THESIS This is to certify that the dissertation entitled A STUDY OF CURRICULA EMPLOYED BY INSTITUTIONS IN TRAINING TEACHERS FOR MIDDLE SCHOOL POSITIONS presented by Mary Anne Lewis has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for Ph. D. degree in Administration and CurricUTum / ’_,W Major professor Date April 1983 MS U is an Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Institution 0- 12771 - fif;.._‘.‘,'b. ,7. .- (II. 0 .I ' I 7‘ 4. . .._I-.-' g 6‘ 3" ? ,7. 3“ J . 4 ." , t-f.‘ fl”; ”‘3‘. i I. H I. A ‘I " .‘ ', ‘ j. A. Tfi 5W ‘1‘";3; - '_ y "z I' "A” \g . ' I“; I.?' I t r \ W ‘ n M o 7. cm! +7.33; my ‘: Z a! - Uta-ems 9;an 1‘ .‘4 \ ~_.-_- /' '— MSU LIBRARIES ”— RETURNING MATERIALS: Piace in book drop to remove this checkout from your record. FINES wiII be charged if book is returned after the date stamped beiow. ¢ 2;“; if ~1r; V. {Ll ;“ .9 i" F: 12.7" ’4‘.” - ; ii a ~ '5' 1 9’ "‘ p -: .4 . “ ' '. ' 4 1‘4».— W fi .Lx.-.‘ fistula“: nau- rooai USE M r Copyright by MARY ANNE LEWIS 1983 A STUDY OF CURRICULA EMPLOYED BY INSTITUTIONS IN TRAINING TEACHERS FOR MIDDLE SCHOOL POSITIONS By Mary Anne Lewis The data for this study were gathered in 1976, but the study was not completed until 1983. Therefore, the reader should interpret these data with caution. A DISSERTATION Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Department of Administration and Curriculum 1983 ABSTRACT A STUDY OF CURRICULA EMPLOYED BY INSTITUTIONS IN TRAINING TEACHERS FOR MIDDLE SCHOOL POSITIONS By Mary Anne Lewis The purpose of this study was to make a cross-sectional analy- sis of teacher-training institutions within the eight states that claimed to have a special certification for middle school teachers and to compare the commonalities and differences in the program offerings and requirements. The sample comprised l25 randomly chosen NCATE-accredited teacher-training institutions representing the eight states that were Said to certificate middle school teachers. The first draft of the model was limited to listing courses or experiences for the training of the middle school candidate. No attempt was made to include experiences of a general-education nature. Only those courses and experiences were included that might be labeled professional-education and subject-teaching areas. The model was sent to eight experts in the field of middle school education. Seventy-one (56%) questionnaires were returned by the 125 institutions selected for the study. The respondents showed a lack of adequate training in the middle school teacher-training programs. All Mary Anne Lewis respondents emphasized a need for special certification of middle school teachers. The analysis of the data revealed that there was no significant difference in the course offerings as given by the 16 middle school teacher-training institutions that responded. Based on the data reported in this study, only one public institution offered all 16 courses suggested in the model. Only 23% of the reporting teacher-training institutions were preparing teachers for middle school positions. Of the 16 teacher-training institutions with middle school teacher-training programs, 57% had had programs for a period of four years, whereas the remaining schools had had programs from one to three years. The data for this study were gathered in 1976, but the study was not completed until 1983. Therefore, the reader should interpret these data with caution. TABLE OF CONTENTS Page LIST OF TABLES ........................ iv Chapter I. INTRODUCTION ..................... 1 The Problem ..................... 1 Purpose of the Study ................ 5 Assumptions ..................... 6 Significance of the Problem ............. 6 Definition of Terms ................. 8 Limitations ..................... 9 Hypotheses ..................... 9 Procedure for Analysis of Data ........... 11 Administration of the Instrument .......... 11 Treatment of the Data ................ 12 Organization of the Dissertation .......... 12 II. REVIEW OF SELECTED LITERATURE ............. 13 Summary ....................... 22 III. DESIGN AND PROCEDURES OF THE STUDY .......... 23 General Information ................. 23 The Sample ..................... 24 Development of the Instrument ............ 25 Procedures for Developing the Model Middle School Teacher-Training Program ............. 25 Relating the Questionnaire to the Research Questions . 29 Data- Collection Procedures ............. 29 Research Questions Developed for This Study ..... 30 Hypotheses to Be Tested ............... 31 Statistical Procedures Used in This Study ...... 33 Summary ....................... 33 IV. ANALYSIS OF THE DATA ................. 35 Statistical Input From the Questionnaire ...... 35 Results of Hypothesis Testing ............ 41 ii V. APPENDIX Public and Private Middle School Teacher-Training Programs Compared With the Middle School Teacher-Training Model ............... Comments Made by Respondents . .. ........... Discussion ...................... Summary ........................ SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS ........ The Problem ...................... Methodology and Procedures .............. Discussion of the Major Findings ........... Implications ..................... Recommendations for Further Study ........... Concluding Statement ................. BIBLIOGRAPHY .......................... iii Table 10. ll. 12. 13. LIST OF TABLES Response Rate From Eight States That Are Said to Certificate Middle School Teachers ........... Number of Private and Public Institutions Having a Middle School Teacher-Training Program ......... Number of Years Middle School Program Had Been Offered Number of Students Enrolled in Middle School Teacher- Training Programs in Private and Public Institutions Number of Semesters a Middle School Teacher Candidate Works in a Middle School Before Student Teaching Number of Hours a Middle Schoo1 Teacher Candidate Practice Taught ..................... Do You Require a Major in One, Two, or Three Disciplines? . Requirement of a Minor in One, Two, or Three Disciplines in Middle School Teacher-Training InstitutiOns ..... Statistical Relationship of Courses Included in the Middle School Teacher-Training Model in Public and Private Teacher-Training Institutions for Middle School Education .................... The Offering of the Preadolescent Psychology Course in Public and Private Middle School Teacher-Training Institutions ...................... The Offering of the Mental Health of Preadolescents Course in Public and Private Middle School Teacher-Training Institutions ...................... The Offering of the Sex Education Course in Public and Private Middle School Teacher-Training Institutions . . . The Offering of a Middle School Curriculum Course in Public and Private Middle School Teacher-Training Institutions ...................... iv Page 36 36 37 38 39 39 4O 44 44 45 46 47 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. The Offering of a Human Relations Course in Public and Private Middle School Teacher-Training Institutions The Offering of Student Teaching in Public and Private Middle School Teacher-Training Institutions ....... The Offering of a Teaching Mathematics Course in Public and Private Middle School Teacher-Training Institutions The Offering ofaTeaching Social Studies Course in Public and Private Middle School Teacher-Training Institutions The Offering of a Teaching Reading Course in Public and Private Middle School Teacher-Training Institutions The Offering of a Teaching Language Arts Course in Public and Private Middle School Teacher-Training Institutions The Offering of a Teaching Science Course in Public and Private Middle School Teacher-Training Institutions The Offering of an Audio-Visual Course in Public and Private Middle School Teacher-Training Institutions The Offering of a Special Studies in Education Course in Public and Private Middle School Teacher-Training Institutions ................ . ....... The Offering of a Career Seminar Course in Public and Private Middle School Teacher-Training Institutions The Offering of an Instructional Strategies Course in Public and Private Middle School Teacher-Training Institutions ....................... The Offering of a Bicultural Education Course in Public and Private Middle School Teacher-Training Institutions Course Offerings by the 16 Public and Private Middle School Teacher-Training Institutions ........... Page 48 48 49 49 50 51 51 52 53 54 54 55 56 CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION The Problem "The most difficult and important branch of human knowledge appears to be that which treats the rearing and education ofchildren."1 So said Montaigne in his essay "Of the Education of Young Boys," writ- ten in the sixteenth century. A little later in the same essay, he suggested that the teacher selected for that educational process is the one "upon the choice of whom depends the whole success of [the young boy's] education."2 Montaigne also had ideas regarding the type of teacher to select and even how he should practice his art. Montaigne preferred among candidates "one with a well-made rather than a well-filled head" and "one who possesses both, but not so much learning as char- acter and intelligence." Also, "he should exercise his charge after a new method."3 1 Many changes have taken place in education since the sixteenth century, however, especially in very recent years; one of the most 4 recent innovations is the emerging middle school. Nevertheless, 1Montaigne, The Essays of Montaigne, trans. E. J. Trechmann (New York: Oxford University Press, n.d.), as quoted by Paul J. Zdanowicz in a speech, "Staffing the Middle School" (n.p., n.d.), p. 1. 2 3 4 Ibid., p. 2. Ibid., p. 3. Ibid., p. 4. 1 Montaigne's requirements for the qualified teacher still apply. Indeed, the most critical problem connected with the establishment and maintenance of middle schools is that of securing teachers who are trained for their work. Although the necesSity of having qualified teachers is pressing in all parts of the school system, this neces- sity is most urgent in the middle school because the middle school is a new institution with a new program of studies and a new social purpose. If the teaching in this new institution is to be done by teachers who follow the old traditions and who fail to catch the vision of a new method and a new opportunity, it is not likely that the middle school will be able to accomplish the purpose for which it was intended.5 The rapid growth of the middle school demands, for many reasons, accredited teacher-training programs designed specifically for the mid- dle school teacher. Yet, data show that when one speaks of the middle school and the training of teachers in that area, educators have not been as progressive and specific as Montaigne would demand. In fact, there is a definite lag in the efforts of teacher-training institu- tions to construct valid courses and to establish innovative instruc- tional techniques appropriate for prospective middle school teachers. A teacher-training program should encourage the mastery of specific competencies of teachers, based on the developmental needs of transescents. Teachers should be certified for middle school posi- tions only after demonstrating proficiency in these competencies. 5J. Krinsky and P. Pumerantz, "Middle School Teacher Prepara- tion Programs," Journal of Teacher Education 23 (Winter 1972): 468-70. I Ii \ll'iil.kl Havighurst identified the following developmental goals or tasks the transescent must achieve if he is to be successful at the adolescent stage. Failure to fulfill these taSks would stifle growth in self-actualization, resulting in personal and social unhappiness in later life.6 1. To learn to interact constructively with others. These young people react very strongly to their agemates. Some become dependent on their peers; an equally normal but puzzling minority desire relative solitude. Attitudes toward adults vacillate con- siderably. This shift of allegiance from adults to peers should be studied carefully by middle school educators so as to provide approp- riate activities for preadolescents to interact constructively with both adults and peers. 2. To achieve an appropriate dependence/independence pattern. The preadolescent begins to cut loose from parents and may look for an adult other than a parent for help in understanding the complexi- ties Of life. He also wants to cut loose from authority and to figure things out for himself. Often, the preadolescent protests that he is not a baby. Guiding the transescent is an important task of the middle school educator, who may become the "listening ear." The middle school educator also provides opportunities for each child to be independent at times and yet attempts to help each child develop security within the group. 6Robert J. Havighurst, Human Development and Education (New York: Longmans, Green & Co., 1953), pp.TTll-19. I'll 11.1-1 linln I.IiII1~trl1I 1. 3. To develop a workable valuing system. Conscience becomes more apparent at this stage. The child exhibits strong feel- ings of fairness, honesty, and values in adults but may "relax" his/her own. These feelings and value systems become relatively stable in the later period of the preadolescent stage. It is impor- tant then that the middle school assist the child to realize that nearly everything is not absolutely right or wrong, black or white, but that there are many gray areas, and also to learn that there are two sides to every interaction. 4. To cultivate intellectual abilities. As the learner's intellectual capacity grows, he moves from a period of preparation for an organization of concrete operations ( 2 to 11 years) to the period of formal operations (11 to 15 years). Activities should be provided for success in concrete operations in the middle school pro- gram to permit the preadolescent to move toward more normal opera- tions. Efficiencies in problem-solving skills (reading, math, etc.) and a knowledge of important concepts in the disciplines are essen- tial if the transescent is to meet this developmental task. 5. To adjust to a changing body. During the transition between childhood and adolescence, the greatest amount of physical (as well as psychological and social) change in an individual will occur. It is critical that the preadolescent learn to accept his body and to realize that classmates may develop differently; self- understanding should be emphasized throughout the middle school curriculum and in guidance sessions. 6. To learn an appropriate sex role. In the early part of the preadolescent period, there is a tendency to prefer one's sex. This is more marked in boys than girls. In the later stages, the boy and girl interests become open. Experience in the middle school should help the preadolescent develop his/her appropriate sex role. These developmental tasks justify the implementation of separate school programs. A program based on the developmental needs of transescents requires a specialized staff.7 Purpose of the Study The purpose of this study was to make a cross-sectional analysis of teacher-training institutions within the eight states that claimed to have special certification for the middle school teacher and to compare the commonalities and differences in the programs' offerings and requirements. This study was undertaken to investigate whether these programs do, in fact, address the concerns and needs of the middle school child or whether these programs merely represent a renaming of the typical elementary or secondary program currently used. This study also investigated whether teacher- training institutions are planning to implement middle school programs according to the criteria stated in a consensus model developed by the researcher and approved by eight experts in the middle school movement. 71bid., p. 113. Assumptions For the purposes of this study, the following assumptions were made: 1. The activities included in the model teacher-training program for middle school teachers are desirable and should be included in any middle school training program. 2. The questionnaire employed in this study was assumed to be adequate. 3. The sample was representative, selected in an appropriate manner, and adequate for the conclusions and inferences to be drawn. 4. The respondents had a clear understanding of what program components are needed to define a program of training for middle school teachers. Significance of the Problem According to George, a majority of novice middle school teach- ers have never had specific experience working with or training to work with emerging adolescents in a learning situation.8 Instead, institutions have turned out elementary and secondary teachers for careers in middle schools. In fact, George found that middle school faculties are composed of one group that has elementary school train- ing and experience and another group that has secondary school train- ing and experience. Often these staffs divide themselves in accordance with their backgrounds, thus creating two widely varying staff 8P. S. George, "Middle School Teacher Certification: A National Survey," Educational Leadership (December 1975): 213-16. subgroups, which sometimes makes it impossible to implement apprOp- riate programs successfully. It should be noted that physical, social, emotional, and intellectual differences among and within pUpils are greater in the middle grades than in the primary grades. Moreover, the specialized programs of the high school are not adequate to account for these differences. In addition, teacher expectations and interactions vary, depending on the grade level taught. Thus, to avoid the subgroup conflict to which George referred and to attend to the fact that middle school students constitute a distinct group with unique needs, educators must recognize that teacher-training programs that train either elementary or secondary teachers no longer suffice. The school in the middle, which is neither elementary nor secondary, demands a trained staff to cope with the "in-between-ager."9 Teacher-education institutions must respond to this demand by developing a teacher-preparation component emphasizing emerging adolescent education. Vars stated that secondary programs in the liberal arts colleges emphasize primarily courses in a teaching field, with perhaps one course devoted to teaching methods.10 Elementary programs stress numerous methods courses and demand less work in the substantive fields. The effective middle school teacher, however, needs to know 9Joseph Bondi, Developing Middle Schools: A Guide Book (New York: MSS Information Corporation, 1972), p. 17. 106. F. Vars, "Teacher Preparation for the Middle Schools," The High School Journal (December 1969): 173-77. both content and methods and have versatility of subject-matter background. Definition of Terms For the purpose of this study, the following terms and defi- nitions were used. Middle school--"It is an educational unit with a philosophy, structure and program which will realistically and appropriately deal with 11 to 14 year olds as they indeed are and behave. Its commit- ment is primarily to the youth it seeks to serve."11 In-between-ager--Used synonymously with transescent. Early field experience-~Site exposure to the middle school setting. This experience is usually gained the first two years of a candidate's program. Public institution--An institution that receives its support from public funds such as taxes. Private institution--An institution that receives its support from private donors. Transescence--A transitional stage of development during which youngsters differ from younger children in the elementary school and from the high school's full-fledged adolescent. The youngsters are generally within the age range of 10 to 14 years. Tweeners--Used synonymously with transescent. NCATE--Nationa1 Council for Accrediting Teacher Education. HLouis G. Romano, Nicholas P. Georgiady, and James E. Heald, The Middle School: Selected Readings on an Emergigg School Program (Chicago: 'Nelson-Hall Company, 1973). Limitations 1. The nature and validity of the major sources of data, which included 125 randomly chosen National Council for Accrediting Teacher Education (NCATE) accredited teacher-training institutions, constituted a limitation of the study. 2. The researcher assumed that individuals would respond to the questionnaire with a true understanding of the training given to middle school teachers. 3. The study was limited by the amount of current research materials available. Hypotheses A11 hypotheses were tested at the .05 level for appropriate- ness of significance. 1. There is no significant difference between public and private institutions that offered Preadolescent Psychology in the training of middle school teachers. ’ 2. There is no significant difference between public and private institutions that offered Mental Health of Preadolescents in the training of middle school teachers. 3. There is no significant difference between public and private institutions that offered Sex Education for the Middle School in the training of middle school teachers. 4. There is no significant difference between public and private institutions that offered Middle School Curriculum in the training of middle school teachers. 1O 5. There is no significant difference between public and private institutions that offered Human Relations for the Middle School in the training of middle school teachers. 6. There is no significant difference between public and private institutions that offered Student Teaching for the Middle School in the training of middle school teachers. 7. There is no significant difference between public and private institutions that offered Teaching Mathematics in the Middle School in the training of middle school teachers. 8. There is no significant difference between public and private institutions that offered Teaching Social Studies in the Middle School in the training of middle school teachers. 9. There is no significant difference between public and private institutions that offered Teaching Reading in the Middle School in the training of middle school teachers. 10. There is no significant difference between public and private institutions that offered Teaching Language Arts in the Middle School in the training of middle school teachers. 11. There is no significant difference between public and private institutions that offered Teaching Science in the Middle School in the training of middle school teachers. 12. There is no significant difference between public and private institutions that offered Audio-Visual Methods of Instruction in the Middle School in the training of middle school teachers. 11 13. There is no significant difference between public and private institutions that offered Special Studies in Education in the training of middle school teachers. 14. There is no significant difference between public and private institutions that offered Career Seminar in the training of middle school teachers. 15. There is no significant difference between public and private institutions that offered Instructional Strategies for the Middle School in the training of middle school teachers. 16. There is no significant difference between public and private institutions that offered Bicultural Education in the training of middle school teachers. Procedure for Analysis of Data In this study, the questionnaire was used as the primary instrument for gathering data from school personnel regarding the institutions' offerings. The questionnaire was developed after a thorough review of the literature related to middle school teacher training. Specifically, the 10-item questionnaire contained questions related to the present teacher-training program in the institutions listed in eight states. The tenth item was the list of courses and activities recommended by a panel of middle school experts. Administration of the Instrument A pilot study was made of the instrument to determine if the questions were understandable. The 36 students in the summer workshop 12 on middle school administration read the questionnaire and critiqued its adequacy. Treatment Of the Data The data were collected, tabulated, and analyzed. Frequency distributions and chi-square correlations are reported in Chapter IV. Organizatibn of the Dissertation This dissertation is organized into five chapters. A state- ment of the need and purposes was contained in Chapter I. A review of relevant literature constitutes Chapter II. This review includes (1) articles and viewpoints that express the need for middle school teacher-training programs from administrators and teachers presently involved in middle school settings and (2) research that documents the status of teacher preparation for middle school teachers. Chapter III contains a discussion of the design of the study and describes the procedures used in developing the instrument and obtaining the data. Statistical analyses used in testing the hypothe- ses and in evaluating the data are presented in Chapter IV. The concluding chapter includes a summary of findings, conclusions drawn from the study, and implications for further research. CHAPTER II REVIEW OF SELECTED LITERATURE Eight-year grammar schools and four-year high schools served as a keystone of America's education at the turn of the century. Nevertheless, this organizational pattern, which persists today, has had to accommodate the introduction of the junior high school. Althougha number of reasons have been offered for creating this inter- mediate level, all of them focus on one issue: easing the student's transition from elementary to secondary education. Madon made the following statement in regard to the develop- ment of the transescent: Every person develops from infancy to adulthood through a enerally well-defined sequence of growth. Transescence Iemerging adolescence) defines a specific period in this growth sequence. The transescent youngster is a special individual identified by certain physical, intellectual, psy- chological, and social characteristics. Because of these unique characteristics, transescents require a unique educa- tional environment designed to serve their characteristics. Sensitive especially prepared personnel to design and implement programs to serve transescent youth are mandatory for the development of an appropriate educational environment for these children. The learning environment typically found in elemen- tary and senior high schools does not provide for the unique needs and characteristics of students at this stage of their development. 2 12Constant A. Madon, "The Middle School: Its Philosophy and Purpose," The Clearing House 40 (February 1966): 329. 13 14 One of the most critical and essential elements required for the success of the middle school, then, is the teaching staff. In fact, a meaningful educational program for the transescent cannot be attained without teachers who are well aware of the nature of their pupils and of the practices that show the most promise in providing for the specialized needs of these pupils. These teachers must acquire competencies that cannot generally be acquired through present programs of preparation for elementary or secondary teachers.13 Yet, although the need for a transitional level has been expressed and implemented in theory and curriculum construction, this critical aspect of teacher preparation has lagged far behind. For example, Walker surveyed 800 junior high school teachers. Seventy percent of them preferred teaching at this level but expressed a need for training.14 Stainbrook's effort revealed another very interesting fact. While the junior high school teachers who participated in the study were slightly younger than those reviewed in Walker's investigation, those staffing middle schools were significantly younger. The attrac- tion of the middle school for younger teachers might thus be a fruit- ful area for further research, although Stainbrook supported mixing older and younger teachers in middle schools. He offered no rationale 13H. T. Fillmer, "A Proposed Teacher Education Program" (paper presented at the Institute for Curriculum Improvement, Gaines- ville, Florida, 1968). 14B. A. Walker, "A Study of the Professional Preparation of Junior High School Teachers in Indiana, 1959," Dissertation Abstracts 20 (1959): 2164. 15 for this notion. Stainbrook found no meaningful differences in preparation among experienced and inexperienced teachers. Moreover, lack of formal coursework in counseling and guidance and intermediate- level student teaching was considered by many as a major flaw in their preparatory program.15 Stainbrook was a strong proponent of inservice education. He offered suggestions for preservice work as well. Aside from the obvious, he felt candidates should be prepared to teach all inter- mediate grades. His writing implies a need for interdisciplinary training. As to specifics, he supported coursework in reading and counseling for all candidates.16 American education has not insisted on certification for intermediate-level teachers. Either elementary or secondary certi- fication has been accepted for teaching positions at the middle or junior high level. As a result, programs offering Junior high or middle school certification are sparse. Whereas California, Illinois, and Texas contain 131, 142, and 252 middle schools, respectively, each state possesses one teacher-training institution that offers a certification program for this level.17 15J. Stainbrook, "A Current and Comparative Analysis of the Professional Preparation of Teachers in the Junior High Schools and Developing Middle Schools of Indiana, 1970," Dissertation Abstracts International 31 (1971): 5916A. 16Itn'd. 17J. Krinsky and P. Pumerantz, "Middle School Teacher Prepara- tion Programs," Journal of Teacher Education 23 (Winter 1972): 468-70. 16 Krinsky and Pumerantz called attention to this state of affairs in their article. They cited a need for the middle school rather than the junior high because the early maturational tendencies of today's youngsters require the implementation of relevant programs within appropriate organizational patterns. The past ten years have Seen the middle school concept acquire increasing support from teacher-training institutions. But it is only recently that they have attempted to deal with teacher prepara- tion. In fact, Krinsky and Pumerantz were unable to locate informa- tion on this topic in the literature. Therefore, they surveyed 241 universities that advertised teacher-training programs. Of the 160 responses, 37% had middle school preparation programs.18 Although relatively small, this finding showed a tremendous improvement over 19 Singer's effort, which reported finding no such programs. Krinsky and Pumerantz also discovered that 18 programs had at least one undergraduate course, and 19 had at least one graduate course.20 The conclusions the authors drew from these findings are interesting. They discovered that institutions are producing teachers for middle school careers who lack the proper orientation to the philosophy and psychology of the middle school. They are poorly prepared for its organization and instructional patterns. As a 181pm. 19I. Singer, "Survey of Staff Utilization Practices in Six States," Bulletin of the National Association of Secondary School Principals 46 (January 1962): 1:13. ZOKrinsky and Pumerantz, "Middle School Teacher Preparation Programs," pp. 468-70. 17 result, "the colleges of education are in effect perpetuating incom- petence in middle school education."21 Obviously, teacher-training institutions must adopt a stronger point of view and develop programs in line with the needs expressed by those wOrking in the field. Hubert looked at the situation from a slightly different point of view. She believed that junior high school teachers have traditionally been looked down upon.22 Since junior highs were created to bring academics to the elementary grades, they were staffed by teachers trained to teach at a higher level. The notion of stepping down did not lead to a positive image. Therefore, preparation programs were at first unnecessary and have failed to come into existence in meaningful numbers because of their negative image. Lack of defini- tive certification has been a factor contributing to the problem. On the other hand, there has been little motivation for col- leges to establish certification programs because faculty members have accepted either elementary or secondary education majors as qualified to teach middle school.23 In a 1968 study she conducted, Hubert found middle schools to be critical of their preparation and the idea of mixing elementary and secondary education as being more theoretical than practical since those with secondary certification outnumbered those with elementary certification by 17 to 1. More than 75% of the 21 22J. Hubert, "On Preparing Teachers for the Junior High and Middle School: The Teacher Input," The Clearing House 47 (May 1973): 550-54. Ibid. 231pm. 18 respondents had not taken a course dealing with the middle school. This finding supported the findings of Hubert's earlier effort.24 In a more recent article, Hubert reported that teachers expressed a strong preference for undergradUate preparation programs. Suggestions for coursework were made. Specifically, the following were named: adolescent and preadolescent psychology and methods and materials for junior high and middle school students. Most respondents were dissatisfied with current offerings.25 Lounsbury and Vars attributed some intermediate-level problems to the predominance of secondary-trained teachers. They felt that their relatively narrow training and interest in subject matter mili- tate against effective interaction with their students. Such inter- action seems to be crucial for students at this level. Clearly, staff trained in elementary techniques, with an interest in the child-centered approach, will be of greater importance to individual student develop- ment.26 A New Jersey study advanced ideas similar to those noted above. This report criticized teacher-training institutions for fail- ing to offer appropriate preparation programs. Suggestions for approp- riate coursework were presented. The study advocated work in team teaching; innovative practices; and physical, intellectual, 24 25 26J. Lounsbury and G. Vars, "The Middle School: Fresh Start or New Delusion?" The National Elementary Principal 40 (November 1971 : 12-19. Ibid. Ibid. 19 psychological, social, and emotional aspects. Moreover, diagnostic teaching experiences should be emphasized.27 The Pittsburgh school district took a different approach to this problem. Concerned about the lack of appropriate formal programs, the school district sponsored a middle school teacher project. Field experience served as the key to the competency-based activity. Teach- ers who successfully completed the program were awarded a Master's degree from the University of Pittsburgh, which was actively involved in all phases of the experience.28 Briefly, this program focused on the competencies required to train teachers to work with urban middle school students. A diagnos- tic prescriptive approach to individualized instruction was employed, with the university acting as the primary training agent. COmmunity involvement was an important component of the program, and a model was created. The university's primary objective was to establish a two-year graduate program designed to prepare teachers for urban middle schools. This objective was achieved. With the paucity of appropriate teacher-preparation programs, this type of activity seems to be an excellent, if not the best, approach. There is no better way of acquiring skills than performing them with the continual guidance of those whOralready possess them. 27New Jersey School Development Council, "The Middle School: An Idea Whose Time Has Come" (Bethesda, Md.: ERIC Document Reproduc- tion Service, ED 083 717, 1973). 28Pittsburgh Board of Public Education, "Pittsburgh Middle School Teacher Project" (Bethesda, Md.: ERIC Document Reproduction Service, ED 102 148, 1974). 20 Curtis advocated the procedure employed in the Pittsburgh program. Experience, he felt, is superior to formal coursework. Curtis was critical of current teacher-preparation programs and spent some time detailing their lack of appeal to education majors. Favor- ing an interdisciplinary approach, he mentioned the goals that have been included in the Pittsburgh preparation program.29 These goals are: 1. To establish a two-year graduate program to prepare teach- ers for urban middle schools. 2. To establish, implement, and evaluate a model whereby, when an institution of higher education and a school district work cooperatively to prepare preservice and inservice teachers to meet an educational need, it is so specified that the components can be adopted by other institutions. 3. To develop, implement, and evaluate an individualized teacher-education program. 4. To develop, implement, and evaluate a competency-based teacher-education program. 5. To develop, implement, and evaluate a teacher-education program in which modules are the instructional vehicle. 6. To provide teachers with competencies to meet the learn- ing needs and styles of handicapped students who are involved maxi- mally in the regular educational program. 29T. Curtis, "Preparing Teachers for Middle and Junior High Schools," Bulletin of the National Association of Secondary School Principals 56 (May 1972): 61-70. 21 7. To develop and implement career-education modules for the Teacher Development Division, School of Education. 8. To develop the portal-school concept at each Teacher Corps site through the use of selected university and district personnel for work with interns, team leaders, resident staff, and administrators. 9. To provide a model of interdisciplinary teaching within the teacher-training area in the School of Education by interweaving themes and issues, content areas, and guidelines in the Cycle IX Teacher Corps Middle School Teacher Development Program. 10. To provide a model of interdisciplinary teaching within the total School of Education by using faculty across division lines within the context of the Cycle IX Teacher Corps Program.30 As noted before, middle school teacher-preparation programs are far behind those for elementary and senior high. Much of this lag may be attributed to the willingness of school districts to accept either elementary or secondary certification for intermediate-level teaching positions. It is only relatively recently that the unique personality and learning characteristics of youngsters at this age have been recognized and considered. When school districts adopt more stringent employment procedures, teacher-training institutions will be compelled to offer programs for those interested in teaching at the intermediate level. Responding to this demand, teacher-training institutions should direct their programs toward the emerging middle school rather than the 30Pittsburgh Board of Public Education, "Pittsburgh Middle School Teacher Project," pp. 102-48. 22 traditional junior high. The middle school teacher-training program concerns itself with providing courses related to the emerging ado- lescent. Finally, middle school student teaching must be included in a preparation program if that program is to be successful. One may be well versed in a variety of academic skills, but if he is not permitted to apply them under guidance, they may well be useless. Student teach- ing at the elementary or secondary level is inappropriate, and train- ing so attained will miss the mark since there are different objectives for and characteristics of each pupil population. Summary This chapter contained a review of relevant literature, including (1) articles and viewpoints that expressed the need for middle school teacher-training programs from administrators and teach- ers presently involved in middle school settings and (2) research that documented the status of preparation for the middle school teacher. The study was restricted by the amount of adequate research available. Because of the recency of the middle school movement, literature is still limited. Chapter III presents the design of the study and describes the procedures used in developing the instrument and in obtaining the data. CHAPTER III DESIGN AND PROCEDURES OF THE STUDY The primary purpose of this chapter is to describe the research design of the study, including the construction of the instru- ment, a description of the data-collection process, the research ques- tions developed for the study, and the statistical procedures employed to analyze the data. General Information The purpose of this study was to make a cross-sectional analy- sis of teacher-training institutions within the eight states that had special certification for the middle school teacher and to compare the commonalities and differences in the programs' offerings and require- ments. This study was undertaken to investigate whether these programs do, in fact, address the concerns and needs of the middle school child or whether these programs merely represent a remainder of the typical elementary or secondary program currently used. The study also inves- tigated whether teacher-training institutions were planning to implement middle school programs according to the components stated in a middle school teacher-training model developed by the researcher and approved by eight experts in the middle school movement. 23 24 The Sample 1 the eight states cited in this study According to George, were the only current certificating states for middle school teachers. They were chosen by the writer to investigate the current criteria used for teacher certification. The sample in this study consisted of 125 randomly chosen National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education accredited teacher-training institutions representing the eight states that certificate middle school teachers. (See Table 1.) Table l.--Response rate from eight states that are said to certificate middle school teachers. Questionnaires Questionnaires States Sent Out .Returned Percent Colorado 16 9 56.2 Florida 15 11 73.3 Indiana 16 6 37.5 Kentucky l6 13 81.2 Nebraska 15 9 60.0 North Carolina 16 11 68.7 Minnesota 16 6 37.5 West Virginia 15 6 40.0 Total 125 71 56.8 1 P. 5. George, “Middle School Teacher Certification: A National Survey," Educational Leadership (December 1975): 213-16. 25 Development of the Instrument In this study, the questionnaire was used as the principal instrument for gathering data from school personnel regarding the institutions' offerings. It was composed of ten items, which sought to obtain information regarding the institutions' offerings and selected demographic information. (See Appendix.) The following areas of concern were the basis for formulating the questionnaire: 1. What are the commonalities and differences in the program offerings and requirements among institutions that currently have middle school programs? 2. Are the institutions' middle school teacher-training programs consistent with the middle school teacher-training program model? Procedures for Developing the Model Middle School Teacher-Training Program From the examination of the literature and discussion with practitioners and theorists in the field of middle school education, a tentative model for middle School teacher training was developed. The model included the following: 1. Clinical- and field-centered training at the middle school level. 2. Competencies in at least two subject areas, namely, mathematics, science, social studies, and English. 3. Competency in the area of developmental reading. 4. Competency in the area of preadolescent psychology. 26 5. Teaching strategies for the middle school level. 6. Classroom guidance. The first draft of the model was limited to the above list of courses or experiences for the training Of the middle school can- didate. No attempt was made to include those experiences that are of a general-education nature. Only those courses and experiences were included that might be labeled professional education and subject teaching areas. The model was sent to eight experts in the field of middle school education. Only five of them returned their questionnaires with comments. A second attempt was made to receive replies from the nonrespondents, but to no avail. Therefore, the responses from the five experts were used to revise and improve the model. From the responses, the following comments were made to sug- gest further changes in the model: 1. There was no strong disagreement with the first model, but all respondents made suggestions for further improvement. 2. Three respondents recommended that in addition to the basic course in reading, an additiOnal reading course in the content area be required of all students. 3. Four respondents recommended audio-visual instruction. 4. Four respondents stated that methods courses in the four basic instructional areas should be included. 5. Five respondents recommended a course on middle school curriculum. 27 6. Two respondents recommended a course that centers on the mental health of the preadolescent in addition to a basic course on preadolescent psychology. 7. Two respondents recommended a cburse in sex education or family-living education. 8. Four respondents recommended a course related to an over- view in career education. 9. One respondent recommended a course in bicultural educa- tion. 10. Two respondents recommended a course on human relations. 11. All of the respondents recommended a seminar or seminars covering topics not traditionally covered in courses, but related to the clinical experiences. TOpics would center on evaluation of pupil growth, parent-teacher conferences, decision making, and so on. A second mailing was sent to each of the five experts, includ- ing the recommendations made by this group of respondents. They were informed that additional items were included for their acceptance or rejection. All five respondents returned the second model. There was consensus within the group about the experiences to be included in the model for training teachers for the middle school, with the following exceptions: (1) only two respondents agreed that a bicul- tural education course should be included, (2) one respondent stated that mental education would be a part of preadolescent psychology, and (3) one respondent suggested that audio-visual instruction be part of the various methods courses. Based on the responses of the 28 five experts, the Model Middle School Teacher-Training Program is as follows: 5 acceptances: 4 acceptances: 3 acceptances: 2 acceptances: Preadolescent Psychology Student Teaching Teaching Mathematics in the Middle School Teaching Social Studies in the Middle School Teaching Science in the Middle School Teaching Reading in the Middle School Teaching Language Arts in the Middle School Instructional Strategies for the Middle School Sex Education for the Middle School Audio-Visual Methods of Instruction Career Seminar Mental Health of Preadolescents. Special Studies in Education (topical seminars) Human Relations Middle School Curriculum Bicultural Education Some of the specific comments made by the five experts con- cerning some of the activities in the model were as follows: The pre-service training should be clinical and field-centered. Early observation experiences should be included during the first two years Of college so that the student can make a deci- sion as to whether or not they want to center their attention in middle school education. 29 It is imperative that the peOple who train the prospective middle school teacher should have had experiences as teachers at this level. They should actively participate with the students in the off-campus experience. Students should move from Observa- tion experiences to tutoring, micro-teaching, etc. and then finally plan for teaching a class of middle school children. The methods courses should be specifically geared to the middle school level. Emphasis should be placed on the role of activi- ties in the instructional program. These students should be assisted to learn how to use various activities such as indi- vidual reports, visual presentations, role playing, construc- tion activities, etc., to help children learn the concepts being taught in the classroom rather than to rely on the textbook. Relatingthe Questionnaire to the Research Questions The items in the questionnaire were used to test the research questions presented in this study. All the questions sought to obtain information regarding institutions' offerings and selected demographic information. Primarily, the questionnaire was arranged in two main parts: 1. Determination of course offerings and other requirements in middle school teacher-training institutions. 1 2. Comparison of course offerings in middle school teacher- training institutions. Questions 1 through 9 centered on the first topic listed above, whereas Question 10 focused on the second topic. Data-Collection Procedures One hundred twenty-five number-coded questionnaires were mailed to the proposed respondents in the eight states that certificate middle school teachers. A cover letter with a self-addressed, stamped envelope was enclosed. (See Appendix.) If the first questionnaire 30 was not returned within two weeks, a second letter was mailed to the respondents with a similar approach as the first letter, but with an urgent request for a speedy return of the first questionnaire. Forty-eight questionnaires were returned frOm the first mailing, and twenty-three were returned from the second mailing, for a total of 71 returns. (See Table 1.) Research Questions Developed for This Study, To provide a descriptive profile of the institutions that were certifying teachers for middle school positions, the following research questions were asked: 1. How many public and private teacher-training institu- tions have a current program that is training middle school teachers? 2. How long has the middle school teacher-training program been offered in these institutions? 3. How many students were enrolled in the middle school teacher-training program in public and private institutions? 4. How many semesters does a middle school teacher candidate work in the middle schools before student teaching in public and private institutions? 5. How many semesters does the middle school teacher candi- date student teach in public and private institutions? 6. Is a major required in one, two, or three disciplines in public and private institutions? 7. Is a minor required in one, two, or three disciplines in public and private institutions? 31 Hypotheses to Be Tested The following null hypotheses were formulated for this study: 1. There is no significant differenCe between public and private institutions that offered Preadolescent Psychology in the training of middle school teachers. 2. There is no significant difference between public and private institutions that offered Mental Health of Preadolescents in the training of middle school teachers. 3. There is no significant difference between public and private institutions that offered Sex Education for the Middle School in the training of middle school teachers. ‘ 4. There is no significant difference between public and private institutions that offered Middle School Curriculum in the training of middle school teachers. 5. There is no_significant difference between public and private institutions that offered Human Relations for the Middle School in the training of middle school teachers. 6. There is no significant difference between public and private institutions that offered Student Teaching for the Middle School in the training of middle school teachers. 7. There is no significant difference between public and private institutions that offered Teaching Mathematics in the Middle School in the training of middle school teachers. 32 8. There is no significant difference between public and private institutions that offered Teaching Social Studies in the Middle School in the training of middle school teachers. 9. There is no significant difference between public and private institutions that offered Teaching Reading in the Middle School in the training of middle school teachers. 1 10. There is no significant difference between public and private institutions that offered Teaching Language Arts in the Middle School in the training of middle school teachers. 11. There is no significant difference between public and private institutions that offered Teaching Science in the Middle School in the training of middle school teachers. 12. There is no significant difference between public and private institutions that offered Audio-Visual Methods of Instruction in the Middle School in the training of middle school teachers. 13. There is no significant difference between public and private institutions that offered Special Studies in Education in the training of middle school teachers. 14. There is no significant difference between public and private institutions that offered Career Seminars in the training of middle school teachers. 15. There is no significant difference between public and private institutions that offered Instructional Strategies for the Middle School in the training of middle school teachers. 33 16. There is no significant difference between public and private institutions that offered Bicultural Education in the train- ing of middle school teachers. Statistical Procedures Used in This Study, The data gathered were organized into related categories according to the purposes of the study. The responses were tabulated and analyzed for each group. To test the research hypotheses, a chi-square correlation was employed. The responses of the group were tallied and tabulated to determine whether relationships existed among the responses of the groups. Frequency distributions and chi -square correlations were reported. Summary This chapter described the research design of the study, including the construction of the instrument, a description of the data-collection process, the research questions developed for the study, and the statistical procedures employed to analyze the data. The research instrument comprised ten items, which sought to obtain information regarding the institutions' offerings and selected demographic information. The following areas of concern were the basis for formulating the questionnaire: 1. What are the commonalities and differences in the program offerings and requirements among institutions that currently have middle school programs? 34 2. Are the institutions' middle school teacher-training programs consistent with the middle school teacher-training program model? From the examination of the literature and discussions with practitioners and theorists in the field of middle school education, a tentative model for middle school teacher training was developed. The model was sent to eight experts in the field of middle school education. Only five of them returned their questionnaires with comments. The responses from these five experts were used to revise and improve the model. I One hundred twenty-five number-coded questionnaires were mailed to randomly chosen prospective respondents in the eight states that certificated middle school teachers. A cover letter with a self-addressed, stamped envelope was enclosed. A total of 71 questionnaires were returned. . The data gathered were organized into related categories according to the purposes of the study. The responses were tabulated and analyzed for each group. Chapter IV presents the results of the statistical analyses used in testing the research questions as well as the data related to the problems presented. CHAPTER IV ANALYSIS OF THE DATA Chapter IV presents the statistical analysis used in testing the research questions and evaluation of the data in relation to the problems presented. Questionnaires were mailed to the institutions randomly chosen from the eight states that were said to be certifying 1 (See Appendix, Table A-1 teachers, as claimed previously by George. for the distribution of schools by states.) As stated in Chapter III, 71 of the 125 questionnaires were returned, for a response rate of 56.8%. Statistical Input From the Questionnaire The following data summarize the responses to the question- naires according to the areas of interest. Research Question 1: How many public and private teacher- training institUthns have a current program that is training middle school teachers? Sixteen of the 71 returned questionnaires claimed a current teacher-training program having one or more courses consistent with the middle school teacher-training model. Thirty-two of the 71 responded that they planned to implementamiddle school teacher-training program, and 23 did not have or plan to have such a program (Table 2). 1P. S. George, "Middle School Teacher Certification: A National Survey," Educational Leadership(December 1975): 213-16. 35 36 Table 2.--Number of private and public institutions having a middle school teacher-training program. Middle School Teacher-Training Frequency Percentage Private Public Program - Yes--Currently 16 22.5 6 10 No--But plans to institute program 32 45.1 6 22 No--No plans to institute program 23 32.4 15 12 Total 71 100.0 27 44 Research Question 2: How long has the middle school teacher- training programibeen offered in these institutions? Table 3 shows how long the middle school teacher-training program had been offered in the institutions that responded. 0f the 16 institutions responding, three had had a program for one year, one had had a program for two years, three had had a program for three years, and nine had had a program for four years. Table 3.--Number of years middle school program had been offered. Number of Years Frequency Percentage 1 3 4.2 2 1 1.4 3 3 4.2 4 9 11.3 No response 55 78.9 Tota1 71 100.0 37 Research Question 3: How many students were enrolled in the middle school teaEher-training program in public and private institutions? Table 4 shows how many students were enrolled in a middle school teacher-training program. 0f the 16 institutions having middle school teacher-training programs, four institutions had two students each, one institution had 10 students, one institution had 15 students, one institution had 20 students, one institution had 21 students, one institution had 25 students, one institution had 27 students, one institution had 28 students, one institution had 30 students, one institution had 45 students, one institution had 50 stu- dents, one institution had 75 students, and one institution had 150 students. In this group of institutions there were ten public and six private institutions. Table 4.--Number of students enrolled in middle school teacher- training programs in private and public institutions. Number of Private Public Students Frequency Institution Institution Percentage 2 4 4 25.4 1° 1 1 6.3 15 1 1 6.3 20 1 1 6.3 21 1 1 6.3 25 1 1 6.3 27 1 1 6.3 23 1 l 6.3 30 1 l 6.3 45 1 l 6.3 50 1 1 6.3 75 1 1 6.3 Total 16 6 10 100.0 38 Research Question 4: How many semesters does a middle school teacher candidate work in the middle schools before student teaching in private and public institutions? The number of semesters a candidate was required to work with middle school children before student teaching is reflected in Table 5. Sixty-five of 71 respondents answered none, one respondent answered one, one answered three, and four respondents did not answer that question. Of the 16 institutions, one public institution required work in a middle school setting before student teaching for one semester; one public institution required three semesters. No data were given for the private institutions. Table 5.--Number of semesters a middle school teacher candidate works in a middle school before student teaching. Number of Semesters Frequency Percentage None 65 91.5 One 1 ‘ 1.4 Three 1 1.4 No response 4 5.6 Research Question 5: How many semesters does the middle school teacher candidate student teach in public and private institu- tions? Table 6 shows that a candidate's student teaching hours were approximately the same whether enrolled in a public or a private institution. Fifty-four of the 71 respondents required 60 or more hours of practice teaching. Seventeen respondents failed to answer this question. Of the 16 teacher-training institutions that 39 have a middle school teacher-training program, nine were public insti- tutions and five were private. Two institutions (one private, one public) did not respond to the question. All 14 of the 16 respond- ing institutions required more than 60 hours of student teaching. Most of the institutions were on a semester basis. Table 6.--Number of hours a middle school teacher candidate practice taught. Number of Hours Frequency Percentage 60 and over 54 76.1 No response 17 23.9 Total 71 100.0 Research Question 6: Is a major required in one, two, or three disciplines in pfiblic and private institutions? As shown in Table 7, 49 of 71 respondents required a major and a minor of candidates in their programs. Twenty-two institutions did not respond to the question. Table 7.--Do you require a major in one, two, or three disciplines? Required Major Frequency Percentage Private Public Yes 1 discipline 38 53.5 5 7 2 disciplines 10 14.1 1 2 3 disciplines l 1.4 O 1 No response 22 31.0 Total 71 100.0 6 10 40 Thirty-eight of 71 respondents required a major in one dis- cipline, ten required a major in two disciplines, and one required a major in three disciplines. Of the 16 respondents, ten were public institutions. Seven of the public institutions required one disci- pline, two required two disciplines, and one required three disci- plines. Of the six private institutions, five required one discipline and one required two disciplines. ResearchyQuestion 7: Is a minor required in one, two, or three disciplines in public and private institutions? One of the 71 respondents required a minor in one discipline; one required a minor in two disciplines. Sixty-nine participants did not respond to this question. Of the 16 institutions that trained middle school teachers,one public institution required a minor in two disciplines, and one private institution required a minor in one dis- cipline (Table 8). Table 8.--Requirement of a minor in one, two, or three disciplines in middle school teacher-training institutions. Required Minor Frequency Percentage Public Private 1 discipline 1 1.4 O 2 disciplines l 1.4 l 0 3 disciplines O O O O No response 69 97.2 Total 71 100.0 1 1 41 Results of Hypothesis Testing Each respondent was asked to check if particular courses were required, elective, or not offered in the middle school teacher- training program in public and private institutions. Listed below are the hypotheses that were tested for each of the course offerings. 1. There is no significant difference between public and private institutions that offered Preadolescent Psychology in the training of middle school teachers. 2. There is no significant difference between public and private institutions that offered Mental Health of Preadolescents in the training of middle school teachers. 3. There is no significant difference between public and private institutions that offered Sex Education for the Middle School in the training of middle school teachers. 4. There is no significant difference between public and private institutions that offered Middle School Curriculum in the training of middle school teachers. 5. There is no significant difference between public and private institutions that offered Human Relations for the Middle School in the training of middle school teachers. 6. There is no significant difference between public and private institutions that offered Student Teaching for the Middle School in the training of middle school teachers. 7. There is no significant difference between public and private institutions that offered Teaching Mathematics in the Middle School in the training of middle school teachers. 42 8. There is no significant difference between public and private institutions that offered Teaching Social Studies in the Middle School in the training of middle school teachers. 9. There is no significant difference between public and private institutions that offered Teaching Reading in the Middle School in the training of middle school teachers. 10. There is no significant difference between public and private institutions that offered Teaching Language Arts in the Middle School in the training of middle school teachers. 11. There is no significant difference between public and private institutions that offered Teaching Science in the Middle School in the training of middle school teachers. 12. There is no significant difference between public and private institutions that offered Audio-Visual Methods of Instruction in the Middle School in the training of middle school teachers. 13. There is no significant difference between public and private institutions that offered Special Studies in Education in the training of middle school teachers. 14. There is no significant difference between public and private institutions that offered Career Seminars in the training of middle school teachers. 15. There is no significant difference between public and private institutions that offered Instructional Strategies for the Middle School in the training of middle school teachers. 43 16. There is no significant difference between public and private institutions that offered Bicultural Education in the train- ing of middle school teachers. The model for training middle school teachers listed the following courses: (1) Preadolescent Psychology, (2) Mental Health of Preadolescents, (3) Sex Education for the Middle School, (4) Middle School Curriculum, (5) Human Relations for the Middle School, (6) Stu- dent Teaching, (7) Teaching Mathematics in the Middle School, (8) Teach- ing Social Studies in the Middle School, (9) Teaching Reading in the Middle School, (10) Teaching Language Arts in the Middle School, (11) Teaching Science in the Middle School, (12) Audio-Visual Methods of Instruction, (13) Special Studies in Education, (14) Career Seminar, (15) Instructional Strategies for the Middle School, and (16) Bicul- tural Education. Table 9 shows the statistical relationship of courses included in the middle school teacher-training model in private and public teacher-training institutions for middle school education. 1. Preadolescent Psychology was required by 9 of the 71 respondents. Six respondents listed it as an elective, and one institution did not offer it. Fifty-five respondents did not answer the question. Sixteen institutions claimed they had middle school teacher-training programs. Of these institutions, six public insti- tutions required this course, three private institutions required it, five public institutions offered it as an elective, one private insti- tution offered it as an elective, and one public institution did not offer it. (See Table 10.) There was no significant difference between 44 public and private institutions that offered Preadolescent Psychology in the training of middle school teachers. Table 9.--Statistical relationship of courses included in the middle school teacher-training model in public and private teacher- training institutions for middle school education. Course Chi-Square Significance Preadolescent Psychology 1.333 .688 Mental Health of Preadolescents 1.666 .434 Sex Education .138 .932 Middle School Curriculum .625 .731 Human Relations .773 .625 Student Teaching _ .000 .725 Teaching Math .000 .851 Social Studies .000 .791 Reading .000 .642 Language Arts .000 .842 Science .000 .762 Audio-Visual .738 .647 Social Studies 2.000 .367 Career Education 3.888 ’ .143 Instructional Strategies 1.000 .333 Bicultural Education 1.200 .548 Note: Significance was determined at the .05 level. Table lO.--The offering of the Preadolescent Psychology course in public and privatelniddle school teacher-training insti- tutions (N = 16). Course Required ‘ Elective Not Required Public Private Public Private Public Private Preadolescent 6 3 5 1 1 0 Psychology 45 2. Mental Health of Preadolescents was required by six respondents. Three respondents listed it as an elective, and one institution did not offer the course. Sixty-one institutions did not answer the question. 0f the 16 institutions that offered a teacher- training program for middle school teachers, four of the public insti- tutions required the course, one offered it as an elective, and one did not offer it. Of the private institutions, two required it, two Offered it as an elective, and six institutions did not answer the question (Table 11). There was no significant difference between public and private institutions that trained middle school teachers and offered Mental Health of Preadolescents (Table 9). Table ll.--The offering of the Mental Health of Preadolescents course in public and private middle school teacher-training insti- tutions (N = 16). Course Required Elective Not Required Public Private Public Private Public Private Mental Health of Preadolescents 4 2 1 2 1 0 No reply = 6 3. Sex Education for the Middle School was required by two respondents. Five of the respondents offered it on an elective basis. Nine of the respondents did not offer the course, and 55 did not answer the question. Of the 16 institutions that offered a teacher- training program for middle school teachers, one public institution required it, three offered it as an elective, and six did not offer it. One private institution required the course, two offered it as 46 an elective and three did not offer it (Table 12). There was no significant difference between public and private institutions that trained middle school teachers and offered Sex Education for the Middle School (Table 9). Table 12.--The offering of the Sex Education course in public and private middle school teacher-training institutions (N = 16). Course Required Elective Not Required Public Private Public Private Public Private Sex Education for the Middle School 1 1 3 2 6 3 4. Middle School Curriculum was required by four of the respondents. Five of the respondents listed it as an elective, and three did not offer the course. Fifty-nine of the participants did not answer this question. Of the 16 institutions that claimed to have a middle school teacher-training program, one public institution required the course, three listed it as an elective, and two did not offer it, whereas two did not answer the question. Three private institutions required the course, two listed it as an elective, one did not offer it, and two did not answer the question. (See Table 13.) No significant difference existed between public and private institutions that trained middle school teachers and offered the course Middle School Curriculum (Table 9). 47 Table 13.-~The offering of a Middle School Curriculum course in public and private middle school teacher-training institutions (N = 16). Course Requ1red Elective Not Requ1red Public Private Public Private Public Private Middle School Curriculum 1 3 3 2 2 1 No reply = 4 5. Human Relations was required by seven of the respondents. One of the respondents listed it as an elective, and two did not offer the course. Sixty-one institutions did not answer the question. Of the 16 institutions that claimed to have a middle school teacher- training program, four public institutions required the course, one offered it as an elective, and one did not offer it; four of the public institutions did not answer the question. Three private institutions required the course, none offered it as an elective, and one did not offer it; two private institutions did not respond to this question (Table 14). There was no significant difference between public and private institutions that trained middle school teachers and offered the course in Human Relations for the Middle School (Table 9). 6. Student Teaching was required by all 71 respondents. Of the 16 institutions that claimed to have a middle school teacher- training program, ten public institutions required Student Teaching, as did the six private institutions (Table 15). No significant dif- ference existed between public and private institutions that trained middle school teachers and offered Student Teaching. (See Table 9.) 48 Table 14.--The offering of a Human Relations course in public and private)middle school teacher-training institutions N = 16 . Required Elective Not Required Course . Public Private Public Private Public Private Human Relations for the Middle 4 3 1 O l 1 School No reply = 6 Table 15.--The offering of Student Teaching in public and private middle school teacher-training institutions (N = 16). Required Elective Not Required Public Private Public Private Public Private Course Student Teaching for the Middle 10 6 O O O 0 School 7. Teaching Mathematics in the Middle School was not listed as such by the institutions. Instead, this course was listed as Teaching Mathematics in the Elementary or Secondary School. No indi- cations were given in the data as to which course was required, although all 16 of the institutions that claimed to have middle school teacher-training programs required the course (Table 16). There was no significant difference between public and private insti- tutions that trained middle school teachers and offered Teaching Mathematics in the Elementary or Secondary School. (See Table 9.) 49 Table 16.--The offering of a Teaching Mathematics course in public end prigate middle school teacher-training institutions N = 16 . Required Elective Not Required Course Public Private Public” Private Public Private Teaching Mathe- matics in the 10 6 O O O 0 Middle School 8. Teaching Social Studies in the Middle School was not listed as such by the institutions. This course was listed as Teach- ing Social Studies in the Elementary or Secondary School. The data did not indicate which course was required, although all 16 institu- tions that claimed to have middle school teacher-training programs required one of the courses (Table 17). Of the 16 institutions that claimed to have a middle school teacher-training program, there was no significant difference between public and private institutions that offered Teaching Social Studies in the Elementary or Secondary School (Table 9). Table 17.--The offering of a Teaching Social Studies course in public and private middle school teacher-training insti- tutions (N = 16). Required Elective Not Required Course Public Private . Public Private Public Private Teaching Social Studies in the Elementary/Sec- 10 6 0 0 0 0 ondary School 50 9. Teaching Reading in the Middle School was not listed as such by the institutions in this study. The course was listed as Teaching Reading in the Elementary or Secondary School. No indica- tion was given in the data as to which courSe was required, although all 16 institutions that claimed to have middle school teacher- training programs required one of the courses. (See Table 18.) Of these 16 institutions, there was no significant difference between the public and private schools that offered Teaching Reading in the Elementary or Secondary School (Table 9). Table 18.--The offering of a Teaching Reading course in public and private)middle school teacher-training institutions N = 16 . Required Elective Not Required Course Public Private Public Private Public Private Teaching Reading in the Elementary] 10 6 O O ' O 0 Secondary School 10. Teaching Language Arts in the Middle School was not listed as such by the responding institutions. This course was listed as Teaching Language Arts in the Elementary or Secondary School. No indication was made as to which course was required, although all 16 institutions that claimed to have middle school teacher-training programs required one of these courses. (See Table 19.) There was no significant difference between public and private institutions that trained middle school teachers and offered Teaching Language Arts in the Elementary or Secondary School (Table 9). 51 Table 19.--The Offering of a Teaching Language Arts course in public end peigate middle school teacher-training institutions N = 6 . I Required Elective Not Required Course . Public Private Public Private Public Private Teaching Language Arts in the Elementary/Sec- 10 6 0 0 0 O ondary School 11. Teaching Science in the Middle School was not listed as such by the institutions. Rather, it was listed as Teaching Science in the Elementary or Secondary School. Respondents did not indicate which course was required, although all 16 institutions that claimed to have middle school teacher-training programs required one of these courses. (See Table 20.) Of these 16 institutions, there was no significant difference between public and private schools that offered Teaching Science in the Elementary or Secondary School (Table 9). Table 20.--The offering of a Teaching Science course in public and private)middle school teacher-training institutions N = 16 . Required Elective Not Required Public Private Public Private Public Private Course Teaching Science in the E1 ementary/ lO 6 O O O 0 Secondary School 52 12. Audio-Visual Methods of Instruction was required by seven of the institutions and was offered by seven of the institutions as an elective. Two institutions did not offer the course, and 55 of the 71 participants did not answer the question. Of the 16 institu- tions that claimed to have a middle school teacher-training program, four public schools required the course and six offered it as an elective. Three private institutions required it, and one offered it as an elective. Two private institutions did not offer the course. (See Table 21.) There was no significant difference between the pub- lic and private institutions that offered Audio-Visual Methods and trained middle school teachers (Table 9). Table 21.--The offering of an Audio-Visual course in public and private middle school teacher-training institutions (N = 16). Required Elective Not Required Course Public Private Public Private Public Private Audio-Visual 4 3 6 l O 2 13. Special Studies in Education was required by one of the institutions included in this study. One institution offered it as an elective, 11 did not offer the course, and 58 did not respond to the question. Of the 16 institutions that claimed to have middle school teacher-training programs, no public institution required the course, one offered it as an elective, six did not offer the course, and three did not answer the question. One private institution 53 required the course, none offered it as an elective, and five listed it as not being offered. (See Table 22.) There was no significant difference between public and private institutions that trained middle school teachers and offered Special Studies in Education (Table 9). Table 22.--The offering of a Special Studies in Education course in public and private middle school teacher-training insti- tutions (N = 16). Course Required Elective Not Required Public Private Public Private Public Private Special Studies 0 1 1 0 6 5 in Education No reply = 3 14. Career Seminar was required by six of the respondents, one institution offered it as an elective, and three did not offer the course. Sixty-one institutions did not answer this question. Of the 16 institutions that claimed to have middle school teacher-training programs, four public institutions required the course, two did not offer it, and four did not answer the question. Two private institu- tions required a Career Seminar course, one offered it as an elective, one did not offer it, and two did not answer the question. (See Table 23.) There was no significant difference between public and private institutions that trained middle school teachers and offered a Career Seminar course (Table 9). 54 Table 23.--The offering of a Career Seminar course in public and private middle school teacher-training institutions (N = 16). Course Requ1red E1ect1ve Not Requ1red Public Private Public Private Public Private Career Seminar 4 2 O 1 2 1 No reply = 6 15. Instructional Strategies for the Middle School was required by two of the institutions; 69 of the 71 participants did not answer this question. Of the 16 institutions that claimed to train middle school teachers, one public and one private school offered the course. (See Table 24.) There was no significant difference between public and private institutions that trained middle school teachers and offered the course Instructional Strategies for the Middle School (Table 9). Table 24.--The offering of an Instructional Strategies course in public and private middle school teacher-training insti- tutions (N = 16). Course Required Elective Not Required Public Private Public Private Public Private Instructional Strategies 1 1 0 0 0 O No reply = 14 l6. Bicultural Education was required by five of the respond- ing institutions. Eight of the institutions listed this course as an elective, and three did not offer the course. Fifty-five did not 55 respond to the question. 0f the 16 institutions that claimed to have a middle school teacher-training program, three public institutions required a course in Bicultural Education, five institutions offered it as an elective, and two did not offer it. Two private institutions required Bicultural Education, three offered it as an elective, and one did not respond to the question. (See Table 25.) There was no significant difference between public and private institutions that trained middle school teachers and offered the course Bicultural Education (Table 9). Table 25.--The offering of a Bicultural Education course in public and private middle school teacher-training institutions (N = 16). Required Elective Not Required Course Public Private Public Private Public Private Bicultural Education 3 2 5 3 2 0 No reply = l Public and Private Middle School Teacher-Training Programs Compared With the Middle School Teacher-Training Model Table 26 shows a breakdown of the course offerings by the 16 institutions that claimed to have a current middle school teacher- training program. Of the 16 institutions, only one public institution offered all the courses suggested in the middle school teacher-training model as required or as an elective. None of the private institutions offered all of the courses listed in the middle school teacher-training model. 56 pp op op X X XXXX XXXX X X punch cowumoauu Fetaupaupm Foogom mpuuwz on» so» mmwmmpecum chowuuzspmcu gmcweom smegma Augmcwsmm ppuwaouv cow» Teoaum cw mopuspm pneumam cowuoagumcm mo muozamz Fmamw>uowuz< poosum «Pepe: on» cw mocmpum mcwgommh Foocom mpuuwz use cw mpg< momsmcmo mcwzuem» poosum mpcuwz oz» cw mcwuemm mewsummp poosom opuvwz as» cw mmvuspm pmwuom mcwzomwh Foogom mpuuwz 0:» cw mowumsmspez newnumoh m:_;omme uzmuzum mcomuepmm ness: Eapzuwccau Foosum mpuvpz Foosum upcu_z as» Low cowumosum xmm mucmomopoum toga mo gupmm: Peace: Amopogoxma ucoummpoummca o m e m N — meowpaupumcH oum>wsa op n m m e m mee_e=eepmefi eupeea mmgsou .mcowpzuvumcw mcwcwpguusocumou Foogom «Fears oum>wgg use owpaan op esp an mmcvgmmmo mmgaoout.m~ mpnmp 57 Public Institution 1 was the only teacher-training institution that offered all 16 courses suggested in the model. Public Institution 2 offered 11 of the 16 courses suggested in the model. Courses not offered were Mental Health of Preadoles- cents, Middle School Curriculum, Special Studies in Education, Career Seminar, and Instructional Strategies for the Middle School. Public Institution 3 offered 12 of the 16 courses suggested in the model. Courses not offered were Sex Education for the Middle School, Human Relations, Special Studies in Education, and Instructional Strategies for the Middle School. Public Institution 4 offered 12 of the 16 courses suggested in the model. Courses not offered were Mental Health of Preadolescents, Special Studies in Education, Career Seminar, and Instructional Strate- gies for the Middle School. Public Institution 5 offered 12 of the 16 courses suggested in the model. Courses not offered were Sex Education for the Middle School, Middle School Curriculum, Special Studies in Education, and Instructional Strategies for the Middle School. Public Institution 6 offered 10 of the 16 courses suggested in the model. Courses not offered were Sex Education for the Middle School, Human Relations, Special Studies in Education, Career Seminar, Instructional Strategies for the Middle School, and Bicultural Educa- tion. Public Institution 7 offered 11 of the 16 courses suggested in the model. Courses not offered were Mental Health of Preadolescents, 58 Middle School Curriculum, Special Studies in Education, Career Seminar, and Instructional Strategies for the Middle School. Public Institution 8 offered 10 of the 16 courses suggested in the model. Courses not offered were Education for the Middle School, Middle School Curriculum, Human Relations, Special Studies in Education, Instructional Strategies for the Middle School, and Bicultural Education. Public Institution 9 offered 9 of the 16 courses suggested in the model. Courses not offered were Mental Health for Preadolescents, Sex Education for the Middle School, Middle School Curriculum, Human Relations, Special Studies in Education, Career Seminar, and Instruc- tional Strategies for the Middle School. Public Institution lO offered 8 of the 16 courses suggested in the model. Courses not offered were Preadolescent Psychology, Mental Health of Preadolescents, Sex Education for the Middle School, Middle School Curriculum, Human Relations, Special Studies in Educa- tion, Career Seminar, and Instructional Strategies for the Middle School. Private Institution 1 offered 12 of the 16 courses suggested in the model. Courses not offered were Sex Education for the Middle School, Human Relations, Special Studies in Education, and Instruc- tional Strategies for the Middle School. Private Institution 2 offered 11 of the 16 courses suggested in the model. Courses not offered were Mental Health of Preadoles- cents, Middle School Curriculum, Special Studies in Education, Career Seminar, and Instructional Strategies for the Middle School. 59 Private Institution 3 Offered 11 of the 16 courses suggested in the model. Courses not offered were Preadolescent Psychology, Sex Education for the Middle School, Audio-Visual Methods of Instruc- tion, Instructional Strategies for the Middle School, and Bicultural Education. Private Institution 4 offered 13 of the 16 courses suggested in the model. Courses not offered were Human Relations, Special Studies in Education, and Career Seminar. Private Institution 5 offered 12 of the 16 courses suggested in the model. Courses not offered were Mental Health of Preadoles- cents, Human Relations, Special Studies in Education, and Instructional Strategies for the Middle School. Private Institution 6 offered 10 of the 16 courses suggested in the model. Courses not offered were Preadolescent Psychology, Sex Education for the Middle School, Audio-Visual Methods of Instruction, Special Studies in Education, Career Seminar, and Instructional Strate- gies for the Middle School. Comments Made by Respondents The confusion regarding content, definitions, and programs was shown by comments made by respondents from the 16 institutions that offered some type of middle school teacher-training program. These comments are quoted on the following pages. 60 It's part of the secondary program. . . . We have no middle school certification in Colorado. We prepare teachers to teach in Middle Schools--I'm not sure that we have met your criteria. I have completed those areas which seem applicable. Director of Student Teaching Colorado We have a thorough middle school program. We offer special training in adolescent psychology, career education, methods of teaching and student teaching to middle school majors. All our middle school people must be certified as either elementary or secondary teachers, because West Virginia does not certify middle school teachers separately. Director of Student Teaching West Virginia Not specifically as labeled, but our grades are certifiable at that level. Our students are not distinguishable from the secondary students. Director of Student Teaching Nebraska Our program is an overlapping program. No signature Our program is the same as a secondary high school teaching certificate. Director of Student Teaching Certification may be given in separate subjects of Middle School English, Middle School Mathematics, Middle School Science, or Middle School Social Studies as specified below: (1) Specialization requirements for certification in Middle School English. (a) a bachelor's or higher degree with an undergraduate or graduate major in middle school English. OR (b) a bachelor's or higher degree with certification in Junior High School, junior high school English, sec- ondary English, or Elementary Education and verifi- cation by a Florida district superintendent of at least one (1) year of successful teaching experience of English, grades 5-8, in a Department of Education approved Florida middle school and successful 61 performance in prescribed middle school components of an approved in-service master plan for teachers. Florida State Board of Education We in Nebraska are in transition--the state has approved a new 4-9 middle grades endorsement and the various teacher education institutions are now developing their own programs in this area. Director of Student Teaching Nebraska We are caught in a limbo between a K-9 and 7-12 certification set-up. On paper "yes" but because of certification patterns in the state there are no "takers" maybe one or two per year. Director of Student Teaching Minnesota At present, we do not have a specific undergraduate program. However, a committee is studying the feasibility of intermediate certification. No signature I wish we knew what a "middle school" is. They come in so many grade ranges, and instructional strategies--self-contained, departmentalized, combinations, self-paced, etc., that it is impossible to predict how a teacher of the middle school should be prepared. ' We have made only a start. Regis College developed two middle school programs for grade range 5-7 or thereabouts, in math- science and in English-social studies. It involves content appropriate for the level, appropriate pedagogies, and student teaching in a recognized middle school. These programs have been approved. So far, Colorado has no "comprehensive middle school" prepara- tion program or standards for such. Where there are middle schools, often teachers skilled in inter- mediate grades with "ELEM Elementary Education" endorsed certifi- cates are selected to fill vacancies, except possibly in music, art, and physical education where a person with "K-12 Art," "K-12 Music," or "K-12 Physical Education" certificates would likely be selected. University students tend to avoid the programs designed to prepare teachers for middle or junior high schools. Such programs seriously limit their employment possibilities--in a time of vast surpluses. Colorado Department of Education 62 Although limited, the preceding data support the statement that con- fusion exists among the institutions that currently claim to have middle school teacher-training programs. Discussion AcCording to the data, 23% or 16 of the responding institutions had made some effort to design curricula and programs with a middle school emphasis, whereas 45% or 32 of the institutions expressed plans to implement such a program in the future. Thirty-two percent or 23 of the institutions had no plans to implement this type of program in the future. Of concern to the researcher was that a significant number of the institutions--54--that were sent questionnaires did not respond. One could conclude that these institutions did not have a middle school teacher-training program. Although the middle school movement has been in existence for a decade, the data showed that only nine of the respondents had a four- year prOgram for training middle school teachers. It was interesting that most of the institutions that received the questionnaire did not respond to most of the questions. However, on Question 5, which was related to the number of hours a middle school teacher candidate was involved in student teaching, 76.1% of the par- ticipants responded with an answer of 60 hours or more. They also responded heavily to Question 6, regarding whether they required a major in one, two, or three disciplines. But on Question 7, which referred to minor subjects, only two institutions responded. Again, the hit-or-miss attitude of the respondents was disturbing to the researcher. 63 0f the 16 institutions with a middle school teacher-training program, all of them required the methods courses for all of the basic subject areas, including the teaching of reading. All of the other courses fell in the required, elective, and not-offered categories. Might this requirement of the various methods indicate that there is a broad-based approach to teaching rather than requiring a major and a minor, which is typical of training teachers for elementary school programs? If so, these 16 institutions must be commended because their approach is consistent with the middle school philosophy. The model for training middle school teachers listed 16 courses. Of the 16 subjects that were recommended, the least fre- quently offered courses were Special Studies in Education, Instruc- tional Strategies for the Middle School, Human Relations, Sex Educa- tion for the Middle School, Mental Health of the Preadolescent, and Middle School Curriculum. Among the 16 institutions that had current programs, there was a lack of uniformity in the course offerings in middle school education, which tended to Show the extent of confusion. Adequate guidelines had not been determined for course requirements for prospective middle school teachers. The statements made by some of the respondents further evidenced the confusion that exists within middle school teacher-training institutions. Public institutions that were certifying teachers for middle school positions were not different from private institutions in terms of course offerings. 64 Summary All of the data collected while pursuing the objectives of this study have been presented and analyzed in this chapter. Various techniques of data comparison were used, including correlation coef- ficients calculated for variables submitted to statistical analysis. All hypotheses were tested at the .05 level for significance, and the following conclusions were drawn: 1. There was no significant difference between public and private institutions that offered Preadolescent Psychology in the training of middle school teachers. 2. There was no significant difference between public and private institutions that offered Mental Health of Preadolescents in the training of middle school teachers. 3. There was no significant difference between public and private institutions that offered Sex Education for the Middle School in the training of middle school teachers. 4. There was no significant difference between public and private institutions that offered Middle School Curriculum in the training of middle school teachers. 5. There was no significant difference between public and private institutions that offered Human Relations for the Middle School in the training of middle school teachers. 6. There was no significant difference between public and private institutions that offered Student Teaching for the Middle School in the training of middle school teachers. 65 7. There was no significant difference between public and private institutions that offered Teaching Social Studies in the Middle School in the training of middle school teachers. 8. There was no significant difference between public and private institutions that offered Teaching Mathematics in the Middle School in the training of middle school teachers. 9. There was no significant difference between public and private institutions that offered Teaching Reading in the Middle School in the training of middle school teachers. 10. There was no significant difference between public and private institutions that offered Teaching Language Arts in the Middle School in the training of middle school teachers. 11. There was no significant difference between public or private institutions that offered Teaching Science in the Middle School in the training of middle school teachers. 12. There was no significant difference between public and private institutions that offered Audio-Visual Methods of Instruction in the Middle School in the training of middle school teachers. 13. There was no significant difference between public and private institutions that Offered Special Studies in Education in the training of middle school teachers. 14. There was no significant difference between public and private institutions that offered Career Seminar in the training of middle school teachers. 66 15. There was no significant difference between public and private institutions that offered Instructional Strategies for the Middle School in the training of middle school teachers. 16. There was no significant difference between public and private institutions that offered Bicultural Education in the training of middle school teachers. The majority of schools offered Preadolescent Psychology, Mental Health, Middle School Curriculum, Student Teaching, Mathematics, Social Studies, Reading, Language Arts, Science, Audio-Visual Aids, Career Seminars, and Bicultural Education. Fifty percent or less offered Human Relations, Sex Education, Special Topics in Education, and Instructional Strategies. Both public and private institutions offered the above courses and required all of them. The least fre- quently offered course was Instructional Strategies, which was listed by only two respondents. Chapter V is a summary of the research, conclusions, and sug- gestions for further research. CHAPTER V SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS In this chapter are presented a summary of the problem and design, a discussion of the major findings, conclusions, and recom- mendations for further research. The Problem The purpose of this study was to make a cross-sectional analysis of teacher-training institutions in the eight states that claimed to have a special certification for the middle school teacher and to compare the commonalities and differences of the programs' offerings and requirements. Methodology and Procedures The sample in this study comprised 125 randomly chosen NACTE- accredited teacher-training institutions representing the eight states that claimed to certificate middle school teachers. A middle school teacher-training program model was developed to use as a criterion in determining whether teacher-training institutions had a middle school program consistent with the model. Respondents were asked to check courses offered by their institutions. The questionnaire was divided into two distinct areas. The first was a descriptive profile of the institutions as compared with 67 68 the model, and the second was concerned with the similarities and differences between the schools themselves. A consensus model and a questionnaire were mailed to the pro- posed respondents in the eight different states. A cover letter with a self-addressed, stamped envelope was enclosed. Institutions were asked to supply catalogues and other pertinent printed materials that described their middle school teacher-training programs. Most of the 16 respondent institutions sent mimeographed course descriptions and requirements. No institution sent a catalogue. Discussion of the Major Findings Based on the data reported in this study, it appears that only one public institution was consistent with the model. That institu- tion offered all 16 courses suggested in the model. Twenty-three percent of the respondents had made some effort to implement courses with a middle school emphasis. Seventy-seven percent had not imple- mented such a program, but some expressed plans to do so. Of the 16 teacher-training institutions having current middle school teacher-training programs, 57% had had programs for a period of four years, whereas the remaining ones had had programs from one to three years. Enrollments in the 16 middle school teacher-training institu- tions ranged from 2 to 150 students; the median was 25 students. Only 2 of the 16 middle school teacher-training institutions required work with middle school children before practice teaching. The following data summarize the responses to the question- naire. 69 There was no significant difference between public and private institutions that offered Preadolescent Psychology in the training of middle school teachers. There was no significant difference between public and private institutions that offered Mental Health of Preadolescents in the training of middle school teachers. There was no significant difference between public and private institutions that offered Sex Education for the Middle School in the training of middle school teachers. There was no significant difference between public and private institutions that offered Middle School Curriculum in the training of middle school teachers. There was no significant difference between public and private institutions that offered Human Relations for the Middle School in the training of middle school teachers. There was no significant difference between public and private institutions that offered Student Teaching for the Middle School in the training of middle school teachers. There was no significant difference between public and private institutions that offered Teaching Mathematics in the Middle School in the training of middle school teachers. 1 There was no significant difference between public and private institutions that offered Teaching Social Studies in the Middle School in the training of middle school teachers. 70 There was no significant difference between public and private institutions that offered Teaching Reading in the Middle School in the training of middle school teachers. There was no significant difference between public and private institutions that offered Teaching Language Arts in the Middle School in the training of middle school teachers. There was no significant difference between public and private institutions that offered Teaching Science in the Middle School in the training of middle school teachers. There was no significant difference between public and private institutions that offered Audio-Visual Methods of Instruction in the Middle-School in the training of middle school teachers. There was no significant difference between public and private institutions that offered Special Studies in Education in the training of middle school teachers. There was no significant difference between public and private institutions that offered Career Seminars in the training of middle school teachers. There was no significant difference between public and private institutions that offered Instructional Strategies for the Middle School in the training of middle school teachers. There was no significant difference between public and private institutions that offered Bicultural Education in the training of middle school teachers. 71 Implications This study showed that not enough exposure is given to the potential middle school teacher before working with the middle-school- age child to acquaint the teacher fully with the "in-betweens." There exists a great deal of confusion as to what constitutes a viable middle school training program. Studies need to be conducted by state departments of education and/or universities to determine which experi- ences are necessary for preservice training that results in competent middle school teachers. It is suggested that the content of courses be examined for similarities and differences. Classroom visitations would clarify subject content inasmuch as various names are given to subjects in different institutions. Recommendations for'Further Study On the basis of these research findings, the following recom- mendations are made for further study: Further research using a larger sample or attempting to gather data from all the schools in one or two states might be more useful than using a small sample as employed in this study. A different approach should be used in replicating this study when obtaining data. Much time should be spent in observing and visiting institutions, placing emphasis on interviewing training per- sonnel as well as students. A mailed questionnaire did not elicit the minute details desired in this particular study, and it would have been more meaning- ful with person-to-person contacts to fill in the omitted details. 72 ConcludingyStatement The writer is greatly concerned about the passive attitudes of educators in continuing to accept haphazard programs and implementing them without adequate preparation. It seems that if anyone were aware of the importance of adequately trained personnel, it would be an educator. As this study was being written, the writer was quite concerned about the confusion that existed among the governing agencies in regard to adequate curricula for the training of middle school teachers. Surely, this confusion is passed on to the transescent through the teachers. Each educational agency must become more accountable to the transescent by supporting only those programs that are appropriate for middle school teacher training. The writer thinks the State Department of Education should be liable for monitoring programs for relevancy and continuity. At present, certificates are granted after completion of a specified program at an institution approved by the State Department of Education and accredited by the National Council for the Accredi- tation of Teacher Education. How has either agency justified calling a program with few courses a "specific" program? In no way can one say that a program that is geared toward teaching the elementary or secondary levels may be called a middle school program. These points reinforce the statement made before: There is a need to involve local teacher organizations and experts in the movement in formulating standards for certification. 73 Last, the credibility of the respondents' answers to the questionnaire is questionable. Some of the respondents seem to have spent some time in thinking about the questions and answered them with care, whereas others seem to have given the first answer that came to mind. Lack of concern was reflected in many instances, which caused the writer to question the respondents' respect for research that might be valuable in the future. The writer respects highly the middle school personnel who have struggled through the years amid the confusion to promote the concept for the betterment of the transescent. It is hoped that those persons within the local and state education departments will become as aware of the importance of a special program for transescents and support it. It is imperative for a coordination of skills and agen- cies, if preventive measures are to be undertaken to decrease drop- outs. This educational stage determines the future of all children. A few suggestions are as follows: (1) that institutions pro- vide relevant courses in sequences that emphasize the middle school philosophies and widely publicize opportunities available in this area; (2) that current middle school teacher-preparation programs be evaluated regularly for strengths and weaknesses by local, state, and national educational atencies; (3) that superintendents and other hiring personnel be more selective in evaluating teachers' credentials before placing them; and (4) that local educational agencies demand more definitive programs from teacher-training institutions. 74 The writer hopes that if the preceding suggestions are con- sidered there will be fewer dropouts from the educational arena because there will be better-planned programs that will produce more adequately trained teachers. APPENDIX 75 76 Owen Graduate Center - 609W East Lansing, Michigan 48824 May 9, 1976 Dear Director: In early April, I sent you a questionnaire requesting information about the middle school teacher-training at your institution. Maybe, there has been an oversight but the requested information has not been returned. I would appreciate it if you or another member of your staff involved in the training of middle school teachers would complete the enclosed questionnaire. Please participate and return the questionnaire immediately. A self- addressed stamped envelope is enclosed for your convenience. Thank you for your interest and cooperation. S'ncerely you , 7W Mary Le is Ph.D. Candidate Department of Administration & Higher Education 77 Owen Graduate Center — 609W East Lansing, Michigan 48824 April 14, 1976 Dear Director: I am planning a dissertation which will examine the program of learnings for undergraduates interested in teaching at the middle school level. In a ramdom sampling of teacher-training institutions your college was selected. I would appreciate it if you or another member of your staff involved in the training of middle school teachers would complete the enclosed questionnaire. Please participate and return the questionnaire within two weeks. Thank you in advance for your interest and cooperation. Sincerely your , Mary 772% Ph. D. Candidate Department of Administration & Higher Education 78 The Training of the Middle School Teacher DuestiOnnaire, Please check (__) those areas that are applicable to your program. 1. Do you have a program for training undergraduates for middle school teaching positions ‘ Yes currently have No but plans have been developed to implement program No and do not plan to implement program How long has the middle school training program been offered at your institution? 1 year 2 years 3 years 4 or more years Is your institution operated publicly or privately? publicly privately Approximately, what is your institution's enrollment? below 1000 1000-5000 SOOO-l0,000 over 10,000 How many students were enrolled in the middle school teacher-training program in 1975? How many semesters does your candidate work in middle schools prior to student teaching? None One Two Three 79 How many semesters does your candidate Semesters One Two Three Total How many semesters does your candidate in a middle Semesters One Two Three school setting? \ student teach? hours in program 1 to 20 21 to 40 41 to 60 60 and over observe children Do you require majors and minors in subject matter areas? Yes Major 3 p. 5 O 11 NO in: one discipline two disciplines three disciplines in: one discipline two disciplines three disciplines 80 10. Check the courses offered by your institution fOr middle school education. Courses Required Elective Not Offered Pre-adolescent Psychology Mental Health of Pre- adolescents Sex Education for the Middle School Middle School Curriculum Human Relations Student Teaching Teaching Mathematics in the Middle School Teaching Social Studies in the Middle School Teaching Reading in the Middle School Teaching Language Arts in the Middle School Teaching Science in the Middle School Audio-Visual Methods of Instruction Special Studies in Educa- tion (topical seminars) Career Seminar Instructional Strategies for the Middle School Bi-Cultural Education Others (List) 81 Table Al.--Distribution of schools by states. State Public Private Colorado 8 8 Florida 10 5 Indiana 11 5 Kentucky 10 6 Nebraska 10 5 North Carolina 9 7 Minnesota 7 9 West Virginia 8 7 BIBLIOGRAPHY 82 BIBLIOGRAPHY Alexander, William M., and associates. The Emergent Middle School. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc., 1968. Bondi, Joseph. Developing Middle Schools: A Guide Book. New York: MSS Information Corporation, 1972. Compton, Mary F. "The Middle School." Educational Digest (April 1969 . Curtis, T. "Preparing Teachers for Middle and Junior High Schools.“ Bulletin of the National Association of Secondary School Prin- cipals 56 (May 1972): 61-70. Eichhorn, Donald H. The Middle School. New York: The Center for Applied Research in Education, Inc., 1966. Fillmer, H. T. "A Proposed Teacher Education Program." Paper pre- sented at the Institute for Curriculum Improvement, Gainesville, Florida, 1968. George, P. S. "Middle School Teacher Certification: A National Survey." Educational Leadership(December 1975): 213-16. Havighurst, Robert J. Human Development and Education. New York: Longmans, Green & Co., 1953. Hubert, J. ”On Preparing Teachers for the Junior Hi h and Middle School: The Teacher Input." Clearing House 47 (May 1973): 550-54. Krinsky, J., and Pumerantz, P. "Middle School Teacher Preparation Programs." Journal of Teacher Education 23 (Winter 1972): 468-70. Lounsbury, J., and Vars, G. ”The Middle School: Fresh Start or New Delusion?" The National Elementary Principal 40 (November 1971): 12-19. Madon, Constant..A. "The Middle School: Its Philosophy and Purpose." Clearing_House 40 (February 1966): 329. Michigan Association of Middle School Educators. "Position State- ment." Michigan, November 1974, pp. 2-3. 83 84 Montaigne. The Essays of Montaigne, Translated by E. J. Trechmann. New York: Oxford University Press, n.d. Quoted by Zdanowicz, Paul J., in a speech, “Staffing the Middle School." No location, n.d. New Jersey School Development Council. "The Middle School: An Idea Whose Time Has Come." Bethesda, Md.: ERIC Document Reproduc- tion Service, ED 083 717, 1973. Pittsburgh Board Of Public Education. "Pittsburgh Middle School Teacher Project." Bethesda, Md.: ERIC Document Reproduction Service, ED 102 148, 1974. Romano, Louis G.; Georgiady, Nicholas P.; and Heald, James E. The_ Middle School: Selected Readings on an Emerging School Program. Chicago: Nélson-Hall Co., 1973. Singer, I. "Survey of Staff Utilization Practices in Six States." Bulletin of the National Association of Secondary School Prin- cipals 46 (January 1962): 1-13. Stainbrook, J. "A Current and Comparative Analysis of the Profes- sional Preparation of Teachers in the Junior High Schools and Developing Middle Schools of Indiana, 1970." Dissertation Abstracts International 31 (1971): 5916A. Vars, G. F. "Teacher Preparation for the Middle Schools." The High School Journal (December 1969): 173-77. Walker, B. A. "A Study of the Professional Preparation of Junior High School Teachers in Indiana, 1959." Dissertation Abstracts 20 (1959): 2164. Wattenberg, William W. "The Middle School as One Psychologist Sees It." High School Journal 53 (December 1969): 164-71. . —.. . fl‘u‘w' - M11111111111111!flilflfllllllljljililiES