A more rigorous curriculum is often cited as one remedy to the many documented failings of American middle schools, but it's not clear if our teaching corps is up to the task. According to the latest international comparison, blame our teacher "preparation gap" for much of the problem.

A new study from Mathematics Teaching in the 21st Century (MT21), a cross-national study of the preparation of middle school teachers in six countries (Taiwan, South Korea, Bulgaria, Germany, Mexico, and the United States) chaired by the esteemed William Schmidt, described the poor preparation in mathematics that aspiring middle school teachers typically receive. Regardless of which route these teachers take to the classroom--via programs designed for elementary, middle or secondary education--their preparation doesn't hold up to the standards for teachers in perennially high-performing countries, such as Taiwan and South Korea.

The report's analysis of the mathematical dimension of preparation is easiest to grasp--only middle school teachers who meet the licensing requirements of secondary teachers (something that all middle school teachers are supposed to do under federal law) are getting the right level of content. Middle school teachers who complete their certification under a state's K-8 requirements appear to be getting some amount of pedagogical instruction. Teachers earning a middle school certificate get the "worst of both worlds": not enough content or pedagogy.

So what's the coursework recipe for better preparation? It's not given here, although specific recommendations for reforming teacher preparation are promised with the release in several years of results from an extensive study of more U.S. teacher preparation institutions and some 20 other countries. It doesn't take a crystal ball to predict that the recommendations will involve more mathematics without shortchanging pedagogy.