AMLE Standards on Middle Level Teacher Preparation

Frequently Asked Questions Revised January 2010

Word Version

Association for Middle Level Education/National Council for
Accreditation of Teacher Education-Approved
Middle Level Teacher Preparation Standards
and
Middle Level Teacher Preparation Program Review

The information provided below is intended to assist persons responsible for preparing middle level teacher preparation reports for review by the Association for Middle Level Education (formerly National Middle School Association) as part of the NCATE accreditation process. If you have additional questions or need further clarification of questions answered here, contact Dr. Ken McEwin, AMLE Program Review Coordinator at mcewinck@appstate.edu or 828 262-2200.

Which middle level teacher preparation programs should be submitted for review by the Association for Middle Level Education (AMLE)?

You should be sure that the state partnership agreement in your state either requires or offers the option of having middle level teacher preparation programs reviewed by the Association for Middle Level Education through the NCATE program review process. Whether or not institutions are required to submit program reports is determined by the partnership agreement between NCATE and individual states. NCATE has partnership agreements with a number of states in which the terms of the partnership defer the program review process to the state. Other state partnership agreements require that NCATE specialized professional associations (SPAs) conduct program reviews. Still other states conduct state program reviews, but provide the option of having programs reviewed by AMLE for institutions wishing to seek national recognition of their middle level teacher preparation programs. Institutions located in states where the program review process is conducted by the state should contact their state agency responsible for program approval for further information on how the reviews are conducted.

If the protocol in your state requires or allows programs to be reviewed through the NCATE program review process, you should refer to the information provided on the NCATE website. http://www.ncate.org The NCATE website also contains information about partnership and protocol agreements for each partnership state. Additional information, including the AMLE/NCATE-Approved Middle Level Teacher Preparation Standards, is found on the AMLE website. http://www.amle.org

If your institution is submitting program reviews to NCATE for review by the SPAs, you need to determine whether your middle level teacher preparation program qualifies for review by AMLE. You should respond to the AMLE standards if your institution offers initial and/or advanced degree programs for the preparation of middle level teachers. AMLE does not review generalist middle level programs (e.g., those without content preparation requirements in teaching fields). AMLE reviews only separately organized teacher preparation programs that focus specifically and exclusively on preparing teachers to teach young adolescents. Young adolescents are typically ages 10 to 14 and are in grades five through eight. However, AMLE does not specify which grades are included in middle level teacher preparation programs since individual states define middle level education through their licensure regulations (e.g., grades 5-8, 4-9, 6-9). AMLE does not review programs that prepare teachers for grade levels that include both elementary and middle or middle and high school grades (e.g., grades K-8 or 6-12).

Does AMLE review generalist programs?

No, AMLE does not review middle level teacher preparation programs that do not require content area preparation.

Does AMLE review middle level endorsement programs that do not result in a degree in middle level education?

The answer depends on the nature of the program. The following policy is intended to help institutions determine which of their programs that could be considered endorsements and/or add-ons (or a similar term used in their state) should be included in the unit review and be submitted for national program review if required to do so by their states. The first set of bullets in the following criteria describe what programs should NOT be submitted. The second set of criteria describe what programs should be submitted. If a unit is still unsure how to apply these criteria they should contact NCATE staff to make a determination.

Programs that do not need to be submitted:

• Endorsements and add on programs that require only a few courses, insufficient content, and/or limited requirements are not included in the NCATE review and will not be listed among the offering of an accredited professional education unit.
• Minors in subject areas are not normally submitted for national program review unless the state agency requires them to be reviewed against national or state program standards.
• Short-term programs offered as professional development for teachers and other educators are not included in the NCATE review and will not be listed among the programs of an accredited professional education unit.

Programs that must be submitted for SPA review (if required to do so by the state) and that are included in the NCATE unit review include the following:

• Endorsement and add-on programs that are similar in content and requirements to other programs within that content area.
• Programs that are of sufficient breadth and depth to meet the SPA standards.

All programs will continue to have the option to submit if they so choose.

Should middle level teacher preparation programs be submitted for review if they are new programs?

New middle level teacher preparation programs should be submitted if all institutional approvals have been completed and the program is ready for enrollment of teacher candidates. It is essential, however, that the program review report include a through description of the assessment system including copies of rubrics/scoring guides that directly assess AMLE Middle Level Teacher Preparation Standards. Explanations of how the rubrics/scoring guides are scored are also essential. If it appears to members of the program review board that everything is in order with the exception of the lack of assessment data, the program will be “nationally recognized with conditions.” The conditional status of recognition of the program will be removed if the appropriate data are submitted within an 18 month period.

How much data should be submitted?

For full recognition, programs will be required to submit data that represent two applications of the assessment. That is, the assessment must be given and data collected at least two times. If an assessment is in a class that is offered every semester, then the two applications could be satisfied in one academic year. If the assessment is in a class that is offered once per year, then the two applications would take two academic years. For revised and response to conditions reports, data from one application of the assessment would be required for full recognition. For new programs, at least one application of data should be submitted. Please see the previous FAQ if the program is so new that assessments have not yet been administered.

What if the middle level teacher preparation program has had fewer than ten completers over the last three-year period? Should a program report be submitted?

Yes, a program report is required if the program has had any candidates in the program over the past three years. However, the 80 percent pass rate requirement does not apply to programs that do not have 10 completers over a three year period.

Can middle level teacher preparation programs be reviewed by AMLE if the teacher preparation unit of the institution is not NCATE accredited or not seeking NCATE accreditation?

No, program review is part of an overall accreditation process for institutions accredited, or in the process of seeking accreditation, from NCATE. For example, separate standards that would overlap unit standards are not included in the program review process. The AMLE standards focus on what is unique to middle level teacher preparation. The unit standards apply to the professional preparation unit (e.g., college of education, school of education). Therefore, responding to the program standards without completing the remainder of the accreditation process is not feasible.

Can programs from institutions that are NCATE accredited submit middle level teacher preparation programs for review at any time?

No, the program review process is a part of either the initial or continuing accreditation process. Therefore, middle level teacher preparation programs are reviewed according to the time line followed by institutions. Details are available from NCATE.

What degree levels are included in the standards and which sets of standards should be used?

AMLE has standards for the initial, masters, and doctoral levels. All degree programs that lead to initial licensure should respond to the initial standards (e.g., baccalaureate; post-baccalaureate, initial; masters, initial). The advanced masters standards should be used for middle level teacher preparation programs that provide licensed middle level teachers with opportunities to improve their professional knowledge and practice. The degree must focus directly and exclusively on middle level teacher preparation. The doctoral standards should be used only for programs where a major emphasis of the degree is on preparing middle level educators. For example a general curriculum and instruction degree or an educational leadership degree would not be reviewed using AMLE Middle Level Teacher Preparation Standards.

What format is utilized by the AMLE/NCATE-Approved Middle Level Teacher Preparation Standards?

Each programmatic standard is followed by several indicators designed to help persons completing the report better understand the meaning of the standard. Each standard also has rubrics to enhance understanding of the meaning of the standard. When preparing responses to the programmatic standards, it is recommended that the rubrics be used to help determine the kind of documentation included in the program review materials.

Programmatic Standard 1: Middle Level Courses and Experiences can be met by including a detailed program of study which is required in the Context Section of the program review report (Attachment A). Sufficient information should be included in this section to demonstrate to members of the program review board that the courses required in the program directly address AMLE Standards. Programs that claim to meet all AMLE Standards in one middle level course will not be approved. Please see additional information in the program review form. Additionally, information documenting that middle level teacher candidates are required to successfully complete internships and student teaching at the middle level should also be emphasized. Please see additional information provided on the program review form.

Programmatic Standard 2: Qualified Middle Level Faculty can be met by completing the required Faculty Chart (Attachment B) found in the Context Section of the program review report. This matrix should include only faculty members with responsibilities in the middle level teacher preparation program. Faculty vitas are not to be included. The emphasis should be placed on demonstrating that program faculty members have middle experience and expertise. This does not mean that everyone teaching in the program has to meet these criteria. However, it should be documented that key program faculty have middle level experience and expertise.

The seven performance-based standards are followed by a number of indicators in three categories: knowledge, dispositions, and performances. Rubrics for each standard are also provided. The indicators following each standard are meant to enhance understanding of the meaning of the standard. However, responses should be to the standard rather than to each of the indicators in the three categories. When preparing responses to the performance-based standards, it is recommended that the rubrics provided be used to help determine the kind of documentation to be included in the program review materials.

Is there a required matrix format that must be used in program review materials?

Yes, matrices for these reports should be downloaded from the NCATE website. Instructions for completing the program review process are also found on the NCATE website. Programs must use the program report form and process to be reviewed by AMLE.

Is there a page limit on program review materials?

Page limits are specified for each of the narrative responses required in Sections I, IV and V of the report, with each page approximately equivalent to one text page of single-spaced, 12-point type or 2000 characters (including spaces). Each attachment required in Sections I and II of the report should be kept to a maximum of five text pages. Although attachments longer than five pages will be accepted electronically, NCATE staff will require institutions to revise reports submitted with lengthy attachments.

Is a separate conceptual framework needed for the middle level teacher preparation programs?

No, an explanation of how the middle level teacher preparation program operates within the unit conceptual framework is what is required. If the program has a separate conceptual framework, it should be included in the response.

What should be included in the Context Section of the program report?

The contextual statement should be a concisely written summary of key points as indicated in the directions included on the program review report form. The Context Section of the program report provides opportunities to document information that is not included in other parts of the program report. Attachments for this section also provide crucial information needed for the program review document. As noted earlier in this document, the Context Section provides opportunities to demonstrate that Programmatic Standards I and II are met.

What happens when middle level teacher preparation programs are approved by AMLE?

When middle level teacher preparation programs are approved by AMLE through the program review process, they become “nationally recognized.” Recognized programs then appear on a list of nationally recognized programs on the NCATE website. NCATE Board of Examiners consider the number of programs that have or have not received national recognition when making their recommendations about accreditation. Therefore, having nationally recognized programs increases the odds that the unit will be nationally accredited. Additionally, in some states, recognition of programs by AMLE is a prerequisite to continuing to offer those programs at institutions.

What process is used to determine whether a middle level teacher preparation program is recognized (approved) by AMLE?

The program review process is described in detail on the NCATE website.

If a program is not approved by AMLE, is there a process for resubmitting the program for additional consideration?

Yes, a revised program report may be submitted for further consideration. The process to be followed is described in detail on the NCATE website.

Do all standards have to be met for a program to be approved/ recognized by AMLE?

Yes, all standards have to be substantially met for programs to be approved and recognized by AMLE.

Is it possible to receive copies of successful program reviews so that I can see models that will help me better understand the review process?

Copies of reviews of other programs are not available from AMLE. All materials submitted, as well as the resulting evaluation information, are kept confidential by AMLE so the integrity of the review process will be upheld. It is suggested that representatives from programs that have been nationally recognized by AMLE be contacted. It is likely that faculty from those programs will share their program review materials. Also, several examples of middle level program reports are available on the NCATE website. Programs faculty at these institutions gave NCATE permission to post their program reports. These examples should not be viewed as the only way to create a successful middle level teacher program review report. http://www.ncate.org/public/programReportSamples.asp?ch=37

AMLE does not endorse a standardized approach to ways programs can respond to the standards. AMLE has worked hard to avoid being overly prescriptive in designing program standards and unduly limiting the ways programs can respond to the standards. Members of the AMLE Professional Preparation Advisory Committee attempted to provide guidance without dictating specific ways in which the standards can be met. For example, specific courses are not required and the design of assessment plans is left to the discretion of program faculty.

How should middle level courses and field experiences be documented? How many courses and internships are required?

There are not specified numbers of middle level courses or hours required. Neither are there specified numbers of middle level internships/student teaching experiences that must be a part of programs. However, early and continuing middle level field experiences should be clearly documented. These middle level field experiences may take different forms, but should be presented in ways that members of the program review board can make determinations about whether this part of the standard is met. Materials from catalogs, promotional materials, and other documents that describe the courses and internships in the program can be used to document middle level courses and internships.

Should samples of candidate work be included in program review materials?

No, samples of candidate work, including portfolios, should not be included in program review materials. What should be included are aggregated data based on multiple assessments that directly reflect AMLE Standards. Program assessments should include explicit expectations, distinguish levels of performance, and include authentic tasks. The resulting assessment data should be used to reach meaningful decisions regarding the success of teacher candidates and the middle level teacher preparation program.

Are there specific types of assessments required by the Association for Middle Level Education?

Yes, the first five assessments must follow the requirements presented on the program review report form (e.g., licensure assessment, content-based assessment, effect on student learning). Assessments six through eight should focus on AMLE standards not covered in the first five assessments. It is very important that persons preparing the middle level program report note that Assessment 2: Assessment of Content Knowledge should focus on the content of the seven AMLE performance standards, not on teaching fields such as mathematics and language arts.

What is the minimum and maximum number of assessments that should be included in the program report?

The minimum number of assessments is six and the maximum number is eight. AMLE does not require more than the first six assessments be utilized. However, it is recommended that all eight assessment opportunities be utilized to document meeting AMLE standards. It is difficult to document that all standards have been met when only six assessments are used.

Should documentation of the positive effects of teacher candidates on student learning be included in the assessment plan?

Yes, it is very important that assessments are included which demonstrate the positive impact of teacher candidates on student learning. Please see information on assessment requirement number five on the program review report form for more information.

Are separate assessments required for each standard?

No, many assessments provide information that includes multiple standards.

Do results from standardized licensure test results help determine whether a middle level teacher preparation program is approved (recognized) by the Association for Middle Level Education?

Yes, 80% of a program’s completers (as defined by Title II) must pass the content examinations in the given areas of specialization in states where such examinations exist in order for a program to gain or retain full national recognition. This requirement does not apply in states that do not have content examination requirements for licensure. The 80% requirement refers to the overall pass rate on the state tests. For example, when Praxis II Grades 5-9 is required in all content areas, the assessment data provided should represent the overall combined pass rate from all of the areas as opposed to 80% of sub-scores in each content area. Please see information on the NCATE website for further information on this topic.

How much information should be submitted regarding the teaching fields (content areas) in the program review materials?

Program review materials for the Association for Middle Level Education should include a listing of courses required for each content area. This listing should be included in the program of study attachment in the Context Section of the program review report form. Program review board members will need to determine if the teaching fields are broad and interdisciplinary (e.g. social studies not just history, science, not just biology). A typical program has four areas from which the teacher candidates select two areas (e.g., language arts, social studies, mathematics, and science). However, some states have as many as 13 content areas and include fields such as physical education and art in addition to the basic four core teaching areas. A listing of courses is sufficient for documentation of this standard. Syllabi are not needed and should not be submitted. It should be documented that teacher candidates know how to use content to make interdisciplinary connections, and are knowledgeable about teaching and assessment strategies that are especially effective in the respective teaching fields.

Are two teaching fields (content areas) required in the AMLE standards?

Yes, two teaching fields are required at the initial preparation level. A teaching field is defined as a subject taught in the middle grades. However, only one teaching field is required at the advanced masters level).

What happens if only one teaching field is required at the initial level?

AMLE program review board members are instructed to acknowledge that these programs will be recognized/approved by AMLE with only one content area (teaching field) as long as all other standards are met. In this situation, the program will be nationally recognized with the program review document listing the lack of a second area of study as an Area for Consideration. This section of the program review report will include a statement recommending that program faculty members consider adding a second area of study (teaching field). However, the national recognition in this situation is full national recognition with no conditions attached or changes required.

If an institution has more that one middle level teacher preparation program, should multiple program review reports be submitted?

It is highly recommended that a separate report be submitted for each program. Some institutions have a traditional middle level teacher preparation program, a post-baccalaureate middle level teacher preparation program that results in initial licensure/certification, and an advanced middle level masters teacher preparation program for licensed teachers. When the traditional and post-baccalaureate programs are included in one report, it is difficult for program review board members to distinguish between requirements and other differences in the two programs. Submitting two separate program reports is not as time consuming as on might first think because many of the sections of the two reports will be the same. For example, the program faculty table, many of the courses, and other relevant material may be the same and therefore can be copied and pasted from one report form to the other.

Do middle level teacher preparation programs have to file separate middle level program review reports to other Specialized Professional Associations (SPAs) for areas such as middle level mathematics, science, social studies, and English/language arts ?

No, middle level programs that prepare candidates in content areas and that meet the AMLE criteria for middle-level programs will submit program reports to NCATE/AMLE and not to each of the content area SPAs (NCSS, NCTM, NCTE, NSTA, ACTFL). Please see the following information:

• 80% of completers must pass state test in content areas.
• Secondary program in content area must be nationally recognized by the appropriate content area SPA.
• Middle level programs could be recognized with conditions by AMLE if secondary content area programs are still in process.
• For those few middle level programs that do not have secondary preparation programs, 80% of the candidates will still be required to pass the state test in the content area and the state must ensure the adequacy of the content preparation.

What are some pitfalls/problem areas to avoid when completing the AMLE program review report?

Some of the most common pitfalls/problem areas are:

• Problem Area 1: Program assessments are generic and more appropriate for the unit rather than the program, (e.g., INTASC Standards or generic scoring guides for all student teacher in the unit). This is one of the most common problems with programs that are not approved/recognized by AMLE. Program assessments must specifically reflect the content and language of the AMLE Standards (e.g., young adolescent, not student; middle level curriculum, not just curriculum). Assessments reflecting generic standards such as INTASC are not acceptable for middle level programs. It is essential that the AMLE Standards be used when designing middle level teacher preparation assessments. Simply showing a matrix with the AMLE Standards aligned with more generic standards will not result in approval and national recognition.
• Problem Area 2: Programs rely on grade point averages rather than on carefully designed rubrics/scoring guides. NCATE does permit the use of grade point averages as an assessment. However, AMLE highly recommends that this method of assessment not be used. It is very difficult for program review board members to determine how grade point averages document meeting specific standards. If the grade point average is used, the NCATE document regarding use of this method should be read. It is found on the NCATE website.
• Problem Area 3: Program reports that do not specify that field experiences are at the middle grades level. It should be stated and documented that internships and student teaching is at the middle level.
• Problem Area 4: Programs submit reports that have only one middle level course and try to make the case that all standards are met. AMLE program review board members will not be convinced that all AMLE Standards can be met in one or two middle level courses. Sometimes institutions will add a course or two to an existing elementary school or senior high school teacher preparation program without making substantive changes. There are not a set number of courses that must focus exclusively on the middle level. However, persons preparing the program review report should document that middle level teacher candidates are receiving a comprehensive program that focuses on the AMLE Standards and the middle level teacher preparation knowledge base. If some courses include both elementary and middle level teacher candidates, it is very important to document that the program assessments used in those courses are focused on both elementary and middle level standards. It is also helpful to include catalog descriptions of these courses so program review board members can see that the course includes a substantial middle level focus.
• Problem Area 5: Program faculty members either do not have middle level experience and expertise or it is not reported. Occasionally, the matrix that is submitted as part of the Context Section contains no documentation that program faculty members have middle level experience or expertise.
• Problem Area 6: MAT-type graduate programs are submitted using graduate rather than initial standards. Programs from all degree levels that result in initial licensure/certification should respond to the initial standards.
• Problem Area 7: Methods courses seem to be designed for learning to teach young children or senior high school students. It should be clearly documented that methods courses focus directly on middle level teaching. This should be reflected in rubrics/scoring guides for program assessments.
• Problem Area 8: Courses required for teaching fields (content areas) are not listed. Course descriptions and syllabi for these courses should not be included in the report. However, it is important to provide a listing of the courses required for each teaching field/content area.
• Problem Area 9: Rubrics/scoring guides used in internships and student teaching are generic to all majors and do not reflect the AMLE standards. They are really unit rather than middle level teacher preparation program assessments. It is essential that rubrics/scoring guides for middle level internships and student teaching directly reflect the AMLE Standards. Generic rubrics/scoring guides designed for use with all teacher education majors should not be used unless they include direct references to the AMLE Standards. A matrix showing the generic rubrics and how they align with AMLE standards will not be accepted as documentation for successfully meeting AMLE Standards.
• Problem Area 10: Aggregated data from assessments that reflect AMLE standards are not included in the program review report. As noted in earlier statements, it is essential that the program assessments directly reflect AMLE Standards rather than being generic in nature. Aggregated data from generic program assessments will not result in approval and national recognition.
• Problem Area 11: Programs seem to be devoid of instruction that focuses on Standard 1: Young Adolescent Development and Standard 2: Middle Level Philosophy and Organization. This is a problem area in some program reports. For example, for Standard 1, the only indication of learning opportunities for teacher candidates may be a human development course or an educational psychology course. This does not mean that a separate course has to be devoted exclusively to young adolescent development. However, it should be made clear in the program review report where middle level teacher candidates acquire this knowledge and how and when the application of the knowledge is assessed. As with standard 1, some program reports fail to establish where this standard is addressed and assessed. Aggregated data documenting that middle level teacher candidates meet these and other AMLE standards should be included in the program review report.

Ken McEwin
AMLE Program Review Coordinator
828 262-2200
mcewinck@appstate.edu