The creation–-through both new construction and reconfiguration of enrollments in existing facilities–-of schools with broader grade spans is increasing in Florida and elsewhere in the United States. The extant literature reports increased fiscal efficiency resulting from the approach, but the potential influence on student outcomes is largely unexplored. This article reports on a completed quantitative study investigating the influence of grade-span configurations on student achievement among Florida public schools (n = 3,523). Results are interpreted to suggest that broader grade spans (e.g., K-8 versus K-5) might represent a viable policy option for administrators and policymakers seeking improved academic outcomes.
AlexanderW. M., & GeorgeP. S. (1981). The exemplary middle school.New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
3.
AlexanderW., & McEwinK. (1989, September). Schools in the middle: A report on trends and practices.Reston, VA: National Association of Secondary School Principals. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED327000).
4.
BeckerH. (1987). Addressing the needs of different groups of early adolescents: Effects of varying school and classroom organizational practices on students from different social backgrounds and abilities. (Report No. 16). Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins Center for Research on Elementary and Middle Schools.
5.
BickelR. (2007). Multi-level analysis for policy analysts: It's just regression!.New York, NY: Guildford.
6.
BickelR., HowleyC., WilliamsT., & GlascockC. (2001). High school size, achievement equity, and cost: Robust interaction effects and tentative results.Education Policy Analysis Archives,9(40), 1–32.
7.
BourdieuP., & PasseronJ. (1990). Reproduction in education, society, and culture. (R. Nice, trans.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
8.
BowlesS., & GintisH. (1976). Schooling in capitalist America: Educational reform and the contradictions of economic life.New York, NY: Basic Books.
CronbachL. (1987). Statistical tests for moderator variables: Flaws in analyses recently proposed.Psychological Bulletin,102, 414–417.
11.
DeYoungA., HowleyC., & TheobaldP. (1995). The cultural contradictions of middle schooling for rural community survival.Journal of Research in Rural Education,11(1), 24–35.
12.
EcclesJ. S., & MidgleyC. (1989). Stage environment fit: Developmentally appropriate classrooms for early adolescents. In AmesR. E., & AmesC. (Eds.), Research on motivation in education (Vol. 3). New York, NY: Academic Press.
13.
EichhornD. H. (1966). The middle school.New York, NY: Center for Policy Research in Education.
14.
EpsteinJ. L., & McPartlandJ. M. (1979). Authority structures. In WalbergH. (Ed.), Educational environments and effects.Berkeley, CA: McCutcheon.
15.
EpsteinJ. L. (1981). Patterns of classroom participation, student attitudes, and achievement. In EpsteinJ. (Ed.), The quality of school life.Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.
16.
EpsteinJ. L. (1983). Longitudinal effects of person-family-school interactions on student out- comes. In KerckhoffA. (Ed.), Research in sociology of education and socialization.Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
17.
GeorgeP. S. (1977). The middle school: A look ahead.Columbus, OH: The National Middle School Association.
18.
HillJ. P. (1980). Understanding early adolescence: A framework.Chapel Hill, NC: Center for Early Adolescence, University of North Carolina.
19.
HoughD. (1995). The elemiddle school: A model for middle grades reform.Principal,74(3), 7–9.
20.
HowleyC. (2008). Don't supersize me: The relationship of construction costs to school enrollment in the U.S.Educational Planning,17(2), 23–40.
21.
HowleyC., & HowleyA. (2004). School size and the influence of socioeconomic status on student achievement: Confronting the threat of size bias in national data sets.Education Policy Analysis Archives,12(52), 1–35.
22.
JenkinsD. M., & McEwinC. K. (1992). Which school for the fifth grade? Programs and practices in three grade organizations.Middle School Journal,23(4) 8–12.
23.
JohnsonJ. (2007). School size, social justice, and conflicting state objectives: An investigation of achievement distributions among Kentucky public schools.Education Leadership Review,8(1), 51–64.
24.
JohnsonJ., HowleyC., & HowleyA. (2002). Size, excellence, and equity: A report on Arkansas schools and districts.Athens, OH: Ohio University. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED459987).
25.
JohnstonJ. H., & MarkleG. C. (1986). What research says to the middle key level practitioner.Columbus, OH: National Middle School Association.
26.
KaganJ., & ColesR. (1972). Twelve to sixteen: Early adolescence.New York, NY: Norton.
27.
LeeV., & SmithJ. (1995). Effects of high school restructuring on and size on early gains in achievement and engagement.Sociology of Education,68(3), 241–270.
28.
LipsitzJ. (1980). Growing up forgotten: A review of research and programs concerning early adolescence.New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Books.
29.
LounsburyJ. H. (1984). Perspectives: Middle school education, 1964–1984.Columbus, OH: National Middle School Association.
30.
LounsburyJ. H., & VarsG. (1978). A curriculum for the middle school years.New York, NY: Harper and Row.
31.
Mac IverI. J., & ReumanD. A. (1988). Decision making in the classroom and early adolescents’ valuing of mathematics. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.
32.
McPartlandJ. M., & WuS. (1988). Instructional practices in the middle grades: National variations and effects. (CREMS Report 25). Baltimore, MD: Center for Research on Elementary and Middle Schools, The Johns Hopkins University.
33.
McPartlandJ. M., (1987). Balancing high-quality subject-matter instruction with positive teacher-student relations in the middle grades. (CREMS Report 15). Baltimore, MD: Center for Research on Elementary and Middle Schools, The Johns Hopkins University.
34.
McPartlandJ. M., ColdironJ. R., & BraddockJ. H. (1987). A description of school structures and classroom practices in elementary, middle, and secondary schools. (CREMS Report 14). Baltimore, MD: Center for Research on Elementary and Middle Schools, The Johns Hopkins University.
35.
MurphyJ. (2009). The educator's handbook for understanding and closing achievement gaps.Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
SimmonsR. G., & BlythD. A. (1987). Moving into adolescence: The impact of pubertal charm and school context.Hawthorne, NY: de Gruyter.
43.
TuckerC. G., & AndradaG. N. (1997). Accountability Works: Analysis of Performance by grade span of school. Available from ERIC Document Reproduction Service. http://www.edrs.com/default.cfm.
WihryD., ColadarciT., & MeadowC. (1992). Grade span and eighth-grade academic achievement: Evidence from a predominantly rural state.Journal of Research in Rural Education,8(2), 58–70.
46.
WilesJ., & BondiJ. (1986). The essential middle school.Tampa, FL: Wiles, Bondi and Associates.
