lee & Smith (2000). School size in Chicago elementary
schools: Effects on teachers’ attitudes and students’
achievement. American Educational Research Journal,
37(1), 3-31.
•Sweetland & Hoy (2000). School characteristics and
educational outcomes: Toward an organization model
of student achievement in middle schools. Educational
Administration Quarterly, 36(5), 703-729.
For Questions or More Information,
Please Contact the Oregon STW Core Team:
Colin Cameron
colin@cosa.k12.or.us
Joni Gilles
joni.gilles@state.or.us
Jill O’Neill
jill_o’neill@beavton.k12.or.us
Bill Rhoades
william.rhoades@bend.k12.or.us
Joel Sebastian
sebastij@canby.k12.or.us
Visit Schools to Watch at www.schoolstowatch.org