CHAPTER 12 

Schools, Academic Motivation, 

and Stage-Environment Fit 

JACQUELYNNE S, ECCLES AND ROBERT W. ROESER
From the time individuals first enter sehool
until they complete their formal schooling,
children and adolescents spend more time in
schools than in any other place outside their
homes. Exploring all of the possible ways in
which educational institutions influence motivation
and development during adolescence
is beyond the scope of a single chapter, In this
chapter, we discuss the ways in which schools
influence adolescents' social-emotional and
behavioral development through organizational,
social, and instructional processes
ranging from those based in the immediate,
proximal relation between students and the
tasks they are asked to perform to the role that
principals and the school boards play in setting
school-level and district-level policies, which
in turn influence the social organization of the
entire school community.
Understanding the impact of schools on
adolescent development requires a conceptual
framework for thinking simultaneously about
schools as contexts in which development takes
place and about the changing developmental
needs of students as they move through the
school system. In the late 1980s, Eccles
and Midgley proposed a model of stageenvironment
fit to guide research on the impact
ofschool transitions on adolescentdevelopment
(see Eccles & Midgley, 1989; Eccles et a!.,
1993). They argued that individuals have
changing emotional, cognitive, and social needs
and personal goals as they mature. Drawing
on ideas related to person-environment fit and
self-determination theory (Deci & Ryan, 2002;
404
Hunt, 1975), as well as more general ideas
person-process-context models of human
development (e.g., Lerner, 2002; Sameroff,
1983), they argued that schools need to change
in developmentally appropriate ways if they
are to provide the kind of social context that
will continue to motivate students' interest
and engagement as the students mature. To'
the extent that this does not happen, they predicted
[hat students would disengage first psychologically
and then physically from school
as they matured into and through adolescence,
This should be particularly true as the adolescents
acquired more incentives and more
power to control their own behavior. We say
more about both of these psychological perspectives
on the impact of classroom experiences
later,
In 1999, we (see Eccles & Roeser, 1999)
proposed a framework for thinking about
school influences that conceptualized the
school context into a series of
ordered, interdependent levels of organization
beginning at the most basic level of
ity to the school as an organizational sys-'
tern embedded in a larger cultural system. In
adopting this heuristic. we assumed that (1)1
schools are systems characterized by multiple'
tory processes (organizational,
and instructional in nature); (2) these
cesses are interrelated across levels of
sis; (3) such processes are usually dynamic
nature, sometimes being worked out each
An Ecological View of Schools and Their Impact on Development During Adolescence 405
between the various social actors (e.g., teachers
and students); (4) these processes change as
children move through different school levels
(elementary, middle. and high school); and (5)
these processes regulate children's and adolescents'
cognitive, social-emotional, and
behavioral development. In this chapter, we
focus on the interface between various theoretical
frameworks that are consistent with
these tenets of school influences. We begin
with a summary of our multilevel description
of school contexts.
AN ECOLOGICAL VIEW OF
SCHOOLS AND THEIR IMPACT
ON DEVELOPMENT DURING
ADOLESCENCE
From the location of the school within macroregulatory
systems characterized by national,
state, and school district laws and educational
policies to the miniregulatory systems that
involve the minute-to-minute interactions
between teachers and individual students,
schools are systems of complex, multilevel,
regulatory processes. Eccles and Roeser (1999)
described these different levels of the school
environment in terms of their hierarchical
ordering-moving from the student in a classroom
to the school building itself, then to the
school district, and finally to the larger communities
in which school districts are located.
Within each of these levels, we discussed
those beliefs and practices that affect students'
experiences on a daily basis. At the classroom
level, we focused attention on teacher beliefs
and instructional practices, teacher-student
relationships, the nature and design of tasks
and instruction, and the nature and structure
of classroom activities and groups. At the
level of the school building. we focused attention
on organizational climate and such schoolwide
practices as academic tracking, school
start time, and the provision of extracurricular
activities. At the level of the school district, we
focused on the between-school grade configurations
that create particular school-transition
experiences for students. Finally, at the level
of schools embedded in larger social systems.
we discussed such issues as school resources,
as well as the linkages of schools with parents
and with the labor market.
We further assumed that in any given school
setting these multilevel processes are highly
interdependent. Relations between different
levels of organization in the school may be
complementary or contradictory and may
influence students either directly or indirectly.
For instance, a principal may decide that all
of his or her teachers should use a particular
practice such as cooperative learning or small
learning communities. However, the impact
of such a decision on the daily experiences of
students depends on how well this practice is
actually implemented at the classroom level.
If done well, students should be seen working
successfully in groups on complex, authentic
problems. Such a well-implemented school
policy is likely to produce gains in self-esteem,
interethnic relationships, and achievement
among students, especially those of low ability
or status (Connell & Klem, 2000; Connell,
2003; FeIner, Seitsinger, Brand, Burns, &
Bolton, 2007; National Research Council
[NRC], 2004; Slavin, 1990; Wigfield, Eccles,
Schiefele, Roeser, & Davis-Kean, 2006). In
contrast, if done poorly, classroom disorganization
can result, leading to far less positive
outcomes at the student level. How such a
schoolwide instructional policy is implemented
depends on many factors. including the morale
within the school. the relationships between
the principal and the teachers, the teachers'
understanding and endorsement of the
new instructional practice, the way in which
the policy change was decided upon, the provision
of adequate in-service training, the
provision of adequate supports for implementation
of new strategies, and the students'
willingness to go along with the new practice.
Recent debates about the No Child Left Behind
policy provide another example of the complex
ways in which a new policy-this time
a national-level policy-can affect the daily
experiences of teachers and students in the
406 Schools, Academic Motivation, and Stage-Environment Fit
classroom and in the school building (DarlingHammond
& Bransford, 2005; NRC, 2004).
Eccles and Roeser (1999) also assumed
that the processes associated with the different
levels of the school environment interacting
dynamically with each other, rather than static
resources or characteristics of the curriculum,
teachers, or school per se, influence adolescents'
development. In addition, adolescents' own
constructions of meaning and interpretations of
events within the school environment are critical
mediators between school characteristics
and students' feelings, beliefs, and behavior.
Finally, in keeping with the stage-environment
perspective proposed by Eccles and
Midgely (1989), Eccles and Roeser (1999)
assumed that these different school-related processes
change across the course of children's
and adolescents' development as they progress
through elementary, middle, and high schooL
That is, not only are children and adolescents
developing, but so too is the whole nature of
the schools that they attend. For example, the
organizational, social, and instructional processes
in schools change as children move
from elementary to middle school. Eccles and
Midgley (1989) argued that these changes are
often associated with declines in many adolescents'
motivation and behavior. Understanding
the interaction of different school features
with the developmental needs of adolescents
is critical to understanding the role of schooling
in young people's development. In the next
sections, we discuss those characteristics of
each level of the school that are most likely
to be important for understanding the impact
of schools on adolescent development. We
also discuss how school characteristics at each
level may also influence group differences in
adolescent development, paying particular
attention to gender and ethnic group differences
within the United States.
LEVEL 1: CLASSROOMS
The most immediate educational environment
for the student is the classroom. This is also
the level that has received the most attention
from educational psychologists. In this section,
we review some of what we know about
teacher beliefs, classroom climate, the nature
of the academic work itself, and experiences of
racial-ethnic discrimination.
Teacher Beliefs
Teacher beliefs have received much attention
in educational psychology. In this section, we
focus on two types of beliefs: Teachers' general
sense of their own teaching efficacy and
teachers' expectations for specific students in
their class.
Teachers' General Sense ofEfficacy
When teachers hold high general expectations
for student achievement and students perceive
these expectations, students learn more,
experience a greater sense of self-worth and
competence as learners, feel more connected
to their teacher and their school, and resist
involvement in problem behaviors (Brophy,
2004; Lee & Smith, 200I; NRC, 2004; Roeser,
Eccles, & Sameroff, 1998; Rutter, 1983;
Weinstein, 1989; Wigfield, Byrnes, & Eccles,
2006). Alternatively, when teachers lack confidence
in their teaching efficacy, they can
engage in behaviors that reinforce feelings of
incompetence and alienation in their students,
increasing the likelihood that their students
will develop learned helpless responses to
failure in the classroom (see Roeser & Eccles,
2000). As we discuss in more detail later, the
prevalence of teachers with a low sense of
personal teaching efficacy is higher in junior
high and middle schools than in elementary
schools. Low teacher efficacy rates are also
higher in schools that serve high proportIons
of ethnic minority and poor adolescents than
in schools that serve more affluent and higher
achieving adolescents (Darling-Hammond,
1997; Juvonen, Le, Kaganoff, Augustine, &
Constant, 2004; Wigfield et aI., 2006).
Differential Teacher Expectations
Equally important are the differential expectations
teachers often hold for various individuals
within the same classroom and the differential
treatments that sometimes accompany these
expectations. Many researchers have shown
that undermining teacher-expectancy effects
depend on how teachers structure activities
differently, as well as interact differently with,
high- and low-expectancy students and on
how the students perceive these differences
(Brophy, 2004; Cooper, 1979; Weinstein, 1989;
Wigfield et aI., 2006). Much of the work on
teacher expectancy effects has focused on the
negative effects ofdifferential treatment related
to gender, race-ethnic group, and/or social
class (see Ferguson, 1998; Jussim, Eccles, &
Madon, 1996; Valencia, 1991; Wigfield et aI.,
2006). Jussim et a\. (1996) found that even
though these effects are typically quite small,
young women, African Americlm adolescents,
and students from poorer homes are more
subject to both the positive and negative
effects of teacher expectancy effects than are
other students.
Researchers such as Steele and Aronson
(1995) have linked this form of differential
treatment, particularly for African American
students, to school disengagement and
disidentification (the separation of one's
self-esteem from school-related feedback).
Steele and Aronson argued that African
American students become aware of the fact
that teachers and other adults have negative
stereotypes of African Americans' academic
abilities. This awareness (labeled stereotype
threat by Steele and colleagues; see Aronson &
Steele, 20(5) increases their anxieties, which
in turn lead them to disidentify with the
school context to protect their self-esteem.
It is interesting that recent studies using the
same theoretical notions and experimental
techniques have shown that Asian students
believe that teachers and adults expect them
to perform very well and that this belief leads
Asian students to perform better on tests when
their ethnic identity is made salient (Shih,
Pittinsky, & Ambady, 1999). Thus, the psychological
processes associated with stereotype
threat can either undermine or facilitate performance
on standardized tests depending on the
Levell: Classrooms 407
nature of commonly held stereotypes about the
intellectual strengths and weaknesses of different
social groups.
Classroom Climate
Classroom climate refers to the more general
character of the classroom and teacherstudent
relationships within the classroom.
In this section, we focus on the following
aspects of classroom climate: Teacher-student
relationships, classroom management, and
motivational climate.
Teacher-Student Relationships
The quality of teacher-student relationships
is a key aspect of the classroom climate.
Teachers who trust, care about, and are
respectful o[students, and who care !Jpedjically
about students' learning, provide the
social-emotional and intellectual scaffolding
that students need to approach, engage, and
persist on academic learning tasks; to develop
positive, achievement-related self-perceptions,
values, and a sense of school belonging;
and more generally to experience a sense
of well-being when in school (Deci & Ryan,
2002; Goodenow, 1993; Midgley et aI., 1989b;
NRC, 2004; Roeser, Midgley, & Urdan, 1996;
Wentzel, 2002; Wigfield et ai., 2006). Feeling
emotionally supported is one of the most
important characteristics of developmental
contexts like schools for fostering adolescents'
positive development-people and feelings of
belonging and support really matter. Declines
in both adolescents' perception of emotional
support from their teachers and in the adolescents'
sense of belonging in their classrooms
are quite common as adolescents move from
elementary school into secondary schools
(NRc' 2004; Roeser, Peck, & Nasir, 2006;
Wigfield et aI., 2006). This shift is particularly
troublesome in our highly mobile society
in which teachers represent one of the last
stable sources of nonparental role models for
adolescents. In addition to teaching, teachers
in mobile societies such as the United States
can provide guidance and assistance when
social-emotional or academic problems arise.
408 Schools, Academic Motivation, and Stage-Environment Fit
This role is especially important for promoting
developmental competence when conditions in
the family and neighborhood cannot or do not
provide such supports (Eccles, Lord, & Roeser,
1996; NRC, 2004; Simmons & Blyth, 1987).
Classroom Management
Work related to classroom management has
focused on two general issues: orderliness!
predictability and control/autonomy. With
regard to orderliness and predictability, the
evidence is quite clear: Student achievement and
conduct are enhanced when teachers establish
smoothly running and efficient procedures
for monitoring student progress, providing
feedback, enforcing accountability for work
completion, and organizing group activities
(e.g., Darling-Hammond & Bransford,
2005: Pintrich & Schunk, 1996; Roeser et aL,
2008). Unfortunately, such conditions are
often absent, particularly in highly stressed
and underfunded schools with inexperienced
teachers (Darling-Hammond, 1997; DarlingHammond
& Bransford, 2005; NRC, 2004).
Research on autonomy versus control is
equally compelling. Many researchers believe
that classroom practices that support student
autonomy are critical for fostering intrinsic
motivation to learn and for supporting socioemotional
development during childhood and
adolescence (Deci & Ryan, 2002; Grolnick,
Gurland, Jacob, & Decourcey, 2002). Support
for this hypothesis has been found in both laboratory
and field-based studies (Deci & Ryan,
2002; Grolnick et aI., 2002; NRC, 2004).
However, it is also critical that the teacher
supports student autonomy in a context of
adequate structure and orderliness (Wigfield
et ai., 2006). This issue is complicated by
the fact that the right balance between adultguided
structure and opportunities for student
autonomy changes as the students mature:
Older students desire more opportunities for
autonomy and less adult-controlled structure.
To the extent that the students do not experience
these changes in the balance between
structure and opportunities for autonomy as
they pass through the K-12 school years, their
school motivation should decline as they get
older (Eccles et aI., 1993).
Motivational Climate
Several teams of researchers have suggested
that teachers engage in a wide range of behaviors
that create a pervasive motivational climate
in the classroom. For example, Rosenholtz
and Simpson (1984) suggested a cluster of
general teaching practices (e.g., individualized
versus whole-group instruction, ability
grouping practices, and publicness of feedback)
that should affect motivation because
these practices make ability differences in
classrooms especially salient to students. They
assumed that these practices affect the motivation
of all students by increasing the salience
of extrinsic motivators and ego-focused learning
goals, leading to greater incidence of social
comparison behaviors and increased perception
of ability as an entity state rather than an
incremental condition. All of these changes
reduce the quality of students' motivation and
learning. The magnitude of the negative consequences
of these shifts, however, should
be greatest for low-performing students: As
these students become more aware of their
relative low standing, they are likely to adopt
a variety of ego-protective strategies that
unfortunately undermine learning and mastery
(Covington & Dray, 2002; NRC, 2004).
Researchers interested in goal theory have
proposed a similar set of classroom characteristics
(Maehr & Midgley, 1996; Midgley,
2002; NRC, 2004; Pintrich, 2000; Pintrich &
Schunk, 2003). Goal theorists propose two
major achievement goal systems: masteryoriented
goals and performance-oriented
goals. Students with mastery-oriented goals
focus on learning the material and on their own
improvement over time. Students with performance-oriented
goals focus on doing better
than other students in their class. Goal theorists
further argue that a mastery orientation
sustains school engagement and achievement
better than does a performance orientation
(see Maehr & Midgley, 1996; Midgley, 2002).
Evidence is quite strong for the first prediction
and more mixed for the second: The desire to
do better than others often has positive rather
than negative consequences, whereas the
fear of failing (performance-avoidance goal
orientation) undermines school performance
(see Midgley, 2002). Finally, these theorists
suggest that the publicness of feedback, particularly
social comparative feedback, and
a classroom focus on competition between
students undermine mastery motivation and
increase performance motivation. The schoolreform
work of Midgley, Maehr, and their
colleagues has shown that school reform efforts
to reduce these types of classroom practices,
particularly those associated with performance
feedback, social comparative grading systems,
and ego-focused, competitive motivational
strategies have positive consequences for adolescents'
academic motivation (e.g., Maehr &
Midgley, 1996). Creating classroom climates
that reframe student role identities in terms of
cooperation, multiple intelligences, effort, and
improvement toward attaining standards rather
than in terms of competition and relative ability
has been an important approach of school
reform movements whose aim is to achieve
equity and excellence in learning outcomes
(e.g., Darling-Hammond, 1997; Maehr &
Midgley, 1996).
The work on understanding group differences
in achievement and achievement choices
is another example of an attempt to identify a
broad set ofclassroom characteristics related to
motivation. The work on girls and math is one
example of this approach. There are sex differences
in adolescents' preference for different
types of learning contexts that likely interact
with subject area to produce sex differences
in interest in different subject areas (Eccles,
1994; Hoffmann, 2002; Wigfield et aI., 2006).
Females appear to respond more positively to
math and science instruction if it is taught in
a cooperative or individualized manner rather
than a competitive manner, if it is taught
from an applied or person-centered perspective
Levell: Classrooms 409
rather than a theoretical or abstract perspective,
if it is taught using a hands-on approach
rather than a book-learning approach, and if
the teacher avoids sexism in its many subtle
forms. The reason given for these effects is
the fit between the teaching style; the instructional
focus; and females' values, goals, motivational
orientations, and learning styles.
The few relevant studies support this hypothesis
(Eccles, 1994; Hoffmann, 2002; Wigfield
et a!., 2006). If such classroom practices are
more prevalent in one subject area (e.g., physical
science or math) than another (e.g., biological
or social science), one would expect sex
differences in motivation to study these subject
areas. In addition, however, math and physical
science do not have to be taught in these ways;
more girl-friendly instructional approaches can
be used. When they are, girls as well as boys
are more likely to continue taking courses in
these fields and to consider working in these
fields when they become adults.
The girl-friendly classroom conclusion is a
good example ofperson-environment fit. Many
investigators have suggested that students are
maximally motivated to learn in situations that
fit well with their interests, current skill level,
and psychological needs, so that the material
is challenging, interesting, and meaningful
(e.g., Ainley, Hidi, & Berndorff. 2002; Chen,
Darst, & Pangrazi, 200 I; Csikszentmihalyi,
Rathunde, & Whalen, 1993; Eccles et aI.,
1993; Hidi, 200I; Hidi & Harackiewicz, 2000;
Koller, Baumert, & Schnabel, 200 I; NRC,
2004; Renninger, Ewen, & Lasher, 2002).
Variations on this theme include aptitude by
treatment interactions and theories stressing
cultural match or mismatch as one explanation
for group differences in school achievement
and activity choices (e.g., Fordham & Ogbu,
1986; Ogbu, 1992; Okagaki, 2001; SuarezOrozco;
& Suarez-Orozco, 200 I; Valencia,
1991). Forexample, Valencia (1991) concluded
that a mismatch ofboth the values ofthe school
and the materials being taught contributed to
the poor performance and high dropout rates
among Latino youth in the high school they
410 Schools, Academic Motivation, and Stage-Environment Fit
studied. Deyhle and LeCompte (1999) made
a similar argument in their discussion of the
poor performance of Native American youth
in traditional middle school contexts. The misfit
between the needs of young adolescents and
the nature of junior high school environments
is another example of these person-environment
fit dynamics.
The Nature of Academic Work
Academic work is at the heart of the school
experience. Two aspects of academic tasks are
important: the content of the curriculum and
the design of instruction. The nature of academic
content has an important impact on students'
attention. interest, and cognitive effort.
Long ago, Dewey (1902/1990) proposed that
academic work that is meaningful to the historical
and developmental reality of students'
experiences will promote sustained attention,
high investment of cognitive and affective
resources in learning, and strong identification
with educational goals and aims. In general,
research supports this hypothesis: Content
that provides meaningful exploration is critical
given that boredom in school, low interest,
and perceived irrelevance of the curriculum
are associated with poor attention, diminished
achievement, disengagement, and alienation
from school (e.g., Finn, 1989.2006; Jackson &
Davis, 2000; NRC, 2004). Curricula that represent
the voices, images, and historical experiences
of traditionally underrepresented groups
are also important (Valencia, 1991). Choosing
materials that provide an appropriate level of
challenge for a given class, designing learning
activities that require diverse cognitive
operations (e.g., opinion, following routines,
memory, comprehension), structuring lessons
so that they build on each other in a systematic
fashion, using multiple representations of
a given problem, and explicitly teaching students
strategies that assist in learning are but a
few of the design features that scaffold learning
and promote effort investment, interest in
learning, and achievement (Blumenfeld, 1992;
Deci & Ryan, 2002; Wigfield et aI., 2006).
Unfortunately, American secondary schools
have problems providing each of these types of
educational experiences. Larson and colleagues
have documented the fact that adolescents are
bored most of the time that they are in secondary
school classrooms (see Larson, 2000).
Culturally meaningful learning experiences
are rare in many American secondary schools
(Fine, 1991; Garcia-CoIl et aL 1996; Graham
& Taylor, 2002; Okagaki, 2001; Valencia,
1991; Wigfield et aI., 2006). The disconnection
of traditional curricula from the experiences
of these groups can explain the alienation
of some group members from the educational
process, sometimes eventuating in school
dropout (Fine, 1991; Sheets & Hollins, 1999).
Appropriately designed tasks that adequately
scaffold learning are also rare in many innercity
and poor schools (Darling-Hammond, 1997).
In addition, from a developmental perspective,
there is evidence that the nature of academic
work too often does not change over time in
ways that are concurrent with the increasing
cognitive sophistication, diverse life experiences,
and identity needs of adolescents as they
move from the elementary into the secondary
school years (Carnegie Council on Adolescent
Development, 1989; Juvonen et aL 2004; Lee &
Smith, 1993,2001).
For example, middle school students
report the highest rates of boredom when
doing schoolwork, especially passive work
(e.g., listening to lectures) and in particular
classes such as social studies, math, and science
(Larson & Richards, 1989). There is also
evidence that the content of the curriculum
taught in schools does not broaden to incorporate
either important health or social issues
that become increasingly salient as adolescents
move through puberty and deal with the identity
explorations associated with adolescence
(Carnegie Council, 1989; Juvonen et ai., 2004)
It may be that declines in some adolescents'
motivation during the transition to secondary
school in part reflect academic work that lacks
challenge and meaning commensurate with
adolescents' cognitive and emotional needs
(Eccles & Midgley, 1989). Recent etforts at
middle school reform suppmt this hypothesis:
Motivation is maintained when middle schools
and junior high schools introduce more challenging
and meaningful academic work
(Jackson & Davis, 2000). We discuss this in
more detail later.
Experiences of Racial-Ethnic
Discrimination
Researchers interested in the relatively poor
academic performance of adolescents from
some ethnic-racial groups have suggested
another classroom-based experience as critical
for adolescent development, namely, experiences
of racial-ethnic discrimination (Brody
et al., 2006; Essed, 1990; Fordham & Ogbu,
1986; Garcia Coli et al., 1996; Graham &
Taylor, 2002; Harris-Britt, Valrie, KurtzCostes,
& Rowley, 2007; Ruggiero & Taylor,
1995; Sellers, Caldwell. Schmeelk-Cone, &
Zimmerman, 2003; Taylor, Casten, Flickinger,
Roberts, & Fulmore, 1994; Wong, Eccles, &
Sameroff, 2003). Two types of discrimination
have been discussed: (I) anticipation of future
discrimination in the labor market, which might
be seen as undermining the long-term benefits
of education (Fordham & Ogbu, 1986); and (2)
the impact of daily experiences of discrimination
on one's mental health and academic motivation
(Essed, 1990; Sellers et al., 2003; Wong
et al., 2003). Both types have been shown to
adversely affect the development of ethnic
minority adolescents. For example, Wong et al.
(2003) found that anticipated future discrimination
leads to increases in African American
youths' motivation to do well in school, which
in turn leads to increases in academic performance.
In this sample, anticipated future discrimination
appeared to motivate the youth to
do their very best so that they would be maximally
equipped to deal with future discrimination.
In contrast, daily experiences of racial
discrimination from their peers and teachers
led to declines in school engagement and
confidence in one's academic competence
and grades, along with increases in depression
Levell: Summary 411
and anger. Interestingly, evidence is beginning
to show that a strong positive ethnic identity has
protective effects against the aversive effects of
daily experiences of racial and ethnic discrimination
(Chavous et al.. 2003; Harris-Britt et al.,
2007; Sellers et al., 2003; Wong et aI., 2003).
Thus, educating for diversity and redressing
discrimination are among two of goals
secondary school educators can pursue in
efforts to reduce achievement gaps. If young
people from immigrant and ethnic minority
backgrounds are afforded environments
that offer them social support, the development
of life skills and transfer of cultural
capital, and strategies for addressing the
twin challenges of racism and poverty. then
such challenges can become sources ofmotivation
and engagement that eventuate in the pursuit
of a college education (Darling-Hammond,
1997). Providing access to equal educational
opportunities also requires attention to the
language in which instruction is provided. For
many immigrant children, schools do not provide
adequate linguistic supports to allow the
children to master the material being taught in
English (Padilla & Gonzalez, 200 I).
LEVEL 1: SUMMARY
The studies of classroom-level influences
suggest that development is optimized when
students are provided with challenging tasks in
a mastery-oriented environment that also provides
good emotional and cognitive support,
meaningful and culturally diverse material to
learn and master, and sufficient support for
their own autonomy and initiative. Connell
and Wellborn (199l), as well as Deci and Ryan
(2002), suggested that humans have three
basic needs: to feel competent to feel socially
attached, and to have autonomous control in
their lives. Further, they hypothesized that individuals
develop best in contexts that provide
opportunities for each of these needs to be met.
Clearly, the types of classroom characteristics
that emerge as important for both intellectual,
motivational, and socioemotional development
would provide such opportunities.
412 Schools, Academic Motivation, and Stage-Environment Fit
LEVEL 2: SCHOOL BUII~DINGS
Schools are fonnal organizations and, as such,
have characteristics and features that are superordinate
to classroom characteristics. These
aspects of the whole school environment
should impact on adolescents' intellectual,
social-emotional, and behavioral development.
Important school-level organizational features
include school climate and sense of community
(Connell, 2003; Connell & Klem, 2000;
NRC, 2004; Rutter & Maughan, 2002) and the
relationships among the students themselves.
School organizational features also include
such schoolwide practices as curricular tracking,
start and stop times, and the availability of
extracurricular activities.
General School Climate
Researchers have become interested in the general
schoolclimateorcultureoftheentireschool.
These researchers suggest that schools vary in
the climate and general expectations regarding
student potential, and that such variations affect
the development of both teachers and students
in very fundamental ways (e.g., Bandura,
2006; Bryk, Lee, & Holland, 1993; DarlingHammond
& Bransford, 2005; Jackson &
Davis, 2000; NRC, 2004). For example,
in their analysis of higher achievement in
Catholic schools, Bryk et al. (1993) discussed
how the culture within Catholic schools is fundamentally
different from the culture within
most public schools in ways that positively
affect the motivation of students, parents, and
teachers. This culture (school climate) values
academics, has high expectations that all students
can learn, and atfirms the belief that the
business of school is learning. Similarly, Lee
and Smith (2001) showed that between-school
differences in teachers' sense of their own
personal efficacy as well as their confidence
in the general ability of the teachers at their
school to teach all students accounted, in part,
for between-school differences in adolescents'
high school motivation and performance.
Maehr, Midgley, and colleagues argued that
just as classroom practices give rise to certain
achievement goals, so too do schools through
particular policies and practices. A school-level
emphasis on different achievement goals creates
a schoolwide psychological environment
that affects students' academic beliefs. affects,
and behaviors (e.g., Maehr & Midgley, 1996;
Roeser et al., 1996). For example, schools' use
of public honor rolls and assemblies for the
highest achieving students. class rankings on
report cards, differential curricular offerings
for students of various ability levels, and so
on all emphasize relative ability, competition,
and social comparison in the school and create
a school-level ability rather than mastery!
task focus. However, through the recognition
of academic effort and improvement, rewards
for different competencies that extend to all
students, and through practices that empha~ize
learning and task mastery (block scheduling,
interdisciplinary curricular teams, cooperative
learning), schools can promote a school-level
focus on discovery, effort and improvement,
and academic mastery.
In studies ofadolescents, Roeseret al. (1996)
found that students' perceptions of the school
mastery goal structure predicted their own personal
mastery goals, which in turn were positively
predictive of their academic self-efficacy
and positive affect in school. Students' perceptions
of the school performance goal structure
were positively associated with their personal
performance goal orientations, which in turn
predicted their feelings of self-consciousness
in school. What were interesting about this
study were the correlations between indicators
of the social climate (i.e., respectful
and caring relationships between teachers and
students) and the academic climate. Students
reporting a strong performance-goal structure
in their school were much less likely to report
that their teachers cared for them, whereas
those perceiving a task goal structure in the
school were more likely to see their teachers
as caring.
Roeser, Eccles, and Sameroff(1998) examined
the relation of perceived school goal structures
to longitudinal change in adolescent students'
motivation to learn and well-being after controlling
for adolescents' sex, race, parental
education level, parental occupational prestige,
and income. Adolescent students' perceptions
of their school as performance oriented were
related to diminished feelings of academic
competence and valuing of school, increased
feelings of emotional distress, and decreased
grades over time, whereas perceived school
task goal structures were associated with
increased valuing of school and diminished
emotional distress over time (Roeser et aI.,
1998). Using the same sample with personcentered
techniques, they found that youth who
were most engaged in school reported a cluster
of positive school perceptions, including a
mastery-oriented school climate and positive
teacher-student relationships. In contrast. those
who were most disengaged reported more of
an ability-oriented school (Rocser, Eccles, &
Sameroff, 2000). In this study and others, adolescents'
perceptions of a school ability goal
structure is found to be highly positively correlated
(r around 0.60) with perceptions of racial
discrimination in school among African- and
Latin American youth (Roeser & Peck, 2003;
Roeser, 2004).
Similarly, Kaplan and Maehr (1999)
reported that perceptions of a mastery goal
structure at the school level were associated
with greater sense of well-being and less
misconduct than when students perceived an
emphasis on performance goals in the sehool.
Fiqueira-McDonough (1986) reported related
findings in a study oftwo high schools that were
similar in intake characteristics and achievement
outcomes but differed in their academic
orientation and rates of delinquent behavior.
The high school characterized by a greater
emphasis on competition and high grades
(ability orientation) had higher delinquency
rates, and the students' grades were a major
correlate of students' involvement in delinquent
behavior (low grades predicted increased
delinquent behavior).
Overall, these studies suggest that the
general school climate, especially its academic
Level 2: School Buildings 413
goal structures, is associated with aspects of
adolescents' academic motivation, well-being,
achievement, and school conduct. They also
suggest the importance of considering how
certainacademic cultures in schools may collude
with perceptions of racial discrimination,
and may undermine students' perceptions of
whether the school is a moral place and whether
or not teachers actually care for students (see
Roeser et al., 2008).
Academic Tracks and Curricular
Differentiation
In the middle and high school years, betweenclass
tracking becomes both more widespread
and more broadly linked to the sequencing of
specific courses for students bound for different
post secondary school trajectories (college
preparation, general education, and vocational
education). As curriculum differentiation practices
intensify in public schools during secondary
schooL students ofdifferent ability levels get
exposed to (often very) different kinds of
academic work, classmates, teachers, and teaching
methods (Eccles & Roeser, 1999; Oakes,
2005).
A general consensus on the overall effects
of curriculum differentiation as an educational
practice remains elusive (Eccles &
Roeser, 1999). Research suggests that students
who are placed in high tracks evidence some
educational benefits; whereas low tracks placements
are associated with negative achievement
outcomes (see Fuligni, Eccles, & Barber,
1995; Kao & Thompson, 2003; Oakes,
Gamoran, & Page, 1992). As just one example,
Hallinan and Kubitschek (1999) found
that assignment to high track classes accelerated
growth in school achievement, whereas
assignment to a lower level or vocational
track decelerated such growth. Studies have
also demonstrated that lower track students
report being labeled "dumb"by teachers
and peers, feel less committed to school,
and feel less successful academically (see
Oakes et aI., 1992). In our own work, we
have found that youth who were in lower
414 Schools, Academic Motivation, and Stage-Environment Fit
track math, English or ESL (English as a second
language) courses saw themselves as less
scholastically compctent, perceived school as
less valuable, and felt less of a sense of school
belonging than students in higher track math
and English (Roeser, 2005; Roeser et aI., 1998).
One factor that appears to explain some ofthese
differential effects concerns teacher qualitythose
students who are placed in lower tracks
during secondary school are often exposed to
teachers with less qualifications, experience
less constructivist teaching practices, and are
exposed to what amounts to watered-down
curricula (e.g., Darling-Hammond, 1997; Oakes,
2005).
In addition, ability grouping has an impact
on students' peer groups: Between-classroom
ability grouping and curricular tracking increase
the extent of contact among adolescents with
similar levels of achievement and engagement
with school. For those doing poorly in school,
tracking is likely to facilitate friendships
among students who are similarly alienated
from school and are more likely to engage in
risky or delinquent behaviors (Dryfoos, 1990).
Dishion, McCord, and Poulin (1999) showed
experimentally how such collecting of alienated
adolescents increases their involvement
in problem behaviors. This collecting of adolescents
with poor achievement or adjustment
histories also places additional discipline burdens
on the teachers who teach these classes
(Oakes, 2005), making such cla'>Ses unpopular
with the teachers as well as the students and
decreasing the likelihood that the teachers with
the most experience will allow themselves to
be assigned to these classes.
Given this accumulating evidence on
the potential costs of tracking, educational
scientists are now questioning the advisability
of between class tracking. Concerns have also
been raised about the ways in which students
placed in different classes and how difficult
it is for students to change tracks once initial
placements have been made. These issues are
important both early in a child's school career
(e.g., Entwisle & Alexander, 1993) and later in
adolescence, when course placement is linked
directly to the kinds of educational options that
are available to the student after high schooL
Poor children, among whom African American,
Latino, and Native American children are
overrepresented, are more likely than their
wealthier and European- or Asian American
peers to be placed in low-ability classrooms
and in vocational track courses during secondary
school (Oakes, 2005). Even in integrated
schools, minority students tend to receive poor
access to teaching resources through tracking
practices (Oakes et aI., 1992; Noguera & Wing,
2006). Furthermore, there is some evidence
that students with limited English proficiency
who are otherwise capable are placed in lower
track classes (see Kao & Thompson, 2003).
Finally, careful assessment of these types of
track placements has shown that many of these
youth are incorrectly assigned to these classes
and tracks (Dornbusch, 1994; Oakes, 2005).
Such misassignment has long-term consequences
for students' ability to go to college
once they complete secondary school.
Finally, concerns have also been raised about
the marginalization and segregation of ESL
students on middle and high school campuses
(Olsen, 1997; Valdez, 200I). ESL programs
are often housed on the periphery of regular
school campuses and often fail to provide real
opportunities for them to interact with native
English speakers. Furthermore, similar to
the misassignment of African American and
Latino students to and lack of mobility out of
low academic tracks. there is some evidence
that ESL students often get reassigned to ESL
programs following school transition events
even though they may have graduated from
such programs into mainstream classes in their
previous schools (Valdez, 200 I).
School Size
In 1964, Barker and Gump proposed that
smaller schools afford young people greater
opportunities for close relationships, make it
easier for students to be monitored by adults,
and have a favorable roles-to-people ratio with
respect to school extracurricular activities that
allows for widespread student participation
in the life of the school. All of these factors
enabled higher achievement, the theory went,
by providing bonds between the student and
the school (Barker & Gump, 1964). In recent
studies, support for the positive int1uence of
small school size has grown. For example,
Lee and Loeb (2000) found that elementary
school size in an urban Chicago sample of
264 (K-8) schools, 5000 teachers, and 23,000
students was correlated with both teacher
beliefs and students' achievement gains. In
the smaller schools (size < 400 students),
teachers took greater responsibility for fostering
students' learning and students showed
greater I-year gains in their mathematics test
scores. Lee and Smith (1995) found a negative
relation between school size and students'
self-reported school engagement (e.g., positive
attitudes toward classes, investing effort in
school, feeling challenged) in the National
Educational Longitudinal Study: 88 datasets
of approximately 12,000 students in 830 high
schools. Similarly, Elder and Conger (2000)
reported that school size was associated with
adolescent developmental outcomes among
high school students in rural Iowa during the
I990s. Across a variety of measures of academic
and social functioning (e.g., grades,
problem behavior), results showed that adolescents
attending smaller schools, on average,
did better than the adolescents attending larger
schools after sociodemographic factors were
controlled.
In summarizing this work, Lee and Smith
(1997) proposed that the most effective K-8
elementary schools with respect to student
achievement gains are those that enroll 400
students or less, whereas the ideal 9-12 secondary
school in this regard enrolls between
600 and 900 students. Students in elementary/middle
schools that are larger than 400,
and those in high schools smaller than 600
or larger than 2, I00, learn less in reading and
mathematics. These findings regarding optimal
size were consistent regardless of the social
Level 2: School Buildings 415
class and racial compOSItIon of the school.
Unfortunately, minority and poor adolescents
are most likely to be concentrated in the most
overcrowded and largest secondary schools
(United Way, 2008).
Extracurricular and Out-of-School
Activities
There is growing interest in the role of extracurricular
activities in adolescent development
(see chapter 7, vol. 2 of this Handbook). Some
people are interested because these activities
can fill time and thus decrease the time
available for adolescents to get in trouble. For
example, in communities where few structured
opportunities for after-school activities exist
(especially poor urban communities), adolescents
are most likely to be involved in highrisk
behaviors such as substance use, crime,
violence, and sexual activity during the period
between 2 and 8 PM. Providing structured activities
either at school or within community organizations
after school when many adolescents
have no adults at home to supervise them is
an important consideration in preventing adolescents
from engaging in high-risk behaviors
(Carnegie Council, 1989; Eccles & Gootman,
2001; Mahoney, Harris, & Eccles, 2006).
Others are interested in the potential benefits
of such activities for adolescent development
(Carnegie Corporation of New York, 1992;
Eccles & Gootman, 200I; Eccles & Templeton,
2002; Mahoney et a\., 2006: Mahoney,
Larson, & Eccles, 2005). There is a positive
link between adolescents' extracurricular
activities and both educational outcomes (e.g.,
high school completion, adult educational
attainment, occupation, and income) and positive
youth development (better mental health
and lower rates of involvement in delinquent
activities), even after controlling for social
class and ability (Barber, Eccles, & Stone,
2001; Eccles & Barber, 1999; Eccles, Barber,
Stone, & Hunt, 2003; Mahoney & Cairns,
1997; McNeal, 1995; Peck, Roeser, Zarrett, &
Eccles, 2007). Participation in sports, in particular,
has been linked to lower likelihood of
416 Schools, Academic Motivation, and Stage-Environment Fit
school dropout, higher rates of college attendance,
greater educational attainment by age
25, and higher occupational attainment at :east
through the 20s, especially among low-achieving
and blue-collar male athletes (Barber et
a!., 200 I; Eccles & Barber, 1999; Eccles &
Templeton, 2002; McNeal, 1995).
Participation in school-based extracurricular
activities has also been linked to increases on
such positive developmental outcomes as high
school GPA, strong school engagement, and
high educational aspirations (Eccles & Barber,
1999; Lamborn, Brown, Mounts, & Steinberg,
1992). Roeser and Peck (2003) found that
among adolescents highly vulnerable to school
disengagement, after-school activity involvement
was associated with a twofold increase in
college attendance rates. In a follow-up study,
specific kinds of activity involvements were
found to underlie this association - those associated
with extracurricular activities at school,
with religious activity, and with volunteering
were particularly important for educational
resilience (Peck et a!., 2008). Similarly, participation
in high school extracurricular activities
and out-of-school volunteer activities predicts
high !evels of adult participation in the political
process and other types of volunteer activities,
continued sport engagement, and betterphysical
and mental health (Youniss, McLellan, & Yates,
1997; Youniss, Yates, & Su, 1997). In contrast
to these positive associations. sports has also
been linked to increased rates of school deviance
and drug and alcohol use (e.g., Eccles &
Barber, 1999; Lamborn et ai., 1992).
These results suggest that participation in
organized extracurricular activities can have
both positive and negative effects. Why? Summarizing
research from several disciplines,
Eccles and Templeton (2002) suggested the
following possible mediating mechanisms:
participation increases the association with
academically oriented peers and exposure
to academic and prosocial values; participation
can lead to enhanced self-esteem and
generalization of a high sense of personal efficacy;
participation can increase exposure to
supportive adults and good mentoring, which,
in turn can lead to superior career guidance
and encouragement; participation can increase
one's social networks and social capital; and
finally participation can increase both soft
skills and other skills needed for success in
school and the transition to adulthood.
Investigators have been especially interested
in the links among peer group formation,
identity formation, and activity involvement
(Eccles & Barber, 1999). For example, Eckert
(1989) explored the link between the peer
group identity formation and both in- and
out-of-school activity involvement. As one
moves into and through adolescence, individuals
become identified with particular groups
of friends or crowds (see also Brown, 1990).
Being a member of one of these crowds helps
structure both what one does with one's time
and the kinds of values and norms to which
one is exposed. Over time, the coalescence of
one's personal identity, one's peer group, and
the kinds of activities one participates in as
a consequence of both one's identity and one's
peer group can shape the nature of one's developmental
pathway into adulthood.
This strong link between activity participation
and peer group membership also provides
an explanation for the negative influences
of sports participation on drug and alcohol
use. Knowing what an adolescent is doing
often tells us a lot about who the adolescent
is with: It is very likely that participation in
organized activity settings directly affects
adolescents' peer groups precisely because
such participation structures a substantial
amount of peer group interaction. One's coparticipants
become one's peer crowd. And such
peer crowds often develop an activity-based
culture, providing adolescents with the opportunity
to identify with a group having a shared
sense of style and commitment. Involvement
in a school organization or sports links an
adolescent to a set of similar peers, provides
shared experiences and goals, and can reinforce
friendships between peers (see Mahoney
et a!., 2005). In turn, these experiences should
influence identity formation as well as other
aspects of adolescent development.
What is important from a school-building
perspective is that schools differ in the extent
to which they provide positive extracurricular
activities for their students. Researchers who
study the advantages of small schools often
point to the fact that more students get to participate
in extracurricular activities in small
schools because there are fewer bodies to fill
all of the available slots (Barker & Gump,
1964; Elder & Conger, 20(0). Large schools
have an overabundance of students to fill all
of the available activity slots. The situation is
even worse in poor, large secondary schools
that have had to cut extracurricular activities to
stay within their budgets. Recently, federal and
state initiatives have emerged to help increase
the availability of after-school programs that
are housed in school buildings. Unfortunately,
most of this money is going to elementary
school and middle school programs rather than
high schools (Eccles & Gootman, 2001).
Unsupervised Spaces
Another important physical dimension of
school buildings to consider is the noninstructional
space that adolescents move in
and through before school, after school, and
between classes. These spaces include the parking
lots and the school grounds, the hallways
and the bathrooms, the sports fields (if there
are any), and the cafeteria(s). One example of
the importance of considering noninstructional
aspects of the school in studies of schooling
and motivation comes from the work of
Astor and colleagues (19981999). Astor's
(1998) interest is in students' experiences of
school violence and their related feelings ofanxiety
or safety while in school. Clearly, concerns
about physical safety can undermine readiness
and motivation to learn. These authors have
found that even though students may respond
affirmatively to a series of questions about how
safe they feel in school in general, they still
can show strong fears in particular areas of the
school or school grounds at particular times of
Level 2: School Buildings 417
the day where violence is most likely to occur.
Forexample, in a recent study ofstudents in five
high school settings in southeastern Michigan,
Astor and colleagues (1999) found that most
violent events reported by students occurred in
what the authors called the "undefined public
spaces" of the school--spaces such as parking
lots, bathrooms, particular hallways, and so on,
where no adults assumed supervisory jurisdiction.
These spaces were undefined in terms of
adult monitoring of behavior in them, and thus
were the frequent sites for fights, unwanted
sexual attention, and so forth.
Fagan and Wilkinson (1998) reviewed
theory and evidence that suggest several different
functional goals that violence can serve
for youth, including the securing of high status
among peers, acquisition of material goods,
dominance of others and retribution for insults
to the self, defiance of authority, and a form
of "rough justice" in situations in which there
is little legitimate adult authority. All of these
goals likely reflect responses to the frustration
or anticipated frustration of basic needs
for autonomy and security in social situations
characterized by a lack of adult supervision
and an absence of opportunities for wholesome
learning, work, and recreation. In sum, understanding
how undefined school spaces affect
the motivation and well-being of students who
are potential victims, as well as how particular
school spaces offer disenfranchised victimizers
a venue to express themselves in violent
ways, can enhance our overall understanding
of lives in school contexts.
School Start and Stop Times
School start time is another tangible schoollevel
characteristic that can int1uence students'
motivation, learning, and development.
Research conducted by Carskadon (1990,
1997) has shown that as children progress
through puberty, they need more sleep and
their natural sleep cycles shift to a desire to
go to sleep later in the evening and to wake
up later in the morning. Unfortunately, secondary
schools typically begin earlier in the
418 Schools, Academic Motivation, and Stage-Environment Fit
morning than primary schools. necessitating
earlier rise times for adolescents (Carskadon,
1997). In concert with other changes. such
as the later hours at which adolescents go to
bed, the earlier school start times of middle
and high school create a "developmental mismatch"
that can both promote daytime sleepiness
and undermine adolescents' ability to
make it to school on time, alert, and ready to
learn. A study of 5th grade students in Israel,
for example, compared of two groups: those in
a school that started at 7:10 AM (early risers)
and those in a school that started at 8:00 AM
(regular risers). Results showed that early risers
slept less, reported more daytime fatigue
and sleepiness, and rcported greater attention
and concentration difficulties in school
compared to their later rising counterparts
(Epstein, Chillag. & Lavie, 1998). The implication
is that the time that schools begin can
have a profound effect on mood, energy. attention,
and, therefore, motivation and learning.
The time at which school ends also has
implications for students' motivation to learn
and development In communities where few
structured opportunities for after-school activities
exist, especially impoverished communities,
young people are more likely to be involved in
high-risk behaviors such as substance use, crime,
violence, and sexual activity, and less likely
to be engaged in productive or academically
relevant activities during the period between
2 and 8 PM. Providing structured activities
either at school or within community organizations
after school when many young people
have no adults at home to supervise them is an
important consideration in preventing students
from engaging in high risk behaviors (Eccles &
Gootman, 2000) and for keeping educationally
vulnerable students on track academically
(Peck, Roeser, Zarrett, & Eccles, 2(08).
SUMMARY o.F SCHOOL-LEVEL
EFFECTS
In this section. we reviewed the impact of
several features of the whole school on adolescent
development. These features included
school climate, school size, curricular tracking
practices, the availability of extracurricular
activities, and the use of noninstructional
spaces. There is very strong evidence that each
of these schoolwide characteristics impacts
adolescent development. Often, between-school
variations on these characteristics result from
school district policies or financial constraints
that are beyond the control of the building's
principal and staff. Reform efforts, however,
have shown that changes can be created in
each of these domains and that such changes
can have a positive impact on the development
of the adolescents attending the refomled
school.
LEVEL 3: SCHOOL DISTRICTS
AND SECONDARY SCHOOL
TRANSITIONS
School transitions are an excellent example
of how the multiple levels of schools interact
to affect adolescent development. All school
districts must decide how they will group
the grade levels within the various school
buildings. One common arrangement is to
group children in kindergarten through 6th
grade in elementary schools, young adolescents
in grades 7-9 in junior high schools, and
older adolescents in grades 10-12 in senior
high schools. Another common arrangement
places the transitions after grades 5 and 8,
creating elementary schools, middle schools,
and senior high schools. The third popular
arrangement groups young people in grades
K-8 in one school and then grades 9-12 in
a high school. In each of these arrangements,
the students typically move to a new and often
larger building at each of the major transition
points. These moves typically also involve
increased bussing and exposure to a much
more diverse student body. In this section, we
discuss two of these transitions: the transition
from elementary to middle or junior high
school and the transition from middle orjunior
high school to high school. Because most of
the empirical work has focused on the junior
high-middle school transition, we emphasize
Level 3: School Districts and Secondary School Transitions 419
this transition. Recent research. however, suggests
quite similar developmentally inappropriate
changes with the transition to high school.
The Middle-Grades School Transition
There is substantial evidence of declines in academic
motivation and achievement across the
early-adolescenceandhigh school years (Dweck,
2002; Eccles & Midgley, 1989; Eccles et aL,
1993; Finn, 2006; Fredricks & Eccles, 2002;
Jacobs, Lanza, Osgood, Eccles. & Wigfield,
2002; Roeser. Eccles, & Freedman-Doan,
1999). These declines often coincide with the
transition into either middle/junior high or high
school. For example, there is a marked decline
in some early adolescents' school grades as
they move into junior high school (Simmons &
Blyth, 1987). Similar declines occur for such
motivational constructs as interest in school
(Wigfield et aL, 2006), intrinsic motivation
(Gottfried. Fleming, & Gottfried, 200 I: Harter,
1998; Harter, Whitesell, & Kowalski, 1992),
self-concepts/self-perceptions and confidence
in one's intellectual abilities (Wigfield, Eccles,
MacIver, Reuman, & Midgley, 1991), mastery
goal orientation (Anderman & Midgley, 1997),
and a sense of belonging at school (Anderman.
1999). There are also increases in test anxiety
(Wigfield et aL, 2006). focus on self-evaluation
and performance rather than task mastery
(Anderman & Midgley, 1997), and both
truancy and school dropout (Rumberger, 1995:
Rumberger & Thomas, 2000). Furthermore,
increasing evidence indicates that these
declines predict subsequent school dropout and
high school failure (Connell, Halpern-Felsher,
Clifford, Crichlow, & Usinger, 1995; Connell,
Spencer, & Aber, 1994; Finn, 2006; Roeser &
Eccles, 1998; Roeser, Eccles, & Strobel, 1998).
Although these changes are not extreme for
most adolescents, there is sufficient evidence
of declines in various indicators of academic
motivation, behavior, and self-perception over
the early adolcscent years to make one wonder
what is happening (sce Eccles & Midgley,
1989; Ryan & Patrick, 2001). Further, although
few studies have gathered information on ethnic
or social-class differcnces in thesc declines,
academic failure and dropout are especially
problematic among some ethnic groups and
among youth from communities and families
of low socioeconomic status. It is probable then
that these groups are particularly likely to show
these declines in academic motivation and selfperception
as they move into and through the
secondary school years.
Several explanations have been offered for
these seemingly negative changes in academic
motivation: Some point to the intrapsychic
upheaval associated with young adolescent
development (see Arnett, 1999). Others point
to the simultaneous occurrence of several life
changes. For example, Simmons and Blyth
(1987) attributed these declines, particularly
among females, to the coincidence of the
junior high school transition with pubertal
development. Still others point to the naturc of
the junior high school environment itself rather
than the transition per se.
Extending person-environment fit theory
(see Hunt, 1975) into a developmental perspective
(stage-environment fit theory), Eccles
and Midgley (1989) proposed that these negative
developmental changes result from the
fact that traditional junior high schools do not
provide developmentally appropriate educational
environments for young adolescents.
The authors suggested that different types of
educational environments are needed for different
age groups to meet developmental needs
and foster continued developmental growth.
Exposure to the developmentally appropriate
environment would facilitate both motivation
and continued growth; in contrast, exposure to
developmentally inappropriate environments,
especially developmentally regressive environments,
should create a particularly poor
person-environment fit which should lead to
declines in motivation as well as detachment
from the goals of the institution. What is critical
to this argument is that the transition itself
is not the cause of the declines; instead, it is
the nature ofthe school into which the students
move. Within this framework, the right kinds
420 Schools, Academic Motivation, and Stage-Environment Fit
of middle school reforms can be quite effective
at reducing these declines.
Two approaches have been used to study
the middle school transition: one focused on
more global school-level characteristics such
as school size, degree of departmentalization,
and extent of bureaucratization and the other
on more specific classroom and motivational
dynamics. The first type is best exemplified by
the work of Simmons and Blyth (1987). They
pointed out that most junior high schools are
substantially larger than elementary schools
and that instruction is more likely to be organized
departmentally. As a result, junior high
school teachers typically teach several different
groups of students, making it very difficult for
students to form a close relationship with any
school-affiliated adult precisely at the point
in development when there is a great need for
guidance and support from nonfamilial adults.
Such changes in student-teacher relationships
are also likely to undermine the sense of community
and trust between students and teachers,
leading to a lowered sense of efficacy
among the teachers, an increased reliance
on authoritarian control practices by the teachers,
and an increased sense of alienation among
the students. Finally, such changes are likely to
decrease the probability that any particular student's
difficulties will be noticed early enough
to get the student necessary help, thus increasing
the likelihood that students on the edge
will be allowed to slip onto negative motivational
and performance trajectories, leading to
increased school failure and dropout.
The latter is best exemplified by the work
of Eccles and Midgley and by the studies on
middle school reform initiated by the Carnegie
Foundation after their report Turning Points
(Carnegie Council, 1989; Jackson & Davis,
2000). These scholars have looked at several
specific aspects of the classroom and school
environment and have shown that negative
changes in these aspects of student' experiences
at school as they make the middle orjunior high
school transition are linked to the declines in
school motivation and engagement. They have
also shown that changing these aspects of the
middle school environment can be effective in
reducing the declines in school engagement
often associated with this school transition
(Anderman, Maehr, & Midgley, 1999; Maehr &
Midgley, 1996).
Grade-Related Differences in
Teacher Beliefs
Differences in all types of teacher beliefs have
been shown in studies comparing elementary
and middle grades teachers. For example,
junior high school teachers on average have
lower confidence in their own teaching efficacy
than do elementary school teachers (i.e., their
ability to teach and influence all of the students
in their classes; Feldlaufer. Midgley, & Eccles,
1988; Midgley & Feldlaufer, 1987; Midgley,
Feldlaufer, & Eccles, 1989a). An equally troubling
difference occurs for teachers' views of
their roles in their students' lives. For example,
Roeser and colleagues found that with increasing
grade level, middle school (6th-8th grades)
teachers are less likely to endorse the notion
that students' mental health concerns are part
of the teacher role (Roeser & Midgley, 1997;
Roeser, Marachi, & Gehlbach, 2000). Thus,
at a time when adolescents need academic
and social-emotional guidance and support
from both parents and nonparental adults (i.e.,
during early adolescence), teachers appear
less likely to be able to provide such support
given the number of students they teach, their
educational training, and the size of secondary
schools. This creates holes in the safety
net available to adolescents at a time when they
are in particularly acute need of adult support
and guidance (Simmons & Blyth, 1987). It is
not surprising that the most at-risk youth often
fall through these holes.
Grade-Related Differences in
Authority Relationships
Despite the increasing maturity of students,
junior high school teachers place a greater
emphasis on teacher control and discipline
Level 3: School Districts and Secondary School Transitions 421
and provide fewer opportunities for student
decision making, choice, and self-management
than do elementary school teachers (e.g.,
FeIdlaufer et aI., 1988; Midgley & Feldlaufer,
1987). Both stage--environment fit theory
(Eccles et aI., 1993) and self-determination
theory suggest that these practices will create
a mismatch between young adolescents' desires
for autonomy and control and their perceptions
of the opportunities in their learning environments;
this mismatch is predicted to lead to a
decline in the adolescents' intrinsic motivation
and interest in school. Evidence supports this
prediction (see Wigfield et aI., 2006).
Grade-Related Differences in
Affective Relationships
Junior high and middle school classrooms
are often characterized by a less personal and
positive teacher-student relationship than are
elementary school classrooms (Feldlaufer
et aI., 1988: Midgley, Feldlaufer, & Eccles,
1988). Given the association of classroom
climate and student motivation reviewed
earlier, it should not be surprising that moving
into a less supportive classroom leads to
a decline in these young adolescents' interest
in the subject matter being taught in that classroom,
particularly among the low achieving
students (Furrer & Skinner, 2003; Anderman &
Anderman, 1999; Midgley et aI., 1988).
Grade-Related Differences in
Grading Practices
There is no stronger predictor of students' selfconfidence
and efficacy than the grades they
receive (Guay, Marsh, & Boivin, 2003). If
academic marks decline with the junior high
or middle school transition, then adolescents'
self-perceptions and academic motivation
should also decline, In fact, junior high school
teachers do use stricter and more social comparison-based
standards than do elementary
school teachers to assess student competency
and to evaluate student performance, leading to
a drop in grades for many young adolescents as
they make the transition to junior high school
(Alspaugh, 1998; Eccles & Midgley, 1989;
Finger & Silverman, 1966; Harter, Whitesell, &
Kowalski, 1992; Simmons & Blyth, 1987).
Imagine what such a decline in grades might
do to young adolescents' self-confidence and
motivation. Although Simmons and Blyth
(1987) did not look at this specific question,
they did document the impact of this grade
drop on subsequent school performance and
dropout. Even after controlling for a youth's
performance prior to the school transition,
the magnitude of the grade drop following
the transition into either junior high school
or middle school was a major predictor of
leaving school early in both studies (see also
Finn, 2006; Roderick, 1993; Roderick &
Camburn, 1999).
Grade-Related Differences in
Motivational Goal Context
Several of the changes just noted are linked
together in goal theory. Classroom practices
related to grading practices, support for autonomy,
and instructional organization affect the
relative salience of mastery versus performance
goals that students adopt as they engage
in the learning tasks at school. Given changes
associated with these practices, it is not surprising
that both teachers and students think
that their school environment is becoming
increasingly focused on competition, relative
ability, and social comparison as the young
adolescents progress from elementary to middle
or junior high school (Midgley, Anderman,
& Hicks, 1995), Midgley et al. (1995) found
that both teachers and students indicated
that performance-focused goals were more
prevalent and task-focused goals were less
prevalent in the middle school classrooms than
in the elementary school classrooms. In addition,
the elementary school teachers reported
using task-focused instructional strategies
more frequently than did the middle school
teachers. Finally, at both grade levels the
extent to which teachers were task-focused
predicted the students' and the teachers' sense
of personal efficacy. It is thus no surprise that
422 Schools, Academic Motivation, and Stage-Environment Fit
personal efficacy was lower among the middle
school participants than among the elementary
school participants. Extending this work,
Roeser et al. (2002) looked at how elementary
and middle school teachers' motivational
practices and perceptions of the learning
environment for teachers was related to their
perceptions of their own work environments
using both self- and principal reports.
Results showed that teachers who were more
performance-oriented based on self-reported
instructional practices also (I) believed there
was an emphasis on performance goals for
students in the wider school environment; (2)
worked in schools where their school principals
reported greater use of performance-oriented
practices and policies in the school as a whole;
and (3) believed there was competition among
staff and inequitable treatment of teachers by
the administration (school performance goal
structure for teachers). Similarly, teachers at
both levels who reported a greater mastery orientation
also (I) perceived a broader emphasis
on such goals for students in the wider
school culture and (2) perceived an emphasis
on innovation and improvement for teachers
among the statT and administration. Thcse
results suggest that the changing nature of the
motivational climate for learning for students
as they progress through school is paralleled
by a changing motivational climate for teaching
for teachers as well.
Anderman et al. (1999) also extended this
work by comparing two groups of young
adolescents: a group who moved into a middle
school that emphasized task-focused instructional
practices, and a group who moved into a
middle school that emphasized more traditional
performance/ability-focused instructional practices.
Although these two groups of students
did not differ in their motivational goats prior
to the school transition, they did after the
transition. As predicted, the adolescents who
moved into the first type of middle school were
less likely to show an increase in their extrinsic
motivational and performance-oriented motivational
goals.
Summary
Changes such as those just reviewed are likely
to have a negative effect on many children's
motivational orientation toward school at any
grade level. However, Eccles and Midgley
(1989) argued that these types of school environmental
changes are particularly harmful at
early adolescence given what is known about
psychological development during this stage
of life. Evidence from a variety of sources
suggests that early adolescent development
is characterized by increases in desire for
autonomy, peer orientation, self-focus and
self-consciousness, salience of identity issues,
concern over heterosexual relationships, and
capacity for abstract cognitive activity (see
Brown, 1990; Eccles & Midgley, 1989;
Simmons & Blyth, )987; Wigfield, Byrnes, &
Eccles, 2006). Simmons and Blyth (1987)
argued that adolescents need safe, intellectually
challenging environments to adapt to these
shifts. In light of these needs, the environmental
changes often associated with transition to
junior high school are likely to be especially
harmful in that they emphasize competition,
social comparison, a performance-goal orientation
rather than a mastery-goal orientation, and
self-assessment of ability at a time of heightened
self·focus; they decrease decision making
and choice at a time when the desire for
control is growing; and they disrupt the opportunity
for a close relationship between students
and teachers at a time when adolescents may
be in special need of close adult relationships
outside of the home. The nature of these environmental
changes, coupled with the normal
course of individual development, is likely to
result in a developmental mismatch so that the
fit between the young adolescent and the classroom
environment is particularly poor, increasing
the risk of negative motivational outcomes.
especially for adolescents who are having
difficulty succeeding in school academically.
The High School Transition
Although there is less work on the transition
to high school. the existing work suggests
Level 3: School Districts and Secondary School Transitions 423
quite similar problems (Coleman & Hoffer,
1987; Jencks & Brown, 1975; Roeser &
Gonzalez, 1997; Wehlage, Rutter, Smith,
Lesko, & Fernandez, 1989). For example, high
schools are typically even larger and more
bureaucratic than are junior high schools and
middle schools. Lee and Smith (2001) provided
numerous examples of how the sense of community
among teachers and students is undermined
by the size and bureaucratic structure
of most high schools. There is little opportunity
for students and teachers to get to know
each other, and, likely as a consequence, there
is distrust between them and little attachment
to a common set of goals and values. There is
also little opportunity for the students to form
mentor-like relationships with nonfamilial
adults, and little effort is made to make instruction
relevant to the students. Such environments
are likely to undermine further the motivation
and involvement of many students, especially
those not doing particularly well academically,
those not enrolled in the favored classes,
and those who are alienated from the values of
the adults in the high school (e.g., Roeser et aI.,
1999). These hypotheses need to be tested.
The few available studies provide initial
support (see Lee & Smith, 200 I; Roeser et aI.,
1999). For example, Fine (1991) documented
how secondary school practices cumulate
to drive out students who are not doing very
well academically. Similarly, studies of ethnic
minority youth provide extensive evidence that
alienating and nonincIusive high school practices
undermine the school engagement and
achievement of students ofcolor (e.g., DarlingHammond,
1997; Deyhle & leCompte, 1999;
Ferguson, 1998; Jackson & Davis, 2000; Lee &
Smith, 1993; Suarez-Orozco & Suarez-Orozco,
1995; Taylor et aI., 1994; Valencia, 1991).
Recent work by Midgley and colleagues provides
additional support. In a longitudinal
study of adolescents from elementary school
to high school, they were able to look at the
impact of both the middle school and the high
school transition. They found less evidence of
negative changes in school experiences as the
students moved into middle school than when
they moved into high school. As one would
expect with the stage-environment fit theory,
they found that the motivational declines were
associated with the high school rather than the
middle school transition (see Midgley, 2002,
for relevant chapters). They concluded that
middle school reform efforts have been effective
in changing the middle school environment
in ways that suppmt rather than undermine the
young adolescents' school engagement and
motivation. Further, they concluded that reform
is now needed at the high school level. These
reforms look very much like the reforms that
were advocated for the middle school years.
Most large public high schools also organize
instruction around curricular tracks that sort
students into different groups. As a result,
there is even greater diversity in the educational
experiences of high school students than
of middle grades students; unfortunately, this
diversity is often associated more with the
students' social class and ethnic group than
with differences in the students' talents and
interests (Lee & Smith, 200 I).
Consequently, curricular tracking has
served to reinforce social stratification rather
than foster optimal education for all students,
particularly in large schools (Dornbusch,
1994; Lee & Smith, 2001). Lee and Smith
documented that average school achievement
levels do not benefit from this curricular tracking.
Quite the contrary-evidence comparing
Catholic high schools with public high schools
suggests that average school achievement levels
are increased when all students are required
to take the same challenging curriculum. This
conclusion is true even after one has controlled
for student selectivity factors. A more thorough
examination of how the organization and
structure of our high schools influence cognitive,
motivational, and achievement outcomes
is needed.
Summary
In this section we summarized the evidence
related to the impact of school transitions on
424 Schools, Academic Motivation, and Stage-Environment Fit
development. As one would expect given
what we now know about the ecological nature
of the junior high school transition, many early
adolescents, particularly the low achievers and
the highly anxious, experience great difficulty
with this transition. In many ways, this transition
can be characterized as a developmentally
regressive shift in one's school context.
Consistent with our stage-environment fit
perspective, such a shift has negative consequences
for many youths' school engagement
and performance. Also consistent with
our stage-environment fit perspective, there
are now an increasing number of intervention
studies showing that the junior high school
transition does not have to yield negative consequences
for vulnerable youth. Educational
institutions for the middle grades can be
designed in a developmentally progressive
manner; when they are, the majority of early
adolescents gain from this school transition.
Finally, emerging evidence on the senior high
school transition suggests that reforms are
badly needed at this level.
LEVEL 4: SCHOOLS AS
EMBEDDED ORGANIZATIONS IN
THE LARGER COMMUNITY
The most distal aspect of school intluence on
adolescent development lies in the fact that
schools are embedded in much larger social
systems. Characteristics of the communities
and the nations in which schools are placed
influence everything about what goes on in
the school building itself. Discussing all of the
macro influences is beyond the scope of a
single chapter. In this section we focus on two
macro characteristics: private versus public
schools and school resources.
Public Versus Private Schools
The question of whether public versus private
schools do abetterjobmotivating adolescent students
and reducing achievement gaps between
those from different social backgrounds is
long-standing. Because of their record with
socially disadvantaged students in particular,
various researchers have commented on the
"religious schools effect" ofCatholic schools in
terms of student achievement and educational
attainments, especially among adolescent
non-Catholics, those of lower socioeconomic
status, and African Americans and Latinos living
in urban areas (Bryk et aI., 1993; Coleman,
Hoffer, & Kilgore, 1982: Jeynes, 2002). In
a meta-analysis of the effects of Catholic religious
school attendance and personal religious
commitment on academic achievement and
school conduct, for instance. Jeynes (2002)
found that, after accounting for socioeconomic
status and gender, the effect sizes for
religious school attendance were between 0.20
and 0.25 of a standard deviation for both academic
achievement and school conduct. These
effects were particularly evident for Black and
Hispanic secondary school students. Although
some suggest these effects are due to Catholic
schools selecting superior students, others
have suggested that this claim is overdrawn
and that the effects of a Catholic school education
on achievement are quite robust (e.g.,
Bryk et al., 1993; Sander, 1995).
Three core features of the culture of these
schools have been examined as instrumental
in the reduction of inequality that are relevant
here: a communal organization, a philosophy
of human dignity, and a restricted range of
curricular offerings (Bryk et ai., 1993). First,
Catholic secondary schools tend to be somewhat
smaller than public secondary schools
and have strong communal culture grounded
in a rich array of rituals and activities outside
of the classroom where teachers and students
get to know one another beyond their schoolrelated
roles. This community environment
provides a social basis for motivating school
learning-a set of caring relationships and
corresponding sense of community become
faculty, staff and students become major
motivators of in-school behavior.
In addition, these secondary schools
are characterized by a set of shared moral
commitments and a spiritual ideology that
emphasize the dignity of each individual and
Level 4: Schools as Embedded Organizations in the Larger Community 425
a corresponding ethic of care. These shared
beliefs are grounded in a religious theology
(Christian personalism) in which social justice
and the desire to provide a humanistic education
for all individuals are paramount, and in
which the dignity of the individual as having
moral worth is preeminent to a view in which
worth is accorded to individuals based on relative
social and academic statuses. Thus, the
school culture is one that bridges two worlds
for individuals-a moral-spiritual one in
which the dignity of all individuals is recognized
and acknowledge as primary; and a pragmatic
one in which individuals are prepared
for the demands of economic and civic life in
a capitalist democracy. It is our view that this
moral center and related humanistic approach
to education that characterizes the culture of
Catholic schools affords young people a nonstatus-based
foundation of worth and a sense
of belonging and corresponding sense of dignity
that disrupts pervasive negative images in
the wider culture that may afflict ethnic minority
youth and undermine their perceptions of
themselves as successful students.
The final, related feature ofCatholic secondary
schools is their "delimited technical core"
(Bryk et al., 1993, p. 297). Students in these
schools have many required classes and less
electives. Generally, all students are exposed
to a common curriculum that the faculty
expect them to learn. Although administrative
sorting still occurs, there are less "tracks" and
less differentiation of curricula by such tracks.
The message to students is that every student
is not only capable of, but is expected to, learn
the core curriculum.
Similarly, Eccles, Lord, and Midgley
(1991) found that student outcomes, as rated
by both teachers and students, were better in
those attending K-8 schools than those who
made a transition into a middle or junior high
school during grade 6, 7, or 8. Students in
K-8 schools were less likely to be truant, violent,
or use substances at school, and were more
likely to say they felt prepared for and interested
in their classwork compared to students
in middle or junior high schools. Furthermore,
students in the K-8 schools reported higher
self-concepts and greater locus of control.
received higher grades, and did better on standardized
achievement tests than those in the
middle grades schools. These K-8 schools
were predominantly private religious schools
(74%) and were smaller size. Both sector
(religious) and size (small) were identified
by Eccles et aI. (1991) as factors that could
explain why students in K-8 schools showed
greater student commitment and engagement
than those who were in middle schools or
junior high schools during these grades.
School Resources
School resources in terms of adequate materials,
a safe environment, and continuity of
teaching staff are often considered important
for adolescents' learning and well-being.
Early studies of school effects on adolescents'
development and achievement were based
on economic models in which tl]e relation of
so-called tangible school inputs (e.g., school
resources or size) to student outputs (e.g.,
achievement and attainments) was the focus.
Although the central question of how much
school resources matter for raising achievement
and reducing inequality in student
outcomes is still being debated, school district-level
variations in such school resources
are likely a major contributor to the continuing
inequity in educational outcomes for several
minority groups in the United States.
Evidence does show that tangible physical
plant of the school can affect students'
behavioral conduct in schooL In their study of
12 London area secondary schools. Rutter and
colleagues (1979) found that although the age
of the school buildings was not significantly
related to achievement or behavioral outcomes
in students, the cleanliness and use of plants,
pictures, and other decorations inside the
school buildings was a significant predictor of
the level of behavioral misconduct students displayed
in the school (after accounting for their
social background). The more inhospitable and
426 Schools, Academic Motivation, and Stage-Environment Fit
cold the school was, the greater the misconduct
of students. This finding may ret1ect the
"broken windows" theory (Wilson & Kelling,
1982) of delinquency and crime in relation
to school physical environments. The basic
thesis is that abandoned and dirty physical
spaces connote a message of a lack of ownership
and monitoring, and therefore become
seedbeds for criminal activity and violence. It
may be harder to value school and feel good
about oneself as a learner in a broken-down,
leaky school building that communicates a
serious lack of societal value for teachers and
students (Kozol, 2006). It also may be harder
for an adolescent to be intrinsically motivated
in a school environment in which poor lighting,
crowding, noise, and debris are features
that are as common as technology, books, and
adequate desks and chairs (e.g., Clark et aI.,
2006; Evans, 2004).
Unfortunately, about 37% of African
American youth and 32% of Latino youth,
compared to 5% of European American and
22% of Asian youth, are enrolled in the 47
largest city school districts in this country; in
addition, African American and Latino youth
attend some of the poorest school districts in
this country. In turn, 28% of the youth enrolled
in city schools live in poverty, and 55% are eligible
for free or reduced-cost lunch, suggesting
that class may be as important (or more important)
as race in the differences that emerge.
Teachers in these schools report feeling less
safe than do teachers in other school districts.
dropout rates are highest, and achievement
levels at all grades are the lowest (Council
of the Great City Schools, 1992; United Way,
2008). Finally, schools that serve these populations
are less likely than schools serving more
advantaged populations to offer either highquality
remedial services or advanced courses
and courses that facilitate the acquisition of
higher order thinking skills and active learning
strategies. Even adolescents who are extremely
motivated may find it difficult to perform well
under these educational circumstances (United
Way, 2008).
SECONDARY SCHOOL
REFORM EFFORTS
We want to end our chapter with a discussion of
several promising efforts at secondary school
reforms. As noted earlier, in 1989 the Carnegie
Corporation issued the report Turning Reports
calling for the reform of education for early
adolescents. Based in part on notions linked to
stage environment fit as well as linked to the
needs of early adolescent children, they suggested
that the middle grades should have the
following characteristics:
• 	 Create small learning communities that will
allow close relationships to emerge between
teachers and students.
• 	 Teach a core academic program to everyone
that includes opportunities for service.
• 	 Ensure success for all by eliminating tracking,
using cooperative learning, providing
t1exible scheduling and adequate resources
to meet the learning needs of all students.
• 	 Empower teachers and administrators to
take control of and responsibility for their
schools.
• 	 Staff schools with teachers who are trained
to teach early adolescents.
• 	 Foster health and fitness.
• 	 Reengage families.
• 	 Connect schools with communities.
Similar recommendations have been offered
by several other scholars, including Connell
and colleagues at the Institute for Research
and Reform in Education (Connell, 2003),
Roderick (1993), Juvonen et al. (2004), Lehr,
Johnson, Bremer, Cosio, Thompson (2004), as
well as the many professionals interested in
the "Middle School Philosophy" (see Feiner
et al., 1997; Jackson & Davis, 2000; Lipsitz,
Mizell, Jackson, & Austin, 1997; Maciver &
Plank, 1997; MacIver, Young, & Washburn,
2002; Midgley & Edelin, 1998). An increasing
number of scholars and student advocates
have argued for a return to the K-8 format
because it seems to create more developmentally
suitable environments for the early
adolescent years (e.g., Juvonen et aI., 2004;
Simmons & Blyth. 1987).
The importance of small schools, schools
within schools, or small learning communities
has been stressed in many reform proposals.
along with the need to provide rigorous,
challenging, and high-quality instruction.
Small learning communities are likely to be
particularly important during this developmental
period because they support the emergence
of strong teacher-student relationships
that will allow students some autonomy within
a very tight support network. These characteristics
should support stronger engagement and
identification with the school institution. When
engagement is accompanied by high-quality
instruction then academic failure should be
preventable. Interestingly. there are calls for
quite similar reforms at the high school leveL
Not surprisingly, the Carnegie Corporation
report stimulated a major reassessment of
schooling for early adolescents throughout
the country. The results have been disappointing.
Many districts changed from a junior high
school fom1at to a middle school format based
on the fact that middle school philosophy
includes many of the components outlined in
the Carnegie Corporation report. Unfortunately,
many of these changes failed to produce truly
successful middle schools. Often, the new middle
schools looked a lot like the old junior high
schools except for the fact that they contained
grades 6-8 rather than grades 7-9 (Jackson &
Davis, 2001; Juvonen et aI., 2004).
In 2000, Jackson and Davis (2000) summarized
the findings of these many middle school
reform efforts. They concluded that the following
middle grade school characteristics support
both learning and positive youth development:
A curriculum grounded in rigorous
academic standards and current knowledge
about how students learn best and is relevant
to the concerns of adolescents
• 	 Instructional methods designed to prepare
all students to achieve at the highest
standards
Secondary School Reform Efforts 427
• 	 Organizational structures that support a
climate of intellectual development and
a caring community with shared educational
goals
• 	 Staff who are trained experts at teaching
young adolescents
• 	 Ongoing professional development opportunities
for the staff
• 	 Democratic governance that involves both
the adults and the adolescents
• 	 Extensive involvement of parents and the
community
• 	 High levels of safety and practices that
support good health
Similar conclusions were reached by
Juvonen and colleagues (2004), Lehr et al.
(2004), and the NRC (2004) in their reviews of
well-studied intervention and reform efforts.
Juvonen et al. (2004) also argued that K-8
structures might be more successful at implementing
the types of classroom characteristics
and building-level opportunities most supportive
of continued academic engagement and
positive youth development.
Together, these recommendations fit very
nicely with the stage-environment fit perspective
we outlined earlier. They are consistent
with both the developmental needs of early
adolescence and what we know about highquality
instruction. We would like to provide
a brief description of four promising programs
as examples ofchanges that can be made at various
levels within the secondary school context
that could support these types of changes: the
Coca-Cola Valued Youth Program (CCVyp,
www.idra.org/CCVYP/default.htm#vyp). the
Teen Outreach Program (www.comerstone
.to), Oyserman's possible selves intervention
(Oyserman, Terry, & Bybee, 2002) and the
First-Things-First whole school reform program
(Institute for Research and Reform in
Education lIRRE], 2004). We pick these particular
programs because they relate directly to
the developmental needs during adolescence.
The CCVYP took unique advantage of adolescents'
desire to make a difference in their
428 Schools, Academic Motivation, and Stage-Environment Fit
community. It offers 7th- through 12th-grade
students considered to be at risk for dropping
out of school an opportunity to tutor elementary
school students who were also identified
as being at risk. The tutors are provided with
training and support by teacher coordinators.
Such a program is unique in its attention to
providing adolescent youth with a meaningful
and authentic opportunity to "matter" in their
school community. By allowing them to tutor
younger children, the program also provides
academically challenged youths with an opportunity
to feel good about their academic skills
and their ability to help other children do well
in school. Finally, it provides an unobtrusive
and respectful means for the tutors' teachers to
become both mentors and protectors.
The Teen Outreach Program (TOP; Allen,
Kuperminc. Philliber, & Herre, 1994; Allen,
Philliber, Herrling, & Kuperminc, 1997), a
national volunteer service program, is designed
to both help adolescents understand and evaluate
their future life options and develop life skills and
autonomy in a context featuring strong social ties
to adult mentors. The three program components
are supervised community service, classroombased
discussions of service experiences, and
classroom-based discussion and activities related
to social-deveiopmental tasks of adolescence.
Participants choose their volunteer activities with
the assistance oftrained staff who help match the
individual's interests and skills with community
needs. TOP sites typically offer a minimum of 20
hours per year of volunteer service for each participant.
In one evaluated program, participants
averaged 45.8 hours of volunteer service during
their 9 months of involvement.
The Teen Outreach Curriculum provides a
framework for classroom meetings that include
structured discussions, group exercises,
role-playing exercises, guest speakers and
informational presentations. These discussions
are designed to help students prepare for, and
learn from, their service experiences by dealing
with topics such as lack of self-confidence,
social skills, assertiveness, and self-discipline.
Trained facilitators lead discussions of such
topics as values clarification, managing family
relationships, and handling close relationships.
Participants are encouraged to discuss their
feelings and attitudes.
Several evaluation studies have been done
on TOP (Allen et aI., 1994, 1997). The students
who performed more volunteer service wcre at
lower risk for course failure while they were
involved in the program; they were also less
likely to be suspended from school and to get
pregnant. Also, implcmentation quality of the
TOPS curriculum did not significantly influence
program outcomes (Allen, Philliber & Hoggson,
1990), suggesting that it is the community service
and possibly the mentoring components
that are the most important program.
The intervention work by Oyserman and
colleagues (Oyserman, Gant, & Ager, 1995)
is based on the importance of group and
individual differences in possible selves for
students' engagement in school. Oyserman
et al. (1995) found that African American students
are more motivated to invest time and
encrgy in mastering school learning materials
if they include academic success in their future
possiblc selves and if these African American
adolescents included academic success in
their view of what it mcans to be a successful
African American (Oyserman et aI., 1995).
Subsequently, Oyserman and colleagues have
developed and tested school-based interventions
dcsigned to increase the salience of
academic achievement in both individuals'
possible selves and ethnic identity. For example,
using a randomized treatment intervention
design, Oyserman et al. (2002) provided
a group of African American adolescents
with a series of experiences designed to help
them expand both their views of themselves
in various future occupations and the means
of obtaining these various occupational goals.
These means included increased commitment
to educational success. Those students who
werc part of the treatment reported greater
bonding with school and greater concern with
doing well in school than the controls. They
also evidenced better school attendance.
First Things First, created by the Institute
for Research and Reform in Education, entails
three basic strategies: the creation of small
learning communities, the creation of strong
connections between family and school, and
the provision of high-quality instruction. These
strategies were selected because they facilitate
the following four experiences for students:
1.	 "Continuity of care" and strong studentteacher
relationships
2. 	 "Flexible scheduling that allows for additional
instructional time and attention to
individual learning needs"
3. 	 "High, clear and fair standards for academics
and conduct"
4. 	 Exposure to "enriched and diverse learning
opportunities"
To accomplish these goals, IRRE works
with districts to provide the following three
experiences for the teachers and staff: (I)
"equip, empower, and expect staffto implement
effective instructional practices"; (2) flexibility
to redirect resources to meet emerging needs;
and (3) "ensuring collective responsibility."
(All quotes are from pages 6 and 7 of IRRE,
2004). All three of these features require
school districts to put together teams of teachers
that work with the same students over
time and across school years. These teams
are provided with common planning time and
with remedial curricular materials that can be
used to help students succeed. The teams are
also provided with resources for their own
continued development as high-quality teachers
and mentors. All students are provided
with a family advocate who works with 15-20
students and their families over time to help
the students succeed. This reform has been
implemented in many school districts across
the country and has been carefully evaluated
in the Kansas City, Kansas, school district. The
results of this evaluation are quite positive for
both the middle and senior high school grades.
The program both reduces high school dropout
and increases academic performance, as well
Summary and Conclusions 429
as closing the gap in academic performance
between White and Black students.
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
We have outlined many ways in which schools
affect the development of adolescents and
stressed the need to take both a systems-level
and a developmental perspective on schools.
We began by pointing out how the multiple
levels of school organization interact to shape
the day-to-day experiences of adolescents
and teachers. We also stressed the interface
of schools as complex changing institutions
with the developmental trajectories of individuals.
To understand how schools influence
development, one needs to understand change
at both the individual and the institutional
leveL Stage--environment fit theory provides
an excellent example of the linking of these
two developmental trajectories. Imagine two
trajectories; one at the school level and one
at the individual level. Schools change in many
ways over the grade levels. The nature of these
changes can be developmentally appropriate
or inappropriate in terms of the extent to which
they foster continued development toward
the transition into adulthood and maturity.
Youth travel through this changing context
as they move from grade to grade and from
school to schooL Similarly, youths develop
and change as they get older. They also have
assumptions about their increasing maturity
and the privileges it ought to afford them.
Optimal development is most likely when these
two trajectories of change are in synchrony
with each other-that is, when the changes in
the context mesh well with, and perhaps even
slightly precede, the patterns of change occurring
at the individual level.
We also discussed the many ways in which
experiences at school are influenced by the
larger cultural and social milieu in which
schools are nested. Culturally shared beliefs
influence how we fund our schools, what and
how we teach, and how we design school policy
430 Schools, Academic Motivation, and Stage-Environment Fit
at all levels. These policies, in tum, influence
the types ofconnections that schools have with
families, communities, highereducationalinstitutions'
the labor market, and the daily experiences
of youths in the schools they attend. On
some levels, our schools are succeeding very
well in supporting both learning and positive
youth development for many groups of people.
At other levels, schools are not supporting
optimal learning or preparation for adult development
for many young people. Adolescents
of color, particularly African Americans,
Latinos, and Native Americans, still perform
less well than European Americans and some
groups of Asian Americans (for discussions,
see, e.g., Jencks & Phillips, 1998; Steinberg,
Dornbusch, & Brown, 1992; Suarez-Orozco &
Suarez-Orozco, 1995; Valencia, 1991).
REFERENCES
Ainley. M., Hidi, S.. & Berndorff, D. (2002). Interest, learning, and
the psychological processes that mediate their relationship.
Journal ofEducational Psychology, 94, 545-561.
Allen. ), P., Kuperminc, G., Philliber, S., & HelTe. K. (1994).
Programmatic prevention of adolescent problem behaviors:
The role of autonomy. relatednes~, and volunteer service in
the Teen Outreach Program. American Journal (~f Community
Pswhology, 22(5), 617··638.
Allen, J. P., Philliber. S., & Hoggson, N. (1990). School·based prevention
of teen-age pregnancy and school dropout: Process evaluation
of the national replication of the Teen Outreach Program.
American Journal ofCommunity PSVI'h%gy, 18(4),505-524.
Allen, J. P.. Philliber, S., Herrling, S., & Kuperminc, G. p, (1997).
Preventing teen pregnancy and academic failure: Experimental
evaluation of a developmentally based approach, Child
Development, 68(4), 729-742.
Abpaugh, J. W (1998). Achievement loss associated with the
transition to middle school and high schooL The Journal of
Educational Research, 92, 20-26,
Anderman, E. M., & Midgley, C. (1997), Changes in achievement
goal orientalion, perceived academic competence, and grades
across the transition to middle level schools, Contemporary
Educational Psychology, 22, 269-298,
Anderman, E. M., :vIachr, M. L.. & Midgley, C. (1999), Declining
motivation after the transition to middle school; Schools can
make a difference. Journal of Research and Development in
Education. 32. 131-147.
Anderman. L H. (1999), Classroom goal orientation, school belonging
and social goals as predictors of students' positive and negative
affect following the transition to middle school. Journal of
Research and Development in Education, 32, 90-103.
Anderman, L. H., & Anderman, E. M, (1999). Social prcdicmrs
of changes in students' achievement goal orientations,
Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25. 21-37.
Arnctt, J. J. (1999). Adolescent ,torm and stress, reconsidered.
American Psychologist, 54, 317-326.
Aronson, J., & Steele, C M. (2005). Stereotypes and the fragility
of academic competence, motivation, and self-concept. In A.
1. Elliot & C S. Dweck (Eds.), Handbook of competence and
motivation, (pp. 436-456), New York; Guilford Press,
Astor, R. A., Meyer, H. A., Behre, W. 1. (1999). Unowned places
and times; Maps and interviews about violence in high schools.
American Educational Research Journal, 36, 3--42.
Astor, R. A, (1998). Moral reasoning about school violence;
Informational assumptions about harm within school subeontexts.
Educational Psychologist, 33, 207-221.
Bandura, A. (2006), Toward a psychology of human agency.
Psychological Science, 1,164-180.
Barher, B, L., Eccles, 1. S., & Stone, M, R. (2001), Whatever happened
to the Jock. the Brain, and the Princess" Young adult
pathways linked to adolescent activity involvement and social
identity. Journal ofAdolescent Research, /6,429-455.
Barker, R. G., & Gump, P. (1964). Big school, smail school.
Stanford, CA: Stanford Unive"ity Pre;;,
Blumenfeld, P. C. (1992). Classroom learning and motivation:
Clarifying and expanding goal theory, Journal of Educational
Psycholog)" 84, 272-·281.
Brody, G. H., Chen, Y-F., Murry, V. M.. Simons. R. L, Ge, X,
Gibbons, F. X" et al. (2006), Perceived discrimination and
the adjustment of African American youths: A five-year longitudinal
analysis with contextual moderation effects, Child
Development, 77(5), 1170-1189.
Brophy, J. E. (2004). Motivating students to learn (2nd ed.),
Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Brown, B, B. (J 990). Peer groups and peer culture, In S. S. Feldman&
G. R. Elliott (Eds.), At the threshold: The dereioping adolescent
(pp. 171-196). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Bryk, A. S.. Lee, V. E.. & Holland P. B. (1993). Catholic schcols
and the common good. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University
Press.
Carnegie Corporation of New York. (1992). A matler oftime: Risk
and opportunir)' ;n rhe non school hours. New York; Author.
Carnegie Council on Adolescent Development (1989), Turning
points: Preparing American YOUlh for the 21st century,
Washington, DC: Author.
Carskadon, M. A. (1990). Patterns of sleep and sleepiness in adoles·
cents. Pediatr;cian, 17,5-12.
Carskadon, M, A. (1997, April). Adolescent sleep: Can we
cile biological needs with societal demands' Lecture given at
Stanford University, April 21, 1997,
Chavous, T.M., Bernat. D, H.. Schmeelk-Cone, K" Caldwell, C.
Kahn-Wood, L, & Zimmerman, M. A. (2003). Racial idenl
and academic attainment among African American adolescents,
Child Development, 74(4), 1076-1090.
Chen, A" Darst, P. W., & Pangrazi, R. P. (200 I). An
tion of situational interest and its source::., British Journal
Educational Psychologv, 71, 383-400.
Clark, C. Martin, R., van Kempen, E" Alfred, T., Head, J.,
H.W., et a1. (2006). Exposure·-effecl relations between
and road traffic noise exposure at school and reading
hension, American Journal ofEpidemiology, 163,
Coleman,J. S., & HolIer, T. (1987). Public andprivate high
The impact ofcommuniries. New York: Basic Books,
Coleman, J. S., Hoffer, T., & Kilgore, S. (1982), Cognitive
comes in public and private schools, Sociology of
55(2/3),65-76.
Connell. J. P. (2003), Getting offt"e dime: First steps toward
menting First Things First. Reported prepared for
Department of Education. Philadelphia: Institute for
and Reform in Education,
Connell, 1. P. Halpern-Felsher, B. L., Clifford, E.,
Gsinger, p, (1995). Hanging in there: Behavioral,
cal, and contextual factOr> affecting whether African-Amelii
adolescents stay in high school. Journal ()fAdo/escent
10,41-63.
Connell, 1. p" & Klem, A. M. (2000), You can get there from
Using a theory of change approach to plan urhan
reform, Journal ofEducarional and Psychological
11,93-120.
Connell, 1. P., Spencer, M. B" & Aber, J. L. (1994). Educarional risk
and resilience in African American youth: Context, self, and
action outcomes in school. Child De,·elopment. 65, 493~506.
Connell, J. P., & Wellhorn. J. a. (1991 j. Competence. autonomy,
and relatedness: A motivatlOnal analysis of self-system processes.
In R. Gunnar & L. A. Sroufe (Eds.), Minnesota symposia
oil child psychology, vol. 23 (pp. 43-77). Hillsdale, NJ:
Lawrence ErIhaum.
Cooper. H. M. (19791. Pygmalion grows up: A model for teacher
expeetation communication and performance influence. Review
o(Educational Research 49(3),389-410.
Council of the Great City Schools. (1992). Nmional urban education
goals: Haselille indicators. 1990-91. Washington, DC:
Amhor.
Covington, M. v., & Dray, E. (2002). The developmenlal course of
achievement motivation: A need-based approach. In A. Wigfield
& J. S. Eccles (Ed,;.), Developmem o(achievemenr motivation
(pp. 33-56). San Diego: Academic Press.
Csikszentrnihalyi, M" Rathunde. K.. & Wbalen, S, (1993). Talented
teenagers: The roots q{ success and failure. New York:
Cambridge University Prc~s,
Darling-Hammond. L. (1997) Tile right 10 learn: A blueprim .liJr
crealing sch(lvls that work. San Francisw: lossey-Bass.
Darling-Hammond, L., & Bransford. 1. (Eds.). (2005). Preparing
teacher.lJi>r a changing world: What teachers should learn (lnd
be able 10 do. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2002). Self-determination research:
Retlections and future dIrections. In E. L. Oed & R. M. Ryan
(Ed,.), Handbook of self-determination them)' research (pp.
431-441). Rochester, l\Y: University of Rochester Press.
Deyhlc, D., & LeCompte, M. (1999). Cultural differences in child
development: Navaho adolescents in middle schools. In R. H.
Sheets & E. R. Bollins (Ed,.), Racia/ and ethnic identity in
school prac/ices: Aspects ofhuman development (pp. 123-140).
Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Dewey, 1. (1990). The child and /he cUl'r;culum. Chicago: University
of Chicago Pre". (Original work published 1902.)
DishlOn, T. 1.. McCord, J., & Poulin, F. (1999). When intervenBons
harm: Peer groups and problem behavior. American
Psyc/wlogist. 54(9), 755-·764.
Dornbusch, S. M. (1994). ()ff the track. Presidential address at the
biennial meeting of the Society for Research on Adolescence,
San Diego. CA.
Dryfaos, J. G. (1990). Adolescent.I' at risk: Prevalence and prevention.
Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Dweck. C. S. (2002). The of ability conceptions. In
A.Wigtield & J. S. Eccles Development of ac/jievement
motivation (pp. 57~88). San Diego: Academic Press.
Eccles, J. $. (1994). Undef'ctanding women's educational and
occupational choices. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 18,
585--609.
Eccles. J. S., & Barber, B. L. (1999). Stlldent council. volunteering.
basketball, or marching band: What kmd of extracurricular
involvement matters'? Journal ofAdolescent Research, 14,10-43.
Eccles. 1. S., Barber, B. L.. Stone, M., & Hunt, 1. (2003).
Extracumcular activities and adolescent development. Jouma/
ofSocia/Issues, 59, 865-889.
Eccles, 1. S., & aootman, l. (2001). Community pro!!ram.I' to promote
yuuth development. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Eccles, J. S" & Midgley, C. (1989). Stage/environment fit:
Developmentally appropriate classrooms for early adolescents.
In R. Ames & c. Ames (Ed,.), Research on mol;,'alion in
education, vol. 3 (pp. 139-181). New York: Academic Press.
Eccles, 1. S., & Roeser, R. (1999). School and community intluences
on human development. In M. Bornste", & M. Lamb
(Eds.), Developmettfal psychololi.\': An advaltced texthook (4th
ed., pp. 503-554). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Eccles, l. S., & Templeton, 1. (2002). Extracurricular and other
afle/-school activilies for youth. In W. S. Sec.da (Ed.), Rel'iew
References 431
of Educational Resean'h, vol. 26 (pp. II J .. I80). WaShington
DC: American Educational Research Association Press.
Eccles, J. S., Lord, S. E., & Roeser, R. W. (1996). Round holes,
square pegs, rocky roads, and sore feet: The impact of Slagel
environment fit on young adole~ents' experiences in schools
and families. In S. L. Toth & D. Cicchetti (Eds.), Adolescellce:
OPPOnultilies and challenges, vol. 7 (pp. 49-93). Rochester,
NY: Univer.,ity of Rochester Press.
Eccles, 1. S., C. Wigfield. A., Buchanan, C M" Reuman,
f)., Flanagan. et al. (1993). Development during adolescence:
The impact of stage··-environment fit on adolescents'
experiences in schools and families. A.merican Psycholo!{lsl,
48,90--IO!'
Eccles, 1., Lord, S" & Midgley. C. (1991). What are we dOing to
early adolescents'? The impact:. of educational contexts on early
adolescents. Amerium Eduf'utional Journal, August 521~542.
Eckert, P (1989). Jocks and burnouts: Social ca/ellories and identin
in the high school. New York: Teacher College Press.
Elder. a. H" Jr., & Conger, R. D. (2m10). Children of tlte I"nd.
Chicago: Chicago University Press.
Entwisle, D. R., & Alexander. K. L. (1993). Entry into school: The
beginning school transition and educdtionai stratitication in the
United Slates. Annual Red,,)\, aj'Sociology. 19.401·--42].
Epstein, R., Chillag, N.. & Lavie. P. (1998). Starling times of school:
Effects on daytime functioning of fifth-grade children in Israel.
Sleep, 3, 250--256.
Essed, P. (1990). Everyday racism: Reportsfrom women of111'0 cullures.
Claremont, CA: Hunter Housc.
Evans. G. W. (2004). The environment of childhood poverty.
American Psycho/agist, 59. 77-92.
Fagan, 1., & WIlkinson, D. L. (1998). Guns. youth violence and
social identity. In M.Tonry & M. H. Moore (Eds.). Youth violence
(pp 373-456). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Feldlaufer. H.,M idgley,C.. &Eccles,!. S. (1988).Student. teacher.and
ooserver perceptions of the classroom environment before
and afler the transition to junior high school. Journal of EarlY
Adolescence. 8. 133-156.
Feiner, R. D., Jackson, A. w., Kasak. D.. Mulhall, P.. Brand. S.. &
Flowers, N. (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, 78.528-532,541-550.
FeIner. R. D., Seitsinger, A. M. Brand, S., Burns. A, & Bolton, N..
(2007). Creating small learning communitie" Lessons from the
project on high performing learning communities about "what
works" in creating productive, developmentally enhancing.
learning contexts. Educarional Psycholv!!ist, 42(4). 209--221.
Ferguson, R. F. (1998). Teachers' perceptions and expectations
and the Black White test score gap. In C. lencks & M.
Phillips (Eds.), The Hlack-White test score gap (pp. 273-~17).
Washington. DC: Brookings InstitUle Press.
Fine, M. (1991). Framing dropouts. Notes on the politics ~f(jn urhan
public high school. Albany: State University of New York Press.
Finger, l. A., & Silverman. M. (1966). Changes in academic performance
in tbe junior high school. Personnel and Guidonce
Journal, 45, 157--164.
Finn. l. D. (1989). Withdrawing from school. Review ofEducational
Research, 59, 117--142.
Finn, 1. D. (2006). The adult lives uf ot-,;"" students: TM roles of
ullainment and engagement in high school. Report to National
Center of Educational Statistics, Washlll~lon DC; U.S.
Department of Education (NCES 2006--328).
Fiqueira-McDonough, l. (1986). School context. gender, and delinquency.
Journal ofYouth and Adolescence. 15, 79~98.
Fordham, S., & Ogbu, J. U. (1986). Black students' school success:
Coping with "the burden of "actmg white."'Urban Review, 18,
176--206.
Fredricks, L & Eccles, J. S. (2002). Children's competence and
value beliefs from childhood through adolescence: Growth
432 Schools, Academic Motivation, and Stage-Environment Fit
trajectories in two male sex-typed domains. Developmental
Psychology, 38, 519-533.
FuEgni. A. J" Eccles, J. S., & Barber, B. L. (l995). The long-term
effects of seventh-grade ability grouping in mathematics.
lournal (if Early Adolescence, 15( I). 58-89.
Furrer. C" & Skinner, E. (2003), Sense of relatedness as a factor in
children's academic engagement and performance. Journal of
Educational Psvchology, 95,148-162,
Garcia Coli. C. T.. Crnie. K., Hamerty. G" Wasik, B. H" Jenkins.
R., Vazquez Garcia, H" et al. (1996). An integrative model for
the study of developmental competencies in minority children.
Child Developmenl, 20, 1891-1914.
Goodenow, C. (1993). Classroom belonging among early adolescent
students: Relationships to motivation and achievement. Journal
ofEarly Adolescence, 13(1), 21-43.
Gotthied, A, E.. Fleming, J. S.. & Gottfried, A. W. (2001).
Continuity of academic intrinsic mOlivation from childhood
through late adolescence: A longitudinal study. Journal of
Educmional Psychology, 93, 3-13.
Graham, S" & Taylor, A. Z. (2002). Ethnicity, gender. and the development
of achievement values. In A.Wigfield & 1. S. Eccles
(Ed,,), Del'elopment of achievement motivotion (pp. 123-146).
San Diego: Academic Press.
Grolnick. W. S.. Gurland, S. 1, lacob, K. E, & Decourcey, W.
(2002), The development of self-determination in middle childhood
and adolescence. In A. Wigfield & 1. S. Eccles (Eds.),
Development of achievemel1t motivation (pp, 147-171). San
Diego: Academic Press,
Guay, E, Marsh, H. W., & Boivin, M. (2003). Academic selfconcept
and academic achievement: Developmental perspectives
on their causal ordering, Journal of Educational Psychology.
95, 124- 136,
Hallinan, M. T.. & Kuhitschck, W. N. (1999). Curriculum differentiation
and high school achievement. Social Psychology of
E,llIcatiol1, 3,41-62.
Harris-Brin, A.. Valrie, C. R.. Kurtz-CoStes, 8., & Rowley, S, J.
(2007). Perceived racial discrimination and self-esteem in
African American youth: Racial s.ocializarlon as a protective
lactor. Journal ufRe,lean" on Adolescence, 17(4),669-682.
Harter, S. (1998). The development of self-representations, In W,
Damon (Series Ed.) & N. Eisenherg (Vol. Ed.), Handbook of
child psycholog\, vol. 3 (5th cd., pp. 553-617). :-.lew York: John
Wiley & Sons,
Harter, S.. Whitesell, N. R., & Kowalski, P (1992). Individual differences
tn the effects of educational transItions on young adolescents'
perceptions of competence and motivational orientation.
American Educalional Re.<mrch .Journal, 29, 809-835.
Hid;' S. (2001). Interest. reading, and learning: Theoretical and practical
considerations. Edacational Psychology Review, 13, 191·~209.
Hidi, S.. & Harackiewicz, J. (2000). Motivating the academically
unmotivated: A critical issue for the 21st century. Review of
Educational Research, 70, 151-180.
HolTmann, L (2002), Promoting girls' interest and achiewme11l in
phYSICS classes for beginners. Learning and Instruction, 12.
447-465.
Hunt, D. E. (1975). Person-environment interaction: A challenge
found wanting hefore it was tried. Review of I::duculional
Research. 45. 209-230.
Institute for Research and Reform in Education. (2004). Fiw Things
First. Internal working document. Philadelphia: Author.
Jackson, A. w., & Davis, G, A. (2000). Turning Poillfs 2000:
Educating adolescenfs in the 21st Ce!1lUry. New York: Teachers
College Press.
lacobs, L Lanza, S" Osgood, D. W.. Eccles, J. S" & Wigfield, A.
(2002). Ontogeny of children's self-beliefs: Gender and domain
differences across grade;, one through 12. Child Development,
73,509-527.
Jencks, C. L., & Brown, M. (1975). The effects
their students. Harvard Educatiollal Review, 45,
lencks, C. L, & Phillips, M. (Eds.). (1998). The Black·White tesl
score gap, Washington, DC: Brookings Institute Press.
.leynes, W. H. (2002). A meta-analysis of the effects of attending
religious schools and religiosity on Black and Hispanic academic
achievement. Education alld Urban Socien" 35,27-49.
Jussim, L Eccles, J. S., & Madon, S. (1996). Social perception,
social stereotypes, and teacher expectation>: Accuracy and the
quest for the powerful self-fulfilling prophecy. In L. Berkowitz
(Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (PP.
281-388), New York: Academic Press.
Juvonen, 1., Le, V. N.. Kaganoff. T.. Augustine, C.. & Constan~
L. (2004). Focus 011 the wonder years: Challenges fixing the
American middle school, Santa Monica, CA: Rand Corporation,
Kao, G" & Thompson, J. S. (2003), Racial and ethnic stratification
in educational achievement and attainment. Annual Review of
Sociology, 29,417-442.
Kaplan, A.. & Maehr, M. (1999\ Achievement
well-being:, Contemporn0: EducaliOlUlI P\ych(
Koller, 0 .. Baumert, J.& Schnabel. K. (2001). Does interest matter?
The relationship hetween academic jntere.st and achievement in
mathematics. journal of Research in i\!tJthematics Education,
32,448-470,
Kozol, J. (2006), Shame r;f the nation. NYC: Three Rivers Press.
Lamborn, S. D., Brown, 	B. 8., Mounts,:-.I S., & Steinberg, L.
(1992). Putting school 10 perspective: The influence of family,
peers, extracurricular participation, and part·time work on academic
engagement. In F M. :-.lewmann (Ed.), Student engagement
and achit}w!mem in American secam/ar;: schools (pp,
153-181). New York: Teachers College Press.
Larson, R. W. (2000), Toward a psychology of positive youth development.
American Psychologist, 55(1), 170,183.
Larson, R. & Richards, M. (Ed,.). (1989), The changing life spare
of early adolescence. Journal (if Youth and Adolescence, 18 (6),
501-626,
Lee, V. E. & Loeb, S, (2000). School size in Chicago elementary
schools: EtTects on teache,,; altitudes and students acbievement.
American Educational Re5earch Jounw/. 37,3-31.
Lee, V. E.. & Smith, 1. B. (1993). Effects of school restructuring
on the achievement and engagement of middle-grade students.
Sociololi,Y of Edumfion, 66,164-187.
Lee. V. E., & Smith. J. B. (1995). Effects of high school restruc-.,
turing and size on early gains in achievement and engagement.
Sociology ofEducation, 68(4). 241-270.
Lee, V. E.. & Smith, J. B. (1997). High school size: Which
best, and lor whom? Educational Ei'o/uatiou and
Analnis, 19(3),205-227.
Lee, V. E., & Smith, J. B. (2001). Restructuring high .Ie
and excellence: What ,rorh. New York: Teacher's
Lehr, C. A.. Johnson, D. R., Bremer, C. D.. Cosio, A..
M. (2004). Essential tools: Increasing rates of s
II'on: Movills:/rom [Joliey and research tn practice. Minneapolii
MN: ICI Pulications Office.
Lerner, R. M. (2002). Concepts and Iheories ofhuman development,
Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum,
Lipsitz, 1.. Mizell, M. H., Jackson, A. w., & Austin, L.
Speaking with one voice: A manifesto for middle-grade!
reform, Phi Della KOI'I}(Jn, 78,533-540,
Maciver, D. j" & Plank, J. 8. (1997). Improving urban
Developing the talents of students placed at risk. In J. L.
Whal current research says to the middle level
243-256). Columbus, OH: National Middle School
Maciver, D. 1.. Young, E. M.. & Washburn, B. (2002).
practices and motivation during middle school (with
attention [0 science). In A. Wigfield & J. S. Eccles (Eds,),
development of achievement molwotion (pp. 333~351).
Diego: Academic Press.
Machr, M. L.. & Midgley, C. (1996), Transforming school
to enhance student motivation and learning. Boulder.
Westview Press.
Mahoney, J. L, & Cairns. R. B. (1997). Do extracurricular activitje~
proted against early schooJ dropout? !)c\,e/opmental
PsrcllOloKY, JJ, 241-253.
Mahoney, J. L, Harris, A. L.. & Eccles. J. S. (2006). Organized
activity participation. positive youth development, and the overscheduling
hypothesi~. Social Polk:..-Report, 20, 1-- 30.
Mahoney. J. L.. Larson, R. w., & Eccles. J. S. (Eds.) (2(X)5).
Organi::edaoivities (V; conte.xls (~f'deve/opmt>nt: Erfracurrirular
llctivifil's, t{Oer-sdwol and community programs. !v1ahwah, NJ:
Lawrence ErlhaulTI.
Mc;"ea!. R, 8. (] 995). Extracurricular activities and high school
dropouts, Suciologr ofEdllcolion, 68, 62-81,
Midgley. C (2002), Goals, goal.\lr"Clur".I, and patterns ojadal'live
leoming. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
~lidgley, c.. Anderman, E.. & Hicks, L (1995), Differences between
clementary and middle school teachers and students: A goal
theory approach. journal ofEarly Adolescence. 15,90-113,
\lidgley. c., & Edelin. K, C. (1998i. Middle school reform and early
adolescenl well-being: The good new, and Ihe bad. Educational
PS,I'chologi.lt, 33, 195~206,
Midgley, C" & Feldlaukr, H, (1987), Students' and teachers' decisionmaking
fit before and after Ihe transitiun to junior high school.
Journal (!(Early Adolescence', 7, 2:::5-241.
Midgley, C" Feldlaufer, H" & Eccles, J, S, (1988). The transition to
junior high school: Beliefs of pre- and post-transition teachers,
Journal (~ft(JUlh (lnd Adolescence. /7,543-562.
Midgley, eM.• Feldlaufer, H" & Eccles, J, S, (1989a), Changes in
teacher efficacy and srudent self- and task-related beliefs during
the transition to junior high school. Journal ofEdu.cational
Psyciwlol(,l', 81,247-258.
Midgley, eM" Fcldlaufer, H., & Eccb, J, S, (I 989b), Student!
teacher relations and attitudes toward mathematics before and
after the transition to junior high school. Child De<'elopmenl,
60, 981-992,
~ational Research Council (2004). Engl1!{ing schools: F()Slerin~
high school studentJ' motivation to learn. \Vashington, DC:
National Academies Press.
Noguera. P. A" & Wing. ], y, (Eds.), (2006), Unfinished husi,
fU'.;;S: C/osinR fhe adlre)'ement in our school.\'. San Francisco:
Jossey-Buss.
Oakes, J. (2005). Keeping frack: Hm.... schools J'tructure inequality
(2nd ed,). New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Oakes, L Gamoran, A" & Page, R, N. (1992), Curriculum dilferentiation:
Opp"!1Unilies, outcomes, and meanings, In P. Jackson
(Ed,). Handhook 01 Research on Curriculum (pp. 57(}~608).
New York: MacMillan.
Ogbu, J. (1992), Understanding cultural diversily and learning,
Eduwlional Researcher, 21, 5~ 14,
Okagaki. L. (2001). Triarchic model of minority children's school
achievement. Educational Psychologist, 36, 9~20,
Olsen. L (1997). A1ade in America: [mmigrant students in our puhlie
schools. New York: New Press,
Oyserman, D" Gant, L" Ager, J. (1995). A socially contextualized
model of African American identity: Possible selves and school
persistence. Journal of Personalit}' and Social Psychology. 69,
1216~12J2,
Oyserman, D" Terry, K" & Bybee, D., (2002i, A possible selves
intervention to enhance school involvement. Journal of
Adolescence. 24, 31 J~326,
Padilla, A, \1., & Gonzalez, R, (lOO]), Academic performance
of immigrant and U,S, horn ~lexical1-heritage students:
Effecls of schooling in Mexico and BilinguallEnglish laninstruction,
American Educational Research Journal, .iN,
Peek, S" Roe,;er, R. W" Zarrell, N. R. & Eccles, J, S. (20071.
Exploring the roles of extracurricular quantity and quality in
the educational resilience of vulnerahle adolescents: Variableand
pattern-centered approaches, Journal of Social Inues, 64,
1')5~155,
References 433
Pintrich, P. R. (2000). Multiple pathways, multiple goals: The role
of goal orientation in Jearnlng and achievement Jot/mal (~r
Educational Ps\'cllO/og\'. 92. 554~555,
Renninger, K. A" Ewen, E" & Lasher. A, K. (2002), Individual
interest as context in expository text and mathematical word
prohlems, Learning umllnstru{'lir)11, 12.467-491.
Roderick. M. (19931. The patli /() timl'l'ing oill: Evidellf'e /ilr inler·
velltion, Westport. CT: Auburn HOllse.
Roderick, M" & Camburn. E. (1999). Risk and recovery from wur;;c
failure in the early years of high schooL AmericaJl Educariorw/
Research joun/a/. 36, J()J~J44,
Roeser, R, W. (2004), Competing schools of thought in achievement
goal theory" In M. L. Maehr & P. R. Pintrieh I Eds, ), Adl'tlllCeS
in motivation and achieremelIf, vol. !3: Mo{h'fIlilljJ \1udeIllI,
impcoving schools (pp. 265~299), Kew York: Elsevier.
Roeser, R, W, (2004. July), The dln'nil\' ill s(hool dur·
ing adolfs('{'ncc project. Paper pre:-ocnted at annual meeting
of William T, Grant Faculty Scholars Program. Vail. CO,
Roeser. R, W" & Ecdc" J, S. (1998). Adolescents' perceptions
of middJe school: Relation to longitudinal changes in academic
and psychological adjustment. Journal (4 R(lS(,(!TCh on
Adolescence,88,12:1-158,
Roeser. R, W.. & Eccles.], S., (2000), Schooling and mental health,
In A, J. Samcroff. M. Lewis. & S, M, Miller (Eds.i, Handbook
of develol'mellllll pS.I'chopa/h%u.l (2nd ed.: (pr, /35-1:;6).
Kew York: Plenum.
Roeser, R, W" Eccles. J, S., & Freedman-Doan, C. (19991. At'ademic
functioning and mental health in adolescence: Patterns. progressions,
ano routes from childhood. JOllrnal i~r Adolescenl
Research, /4, IJ5·~ 174.
Roeser. R. W" Eccles, J. S" & Samcroff. A. J. (/ '19M), Academic and
emotional functioning in early adolescence: Longitudinal relatIons,
patterns, and prediction hy ('xperience in middle ,,,chool.
Development and Pwchopalhologr, /0, 321-::l52,
Roeser, R. w., Ecdes, ], S" & Samerotf, A. J, (2()(X)). School as
a context of social~elTlo(ional development: A of
research findings, Elementary SciJool Journal, 100,
Roeser. R. w., Eccles. J. S. & Strobel, K. (1998). Linking the study
of schooling and memal health: Sele(;tcd b\ue...; and empiri~
cal illustrations al the level of the individuaL Edu{'(Itional
Psychologist, 33, 153-176,
Roeser, R. W" & GonzaJcz. R 0997), Re:·;earcl! on Il'unsitiotlJ inl(l
and out (~fthe middle school }'ear,\'. Working: paper for the National
Inslitute on the Education of At-Risk Students of the OtTic'e of
Educational Research and Improvement; Washington. nc.
Roeser. R. W., & Midgley, C. M, (1997), Teachers' vicws
of student mental health, Elemenlary Sf hool Journal.
115-133.
Roeser. R, w., Maraeh;, R., & Ge/hhach, H. (2002), A goal theory
pcr~pective on teachers' professional identities and the contexh
of teaching. In C ;\1, Midgley (Ed.), Goals, Moal stmclUre.l,
and patlerns otadaplil'e learning (pp. 205-241), Mahwah, N]:
Lawrence ErJhauITL
Roeser, R. W" Midgley, C M" & lIrdan. T, C. (19911), Perceptions
of the school psychological environment and carll' adole,cenls'
psychological and behavioral functioning in school: The
medIating role or and belonging. Journal (~f Edu(,IlJiolldl
PSycllOlof!,v, 88,
Roeser, R. w', & Peck, S, C (20031. Patterns and pathways of
educational achievel11eOl at:ros:-. adolescence: A holislic~
developmental perspective, In W, Damon (Series Ed.) & S. C.
Peck & R. W. Roeser (Vol. Eds,), Nel<' direClior/s JiJr child alld
odolescent developtnem, voL 10J: Person-centered apPr(J(}cile.\
to sludvin,~ developmenr in conrexi (pp. 39-62), San Francisco'
Jossey-Bass.
Roeser, R. W., Peck. S, C. & Nasir, N, S, (2000). Self und identity
processes in school motivation, learning. and achievement, Tn
p, A, Alexander & P, H. Winne, (Eds,), Handlwo/.. of cduClIlionall'-,ychology.
2nd cd.: (pp. 391-424 ), Mahwah, OIJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum.
434 Schools, Academic Motivation, and Stage-Environment Fit
Roscnholtz, S, J" & Simpson, C (1984), The formation of ability
conceptions: D~vel()pmental trend or social construction?
Review I,{Educational Research, 54, 31~63,
Rugg,ero, K, IlL & Taylor, D, M, (1995), Coping with discrimination:
How disadvantaged group members the discrimination
that confronts them. .tournai and Social
Psr('holog\', 68, 82~838,
Rumberger, R W, (1995), Dn'pping out of middle school: A mul·
tilevel analysis of students and schools, American Educational
Resew!'h Journal, 32, 583--U25.
Rumberger. R w., & Thomas, S, L (2000), The distribution of
dropout and turnover rates urban and suburban high
schools, Sociology a/ Edru'OIian. 39-67,
Rutter, M, (1983), School effects on pupil progress: Research findings
and policy implications. Child Deve/opmem. 54, 1-29,
Rutter. M, & Maughan, B. (2002), School effectiveness findings
]979-2002, Journal 0/School Psychology, 40. 451 A75,
Rutter, M" Maughan, B.. Mortimore. P.. & Ouston, 1. (1979),
thousand hours: Secondary schoul.\" and (heir effects on
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press,
Ryan. AM .. & Patrick. H. (2001), The classroom social environment
and changes in adolescents' motivation and engagement
during middle school. Americill1 Educlitiunal Research Journal,
38.437-460,
Sameroff, A, J, (1983), Developmental systems: Contexts and evo·
lution, In W, Kessen (Ed,), Handbook I'o/.
/: HisIOl): Iheorr, and melhods (pp, 237-294), John
Wiley & Sons.
Seliers, R M" Caldwell, C H" Schmeclk-Cone. K. H,. &
Zimmerman. M, A. (2003), Racial identity, racial discrimination,
perceived stress, and psychological distress among African
American young adults, Journal afHealth and Socia} Belwvior,
44(3).3rJ2-317,
Sileets, R, H" & Hoilins, E R, (Eds,), (1999), Racial and elhnic
idenlity ill scilool prartic('s: Aspects of human development.
Mahwah. NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum,
Shih. M" Pittinsky, T L & Ambady, N, i 1999), Stereotype susceptibility:
Identity s"lienel' and shift' in quantitative performance.
Psycfw/ogind Science, /0,80-83,
Simmons. R G,. & Blyth, D, A. (1987), MOFing infu adolescence:
The impact {~(pubertaf change and w)wo! context. Hawthorn,
NY: Aldine de Gruyter.
Slavin, R, E (1990), Achievement effects of ability grouping
in secondary schoob: A best~evidence synthesis. Rei'ie~f of
Ed/l(",tiOiIOI Re,I'ea11'h, 6!J, 471-499,
Steele. eM" & Aronson, 1. (1995), Stereotype threat and the intellectual
rcst performance of African-Americans. Journal of
Personalifl a"d Social P,lych%i(". 9,797-8 [I,
Steinberg, L Dornbusch, S" & Brown, B, (1992), Erhnic differences
in adolescents achievements: An ecological perspective.
Ameri('an p/,;,yc!w{ogisl. 47. 723-729.
Suarez-Orozco. C & Suarez-Orozco, M, f2oo[), Children 0/
Immigra!i01L Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Smirez-Orozco. C, & Suarez-Orozco, M. (1995), Trans/ormalions:
Immigration, family life. and achievement moth'arion among
Lalino adolesco,ls, Stanford. CA: Stanford University Press,
Taylor, K D" Casten. K, Flickinger, $" Roberts. D" &
Fulmore, C. D, (1994). Explaining the school performance
of African*American adole:,cents, Journal of Research an
Adolescencc, 4. 21A4,
United Way, (2008J. Seizing Ihe middle ground: Why middle school
creates the pathway to college find Ihe workforce. Los Angeles:
United Way of Greater Los Angeles.
Valdez, G, (2001), Learning aruillot learning EnRlish: Latino students
in American schools, New York: Teachers College Press,
Valencia. K K (Ed,) (1991), Chicano and success:
Rescarch ana policy agendas ji}r lire London: Falmer
Press,
Wehlage, G" Rutter. R,. Smith, G,. Lesko, K. & Fernandez, R,
(1989), Reducinli the risk: Schools as communities of supporT,
Philadelphia: Fahner Press,
Weinstein, K (1989), Perceptions of classroom processes and student
motivation: Children's views of self-fulfi[ling prophecies,
In C Ames & R. Ames (Eds.). Reseaty'h un motivation
in EduCI1Tion. vol, 3: Coals and cognilions (pp, 13-44), New
York: Academic Press,
Wentzel, K (2002), Are effective teachers like good parents?
Teaching styles and student adjustment in early adole,.;ence,
Child Development. 287-301.
Wigfield. A.. Byrnes, j, B" & Eccles. J, S. (2006), Adolescent
development. In p, A. Alexander & p, Winne (Eds,), Handbook
0/educalional psvchologr (2nd ed,; pp, 87-113), Mahwah. NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum,
Wigtield, A,. Eccles, J, S., MacIver, D" Reuman, D" & Midg[ey. C
(199]), Transitions at early adolescence: Changes in children's
domain-spedfic :jelf-perceptions and generaJ self-esteem across
the transition to junior high school. Developmentul Psycholag,\'.
27,552-565,
Wigtield. A.. Eccles, j, S" Schiefelc, U" Roeser, R.. Davis-Kean, p,
(2006), Motivation. In N. Eisenberg (Ed,), Handbook 0/ child
psvcholog\', vol. 3 (6th ed.), Hoboken. NJ: John Wiley & Sons,
Wilson. J, Q" & Kelling. G, L (1982), Broken windows. ,4tlanlic
Momhlr, Marcb,[Available at wwwTheAllantic.cortl,j
Wong, C A.. Eccles, J. S" & Sameroff. A. ], (ZOO), The influence
of ethnic discrimination and ethnic identification on AfricanAmericans
adolescents' school and socioemoiional adjustment.
Journal a/Personalit),. 71.1197-1232.
Youniss, 1.. McLellan. ], A" & Yates, M, (1997), What we know
about engendering civic identity. American Behavioral Scientist,
40.6[9-630,
Youniss. J.. Yates, M,. & Su, Y {I 997). Social integration:
Commumty service and marijuana use in high schooL
HANDBOOK OF
ADOLESCENT PSYCHOLOGY
THIRD EDITION
Volume 1: Individual Bases of Adolescent
Development
Edited By
RICHARD M. LERNER 

LAURENCE STEINBERG 

ffiWILEY

John Wiley & Sons, Inc.