Beyond their own walls, middle schools are having a profound effect on the entire range of American schooling, K–12. However, the recent indictments of student achievement at the middle level (TIMSS, NAEP) have increased attention on middle schools in general, and leadership in particular. What are the essential skills and knowledge that are necessary to effectively administer a middle school in the new millennium? The purpose of this research is dedicated to discovering and highlighting the qualities of effective leadership from the perspectives of the principals themselves—“in their own words.” As a result of the data analysis, a model of leadership grounded in the concept of “developmental responsiveness” has emerged. This new paradigm is examined within the context of school improvement and is compared to what the literature and professional organizations identify as necessary characteristics.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AndermanE., & UrdanT. (1995). A multilevel approach to middle-level reform. Principal, 74, 26–28.
2.
BarthR. (1985). The principalship. Educational Leadership, 59(3), 92–94.
3.
BauckJ. (1987). Characteristics of the effective middle school principal. NASSP Bulletin, 71(500), 90–92.
4.
BeaneJ. (1999). Middle schools under siege: Points of attack. Middle School Journal, 30(4), 3–9.
5.
BeckL. (1994). Reclaiming educational administration as a caring profession.New York: Teachers College Press.
6.
BradleyJ. (1998, April 15). Muddle in the middle. Education Week, 17(31), 38–42.
7.
BroughJ. (1997). Home-school partnerships: A critical link. In IrvinJ. (Ed.), What current research says to the middle level practitioner (pp. 265–274). Columbus, OH: National Middle School Association.
8.
California State Department of Education. (1987). Caught in the middle: Educational reform for young adolescents in California public schools.Sacramento, CA: Author.
9.
Carnegie Council on Adolescent Development. (1989). Turning points: Preparing youth for the 21st century.New York: Carnegie Corporation.
10.
Carnegie Task Force on Teaching as a Profession. (1986). A nation prepared: Teachers for the 21st century.New York: Carnegie Forum on Education and the Economy.
11.
ClarkS., & ClarkD. (1990). Restructuring middle level schools: Strategies for using Turning Points.Reston, VA: NASSP.
12.
ClarkS., & ClarkD. (2000). Developmentally responsive curriculum and standards-based reform: Implications for middle level principals. NASSP Bulletin, 84, 1–13.
13.
DesimoneL. (1999). Linking parent involvement with student achievement: Do race and income matter?Journal of Educational Research, 93(1), 11–30.
14.
DormanG. (1981). Middle grades assessment program.Chapel Hill, NC: Center for Early Adolescence, University of North Carolina.
15.
EcclesJ., & MidgleyC. (1989). Stage-environment fit: Developmentally appropriate classrooms for young adolescents. In AmesR. E., and AmesC. (Eds.), Research on motivation in education (Vol. 3, pp. 139–181). New York: Academic Press.
16.
EcclesJ., MidgleyC., & AdlerT. (1984). Grade-related changes in the school environment: Effects on achievement motivation. In NichollsJ. H. (Ed.), The development of achievement motivation (Vol. 3, pp. 283–331). Greenwich, CT: JAI.
17.
EichhornD. (1966). The middle school.New York: Center for Applied Research in Education.
EriksonE. (1964). Childhood and society.New York: Norton.
20.
FinnJ. D. (1989). Withdrawing from school. Review of Research, 59, 117–143.
21.
FullanM. (1999). Leading change in professional learning communities. Education Update, 41(8), 1–4.
22.
GeorgeP. (1990). From junior high to middle school—principals’ perspectives. NASSP Bulletin, 74, 86–94.
23.
GeorgeP., & GrebingW. (1992). Seven essential skills of middle level leadership. Schools in the Middle, 1(4), 3–11.
24.
GrossS. (1998). Staying centered: Curriculum leadership in a turbulent era.Alexandria, VA: Association of Supervision and Curriculum Development.
25.
HankinB., AbramsonL., SilvaP., McGeeR., MoffittT., & AngellK. (1998). Development of depression from preadolescence to young adulthood: Emerging gender differences in a 10-year longitudinal study. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 107, 128–140.
26.
HarterS. (1981). A new self-report scale of intrinsic versus extrinsic orientation in the classroom: Motivational and informational components. Developmental Psychology, 17, 300–312.
27.
JacksonA., & DavisG. (2000). Turning Points 2000: Educating adolescents in the 21st century.New York: Carnegie Corporation of New York.
28.
KeefeJ., ClarkD., NickersonN., & ValentineJ. (1983). The middle level principalship: Volume II: The effective middle level principal.Reston, VA: National Association of Secondary School Principals.
29.
KilcreaseA. (1995, November 8–10). Principals’ perceptions of the functions and characteristics of middle schools in Mississippi. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Mid-South Educational Research Association, Biloxi, MS.
30.
LeithwoodK., & JantziD. (1999). The relative effects of principal and teacher sources of leadership on student engagement with school. Educational Administration Quarterly, 35, 679–706.
31.
LightfootS. (1983). The good high school: Portraits of character and culture.New York: Basic Books.
32.
LincolnY., & GubaE. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry.Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
33.
LipsitzJ. (1984). Successful schools for young adolescents.New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.
34.
LounsburyJ. (2000). The middle school movement: “A charge to keep.”Clearing House, 73(4), 193.
35.
ManningM. L. (1993). Developmentally appropriate middle level schools.Wheaton, MD: Association for Childhood Education International.
36.
ManningM. L. (2000). Middle schools 2000: A critical juncture. Clearing House, 73(4), 190–191.
37.
McNealR. (1999). Parental involvement as social capital: Differential effectiveness on science achievement, truancy, and dropping out. Social Forces, 78(1), 117–144.
38.
MerriamS. (1988). Case study research in education: A qualitative approach.San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
39.
MontgomeryJ. (1995). From K–3 to junior high: A principal's challenge. Principal, 74, 51–53.
40.
MurphyJ. (1999). Reconnecting teaching and school administration: A call for a unified profession. UCEA Review, 90(2), 1–7.
National Middle School Association (NMSA). (1995). This we believe.Columbus, OH: Author.
43.
National Middle School Association (NMSA). (2000). National Middle School Association's position statement on academic achievement. Retrieved June 26, 2002, from http://www.nmsa.org/resources/pospapacachieve.html
44.
NeufeldB. (1997). Responding to the expressed needs of urban middle school principals. Urban Education, 31(5), 490–510.
NoddingsN. (1992). The challenge to care in schools: An alternative approach to education.New York: Teachers College Press.
47.
PetersenA., & HamburgB. (1986). Adolescence: A developmental approach to problems and psychopathology. Behavior Therapy, 17, 480–499.
48.
PiagetJ. (1952). The origins of intelligence in children.New York: International Universities Press.
49.
PollioH. (1991, Fall). Hermes in the classroom: Interpreting what expert teachers say about teaching (Teaching-Learning Issues, No. 69). Knoxville, Learning Research Center, University of Tennessee.
50.
RubinsteinR. (1990). A teacher's view of the quality principal. Educational Horizons, 66, 151–152.
51.
SchmidtD. (1988). Do squirrely kids need squirrely administrators?Principal, 68, 48–53.
52.
SergiovanniT. (1996). Leadership for the schoolhouse: How is it different? Why is it important?San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
53.
SpillaneJ., HalversonR., & DiamondJ. (2001). Investigating school leadership practice: A distributed perspective. Educational Researcher, 30(3), 23–28.
54.
TarterJ. (1995). Middle school climate, faculty trust, and effectiveness: A path analysis. Journal of Research and Development in Education, 29, 41–49.
55.
TonniesF. (1957). Gemeinschaft unt Gesellschaft. (Community and Society).C. P. Loomis, ed. and trans. New York: HarperCollins.
ValentineJ., ClarkD., NickersonN., & KeefeJ. (1981). The middle level principalship: Volume I: A survey of middle level principals and programs.Reston, VA: National Association of Secondary School Principals.
58.
ValentineJ., MaherM. C., QuinneD., & IrvinJ. (1999). The changing roles of effective middle level principals. Middle School Journal, 30(5), 54–56.
59.
VygotskyL. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes.Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
60.
WellerL. D. (1999). Quality middle school leadership: Eleven central skill areas.Lancaster, PA: Technomic Publishing.
61.
WilliamsonR. (1991). Leadership at the middle level. In CapellutiJ., & StokesD. (Eds.), Middle level education: Programs, policies, and practices (pp. 36–41). Alexandria, VA: National Association of Secondary School Principals.
62.
WilliamsonR., & JohnstonJ. (1999). Challenging orthodoxy: An emerging agenda for middle level reform. Middle School Journal, 30(4), 10–17.
