Specialized Middle Level Teacher Preparation: Moving from Advocacy to Actualization.

Is specialized middle level teacher preparation necessary? This essay offers the authors’ thoughts regarding middle level teaching and the necessity of specialized middle level teacher preparation. The reader is encouraged to further the discussion of middle level teacher preparation from advocacy to actualization. Is middle level teacher preparation necessary? While this question may have the tone of a condescending remark, or demeaning query, as middle level education proponents, we believe this question represents the growth and maturation of the field of middle level education. Our predecessors, William Alexander, John Lounsbury, Gordon Vars, Kenneth McEwin, Paul George, Nancy Doda, and many others spent much of their careers providing passionate responses to their generation’s question: “Is middle level education necessary? ” Through their advocacy, multiple national organizations developed from the grassroots efforts to change the educational practices and policies related to how schools were organized and young adolescents were educated. This shift in schooling for 10to 15-year-old students raised critical questions about the preparation of teachers for the middle grades. Our predecessors adamantly called for specialized teacher preparation, and many middle level groups responded with position statements, standards, and policy changes. Changes in licensure options for specifically prepared middle grades teachers did occur; however, there continues to be a lack of regard for specialized middle level teacher preparation. The question of necessity is posed at a critical juncture in the process of growth and change and represents an adjustment in focus that has moved beyond the need for schools organized for young adolescents, to the obligation of preparing teachers for these schools. Is “Good Teaching Just Good Teaching? ” Many opponents of specialized middle level teacher preparation often rely on the adage “good teaching is just good teaching” as a means of defending a general approach to teacher preparation. Generally speaking, it is difficult to argue against the merits of this statement. Good teaching is good teaching. Teachers typically know it when they see it. In fact, it is usually easy to identify examples of good teaching— students excited about learning, teachers skillfully facilitating a class discussion, authentic opportunities to explore a topic. Good teaching simply addresses some of the core elements of teaching (e.g., assessment, classroom management, instruction, curriculum, content knowledge, student engagement). However, the question regarding good teaching should really focus on whether good teaching looks the same across grade bands, and this is where the variation typically takes place in schools. Educational practices and good teaching do not look the same from elementary school to middle school to high school to college. While many of the same elements will be present, for good teaching to be most effective, the specific population being served should be carefully considered and thus, greatly influence the teaching decisions that are made. As such, 1 Cook et al.: Specialized Middle Level Teacher Preparation Published by ScholarWorks @ UVM, 2016 school communities should respond with a specialized approach to meet the developmental needs of the specific age group. Elementary and secondary programs currently exist with little question of whether they are necessary. Why would middle grades education be any different? In fact, due to the tremendous variability and personal changes that take place during puberty, there is no greater need for this specialized approach than during young adolescents’ middle grades years. Providing a developmentally responsive educational experience for middle grades students is essential for academic success, and middle grades advocates and organizations have called for a specialized approach to teaching middle grades adolescents since the late 1960s through various positions statements and research projects (Eichhorn, 1966; Howell, Cook & Faulkner, 2013b; Jackson & Davis, 2000; National Association of Secondary School Principals [NASSP], 2006; National Forum to Accelerate Middle Grades Reform, 2014b; National Middle School Association [NMSA], 2010). There is no shortage of information about how middle grades students should be taught. Each of these documents addressed the fundamental pedagogy and practices necessary for ensuring effective and meaningful middle grades schools for students. Specifically, each highlighted the need for middle grades students to encounter meaningful curriculum and engaging learning experiences delivered from highly qualified teachers passionate about working with young adolescents. The Association for Middle Level Education (AMLE) provided the foundation for middle grades education with This We Believe: Keys to Educating Young Adolescents, a core document that identified the essential attributes and characteristics of successful middle level education (NMSA, 2010). Providing a developmentally responsive, challenging, empowering, and equitable educational experience that emphasizes curriculum, instruction, and assessment; leadership and organization; and culture and community are the key components to effective middle grades schools. Jackson and Davis (2000) also highlighted seven key design elements to ensure success for middle grades students – rigorous curriculum, appropriate instructional methods, highly-qualified teachers prepared to teach young adolescents, relationships for learning, democratic governance, safe and healthy school environment, and parent and community involvement. Jackson and Davis stated, “The goals of excellence and equity can be reached only through comprehensive, ongoing change involving all the design elements” (p. 219), and each of these elements is critical for school and student success. The National Forum to Accelerate MiddleGrades Reform asserted “high performing middle-grades schools are academically excellent (challenge all students to use their minds), developmentally responsive (sensitive to the unique developmental challenges of early adolescence), socially equitable (democratic and fair and provide every student with high-quality teachers), and embrace organizational structures to support and sustain their trajectory toward excellence” (National Forum, 2014b). Finally, the National Association of Secondary School Principals (2006) produced Breaking Ranks in the Middle: Strategies for Leading Middle Level Reform, a document grounded in reforming middle grade schools through collaborative leadership and professional learning communities; personalizing the school environment; and curriculum, instruction, and assessment. The strategies in this book stress the importance of the middle school philosophy to provide rigorous, personalized learning environments that engage students in meaningful learning. Howell, Cook, and Faulkner, in their Framework of Effective Middle Level Practices, also emphasized the specialized nature of teaching middle grades students (Faulkner et al., 2013; Howell, Cook, & Faulkner, 2013). They identified the relationship between eight key constructs of effective middle level practice— developmental spectrum, organizational 2 Middle Grades Review, Vol. 2, Iss. 1 [2016], Art. 2 https://scholarworks.uvm. edu/mgreview/vol2/iss1/2 structures, teacher dispositions and professional behaviors, relationships, content knowledge, curriculum and instruction, assessment, and classroom management. While all eight of the constructs are important in providing meaningful learning experiences to students, they emphasized the importance of viewing the core of the Framework (i.e., developmental spectrum, organizational structures, teacher dispositions and professional behaviors, and relationships) as the primary lens through which one should view the constructs situated outside of the core (i.e., content knowledge, curriculum, and instruction, classroom management, and assessment). For instance, having a thorough understanding of the developmental spectrum of adolescents (i.e., cognitive, physical, social, emotional, cultural, and moral) and the organizational structures of middle grades schools (e.g., common planning time, interdisciplinary teams, integrated units of instruction), should allow teachers the appropriate lens to reflect on the required content knowledge to plan and implement integrated units that offer a more relevant, rigorous, and meaningful curriculum that challenge students. While an adequate amount of information exists on how to teach and organize middle grades schools, much of the challenge in ensuring all middle grades young adolescents encounter this type of educational experience lies with initial teacher preparation. Many teachers who teach in middle grades schools were not specifically prepared to do so (Jackson & Davis, 2000). Providing specialized middle level teacher preparation in universities across the country is an essential step for ensuring middle grades students receive effective middle grades teaching. What is High Quality Middle Level Teacher Preparation? Every child deserves to have a competent, effective classroom teacher, but if that goal is to be actualized, high quality teacher preparation is essential. Though teacher preparation programs have been a staple of nearly every college or university curriculum for decades, the preparation of teachers continues to find its way into the national conversation. Various entities— public, private, and even entrepreneurial—define “high quality teacher preparation” in a manner that best suits their needs. Most teacher educators, like the authors, believe high quality teacher preparation is best achieved through a clearly defined, university-based curriculum, while others believe similar results can be realized by engaging motivated college graduates in an intense, non-university-based alternative certification