AIM at Middle Grades Results: About Aim

Blue background with Yellow Star Blue with bottom half of star

About AIM > Research > Theory and Research Supporting AIM > Element 2

THEORY AND RESEARCH SUPPORTING
AIM AT MIDDLE-GRADES RESULTS
DESIGN ELEMENT TWO

A SAFE AND HEALTHY CLIMATE FOR LEARNING AND DEVELOPMENT

Development of the Whole Child

Teaming: Small Communities for Teaching and Learning

Comprehensive Health Services

* * *

AIM schools also seek to create a safe and healthy climate for learning and development. They focus on the whole child, not just academic learning; create small, personalized learning communities where each child is known well by at least one adult; and provide comprehensive services to support healthy development.

Development of the Whole Child
In his 2001 article for The American Prospect, "Schools that Develop Children," James Comer argued that schools do well to focus on the whole development of the child, rather than on test scores alone. A "good education," Comer wrote, "should help students to solve problems encountered at work and in personal relationships, to take on the responsibility of caring for themselves and their families, to get along well in a variety of life settings, and to be motivated, contributing members of a democratic society. Such learning requires conditions that promote positive child-and-youth development" (p. 1).

AIM teachers seek to help students to grow along what Comer defines as the "important developmental pathways--physical, social-interactive, psycho-emotional, ethical, linguistic, intellectual-cognitive, and eventually academic." They also seek "to channel potentially harmful aggressive energy into the energy of constructive learning, work, and play" (p. 2). They pay special attention to the unique developmental challenges of early adolescence, drawing upon the work of Joan Lipsitz, Tony Jackson, Paul George, Ronald Williamson, and other experts in middle-grades reform. (For a full list of references, see the Phi Delta Kappan Five-Foot Bookshelf, located under Tools and Resources at www.mgforum.org.)

Teaming: Small Communities for Teaching and Learning
According to Flowers, Mertens, and Mulhall (2000), the single most important factor influencing student achievement gains, as measured by the Michigan Educational Assessment of Progress (MEAP), is whether the school has interdisciplinary teams of teachers who plan and work together and share the same groups of students for a significant part of the school day. The researchers note, "Teaming creates an environment where students and teachers get to know one another well and helps teachers to better support and understand the needs of students. Teachers can create coordinated and integrated lesson plans, connecting subject matter around a central theme. Combined with common planning time for teachers, teaming also fosters more effective teaching practices, such as coordination of curriculum and student assignments, as well as increased parent contact and involvement" (http://nmsa.org/).

The researchers also found that schools engaged in teaming in all middle-grade levels, combined with high levels of common planning time (at least 30 minutes, four times per week) showed the greatest improvement in test scores. The largest gains in test scores occurred among schools where at last 60 percent of the student population received free or reduced-price lunch.

Comprehensive Health Services
Health is Academic: A Guide to Coordinated School Health Programs, edited by Marx, Wooley, and Northrop, (http://www2.edc.org/MakingHealthAcademic/) explores the background theory and key characteristics of comprehensive, coordinated school health services. Programs need to be comprehensive and coordinated because health is not merely the absence of disease-it is physical, mental, and social well-being. When students are ill, hungry, or distracted by family or social problems, they cannot pay attention or participate fully in class. Unless schools address these barriers to learning, education-and education reform-will not succeed. By addressing students' well-being and ability to learn in a less fragmented way, schools and communities can avoid gaps, collaborate on overlapping functions, and eliminate unnecessary duplication of efforts.

Marx, Wooley, and Northrop outline the essential features of a comprehensive school health program. Such programs are not packaged products, but processes of change that schools and districts can embark on to improve education for all. They include:

A customized plan
Each school or community's unique populations, needs, resources, problems, and financial capabilities drive the target of a coordinated school health program.

Teamwork
Teamwork is central at all levels: between local districts and state or national organizations; between the school and community players; among school administrators, staff, and students; and within classrooms, cafeterias, and clinics.

Family and community involvement
Effective school change involves students and their families. It requires mobilizing both school and community resources to make children's education and health a community priority.

A commitment to continuing improvement.
Systemic changes in schools require long-term, steady commitment; ongoing professional development; and regular evaluation to monitor progress and demonstrate program quality and satisfaction.

* * *

Link to bibliographical references.

* * *

Return to Theory and Research section index page.

* * *

Read about the theory and research supporting Design Element 3.

* * *

Read our Accessibility Statement | View our Site Map