From Observation to Ethical Inquiry: Course Redesign in Middle Level Educator Preparation

Strong school-university partnerships foster valuable clinical experiences for preservice teacher candidates at three universities.The blend of practice and research at the university reaffirms my deeply held belief that worthwhile knowledge draws on both worlds. Indeed, the separation of practice from theory, of practitioners from scholars, is more often than not a divorce that is more symbolic than real. (Cuban, 1993, p. xxi)Forty-six states and the District of Columbia require some form of specialized middle level teacher preparation leading to licensure or an endorsement (Association for Middle Level Education [AMLE], 2007), and accreditation agencies inform the practices and policies for the majority of institutions preparing middle level teacher candidates across the country. Current debates about the most efficient and effective ways to improve P-12 education include teacher preparation as the focal point (Darling-Hammond, 2010), and the Blue Ribbon Panel on Clinical Preparation and Partnerships for Improved Student Learning has highlighted the importance of school- university partnerships in preparing teachers capable of increasing student achievement (National Council for the Accreditation of Teacher Education [NCATE], 2001; 2010). Preparing middle level teachers to improve student achievement is becoming a major priority in the larger landscape of teacher education, and concerns about the nature and quality of specialized middle level preparation permeates larger conversations about licensures and endorsements within the field of middle level education. It is critical for middle level educators to participate in these conversations to ensure that middle school philosophy remains at the core of teacher preparation practices.In this article, we describe how three universities approach middle level teacher preparation through partnerships and clinical experiences. We share the structures of our programs and the role of our partnerships in the clinical preparation of our candidates. We also discuss the challenges and opportunities presented by school-university partnerships and discuss both the advantages and disadvantages of engaging in such work. Finally, we will situate the implications of NCATE's Blue Ribbon Panel Report in the historical and social context of middle level education and offer recommendations for others seeking to develop clinical experiences through school-university partnerships.Clinical practice through partnershipsTeacher candidates often cite clinical field placements as the most powerful learning experiences of their preservice education. They tend to value field experiences over the content of teacher education courses, as the school context is very powerful and lends itself to the social nature of learning to teach. The physical divide between courses taken on college campuses and field work completed at local schools only exacerbates the disconnect teacher candidates perceive between theory and practice in teacher education. Candidates come to our programs valuing practice over theory and the very design of our programs presents the idea and reinforces it throughout their education.In an effort to help candidates value both coursework and field work, institutions of teacher education need to shiftfrom the traditional, universitybased approach of teacher preparation to a clinical approach with practice-based curriculum (Ball & Forzani, 2009). The NCATE Blue Ribbon Panel report calls for teacher preparation that is clinically based and integrates the practice and pedagogy of learning to teach (NCATE, 2010). School-embedded teacher preparation provides the opportunity to guide candidates to the explicit connections between what they are learning in their coursework and what they are observing and experiencing in their field work.Clinically-based teacher preparation is particularly important for middle level education candidates, as they need to interact with and learn from young adolescent students to value their unique developmental needs. …

Middle level students’ engagement with mathematics can be an opening or a barrier to future opportunities. Enrollment in advanced mathematics and science courses as well as career choices are linked to students’ mathematical success at the middle grades level. Hence, teacher preparation that supports high quality mathematics instruction has never been more important. In this chapter, we examine the structures and processes of a multisite middle level mathematics teacher preparation program. The program consists of five courses taught to four different sites via teleconferencing technology. The majority of students are primarily enrolled in an undergraduate elementary teacher certification program and seeking an add-on middle level mathematics endorsement. Based on our analysis of survey data, we report three specific student outcomes: the development of a learning community within and across sites, the development of various aspects of content knowledge for teaching, and the development of three core instructional practices. We also provide implications related to the importance of community in a distance environment, particularly in the context of middle level teacher preparation.

Middle level teacher educators report their views of online teacher preparation.Online education has been on the rise (Allen & Seaman, 2006, 2008; Nagel, 2009) as universities have sought to expand access to multiple populations, address campus capacity constraints, and capitalize on market opportunities (Eastman & Swift, 2001; Volery & Lord, 2000). Many colleges of education are facing declining enrollments in a poor economy at a time when state funding for higher education is being cut dramatically (Stratford, 2009), making online teacher education an attractive way to serve more students while lowering instructional costs (Neely & Tucker, 2010). It is difficult for traditional programs to compete with the conveniences online education offers students who can take classes in their pajamas, work around their busy work or family schedules, and avoid the hassles and costs of commuting or living on campus.Middle level education literature has long called for teacher preparation programs specifically aimed at meeting the unique needs of young adolescent learners (Alexander & McEwin, 1988; Carnegie Council on Adolescent Development, 1989; Douglas, 1920; Elliot, 1949; Floyd, 1932; George & McEwin, 1978; Scales & McEwin, 1994; Swaim & Stefanich, 1996; Van Til, Vars, & Lounsbury 1961). While online teacher education may be one way to reach more potential teachers in a cost effective, convenient, and engaging manner, a closer examination of online middle level teacher preparation coursework is warranted to ensure that it prepares teachers who are properly equipped to reach and teach young adolescents (National Middle School Association [NMSA], 2003).Online middle level teacher preparation surveyHow does an increase in online courses and programs impact teacher preparation, specifically the preparation of middle grades teachers who need to learn to become student-centered, developmentally responsive practitioners? What do the experts in middle level teacher preparation have to say about the effectiveness of online middle level teacher education? Several colleges of education have begun to implement online coursework in middle level teacher education, and faculty who have experience with courses taught completely or partially online may be able to provide insight into the potential impact of this approach. Further, those who have chosen to remain engaged in face-to-face instruction may have concerns or insights that could help us make better informed decisions about online middle level teacher preparation.This article reports findings from a survey of middle level teacher educators to determine their views of online teacher education (Editor's note: See the full survey in the online issue of Middle School Journal). The questions were grounded in the literature about effective middle level education and the important aspects of providing teacher preparation unique to those seeking to teach young adolescent learners. The survey questions were derived from the following research questions:* What types of best practices are participants able to model and use consistently in online environments?* How are relationships and the social aspects of teaching impacted by online instruction?* How does online coursework impact student performance in terms of rigor and teaching for understanding?* What do instructors perceive as the benefits of online teaching? What are their concerns?The survey was distributed to 125 middle level education professors from 38% of all states offering middle level licensure or endorsements. Participants were identified through e-mail lists of professional memberships in middle level teacher preparation associations. Of those invited to participate, 53 completed the survey, resulting in a 42% response rate. Background data were gathered related to the number of years as a middle level teacher educator, experiences with teaching online courses, and the types of courses being taught online within programs (see Figure 1). …

Challenges in middle level teacher prepa ration Two important challenges face middle level teacher preparation: one is specific to middle level, the other affects all teacher education. First, few teachers of students in grades 6-8 receive undergraduate or gradu ate teacher education designed specifically for the middle grades (Scales & McEwin, 1994). In a 1992 study of middle level teacher education in eight states, Scales (1992) found only 17% of middle level teachers had received special middle level preservice preparation for teaching in grades 6-8. In a larger study conducted in 1993 in five states, 22% of the middle level teachers surveyed had received their initial teacher preparation in middle level education (Scales & McEwin, 1994). In both studies, teachers stated strong ly their need to be prepared specifically to teach young adolescents. A second major challenge facing middle level teacher education is the poor quality of teacher preparation generally (Goodlad, 1991). Not only did nearly one-half of the teachers in both the 1992 (Scales, 1992) and the 1993 (Scales & McEwin, 1994) studies rate their preparation as inadequate or poor on topics viewed as important for middle grades teaching, but more serious are the criticisms of teacher education by Goodlad (1991). Goodlad conducted a nationwide study of teacher education pro grams. He found that institutional mission, leadership, organization, and commitment with respect to teacher education [fell] short of the ... conditions (p. 151) necessary for effective teacher education. The major com ponent parts of teacher education programs (i.e., liberal arts coursework, education coursework, and field experiences) often were not connected closely enough to one other and did not form a coherent, whole program. In too many programs teacher education was not the top priority of the fac ulty who taught the courses for prospective teachers, let alone of the institutions housed the program. Moreover, even when all the component parts [were] functioning well and together, the potential for excel lence [was] diminished by state intrusions (Goodlad, 1991, p. 153) into program curric ula based on licensing requirements. Therefore, teacher education in general and middle level teacher education in particular are in need of major improvements, and these improvements must go hand in hand with efforts to improve middle level schools. Although both the process and the sub stance of teacher education reform are important, much more has been written about what needs to be improved in teacher education than the processes to be used in accomplishing the changes. Since several sets of excellent recommendations are avail able about reform of teacher education in

Middle school education is failing to meet the intellectual needs of young adolescents, yet there is little research that examines how teachers are prepared to work at the middle level. In this article, I discuss findings from a semester-long, qualitative case study that examined how the elementary and secondary teacher education pathways at one institution prepared social studies teachers for the middle school level. The study reveals several key findings which help explain why many middle level social studies teachers may not be fully prepared to meet the needs of their young adolescent students. In order to prepare social studies teachers who can engage and challenge young adolescents' minds, teacher educators in both elementary and secondary programs must devote further attention to the preparation of middle level teachers.

The aim of this research is to determine the viewpoints and readiness of class, mathematics and science teachers on STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics) Education. The other aims are to determine different between branches and seniority in the readiness of teachers on STEM Education. The review method was used in the study the sampling of the study consisted of 371 teachers, who were selected randomly from Siirt and Batman. A questionnaire was developed by the authors of the study to determine the readiness of the teachers on STEM Education. Frequencies, arithmetic averages and the Kruskal Wallis H was used in this research. The teachers who participated in the study believe that they are inadequate about implementing teaching designs that are inventive, use scientific methods, develop creative STEM products, and aim to raise students who critically examine these products. In addition, they do not see themselves adequately in terms of process evaluation, assisted education in information technology, development of engineering applications suitable for the student level, analysis according to Bloom taxonomy and activities related to higher skill levels. Among the issues that teachers see themselves as middle level and above it are project-based, probabilistic learning and structuring of knowledge.

As educators and policymakers acknowledge the unique demands of teaching young adolescents (usually considered to be ages ten to fourteen and enrolled in grades five to eight), the call for specialized professional preparation of middle level teachers is gaining momentum. A consensus is also growing about what the contents of professional preparation programs for teaching on the middle level should be (e.g., comprehensive study of early adolescence and of the philosophy and organization of middle level education; middle level field experiences; and preparation in two or more teaching fields, such as mathematics and social science [McEwin and Dickinson 1995]). The emergence of the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards1 offers new opportunities for exploring the views of highly accomplished middle level teachers concerning the professional preparation for teachers of young adolescents. For the first time in history, nationally recognized and board-certified middle level teachers have been identified through a rigorous assessment program. It seemed logical to us to ask these distinguished teachers what they believe about the professional preparation of middle level teachers. We were especially interested to learn whether their views strengthened or contradicted the decades-long call for the specialized preparation of middle level teachers.

This article reports on a three-year, state-wide teacher education restructuring endeavor for the preparation of teachers at the middle level. The article reviews the need for specialized preparation for middle level teachers and overviews the work of the South Carolina Middle Level Project and the South Carolina Middle Grades School State Policy Initiative, along with the current status of middle grades teacher preparation and certification in South Carolina. Through this presentation, major collaborative efforts are identified involving colleges and universities, public schools and professional associations, the South Carolina Commission on Higher Education and the South Carolina Department of Education. Based on this information and efforts already made, the article offers a recommended plan for achieving state-wide reform in teacher preparation and gives specific focus to the preparation of teachers for middle level classrooms.

Since William Alexander’s (1963, 1995) call for attention to the need for specialized middle level teacher preparation in 1963, 45 states have created requirements for middle level certification, licensure, or endorsement (Association for Middle Level Education [AMLE], 2014) which have led to institutions of teacher preparation creating routes designed to prepare candidates to teach grades 5–9. Because of questions raised about content and consistency of these programs, this study systematically documents components of undergraduate middle level teacher preparation programs in 1,324 institutions from 50 states and the District of Columbia. The findings reveal that even though 45 states have explicit mandates for middle level certification, licensure or endorsement, almost half of the institutions preparing teachers for grades 5–9 do not offer courses or experiences specific to middle level education or young adolescents.

Professional development at the middle school level has a convoluted history, particularly with regard to middle level teacher preparation. This chapter discusses this history from three perspectives: the recent history of professional development for middle level schools and their teachers; policies and trends affecting middle school teacher professional development including current concerns about accountability, the renewed focus on subject matter expertise, and middle school teacher preparation standards; and support for new and experienced middle school teachers through professional development including mentoring, induction, action research, looking at student work, and professional development as part of the every day lives of teachers and teams.

Over the last decade, significant changes have occurred in how schools are organized, how educators are prepared and certified, how accreditation policies have shifted both curriculum and content, as well as changes to the demographics of middle school classrooms. This volume, Preparing Middle Level Educators for 21st Century Schools: Enduring Beliefs, Changing Times, Evolving Practices provides a review of current research focused on middle level educator preparation at all levels. Our enduring beliefs about young adolescents have not changed (e.g., need for developmentally responsive instruction, caring adults who understand them and are prepared to teach them, opportunities to explore their interests) but the political and sociocultural climate of schools and schooling has. In light of changing times, this volume allows researchers and teacher educators to share research from their context and inform the evolving practices of educator preparation for the middle level.The research presented in this volume is organized into three sections, with an introduction provided for each. The authors grounded their work in the Association for Middle Level Education’s teacher preparation standards (2012) and tenets of This We Believe (NMSA, 2010). By doing so, they examine topics that hold potential for meeting the learning needs of teachers and students in middle level schools. The first section includes chapters from individuals working to ensure that the enduring beliefs of middle level education continue to guide the structures of their middle level teacher preparation programs. The second set of chapters closely examines how changing times are shaping the work of teacher educators. Finally, the last section spotlights evolving practices that continue to develop in response to the changes impacting our classrooms, schools, and communities.This text provides readers with researched-based practices and information to help them continue the tradition of middle level teacher education. The enduring beliefs of preparing teachers who understand, respect, and honor the many talents, gifts, and contributions of the young adolescent student will guide teacher educators as they respond to the changing times of education and the evolving practices of teachers, teacher educators, and schools.

The concept of middle level schooling has existed in the United States since the early 1900s. During the early 1960s, middle level schools were organized to meet the unique developmental needs of early adolescents. Yet, special training, preparation and/or certification for aspiring teachers who wish to work at this level are not available in the majority of states. Many state licensing agencies provide either elementary or secondary certification, which historically was believed to be adequate for middle level teaching. This study investigates the special preparation and training needs of middle level teachers as perceived by teachers and administrators in a suburban school district which was involved for several years in the implementation of innovative practices for middle schools. Middle level educators in this district had received in-service training and were engaged in considerable discussions on research related to effective middle schools. Thirty teachers and 10 administrators were surveyed about their own levels of preparation and their concepts of the elements of model preparation programs for middle school teachers. In a follow-up interview process, including a sample of the survey respondents, interviewees discussed in-depth their district's middle school programs; the impact of a state grant focusing on middle school organizational and instructional issues; and their perceptions about staff development needs of middle school personnel that were not being addressed. The data obtained through survey responses, interviews, and examination of district documents showed that the majority of the sample personnel received their training in middle school concept areas through formal in-service opportunities and/or on the job experience. Furthermore, a majority of the participants endorsed and expressed a need for the following: a special preparation program for middle school teachers containing field experience at the middle level; training in the unique developmental needs of the early adolescent; and, special training in a variety of instructional strategies. Results also indicated that the sample personnel were not aware of the school district's own studies on middle level schooling and were dissatisfied with the current programs, which they felt had suffered as a result of a lack of effective leadership at the district and building levels.

The reason for developing specialized middle level teacher preparation programs seems clear. Young adolesce ts need teachers trained to provide them with developmentally responsive learning experiences that give them the tools and knowledge to be successful. Haying determined that young adolescents are at a unique developmental level, experts in the field of middle level education have long advocated for specialized teacher training programs (Carnegie Council, 1989; Dickinson & McEwin, 1997; Jackson & Davis, 2000; Scales & McEwin, 1996). Recent research supports that stand (Giebelhaus, 1998; Lockart & Butt, 2002). States are slowly responding to the need for specialized teacher preparation programs by adding middle level certifi cates to licensing requirements (Gaskill, 2002). As specialized middle level preparation programs evolve and grow, there is a need to ensure these programs prepare middle level teachers according to the current best practice research. This article will describe a program at Berry College, a small, private college in Georgia recog nized for its teacher preparation program continu ously accredited by the National Council for the Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE) since 1974. Using the National Middle School Association's (2002) position statement on the pro fessional preparation of middle level teachers as a guide, we applied the essential elements described in that statement to the development of the Berry College middle grades program. Georgia was one of the first states to require middle level certification and to have a number of schools

To meet the demand for certified math and science teachers, alternative certification programs attempt to provide fast-track training and licensure of STEM-area educators (Goldhaber, Kreig, Theobald, & Brown, 2014). Teachers prepared in programs with a middle level specialization have been shown to participate in effective practices such as teaming and collaborative instructional strategies (Mertens, Flowers, & Mulhall, 2002). However, few preparation programs have middle level specializations, and teachers prepared in accelerated programs tend to have greater difficulties with classroom management, planning, and differentiated instruction than those prepared in traditional programs (Darling-Hammond, 2009; Wilson, 2011).Researchers examined a cohort of beginning teachers completing an accelerated STEM M.A.T. program whose struggles with planning and engaging young adolescents seemed outside of the norm. Utilizing the middle school model (NMSA, 2010; Jackson & Davis, 2000), Lortie’s (1975) apprenticeship of observation, and the formation of teaching beliefs (Richardson, 2003) as an integrated framework, this study sought to describe and explain the beliefs of beginning STEM teachers prepared in an accelerated M.A.T. program. Findings indicate new teachers from STEM backgrounds view their students through the lenses of their previous educational experiences and highlight the need for traditional teacher preparation and specialized middle level instruction.

The preparation of middle level school educators has been a topic of major concern for almost three decades. In this study, middle level educators were asked to rate the areas of field experiences, classroom management, student counseling, human development, curriculum design, educational technology, and philosophical foundations as to their importance in the preparation of prospective teachers. The data showed that longevity of experience was an influential factor in determining the importance of the areas to be included in middle level teacher preparation programs. Beginning (1 to 7 years) and highly experienced teachers (14 + years) rated six of the seven areas as being more important than did their colleagues with 8 to 13 years of experience. The level of certification (elementary, middle level, or high school) had little or no influence on educator preferences. Major implications of the study include the importance of providing quality field experiences for prospective middle level teachers and the necessity of revising current programs by incorporating the "social studies model."