This issue of the Middle Grades Research Journal focuses on methodologies relevant to middle grades education research. These articles were originally presented at a symposium at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association in San Francisco, California in 2006. The impetus for this symposium came about in early 2005 when two members of AERA’s Middle Level Education Research (MLER) Special Interest Group, Dick Lipka and Micki Caskey, decided to focus attention on this critical issue. While these papers are a recent contribution to addressing relevant methodologies for middle grades education research, the recognition of this need for more rigorous methodologies and the call for additional research on the impact of what has come to be referred to as the “middle school concept” on student learning and achievement are not recent.
Over the past several decades, questions about the effectiveness of the middle grades philosophy on student learning and achievement have been posed by policymakers, school systems, and researchers. The National Middle School Association’s A 21st Century Research Agenda (1997) posted, “Does it work and how do you know?” (p. 5) and “Which middle grades schooling practices contribute to what types of outcomes?” (p. 7). In 2003, Hough summarized the issue in asking, “Are middle schools producing better outcomes for young adolescents than other school types?” (p. 8). Simply stated, the problem facing middle grades education in the United States is the lack of definitive, scientifically-based research that empirically demonstrates that the implementation of the middle school concept has a positive effect on student learning and achievement.
Numerous organizations and publications have put forth recommendations specific to middle grades education (perhaps more so than for either elementary or secondary education). The National Middle School Association (NMSA) first published their position statement, This We Believe, in 1982 which contained a list of the essential elements of a “true” middle school. In 1989, the Carnegie Council on Adolescent Development published Turning Points: Preparing American Youth for the 21st Century, which included eight recommendations for improving the education of young adolescents. By 1999, the National Forum to Accelerate Middle Grades Reform, an alliance of educators, researchers, national associations, and officers of professional organizations and foundations, developed a vision statement calling for all middle schools to be academically excellent, developmentally appropriate, and socially equitable (National Forum, n.d.). Along the way, a myriad of middle grades reform models, initiatives, and other projects have added more specific recommendations, principles, or design elements in an effort to improve middle grades education.
In 2003, the research-based companion volume to the most recent version of This We Believe (NMSA, 2003) was published. Research and Resources in Support of This We Believe (Anfara, Andrews, Hough, Mertens, Mizelle, & White, 2003) contained six recommendations for the direction of future research:
More large-scale, longitudinal studies
Studies combining quantitative and qualitative methodologies
Studies that examine more than one reform recommendation, practice, or design element
More studies that replicate previous methods and designs
Need to design and conduct more experimental studies
Need to create a national database
While these recommendations do not specifically call for a more rigorous application of research methodologies or designs, it is clearly implied. In order to conduct large scale, longitudinal studies, or studies replicating previous methods and designs, or developing sophisticated mixed-methods research designs, middle grades education researchers must be equipped with the necessary methodological skills. Studies utilizing appropriate research designs and employing proper methodological techniques generate research findings that contribute to the broader knowledge base of effective programs, practices, and policies for young adolescents. Without such studies, we cannot properly address issues such as appropriate structures and organizations, curriculum, or instructional strategies for middle grades students.
As middle grades education researchers, we need to heed the national research recommendations. The authors contributing to this issue agree that varying research designs and methodologies can be applied to middle grades research with the caveat that they must be rigorous and methodologically sound. Unfortunately, there is often a tendency among educational researchers to utilize inappropriate methodologies or research designs. This, however, is not a recent development in educational research. Norton & Lindquist specifically addressed this issue in the early 1950’s. In a review of the educational research literature, they found, “The published studies give little evidence that the typical education research worker has achieved a thoro [sic] understanding of the experimental design he has employed, or that he is familiar with recent developments in the field of experimental design” (1951, p. 350). They go on to state that, “…there is serious need in educational research for more thoro [sic] and rigorous training of research workers, both in the use of research technics [sic] and in report writing” (p. 350). This, in part, was the impetus for the recent AERA symposium focusing on relevant methodologies. The symposium participants share similar concerns about the application of appropriate research methodologies in addressing problems specific to middle grades education.
The papers in this issue serve as a resource to the middle grades education research community. They cover a wide number of methodological topics ranging from qualitative to quantitative to the use of mixed methodologies and action research. While the authors are middle grades education researchers, the methodological topics they discuss are not specific to middle grades, but to all educational research.
The first article, The Relevancy of Large-Scale, Quantitative Methodologies in Middle Grades Education Research, by Steve Mertens, examines the relevancy of large-scale, quantitative methodologies to middle grades education research. This article describes and discusses several quantitatively-focused topic areas, including cross-sectional, longitudinal, experimental, and quasiexperimental research designs, and the advantages and disadvantages for each are presented. It also addresses topics such as data triangulation, validation of research designs, power analysis, and sample size estimation and their relevancy to middle grades education research.
In Utilizing Mixed Methods in Middle Grades Research, Vince Anfara examines a third methodological movement that began in the 1980’s. He discusses the major issues related to mixed methodologies pointing out both the strengths and weaknesses of this approach. The article presents two studies related to middle grades education that employ mixed-methods designs. It concludes with a call for the application of more rigorous mixed methodologies in studies designed to answer some of the important questions in the field of middle grades education that need further clarification.
Penny Bishop addresses the use of visual methods in The Promise of Drawing as Visual Method in Middle Grades Research. This article examines the promise of visual methods, and of drawing in particular, in accessing middle school students’ perceptions as a means of informing the middle school reform movement. A sample of studies utilizing drawing in middle grades research is presented followed by a discussion of the major issues and debates related to the method concerned in particular issues of reliability and validity. It concludes by addressing the question of the promise of drawing as a method in middle grades education research.
Relevant methodologies in action research are discussed in Micki Caskey’s article, The Value of Action Research in Middle Grades Education. In addition to reviewing the historical context, this article provides definitions of action research and examines pertinent issues including dilemmas and benefits that relate to action research methodology. Two research designs—participatory and practical—are discussed together with data collection techniques for practical action. Recommendations for future research utilizing this often overlooked methodology are also provided.
Taken together, these four articles provide a general overview of varying methodologies applicable to middle grades educational research. In conclusion, it is hoped that you will find this collection of methodological papers relevant in your own research or in the training of future educational researchers. For middle grades education researchers, it is imperative that we continue to conduct and promote middle grades education research. However, as researchers, we need to be more attuned to and focused on the application of appropriate and rigorous methodologies in conducting or evaluating future middle grades educational research.
Steven B. Mertens, Ph.D., Guest Editor
October 2006
