GATEways 1991 (Volume 4, Issue 1) by GATEways

GATEwAYs TO

TEAc~ER EduCATioN JOURNAl of THE CEORGiA AssociATioN of TEAdiER EdUCATORS VOlUME IV, NUMbER 1

GATEways to Teacher Education The Journal of the Georgia Association of Teacher Educators Published by College of Education, Georgia State University Volume IV, Number 1 Editor: Edith Guyton, Georgia State University Associate Editor: Janet Towslee, Georgia State University Officers of the Association President - Alma Callaway, Fort Valley State College Past-President - Diane Willey, Kennesaw State College President-elect - Judith Mitchell, Kennesaw State College Second Vice President - W.AR. Cochrane, Albany State College Secretary - Ann Vanderbeek, Gwinnett County Schools Treasurer - Glenda Akins, Valdosta State College Executive Secretary - Eugene Bales, Atlanta Public Schools Editorial Board Linda Akanbi, Albany State College (GA) Theodore E. Andrews, Department of Public Instruction Olympia, Washington . Eugene Bales, Atlanta Public Schools Douglas M. Brooks, Miami University (OH) Thomas J. Buttery, East Carolina University (NC) John Cochran, Jr., Armstrong State College (GA) Pabick Daunt, Ball State University (IN) Kenneth Henson, Eastern Kentucky University Terry James, University of Centtal Arkansas Mary Marockie, Regional Education Service Agency (WV) Marcia Swiatek, Lancaster (NY) Public Schools Mary Jane Vance, Rains Independent School Disuict (TX) Candace B. Wells, The Wichita State University (KS)

Volmne IV. Nmnher 1

From the Editors This issue of GATEways addresses several of the most crucial and current issues in teacher education: developing reflection, professional development schools, mentoring, and preparing teachers for urban schools. Discourse on these topics is important for the continuing process of developing the best ways to educate teachers. We hope readers find the ideas stimulating and enriching. . The last article is derived from Jerry Robbin's address to the Southeastern Association of Teacher Educators at the 1990 meeting in Savannah. His audience was so thoroughly entertained and enlightened that they demanded copies of his speech. We thought publication in GATEways would be a good way to disseminate this paper. Edith Guyton, Editor

Janet Towslee, Associate Editor

ii GA'fEwaya to Teacher Education

GATEw路ays to Teacher Education Volume Iv, Number 1

Thble of Contents Developing Reflection in Educational Course Work Via the Professional Portfolio .......................................................... 1 Donna J. Cole, Wright State University; Thomas Lasley, University 0/ Dayton,' Charles W. Ryan, Wright State University; Howard Swonigan, Central State University,路 Beverly Tillman, University o/Dayton,' and James Uphoff, Wright State University

A Professional Development School:

Getting Started ......

Sherry J. Kern, Annette D. Digby, and Roderick J. McDavis, University ofArkansas

The Identification of Critical Behaviors of Peer Assistants Serving as Beginning Teacher Trainers .............................. 20 Barbara K. McKenzie, West Georgia College

Preparing Successful Teachers for Urban Schools ............. 28 Gwendolyn Y. Turner, University 0/ Missouri-St. Louis

De~~. S~re~ ~ ....................................................... 38 Jerry Robbins, Eastern Michigan University

Volmne IV, Number 1

...

Developing Reflection i Educational Course Work Via the Professional Portfolio Donna J. Cole, Associate Professsor ofEducation,

Wright State University, Thomas Lasley, Chairperson, Department of Teacher

Education, University ofDayton Charles W. Ryan, Professor ofEducational Leadership, Wright State University Howard Swonigan, Associate Professor ofEducation, Central State University Beverly Tillman, Assistant Professor ofEducation, University ofDayton James Uphoff, Director oflAboratory Experiences, Wright State University In this paper we present the results of a collaborative effort to develop the reflective abilities of teacher education students and first-year teachers through the use of portfolios. Three universities and one urban school system formed the Ohio Consortium for Portfolio Development: CenttaI State University in Wilberforce, Ohio; the University of Dayton; Wright State University in Dayton; and the Dayton (Ohio) City School System. The project was organized in response to an invitation by Lee Shulman, Director of the Teacher Assessment Project (TAP) located at Stanford University, to develop a process for increasing reflectivity skills of flISt year teachers. We began this effort in inttoductory education courses. Our decision to include this effort in education courses is consistent with current practices in teacher education and a need to inttoduce the portfolio process in the sophomore year. This permits students to analyze, synthesize, integrate, and critique values, beliefs, and concepts related to teaching. In doing so they gain a fuller 1

GATBwaYI to Teacher Education

sense of self and of the institutions in which they hope to teach. The Stanford assessment project requested that selected universities and school systems (especially those with significant minority enrollments) examine the validity of alternative modes of teacher assessment and their potential impact on teacher education and teacher induction programs. The Ohio Consortium decided to focus its developmental energies on portfolios.

Portfolios Portfolios have a significant history in higher education. They have been employed in evaluating students' life experiences in order to award college crediL The professional fields of architecture and art education programs have a long tradition of using them. More recently, medical, legal, and business preparation programs have adopted the portfolio as a means of assisting students with career planning (Burnett, 1985; Clark & Zimmerman, 1983; Curtis et al., 1985; Elbow & Balanoff, 1986; Soares & GoJdgehn, 1985; Zenoff & Barron, 1983). They also have been used in teacher education programs to evaluate teacher ttainees. Several states, New Jersey for example, have made portfolios a part of the routine teacher evaluation process (Funhwengler, 1985; Terry & Bade, 1983). Shulman's work on teacher assessment at Stanford included experimentation with portfolios because they offer more broader and in depth picture of a teacher's thinking and behavior than the ttaditional paper and pencil evaluations. Portfolios appealed to the Consortium members for two reasons. First, they can serve both product and process functions. As products, they can demonstrate a student's or teacher's work to peers, university faculty, and employers (including prospective employers). For teacher education students they constitute a record of achievement which is richer and more illusttative than a ttaditional undergraduate transcript For practicing teachers, they provide a series of enmes demonstrating the teacher's philosophy in practice in relation to the learning contexts which individual teachers perceive as important. But portfolios are more than products; they also are a process. It is as a process that portfolios can be significant in developing reflection among teacher education students and teachers. When students and teachers make decisions about the way in which they organize portfolios, they begin to reflect and develop an understanding of professional roles and responsibilities. The infusion of individual values into each institution's programs is an additional benefit for all involved. To facilitate reflection, the representatives of the consortium universities directed their teacher education students, beginning in the 1988-89 school year, to develop portfolios. Students were requested to place evidence in their portfolios from foundations courses or from other experiences, which they believed indicated growth in the following five categories (Shulman, Haertel, and Bird, 1988, pp. 43-44): Volume IV, Number 1

1. Professional Responsibility: The teacher is responsible to several panies (e.g., parents, students, community, etc.), and also responsible for continuous improvement of teaching, cultivating an educated manner, and developing thoughtful pursuit of the specific purposes of teaching. 2. Command of Subject Matter: Subject matter is a field of activity; a cluster of ways of knowing how to distinguish what is good, true, beautiful from what is not; a conceptual sb'Ucture; a body of infonnation and skills. 3. Content.Specific Pedagogy: The teacher must convey the substance and value of subject matter to students. This requires the perfonnance of content-specific representations and academic tasks which may be accomplished by an array of content-specific materials and media. 4. Class Organization and Management: The teacher must arrange the content as a workable program of action for the class, define a structure of participation in class activity, establish a fair and productive system of expectations and routines, and handle class logistics. 5. Student.Specific Pedagogy: The teacher must work with students as individual persons in order to promote each student's engagement with the substance of the class, provide practice, arrange feedback, and promote the satisfactory consummation of each activity. Students were provided suggestions about possible types of evidence that might be included as enmes (e.g., evaluation of a field experience from a cooperating teacher, a research paper, a lesson plan, tape recording of a lesson, etc.).Then students were asked to demonstrate reflection regarding the evidence they included. This justification could take place in at least two complementary ways. First, students could explain in writing what the evidence indicated in relation to each category. Second, the students could include the written observations of a peer, a professor, or a cooperating teacher about what the evidence demonsttates. To assess the levels of reflection demonstrated in the portfolios, the Consortium members agreed to rate reflective statements according to Van Manen's (1977) three levels of reflectivity. Van Manen's Level One consists of reflection about the techniques or methods employed to achieve given instructional objectives. An example: "These are my assertive descipline rules which introduced .. !' Level Two consists of reflection which examines not only means, but also the worth of objectives in relation to larger social and cultural contexts. Finally, Level Three is a level of reflection which involves the reaching of judgement about means and aims in light of an ethical substance. While all three universities agreed to employ the categories of portfolio enmes, the inclusion of justifications, and the rating scale, it was decided to 3

GAmway. to Teacher Education

implement the portfolio process in different ways. The three universities also agreed to work with the Dayton Public Schools in the Entry Year Program. A brief description of each university's approach follows.

Central State University Model Centtal State University is a state-assisted undergraduate institution with a predominantly African-American enrollment of 2,890 students. The university is located about 10 miles from Dayton in a rural area in Wilberforce, Ohio. Beginning in the fall quarter of 1988, portfolio development was ~tituted as an experimental program and as a project requirement in the entry level Education Foundation course. Thirty-five fIrSt-year students and sophomores were initially enrolled and they produced the fIrSt set of portfolios. To clarify expectations, lectures and discussions focused on the Teacher Assessment Model and the five accompanying categories. Five activities in the education course related to portfolio development and reflection about teaching:. 1. Orientation to and discussions of the five categories combined with directions for planning and developing portfolios; 2. Textbook Analysis: five "project task sheets" directed toward textbook studies and assigned activities in response to critical questions on teacher competence; 3. Small Discussion Groups: requiring reports on teacher competence topics; 4. Library Research: assignment requiring students to be acquainted with journals in education and to examine and critique the five categories; ~. Portfolio Party: an infonnal relaxed atmosphere to promote a spirit of inquiry, permit opportunity for sharing, and to prompt interaction among the students and instructor. While students' reactions to these questions were stimulating and thought provoking, they seemed most motivated by a possible extrinsic reward in the production of portfolios: "availability of a portfolio to present at an interview for a teaching position" is one viewpoint that was reported. What remains as a research and curriculum thrust is a continued effort to improve the model and to make portfolio development a requirement for all students in teacher education. Upper division students in teacher education who were not afforded the portfolio experience continue to make inquiries

Volmne IV. Numhr.T 1

about portfolio production. The Coordihator of the Special Education Program has instituted portfolio development as a project requirement in all courses.

Dayton Public Schools Entry Year Thacher (EYT) Program

The Ento' Year Teacher Promm is a voluntary program in which Dayton Public School teachers participate during their rust year of employment under an initial classroom teaching certificate. Its purpose is to assist beginning teachers with the transition into teaching and to provide an opportunity for new teachers to develop their teaching style within the philosophical framework and expectations of the district. In a ci~y of roughly 200,000, surrounded by the metropolitan area of southwest Ohio with double the population, the Dayton district faces both urban and suburban/rural concerns. There is a growing movement to include portfolios in the Entry Year Teacher Program. Identified as a voluntary self-assessment model, the portfolios are being addressed by all parties as a pilot activity to be integrated into the repertoires of first-year teachers. 'Ibis model relies heavily on the concept of portfolios which document areas of challenge and growth for the entry year teacher, as well as the mentor teacher. Participants in the Entry Year Teacher Program have the option of developing a portfolio. If participants choose to develop portfolios, they are designed to focus on areas of teacher concern. A total of 100 plus new teachers (from a total teaching staff of approximately 1,963) are hired by Dayton Public Schools each year and the DPS Office of Staff Development piloted the program with a select group of new teachers. There are 136 mentees and 130 mentors participating in the program. A small number of Dayton's 1989-90 Entry Year Teachers were exposed to the portfolio concept in their last quarter of course work (composed principally of student teaching, a weekly seminar, and a course on The Teacher In School and Society) at Wright State University. While these teachers have had more time to absorb the nature of portfolio development than their colleagues, they are not as involved in the portfolio process as others who have started developing portfolios from their very first term in teacher education courses. Given the enormous demands on all first-year teachers, the substantial progress and participation in the overall project already shown by Dayton's EYT group are highly encouraging. Interim assessments of the extent of portfolio development and its value to practicing teachers are inconclusive at this point.

University of Dayton Model The University of Dayton is a private Catholic University enrolling approximately 6,500 undergraduate students. In 1988, the University instituted

GATEways to Teacher Education

an experimental program which attempted to integrate its general education courses with foundation teacher education courses. Twenty-three first-year Elementary Education students enrolled in the experimental program. These students were asked to develop portfolios and continue the process throughout their four years of undergraduate education using the guidelines described above. Portfolios were not part of the course requirements. However, students were assigned an advisor/mentor who met with each student to review the content and organization of the portfolios. Students met with their advisor/mentor at least once every year to evaluate the portfolios and to assess the individual student's progress toward becoming a teacher decision maker. The portfolios were also used in the required capstone education course, The PhilosoPhy of Education, as a basis for reflecting on the purposes and means of education. This statement will become the fmal entry in their portfolio and the final basis upon which the student will be evaluated. A variety of early observations about student performances are available at this time. Initially, students seemed most interested in the portfolio product as providing them an advantage in applying for a teaching position. However, the discussions between student and mentor about the portfolios have resulted in significant dialogues about the student's work and its relationship to the categories suggested for the organization of the portfolios. For example, one student had written a paper for an English course on metaphors used in Martin Luther King Jr's &'1 Have a Dream" speech. She reflected that her paper could fit two categories: her command of subject matter and her awareness of the teacher's professional responsibility to various ethnic and minority groups. On the other hand, there were instances in which students failed to see relationships between the categories and their present work and their future careers. Two other noteworthy results are that students not enrolled in the experimental program have heard about the project and have begun to inquire about the possibility of advising belp in developing their own portfolios and that faculty not engaged in the program but who serve as mentors/advisors (including faculty in Arts and Sciences) have begun to inquire about the possibility of using portfolios.

Wright State University Model Wright State University is a metropolitan state-supported university dedicated to the educational, social, and cultural needs of the Dayton area with an enrollment of 17,000 graduate and undergraduate students. Portfolio development began at Wright State in the fall of 1988 as a department-wide endeavor. The areas in which it was formally introduced were: (1) Phase I-FgnruJaricms: In this phase the beginning teacher education student is enrolled in introductory education course work, (2) Phase IIVolwne IV, Nwnber 1

Methodolo&ical: Methods courses are oompleted and faculty continue portfolio development in this phase with students who have completed the portfolio introduction in Phase I and (3) Phase llI-Practicum: In the [mal phase the students conclude their pre-service ttaining with student teaching and take their last foundations course, The Teacher in School and Society. In the course the portfolio is employed as an assessment tool for the students. During the Phase I experience, a student takes two education courses, and participates in a mentoring partnership. Also, one field experience occurs before the fall terin starts and lasts one week. The "phase" design permits mentoring throughout the four-course sequence, and a mentoring professor may instruct all four courses. During the 1988-89 school year 225 students received an introduction to the teacher assessment project and an explanation of the portfolio requirement and five beginning teacher education student groups began portfolio development in the fall of 1988. An additional 60 students started the Phase I program in the winter and spring terms for a grand total of 285. The portfolio consttuction was assigned as a class requirement and received a point value of 20 to 30 percent of the total course grade. A minilecture inttoduced the project in each class and prepared written materials explained the procedure. Explanations on the handout were explicit (e.g., use of a three ringed binder, put your name on the cover, include reflective statements and organized the content around Shulman's five elements). Students were encouraged to include photos and tapes as well as work from other courses. Professors stressed individual creativity. Portfolio questions and discussion occurred routinely throughout the two tenDS. The quality of portfolio products improved as samples became available, and the university supervisors completed familiarization training in portfolio construction. At the end of each quarter the portfolios received a "menlQr review" with the evaluation centering on adherence to the prescribed criteria, especially the reflective statements. The mentors used the portfolios during the student/ mentor conference held during the last 10 days of the tenD. The portfolio became an unanticipated asset for these conferences. Students used the portfolio as an analytical tool for their term efforts and found the portfolio activity useful in connecting life experiences to undergraduate education. A survey was administered in June, 1989, to 133 students, 22 percent males and 78 percent females. Ninety-three percent of the students indicated the portfolio assisted in reflecting on the teacher's role, with only 7 percent responding neuttaUy and none negatively. When asked if they viewed the portfolio as useful in professional growth, 56 percent responded neuttally, 44 percent found it profitable and none responded negatively. From the participants' clarifying comments it was evident that their short period within the teacher preparation program limited the extent to which reflection on teaching had developed. As one participant remarked, "The portfolio has helped me see 7

GATEways to Teacher Education

how much growth I need to do from now until I graduate." Respondents also were asked if the ponfolio aided in clarifying the criteria (for example, if the portfolio aided in clarifying professional responsibility). The second type of question asked participants to estimate proficiency in a given area. In the "professional responsibility" area, 75 percent of the respondents felt that the portfolio aided in clarifying teaching responsibilities, with the majority of respondents (74 percent) stating that they were neuttal in their proficiency in this area. The majority of the participants responded neuttally in regard to the portfolio helping to clarify subject-content knowledge. But 89 percent of the respondents rate themselves proficient in this category. Students unanimously agreed that the portfolio did little in clarifying content-specific pedagogy. These responses were expected since Phase I does not develop methodological content. However, 90 percent of the students viewed the portfolio as helpful in clarifying classroom management and organization tasks. Ninety-two percent rated themselves as not proficient in this area. The majority of the responses for the portfolio as an aid in classroom organization were concerned with field related activities. These were designed to have students reflect on their observations in the schools and make plans for professional growth. Clearly, the assignment requesting them to observe and respond to classroom organization promoted reflectivity. Similarly, the portfolio was viewed as helpful in clarifying studentspecific pedagogy (75 percent in agreement) with 75 percent of the respondents scoring neuttal in proficiency. Again, Phase I course work involves activities focusing on child pedagogy. Overall 89 percent of the respondents rated the portfolio development exercise profitable in developing professional competence. Another element of the WSU project involved Phase m - Practicum. Insttuctors began portfolio consttuction in the fall of 1988. In this academic year approximately 240 student teachers consttucted ponfolios. The portfolio was constructed and inttoduced as part of an evolving professional role. A seminar by the Phase ill coordinator inttoduced the portfolio project by stressing the advantage of having a portfolio available for the job interview process. Photos and tapes, sample lesson plans, teaching units, student feedback reports, critical incident resolutions and other teaching evidence were suggested for inclusion. Students received no formal feedback on their portfolios. The data do not lead to clear conclusions at this time, but we believe both students and faculty developed new professional skills during this project. Through faculty portfolio discussion the following changes were inttoduced into the teacher education program for the 1989-90 academic year: (1) Phase I faculty reevaluated their course requirements to highlight reflectivity, (2) Phase I course activities and conferences have been suggested to foster Volmne IV, Nwnber 1

higher level thinking skills and (3) Phase ill Practicum supervisors were aske to work closely with their students and two sessions of the weekly seminar were devoted to the portfolio process. An added dimension to the portfolio project involved the educational administtation area in 1990-91. The Department of Educational Leadership has committed three faculty members to assist in developing guidelines for administtative review of portfolios. The main focus is developing a process for use of portfolios in selection and retention of entty year teachers. The portfolio content can be used to assess a prospective teacher's growth, subject matter competence, professional attitude, content mastery, classroom organiz~ tion and student specific values. We also ~ee potential in portfolios for assisting administtators with staff selection and development.

Conclusions The Ohio Consortium for Portfolio Development is beginning its third year of collaboration in developing reflective practitioners through the use of portfolios. During this time, members have met monthly for planning, sharinl individual activities, and evaluating. They have participated in meetings of til national consortium initiated as part of the Stanford Teacher Assessment Project to consider the special assessment needs of America's minority teachers. Over 800 students, both graduates and undergraduates have participated in the development of portfolios. Some of these swdents have graduatCl and are beginning teachers in the entty year program in Dayton. Experience( teachers in this system have also constructed portfolios during this time. How do these participants evaluate their experience as portfolio constructors? As the project began, all involved experienced some confusion as there were no models to follow. Individual faculty developed guidelines for their students, but their own understanding of the purpose of the portfolio was limited. Students were uncertain as to what was expected of them. Those wb were getting a grade wanted more guidelines; those whose participation was voluntary felt freer to experimenL Standards evolved ex post facto once the fllSt student portfolios were submitted. When sample portfolios from each institution were reviewed by the Consortium, it was evident that there was variety in how students solved the problem of consttucting portfolios. At the same time, portfolios were similar enough so that it was not possible to tell which institution students attended by the content of their portfolio. Students felt positive about the experience once it was completed and expressed a sense of satisfaction at having solved a complex and ambiguous problem. Those who generally do not do well on paper and pencil tests indicated the portfolio offered another way to present themselves in a positive lighL Although the level of reflectivity in fllSt-year students and sophomores was not always high, many appreciated the opportunity for reflection that the portfolio provided. For some, it helped to recognize the contribution their 9 GATEways to Teacher Education

liberal arts courses made to their development as a teacher. For others, the opportunity to visualize the total college experience as pan of their professional preparation was rewarding. Those students who started portfolios during their student teaching felt very strongly that they should have been required to maintain them throughout the program. The added stress of creating a portfolio during the fmal quarter of student teaching was a heavy burden to them. Many students saw the portfolio as giving them a competitive edge in the job search. One anecdote seems to confirm this view. The Director of Laboratory Experiences at Wright State University received an out-of-state call from a school district personnel director saying that he had interviewed one of our students and was moderately impressed. At the end of the interview, the student applicant produced his portfolio. The personnel director looked through it and was greatly impressed by the student's initiative and by the portfolio itself. He 9ffered him the job. It remains to be seen whether he will still be impressed when confronted with 50 to 100 portfolios to select candidates. It is clear that personnel administrators will need to be helped to understand how portfolios can be useful to them in the interviewing process and wbat advantages portfolios may have. As teacher educators, we need to listen to school administrators as they tell us what kinds of documentation they fmd most useful for staff selection. This emphasis will receive further attention in 1990-91 as graduate faculty from the Educational Leadership Depanmentjoin the consortium to frame the administrator's role in the portfolio process. IT school districts believe that portfolios can help teachers become more reflective practitioners, they need to include teachers and the teachers' union in the development of policy. For success, both the school district and the teachers' union should be involved in the overall development of the project from the very beginning. The issue of who will keep portfolios and how they will be used will be a sensitive one. H districts decide to use the very detailed Stanford TAP model for structuring in-depth portfolios, then they should probably target experienced teachers and not beginning teachers. Beginning teachers could not devote the time to highly structured portfolio construction during their already stressful flTSt year. For experienced teachers it can provide a very stimulating opportunity to reflect on teaching experience. Those institutions where a commitment was made by a total faculty or where the department chair or dean strongly supported the project seemed to enjoy greater success in developing products. Some mentors found the portfolio a good vehicle for mentor/student interactions. Many portfolios included autobiographies which helped faculty to know their students better and to see them as multi-dimensional. Consortium members recognize that they have only made a beginning in Volume IV. Number 1

helping their students become more reflective, but all agree that the portfolio has enough promise to warrant a continued commiunenL The collaboration itself has been so rewarding that other spin-off ventures have already resulted. We are striving to emphasize the personal philosophical, social, and professional development of ~ teacher-candidate in these programs. In light of Educational Testing Service's announcement that it is revamping the National Teacher Exam and that stage three will include an evaluation of portfolios, it behooves us all to keep experimenting with portfolio development, as the Ohio Consortium for Portfolio Development is now doing. Funding for this project was provided by the Carnegie Foundation and Wright State University, Presidential Grant Funds. +

References Anderson, L. and Burns, R. (1989). Research in classrooms: The study of teachers, teaching and instruction. New York: Pergamon Press. Burnett, D. G. (1985). Giving credit where credit is due: Evaluating experimental learning in the liberal arts. Innovative Higher Education, 10 (1),43-54. Bullough, R. V. (1989). Teacher education and teacher reflectivity. Teacher Education,. 30 (2), 15-21. Carnegie Forum on Education and the Economy, (1986). A nation prepared; Teachersfor the 21st century. New York: Carnegie Forum on Education and the Economy. Clark, G. & Zimmennan, E. (1983). Identifying artistically talented students. School Arts, 83 (3), 22-25. Curtis, P. and others (1985). Documentation of inpatient experiences of resident physicians. Journal ofMedical Education., 60 (5), 408-410. Dillehay, J., Graham, G. & Mercer A. (1990). Basic analysisfor research in education. Dayton, OH: Wright State University. Elbow, P. & Balanoff, P. (1986). Portfolios as a substitute for proficiency examinations. College Composition and Communication., 37 (3), 336-339. Entry Year Teacher Program: 1989-90. Proposal submitted to the office of Staff Development of Dayton Public Schools by Anna Mays of the Division of Professional Practice and Research, College of Education and Human Services, Wright State University, Dayton, Ohio, 1989. Fink, A. and Kosecoff, J. (1985). How to conduct surveys: A step-by-step guide. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications. Fitz-Gibbon, C. and Morris, L. (1978). How to calculate statistics. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications. Furtwengler, C.B. (1985). Evaluation procedures in the Tennessee career ladder plan. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American 11 GATEways to Teacher Education

Educational Research Association. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 259 012). Isaac, S. &. Michael, W. B. (1987). Handbook on research and evaluationjor education and the behavioral sciences (2nd Edition). San Diego, CA: EDITS. Leedy, P. (1980). Practical research planning and design (3rd Edition). New York: MacMillan Publishing Company. Oosterhof, A. (1990). Classroom applications 0/ educational measurement. Columbus, OH: Merrill Publishing Company. Putka, Gary. Education degree isn't a requirement in plan to certify teachers nationally. The Wall Street Journal. July 17, 1989. Reflection: A Proposal. Submitted to the Carnegie Foundation of New York by the Ohio Consortium for Portfolio Development, July 1989. Ross, Dorene D. (1989). First steps in developing a reflective approach. Journal o/Teacher Education, 30 (2,22-30). SAS Institute Inc. (1985). SAS user's guide: Basics (Version 5 Edition). Cary, NC: Author. SAS Institute Inc. (1985). SAS user's guide: Statistics (Version 5 Edition). Cary, NC: Author. Shulman, L. S. (1986). Paradigms and research programs in the study of teaching: A contemporary perspective. The Handbook 0/ Research on Teaching. (pp. 3-49) New York: MacMillan Publishing Company. Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher. 15 (2),4-10. Shulman, L. S., Haertel E. &. Bird, T. (1988). Toward alternative assessments o/teaching: A report o/work in progress. Unpublished paper, Stanford University, Palo Alto, CA. Soares, E. J. &. Goldgehn, L. A. (1985). The portfolio approach to business education. Bulletin o/the Association/or Business Communication, 48 (3), 17-21. Terry, O. L. & Eade, O. E. (1983). New Roles for meeting challenges in professional development. Paper presented at the annual conference of the Association of Teacher Educators. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 229 342) VanManen, M. (1977). Linking ways of knowing with ways of being practical. Curriculum Inquiry, 6, 205-228. Zenoff, E. H. &. Barron, J. A. (1983). So you want to hire a law professor? Journal 0/Legal Education., 33 (3),492-510.

VollDDe IV, NlDDber 1 12

A Professional Developme t Scho I:

Getting Started Sherry J. Kern, Annette D. Digby, and Rotkriclc J. McDavis University 0/Arkansas The Holmes agenda O'omorrpw's Schools, 1990) encourages close relationships between universities and public schools. Goodlad (1990), as a result of his five-year Study of the Education of Educators, presents 19 postulates that he views as essential for teacher preparation programs. A review of the postulates supports the belief that school/university collaboration should be an integral component of the teacher education process. Specifically, this collaboration is expected to result in the creation of professional development schools. Professional development schools, unlike old lab schools, should be designed to facilitate site-based teaching, research, and service. Iomonow's Schools defmed a Professional Development School as "a school for the development of novice professionals, for continuing development of experienced professionals, and for the research and development of the teaching profession" (Ipmoaow's Schools, 1990, p. 1). Universities and public schools no longer have the option of acting independently of each other. Both entities must work together to prepare quality teachers and to solve the problems facing education in the next century. "All PDS professional staff must be committed to and involved in the process of teaching teachers, the idea of changing teacher education, and restructuring schools" (Soder, 1990, p. 3). Theobald (1990) delineated the need for interdependence among educational institutions:

Public schools have an unmet need/or better teachers. In order to produce these better teachers. universities need access to exemplary school settings in which to place their student teachers and to conduct 13 GATEways to Teacher Education

research on effective practices. This research in turn can be used by the schools to improve the educational experiences provided to elementary and secondary students. These well-prepared elementary and secondary students will eventually meet the universities unmet need/or excellent undergraduate and graduate students. And so on. (p.2)

As a Holmes Group member, the College of Education at the University

of Arkansas, Fayetteville, initiated partner school relationships as a prelude to establishing a professional development school (The Holmes Group FORUM, 1990). Initial partner school relationships began in January 1990 with two elementary schools, two middle schools, and one high school in three public school districts in Northwest Arkansas. The College of Education chose to begin with partner schools so that progress would be consistent, if not dramatic. This modest beginning provides all members of the various partnerships an opportunity to gain ownership in the collaborative process and to begin communicating in a relatively non-threatening manner. Partner schools provide a bridge between minimal communication with public schools and the establishment of a true professional development school. It is hoped that a true professional development school is the outcome of the partner school relationships. The purpose of this article is to describe how the College of Education initiated partner school relationships with three local public school districts, to outline partnership activities, to present partnership research projects, and to discuss future initiatives, including the establishment of a professional development school.

Getting Started The fast step taken by the College of Education in establishing partner school relationships was to identify possible partnership schools. Criteria for selection of partnership sites included demographics that represented a variety of student socioeconomic levels, school sizes/locations/grade levels, and faculty compositions. Public school and university faculty interest was another consideration in choosing participants. University faculty realized that no partner school relationship would be successful unless the teachers and faculty at both institutions were willing to participate. De Bevoise (1986) pointed out that "when suggesting personnel for a cooperative project, administtators want to look not only for people who have good ideas but who are also good listeners, capable of hearing the opposite point of view" (p.ll). Building principals at each public school identified a core group of faculty who had expressed an interest in developing schooVuniversity partnerships. Team size varied from ten to twenty members, depending upon faculty numbers and interest. The needs and interests of public school faculty at the partnership sites were matched with specific research interests and pedagogical Volume IV, Number 1 14

training of the university faculty members. University faculty members possessed some area of knowledge or expertise that would benefit the partnership schools. The initial meetings of the partnership teams were open-ended. A flexible agenda provided an opportunity to focus the direction of the partnership into channels that were of interest and concern to the faculty involved, thus allowing maximum benefit for all audiences. "Ultimately, the collaborators need to recognize not only their own interests but also the needs and perspectives of all represented in the collaborative venture" (De Bevoise, 1986, p. 10). Initial meetings of the public school/university faculty focused on brainstorming mutually acceptable projects. Follow-up discussions focused on the nature, structure, and pwpose of each partnership arrangement. Sustained, active involvement of faculty and administtators from both institutions aided in establishing rapport between professionals from the institutions. The discussion sessions eventually led to the establishment of short- and long-tenn goals for the partnership sites. While establishing a direction for the partnership, a coordinator was appointed from the faculty at both institutions so that communication of meeting times and other housekeeping matters could be administered efficiendy. The coordinators functioned as moderators and communicators. Since it was essential that all members of the partnership maintain a high-level of ownership for the success of the partnership, activities and duties were distributed among all involved faculty. It was not the responsibility of the coordinators to design and implement all partnership activities. No single agenda provided partnerships with an appropriate direction for the future. Successful partnerships have continued to evolve as issues have been addressed and resolved, leading to new areas of concern and interest The ultimate aim of the College of Education partnerships has been, and continues to be, the evolvement into one or more professional development schools.

Partnership Activities Partnership activities are limited only by the creativity and enthusiasm of the faculty. Special emphasis is placed on the needs of the student population within the schools. The research interests of the school and university faculties also are taken into consideration. Activities include, but are not limited to, faculty inservice, faculty exchange, and collaborative research projects. No activity or project is beyond the scope of the partnership relationship if it is deemed valuable by the faculty. Public school inservice opportunities are a logical beginning for partnership activities. A major focus of the partnership meetings is to identify inservice needs, to suggest appropriate experts in the field, and to organize the inservice experiences. At one of the partnership sites, faculty participate in a 15 GA1Eways to Teacher Education

series of workshops on cooperative learning for which they receive staff development crediL At other partnership sites inservices are conducted on management techniques, whole language instruction, and goal-setting. Inservice activities include ttaditionallecture-based programs, as well as more field-based, hands-on training in new and innovative techniques. Resources from within the community, the state, or even the nation, are utilized. Another partnership activity, faculty exchanges, are a unique opportunity to blend the university and public school settings through the crossing of institutional boundaries. Inviting school personnel to guest lecture in university methods classes as practicing experts provide credibility to faculty lectures and activities. Having university personnel in public school classrooms provides them with on-going contact with day-to-day teaching activities operations. This contact allows university personnel to remain current with public school trends and issues while providing curriculum and instruction expertise to faculty in public schools. University personnel also utilize the expertise of public school faculty members. Most commonly, university faculty invite public school faculty and administrators to be guest speakers in a variety of education classes. Public school faculty and administrators present their ideas on middle-level education, selected topics related to the needs of special students, and professionalism.

Partnership Research Projects Collaborative research projects are another natural partnership activity. Public school faculty have opportunities to conduct research that they otherwise might not have the time or expertise to complete. Collaborative research projects also aid university personnel in maintaining an accurate pulse on the true concerns and issues .facing public school teachers and students. The research designs are not all empirical, but the information is significant in modifying practices within the partnership setting. Collaboration with university personnel appears to result in greater control of the validity and reliability of research projects, as well as help to disseminate the findings to a wider audience. One joint research project qualitatively investigated the relationship between teacher planning and instructional outcomes. Faculty from one of the elementary settings participated in non-structured interviews during which they described their planning techniques for a variety of instructional activities. A university researcher then analyzed the relationships between the teachers' metacognitive understandings and actual practice. A second successful collaborative research project was a presentation at a national meeting of the National Council of Teachers of English. One university professor and two junior high school teachers, all members of a public schooVuniversity partnership team, collaborated to produce an interdisciplinary unit on Colonial AmeriCa Eqtitled "Multi-Level Collaboration: Volmne IV, Nmnber 1 16

One Model for Successful Integration !If English and Social Studies," the presentation was a product of a public school ttaining session on cooperative learning conducted by the university faculty representative. A third research project was an on-going assessment of restructuring efforts aimed at establishing a true middle school organization. The partnership used qualitative research methods to establish a structure that incorporated the most appropriate practices for the existing public school setting. Faculty from both the participating middle school and the university conducted the onsite research on-site at a partner school. Public school faculty provided input regarding unique academic, and social-emotional needs of adolescents. University faculty reviewed current literature regarding appropriate middlelevel education, pedagogy, and practice. As partnerships develop, increased opportunities are available for all team members, both university and public school, to participate in field-based research and teaching experiences that direcdy correlate teaching practice with acher preparation. Additional partnership activities for university team members include, but are not limited to, membership on public school committees, collaboration in the development of programs, such as science fairs, young authors, and parent inservice. Public school faculty have opportunities to increase their subject matter and pedagogical knowledge by participating in professional development activities as described in the following excerpt from Tomorrow's Schools (1990):

To become an accomplished professional teacher requires not only systematic training and formal socialization but updating your Icnowledge of the subjects you teach, attending more closely to the students you teach, developing new methods for your repertoire and extending your influence beyond the bounds ofyour own classroom. Knowledgeable and practical university faculty should be your colleagues in all these endeavors (p. 51).

Next Steps The partnership relationships between the College of Education and five public schools are progressing in a timely manner. Frequent interactions between university and public school faculty are producing significant gains in understanding and cooperation. To date, no partnership school is accepting the challenge of entering the closer professional development school relationship, but progress is being made toward this goal. Partner school faculty recognize that "change on a grand scale does not occur overnight or even in a year or two. Rather, it proceeds in the form of many little tries, all aimed toward a common goal and each judged in terms of its contributions to that goal" (Schlechty, Ingwerson, Brooks, 1988, p. 31). More in-depth interaction between the college and public schools through a greater level of collaboration is being actively supported by faculty at participating institutions. 17 GAmways to Teacher Education

As college and public school personnel continue to work together, the framework for a professional development school is being developed. To lay the groundwork for a smooth transition from a partnership to a ttue professional development school, a task force comprised of representatives from existing partnership teams will be fonned to address the feasibility and accountability for future professional development schools. The mission of the taSk force is to identify possible funding resources, possible site locations, and policy issues such based upon the following principles of design outlined by the Holmes Group:

Professional Development Schools will become a long-term force for the improvement of teaching and learning to the extent that they release and focus the talent, energy, and enthusiasm of excellent, ambitious teachers, teacher educators, and administrators. To accomplish these ends, our principles of design have called for: * innovation and flexibility in the teacher's job defmition; * new ways of organizing and allocating responsibility among teachers, administrators, and university educators; * new ways of allocating budgets and new sources of funds; * more efficient use of existing resources, including administrative overhead, to support instruction; * more time for reflective professional conversation; * new fonnats for assessing students and evaluating teachers; * encouragement, resources, and collaboration with school and university colleagues to think through, work out, test, and revise teachers' own best ideas about teaching and to solve their mostfrustrating problems <Tomorrow's Schools, 1990, p. 94).

Summary The ongoing teaching, research, and service mission of the University of Arkansas, in conjunction with restructuring efforts within the educational community, provide a unique opportunity for the College of Education to lead and to participate in the future role of educational collaboration in the next century. The College of Education and its partnership schools realize that the task remaining is great, but the effort is essential if true educational renewal is to be achieved. The establishment of professional development schools is one means by which Arkansas schools and universities can directly impact educational renewal for the 1990s and beyond. +

Volmne IV, Nmnber 1

References

De Bevoise, W. (1986). Collaboration: Some principles of bridgework. Educational Leadership, ~(5), 9-12. Goodlad, J. (1990). Better teachers for our nation's schools. Phi Delta Jr~pan, 72(3), 185-194. The Holmes Group. (1990). Tomo"ow'S schools: Principlesfor the design of professional development schools. East Lansing, MI: The Holmes Group, Inc. The Holmes Group. (1990). Kathleen Devaney, (Ed.). FORUM, ~ (2). Schlechty, P., Ingwerson, D., & Brooks, T. (1988). Inventing professional development schools. Educational Leadership, ~(3), 28-31. Soder, R. (1990). Professional development schools: Here to stay or here at all? National Networkfor Educational Renewal, ~ (1), 1,3 Theobald, N. (1990). The Financing and Governance of Professional Development or Partner Schools, (Occasional Paper No. 10). Seattle, Washington: Center for Educational Renewal.

19 GATEway. to Teacher Education

...

he Identification of ritical Behaviors of eer Assistants Serving s Beginning Teacher â&#x20AC;˘ alners Barbara K. McKenzie Assistant Professor Department o/Media Education West Georgia College J

T his study was undertaken winter term of 1990 as part of West Georgia College's Regional Center for Teacher Education. Using the critical incident technique, all the peer assisted teachers in an Atlanta metto-area school system were asked to complete critical incident reports describing the effective and in effective behaviors they had observed peer assistants demonsttating. In addition, the respondents were asked to provide basic demographic data. Demographic profiles of the study'S peer assisted teachers and a listing of the identified effective behaviors of peer assistants serving as beginning teacher trainers are reponed. Also reponed are suggestions for program improvements. The training of beginning teachers has become an important concern for both teacher training institutions and K-12 schools (Huffman and Leak, 1986; Stahlhut, 1988). Recent research fmdings suggest that using experienced teachers to guide fIrst year teachers is an effective means of increasing their success rates as new teachers (Gray and Gray, 1985; Tanner and Ebers, 1985; Galvez-Hjornevik, 1986; Huffman and Leak, 1986; Jensen, 1987; Stalhut, 1988). The specific types of behaviors that experienced teachers display while working with fIrst year teachers, however, has not been highly investigated Volume IV, Number 1 20

(Smith and Huling-Austin, 1985; Anderson and Shannon, 1988). What experienced teachers do while working 路with new teachers, their effective and ineffective behaviors, must be more closely examined. Once experienced teachers, serving in an assistant capacity, know what behaviors help new teachers they can better provide the type of assistance that.is truly needed in teacher induction programs (Gray and Gray, 1985). The purpose of this study was to extend the present knowledge base on the types of behaviors experienced teachers display while assisting beginning teachers. Critical behaviors that experienced teachers exhibited while guiding fIrSt year teachers were identified and then put into guidelines for future teachers involved in inductive programs to follOW. Specifically two research questions were addressed in this study: 1. What are the effective behaviors of peer assistants that help to improve the teaching practices of beginning teachers? and 2. What are the ineffective behaviors of peer assistants that do not improve the teaching practices of beginning teachers?

Methodology The principal research method used in this study was the critical incident technique. What experienced teachers, known as "peer assistants" in this study, did while guiding first year Georgia teachers was identified by collecting critical incidents that were observed taking place on the job as peer assistants guided them in the schools. The critical incident technique was selected because it has certain values not obtainable by other techniques of measurement: 1. Adequate collection of critical incidents places categories of human behavior on an empirical base, thus providing for greater Validity for any subsequent measuring instrument. 2. Collections of critical incidents provide realistic bases for any of a variety of evaluation techniques, although the incidents do not of themselves comprise a measuring instrument. 3. The critical incidents themselves can frequently serve as a source of raw material out of which evaluation items are conducted (Good, 1966, pp.261-62). Flanagan first used the critical incident technique in 1954 to analyze the effective and ineffective combat-leadership behaviors of pilots in the United States Air Force in World War ll. The techniquee was found to be helpful in identifying effective and ineffective behaviors of combat pilots. During the past 40 years, the critical incident technique has been successfully applied in a number of other fields, including sports (McKenzie, 1986), 21 GATEways to Teacher Education

business law (Wilkinson, 1979), consulting (Hanson, 1977), and Special Education (Ingram and BJackhurst, 1976). The critical incident technique used in this study involved two major steps: (1) the development and administtation of a survey to collect observed incidents of peer assistants that were viewed as effective and ineffective in assisting beginning teachers and (2) a content analysis of the incidents to identify and categorize the observed behaviors.

Step One - Development and Administration of the Survey In January of 1990, forty three beginning and/or new teachers involved

in a Peer Assistant program in eighteen Atlanta schools were sent a packet of materials. The packet included a cover letter explaining the nature of the study, a demographic data sheet, and six critical incident reporting forms (three effective and ineffective). The critical incident fonns asked the beginning/new teachers (1) to recall their observations of peer assistants, (2) focus on the behavior of one or more peer assistants who dispJayed especially effective and/ or ineffective behavior, and (3) to write as precisely as possible responses to three open-ended questions: (a) What was the situation or background in which the incident occurred? (b) What did you personally observe happening? and (c) What were the consequences? Two weeks after the fll'St mailing a reminder postcard was sent asking the nonrespondents to complete and return the survey. Two weeks after the reminder postcard was sent, another copy of the original survey materials and an appeal letter were mailed to the remaining nonrespondents.

Step Two - Content Analysis Once the return rate had reached a diminishing point of return a content analysis took place in several stages: (1) sorting and screening the reports, (2) assigning peer assistant behavior statements to a category, (3) identifying and writing the behavior statements from the reports, (4) placing each behavior statement into a category, and (5) rerming the peer assistant behaviors. Poolina and screeniDK the reports. The data shown in Table 1 describe the beginning/new teachers included in the content analysis. The fmal reports that were accepted were descriptions of the observed behaviors of peer assistants that met all of the criteria: (1) described an incident that dealt with peer assistants, (2) reported on the critical behaviors of peer assistants, and (3) described specific behaviors of peer assistants. About 5 percent of the reported incidents did not meet these criteria. 2. Formu1a.jna the framework of cateKories of peer assistant behavior statements. The reported behaviors were fust divided into effective and ineffective. Upon further ~xamining the reports, the categories of 1.

Volmne IV. Nmnber 1

planning and implementing emerged. 3. Identifyin& and writinS the berulvior statements. The incidents were read repeatedly by the investigator and then written to capture both the content and the spirit of the language of the reports. A single mention of an incident was sufficient to include it in the list. 4. Placin& each behavior statement into a Catesoa. All the statements were carefully placed into one of the four categories: (1) effective planning, (2) effective implementation, (3) ineffective planning, and (4) ineffective implementation. 5. Refinin& the statements. Since errors can occur in content analysis, such as the categories and behavior statements needing revisions to better reflect the reports, several reliability checks were conducted. Another investigator read the reports several times to verify whether there was evidence for each category and each individual behavior statement. Based on the input from the reliability checks, both the study's categories and behavior statements were supported.

Findings Of the fony three new and beginning teachers in the Atlanta Peer Assistant program that were surveyed, nineteen completed the survey, 44.2%. Only. their observations of effective peer assistant behaviors that helped to improve the teaching practices of new teachers will be reported below. Since research advocates that more learning takes place when positive guidelines are provided for professionals to follow, only the effective critical behaviors of peer assistants are reported (Mims and Carr, 1991; Knowles, 1970). The effective behaviors of Peer Assistants are reported in Table 2 below.

Summary and Implications According to the findings of this study, peer assistants do have a positive impact on meeting the needs of new and beginning teachers in Georgia. The most effective types of peer assistant behaviors that were identified by the respondents were: (1) providing opportunities for beginning/new teachers to observe effective teaching practices of experienced teachers, (2) providing background information on the school and its students, (3) periodically meeting with beginning/new teachers to discuss their concerns, (4) sharing effective classroom management sttategies, and (5) being observed by the peer assistant and receiving suggestions for improvement. In addition, the study's findings suggested that (1) an adequate amount of time be scheduled for both the new/beginning teacher and peer assistant to meet on a regular basis so that problems or concerns could be quickly resolved and (2) peer assistants should have the same subject matter expertise as the new/beginning teacher. 23 GATEways to Teacher Education

The study's guidelines on the effective critical behaviors of peer assistants can be used in a variety of ways in teacher induction programs. 1. Experienced teachers, serving as peer assistants, can use the guidelines to assess their own practices when working with beginning teachers. 2. School administrators can use the guidelines to select teachers to serve as peer assistants within their school system. 3. Trainers of peer assistants can use the guidelines as a base on which to develop and direct their peer assistant training programs. 4. Evaluators of peer assistants can use the guidelines as checklists in assessing the practices of their experienced teachers who are working in the teacher induction program.

Volume IV, Number 1 24

TABLE 1

Demographic Information on New/Beginning Teachers in the Atlanta Peer Assistant Program

New leacIaer .. GccqIa BealRnlna leacber In Gcor&Ia . . . . . . . . . .. .

F. . . Male

ZI-25,. . . Z6.J0J'" 31.J5,earI

36-40,..... 41-45,earI Bacllelar·......... Blldaelar·........ pl_ 10............. credit

................

Muter·........ 'lu sam........... credIt

"i iZ

BmSG

~ g •

FPJa Highest Level fI Education

DposidOD

-Ag.

t3 ~

TABLE 2 EFFECTIVE CRITICAL BEHAVIORS OF PEER ASSISTANTS ecce AMistan t Bebayiors duripg tbe planning pbase of instruction

The Peer Assistant: I-provides opportunities for beginning/new teachers to observe actual classes where good teaching practices are demonstrated,

(0=7)

2-provides background infonnation dealing with the school's procedures and overall student regulations, 3-shares ideas with beginning/new teachers on how manage students,

(0=4)

effectivel• • • • (0=3)

4-helps the beginning/new teacher select and retrieve appropriate• • • (0=2) learning materials for use in the classroom, S-displays an enthusiastic and positive attitude in wQrking with • • (0=2) the beginning/new teacher, 6-provides background infonnation on the nature of students in the school system,

(0=1)

ecce Assistant bebayiors durinl tbe implementation pbase of instruction

The Peer Assistant: I-periodically meets with beginning/new teachers to discuss lheir classroom experiences and overall concerns,

_ _ _ _ _ (0=5)

2-obscrves the beginning/new teacher instructing classes and offers suggestions for improvements,

_ _ _ (0=3)

3-oCfers advice on how to grade homework assignments and detennine course grades, 4-makcs suggestions on how to effectively set up the classroom such as desk arrangements, media, and/or visuaVleaming displays.

(0=1)

Volwne IV, Nwnber 1

References Anderson, E.M. and AL. Shannon (1988). Toward a Conceptua1ization of Mentoring. Journal o/Teacher Education., 32 (1), 38-42. Flanagan, J.C. (1954). The Critical Incident Technique. Psychological Bulletin, ~, July, 373-58. Galvez-Hjomvik, C. (1986). Mentoring Among Teachers: A Review of the Literature. Journal o/Teacher Education., .31 (1), 6-10. Good, C.V. (1966). Essentials o/Educational Research. New YorlcAppleton-Centry-Crofts. Gray, W.A. and M.M. Gray (1985). Synthesis of Research on Mentoring Beginning Teachers. Educational Leadership, ~ (2),3743. Hansen, James, et al. (1976). Critical Incidents in Consultation. Elementary School Guidance and Counseling, li, 291-95. Huffman, Gail and Sarah Leak (1986). Beginning Teachers' Perceptions of Mentors, Journal o/Teacher Education,.31 (1), 22-25. Ingram, C. G. and E.A. Blackhurst (1976). Teaching and Advising Competencies of Special Education Professors. Exceptional Children, ~, 85-93. Jensen, M.C. (1987). How to Recruit, Select, Induct and Retrain the Very Best Teachers. School Management Digest Series, No. 32. Knowles, M.S. (1970). The Modem Practice of Adult Education: Andragogy versus Pedagogy. New York:Associated Press. McKenzie, B.K. (1986). The Identification and Validation of Critical Safety Behaviors of High School Girls' Gymnastics Coaches. Dissertation, Michigan State University. Mims, N. and D. Carr (1991). Reading Skills and Activities for Teacher Support Programs. Dubuque, Iowa:KendaU/Hunt. Smith, JJ. and L. Huling-Austin (1985). A Research-Based Staff Development Program for Beginning Teachers. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago. Stalhut, R., et al. (1988). Coaching Student Teachers to Elicit Mentor Role Behaviors from Their Cooperating Teachers. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education, New Orleans. Tanner, C.K. and S.M. Ebers (1985). Evaluation of Beginning Teachers in a Performance-Based Certification Program. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago. Wilkinson, KL. (1979). Effective and Ineffective Teacher Behavior as Viewed by Students in Secondary Law Classes. Delta Pi Epsilon Journal. 20-21, 1-11. 27 GATBwaYI to Teacher Education

. eparing Successful achers for Urban hools Gwendolyn Y. Turner, Associate Professor, Department of Childhood Education, University of Missouri-St. Louis

T eachers who work in urban areas need to be prepared to work with students who are culturally, ethnically, and racially diverse. Existing teacher education programs are not designed to prepare teachers for today' s nor future urban classrooms. Teacher education programs need to make changes in curricula, clinical experiences, and commitment to urban schools if teachers are to be successful in helping these students achieve learning success. Teachers playa vital role in the academic success of their students. They set agendas for achieving learning goals, develop learning activities, shape attitudes toward learning, and create learning environments within their own classrooms. Teachers negatively and positively affect student performance through their expectations and actions. Classroom teachers are the most significant persons in the process of educational reform, for they directly affect learners. One of the greatest challenges facing education is preparing successful teachers who can provide quality education for all students but especially those who work with urban students. Urban schools are beset with the same myriad of economic, social, and political problems that generally plague our inner cities. Consequently, teachers who work in our inner cities need to understand not only the impact of this environment on their students but also on the teaching conditions. According to Monte-Sieburth (1989), a "good" teacher in urban schools cannot be simply skills-oriented and subject-matter knowledgeable, but also must also be culturally sensitive and sensible. Preparing teachers for inner-city classroom needs to differ from preparing teachers to teach in non-urban environVolwne IV, Nwnber 1

ments (Weiner, 1990). This paper looks at issues related to teaching in the urban school and the educational preparation that teachers receive prior to entering this environment.

Urban Environments, Students, and Thachers Urban environments are in varying stages of development. Cultural and economic institutions are flourishing at the same time that employment opportunities are decreasing in inner cities. Tax revenues are changing as more poverty-stricken families seek affordable public housing, and middle-income families relocate outside the centtaI city or in highly selective, homogenous neighborhoods. Demographic patterns reveal that many immigrants, elderly, single-parent families, unemployed and underemployed persons are concenttated in inner-city neighborhoods. Social problems such as crime and dysfunctional families are increasingly affecting the school populations. Financial resources are decreasing as urban schools are serving increasing numbers of ethnically and racially diverse, bilingual, immigrant, refugee and mainstream students. These changes profoundly affect schools in urban areas. Also, they have affected the general population's attitudes toward these schools and even educators' expectations for urban students' ability to learn. (Charner & Rolzinksi, 1987; Montero-Siebuth, 1989; Walberg, Bakalis, Bast, & Baer, 1989), Urban students who represent a variety of cultures, languages, and learning styles present challenges to urban teahers who must learn to recognize these students' learning strengths as well as weaknesses. Negative media and false perceptions of urban students' lives have created stereotypical images of all urban children as disadvantaged, deprived, and incompetent ghetto children (Cuban, 1989; Hale-Benson, 1988; Hennan, 1977; Larke, Wiseman & Bradley, 1990; Rist, 1970). Their problems, like those of non-urban children, are connected to larger social and economic realities. Recognizing and understanding these connections have been made more difficult by what Montero-Sieburth (1989) descn'bes as dominant research theory explanations and single causal factors (e.g., female-headed households). Stating that educational problems in urban schools are categorized "according to the perceptions of outsiders," Montero-Siebuth further contends that all urban students are lumped together as problematic and deficient, ignoring the possibility of individual, intragroup, or intergroup differences. Learning to recognize these differences is essential in teacher-student re~onships. While demographic trends indicate a diverse student population rapidly growing in urban schools, there is a shortage of teachers prepared to teach in these schools. Increasing turnover rates for new teachers, and the loss of experienced urban teachers contribute to this problem (Habennan & Rickards, 1990). In addition, there is a critical shonage of racially-diverse teachers (both preservice and inservice) who have traditionally taught in urban schools. 29 GATEwaYI to Teacher Education

If present trends continue, who then will be available to teach urban

students? The majority will be young, Caucasian women with little experience in bilingualism or cultural diversity. An assignment in a "suburban" school will be their teaching preference, and their attitudes will have been shaped by a society that is biased along race, gender, and class lines. Their existing teacher preparation program will prepare these teachers for suburban schools not urban school environments. To help urban schools succeed, the demand exists for teachers well-prepared to teach these children. Teacher preparation programs need to be expanded to address the attitudes as well as the know ledge that will help new teachers succeed in urban schools (Association of Teacher Educators, 1991; Cooper, Beare, & Thonnan, 1990; Grant, 1989).

Teacher Preparation Teacher Education should be geared to reasonable expectations for those who are to be stewards of schooling in a democratic society. (Goodlad 1990 pg.l85). J

One of the major aspects of educational refonn has been the focus on improving the preservice preparation of teachers. Most of these reforms include establishing higher academic initiatives (e.g., grades and test scores), upgrading standards of perfonnance, addressing the need for more ethnicallydiverse teachers, and collaborative educational ventures between schools of education and public schools (Holmes Report, 1986; Carnegie Forum, 1986). While these educational refonns are noteworthy and focus on upgrading the preservice preparation of teachers, they still do not address the needs for retaining, recruiting, or preparing teachers who will teach in urban classrooms. Understanding why existing teacher training programs do not meet these challenges is to recognize that they are designed to prepare teachers for small town, suburban, or rural schools, not the urban schools. Very little commitment has been made to preparing successful urban teachers. One of the most significant contributing factors in existing teacher education programs is the composition of their full-time teaching faculty who directly influence teacher candidates. The majority of teacher education faculty are middle-aged, Caucasian males who do not have direct experience teaching in urban schools, and whose knowledge about these schools and ethnically-diverse student populations come from second or third-hand sources. They have little interest in nor want any kind of experiences with urban school environments (Grant, 1989; Tillman, 1989). In an explanation of the irrelevance of preparing urban teachers to the school of education faculty, Habennan (1989) maintains that:

A third view is that teacher education programs have never accepted the charge o/preparing urban teachers. Since School o/Education/aculty believe Volwne IV, Number 1 30

they are providing generic principles for teaching in all situations, they cannot be held accountable for a goal they have never accepted: preparing urban teachers. Finally, there is a view, common to many professional educators, that urban schools are beyond redemption and rather than participate in "band-aid" efforts to Jceep dying institutions alive it is better to not help urban schools at all and plan for some sort of replacement institution (pp. 22-23). This view is not atypical; many of the existing programs have continued with business as usual with the only concession being the adding of a course in multicultural education to their undergraduate requirements. They have not however focused on developing a sustained multicultural curriculum for teacher candidates (Grant & Secada, 1989; Larke, 1990). Teacher preparation programs must be altered if teachers are to be prepared to work with diverse students in urban classrooms. Recent research studies (Cooper, Beare, & Thonnan, 1990; Larke, Wiseman, & Bradely, 1990) have shown that early clinical experiences and mentoring with diverse ethnic groups at the preservice level changes both teacher attitudes and expectations of ethnically-diverse students. In a study to determine why urban teachers quit, Haberman and Rickards identified three areas that need to be improved in preparing teachers to work in urbaIl schools: (a) working with students of various backgrounds, (b) maintaining discipline, and (c) working with underachieving students. Each of the above was given as a reason and a problem encountered by urban teachers who quit teaching in urban schools. Teacher preparation programs need to give special attention to each. Preparing urban teachers can be accomplished if the educational community is willing to make some fundamental changes; many of these can be implemented with existing personnel and resources. Some recommendations for preparing teachers to work with urban students are presented below.

Recommendations 1. Publicize slltcessful programs. Successful urban programs rarely are acknowledged in the popular press or even in education classes. The negative press has had an overwhelming influence on the public's peruption (as well as teacher candidates') of all urban schools as places of chaos, crime, and ignorance. Fear of urban schools is pervasive in this society (Habennan, 1989; Montero-Sieburth, 1989). Acknowledgments of the positive aspects and accomplishments of schools in urban areas are usually relegated to presentations made at professional conferences and infrequent papers published in select professional journals. As helpful as both of these are in presenting the favorable aspects of urban schools, too few people are privileged to this infonnation. The positive coverage of urban schools should eminate from both the schools themselves 31 GATEways to Teacher Education

and schools of education. The "good" in urban schools must be recognized along with the "bad." Millions of children attend urban schools, and they along with their parents and teachers need to understand that school is a place for learning and accomplishments. Teacher preparation programs can establish partnerships and early clinical experiences with urban schools to allow teacher candidates to have ftrsthand knowledge of working with urban learners. Tutoring, mentoring, and internships that allow for interactjons between potential teachers and learners help both to learn to work together. Urban teachers need to work with preservice teachers and teacher educators to share their teaching expertise, especially their techniques for maintaining discipline and motivating learners. positive publicity may be one of the simplest ways to help prepare urban teachers. 2. Infuse regular teacber education programs with multicultural and multi-ethnic as well as dominant cultural curricula materials. Recognizing cultural diversity is not a passing fad, schools of education can no longer offer a single course on multicultural education and expect reachers to embrace and respect cultural differences. Many new urban teachers will have only limited knowledge of children who do not share their values, culture, or ethnic heritage (Larke, 1990). According to Grant (1989), most existing discussions on cultural differences in teacher education classes are ineffective for new urban teachers. He asserts: While in college, they probably heard afew lectures on the "minority child," the "at-risk student," and the "second-language student." But they probably didn't take those lectures seriously. They may have found it interesting to hear about "those other people," and they probably retained enough of the information in those lectures to regurgitate it on subsequent exams (p. 765).

To improve cultural awareness, teachers need to understand the history, literature, and the socio-class status of various groups. This understanding will not come about from selecting a month or a few weeks of the year to acknowledge that diverse ethnic groups exist. However, this can be accomplished in the regular teacher education classes through reading and discussing works that reflect the diverse groups in America. A few minutes spent in any university library will reveal a wealth of material. As Fordham and Ogbu (1986) suggest, when educators seek to understand the impact of culture on students' academic efforts and success, they can help these students achieve. When preparing course syllabi, teacher educators can include citations reflecting cultural diversity. Preservice teachers can be asked to read, review, and discuss these works as a part of researching the professional literature. Discussions with Vo)wne IV, Nwnber 1 32

successful urban teachers about their work and students will also provide preservice teachers with insights into working with children who do not share the teacher's values and beliefs. Teacher preparation programs should prepare potential teachers to become sensitive to cultural differences as well as _ individual differences. Teacher preparation programs should encourage student teacher memberships in professional associations; this broadens their knowledge of their disciplines, the learning process, lmd the teaching profession. Successful activities used by this author have included (a) preservice teachers visiting sChools and interviewing teachers, (b) inservice teachers visiting methods courses to discuss successful teaching approaches, (c) preservice teachers attending professional conferences in which successful programs have been described, (d) preservice teachers inteviewing students to have first-hand knowledge of their impressions of schools, and (e) preservice teachers serving as both volunteer and paid tutors with children from inner-city communities.

3. Focus on preparing teachers to teach content and metacognitive skills. In a discussion of what do teachers need to know in order to be successful in the urban classroom, Shulman (1989) proposes the following: (a) teachers must know their content, (b) they must know the curriculum materials, (c) they must know how to organize and manage a classroom, (d) they must have a repetoire of strategies to teach specific topics, (e) they must be able to use a variety of approaches including lecture, recitation, cooperative learning, discovery learning, and project development, (1) they must be able to think about and present the ideas of a text to students in a variety of ways, (g) they must be able to assess students' understandings of a concept before, during, and after insttuction, (h) they must understand the importance of students' backgrounds in learning new ideas, (i) they must be able to effecti'Vely use motivation sttategies, and (j) they must be able to relate to children of different ethnic and cultura1 backgrounds. Ornstein and Levine (1989) maintain that teacher education does little to help preservice teachers acquire the knowledge of what works so they can use these techniques effectively in urban schools. Teacher ttaining programs should emphasize metacognitive sttategies as a means of helping urban teachers improve the learning capabilities of their students. Many of these students are at risk of academic failure, and teachers must be equipped to help them succeed. As Haberman and Rickards (1990) indicated, urban teachers need to help their students overcome learning problems that have resulted in many of these students becoming underachievers. Metacognition focuses on learning about one's own learning. Learners become aware of themselves, the learning task, and the text that they must learn. Using metacognitive sttategies allows learners to be active not passive 33 GA1EwaYllO Teacher Education

participants and helps students to monitor their own understanding (Baker & Brown, 1984; Weinstein, 1987). Teachers preparing for urban schools need to help their students learn to succeed in the academic environment. Many of these students will not have the academic background or home environment that enhances the self-directed learning required in school settings (Welch, Hodges, Warden, 1989). Learning success will depend upon students being able to recognize their own learning strengths and weaknesses as well as use strategies to improve their own independent learning. Metacognitive strategies that allow students to improve their reading, writing, listening abilities, as well as study skills are sorely needed by many urban children. Preservice teacher programs need to help teachers equip urban learners with the academic tools needed for learning success. Metacognitive strategies that help students improve their own learning are included in Figure 1. These strategies are designed to help students comprehend better (REAP, ReQuest, and Text Lookbacks), improve their writing (Summary Writing), listen more effectively (Listen-read-discuss), and monitor their learning (Time management and What-I-Know). Even though these strategies can be used by any student, many of our urban students struggle to gain confidence in their ability to learn and need these techniques to ensure learning success.

Summary This discussion on preparing urban teachers does not ignore the responsibility of urban schools and communities to provide a safe, supportive, learning environment for teachers and students. However, teacher education programs must also assume responsibility in improving urban schools by preparing the teachers who will work in them. Herman (1977) reminds teachers that (a) teaching urban children to read, write, and speak the English language is a primary goal, (b) teaching in innercity schools requires freshness and vigor of mind, and (c) teaching urban children, like teaching non-urban children, requires the "ability to draw out the intelligence and fashion the character of young human beings in the process of development" (pg. 37). The job for teacher education programs is to help preservice teachers develop the knowledge, skills, and attitudes to work with the diverse student populations that are in our urban schools. +

Volume IV, Number 1

Figure 1 Metacognitive Strategies

ReQuest Discussion Strategy which moves a student beyond literal comprehension (Manzo, 1985).

Time Management Scheduling procedures that allow students to organize and conb'Ol their time (Snider, 1983).

L.ten-Read-Disc:uss Otganized listening activity that improves comprehension (Alvermann, 1987).

Summary Writing Step-by step approach to writing summaries (Hare & Borchardt, 1984).

Text Lookbaeks Recalling information through frequent rereadings of text (Gamer, Hare, Alexander,Haynes, Winograd, 1984).

REAP Reading, Encoding, Annotating and Pondering the author's ideas (Banet and Manzo, 1976).

What-I-Know Self-monitoring strategy that allows for ~lIing background and establishing purposes for learning (Heller, 1986).

3S GATBwaYI 10 Teacher Education

References Alvennann, D. (1987). Discussion strategies for content area reading. In D. Alvennann, D. Dillion, & D. O'Brien, (Eds.), Using discussion to promote reading comprehension (pp. 34-42). Newwark, DE: International Reading Association. Association of Teacher Educators (1991). Restructuring the education of teachers: Report of the commission on the education of teachers into the 21st Century. Reston, VA: Author. Baker, L. & Brown, A. (1984). Metacognitive skills and reading. In P.D. Pearson (Ed.), Handbook of reading research (pp. 353-394). New York: Longman Publishers. Carnegie Forum on Education and the Economy. (1986, May). A nation prepared: Teachers/or the 21st Century: The report of the taskforce on teaching as a profession. New York: Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching. Charner, I. & Rolzinski, C. (Eds.) (1987). Responding to the educational needs oftoday's workplace. New Directionsfor continuing education, No. 33, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Cooper, A., Beare, P., & Thorman, 1. (1990). Preparing teachers for diversity: A comparison of student teaching experiences in Minnesota and South Texas. Action in Teacher Education. 12(3), 1-4. Cuban, L. (1989). The 'at-risk' label and the problem of urban school reform. Phi Delta Kappan, 70(10), 780-784. Eanet, M. & Manzo, A. (1976). REAP: A strategy for improving reading! writing/study skills. Journal ofReading. 19,647-652. Fordham, S. & Ogbu, 1. (1986). Black students' school success: Coping with the "Burden of acting white. '" The Urban Review, 18(3), 176-205. Garner, R., Hare, V., Haynes, J. & Winograd, P. (1984). Inducing use of a textlookback strategy among unsuccessful readers. American Educational Research Journal. 21, 789-798. Goodlad,l. (1990). Better teachers for our nation's schools. Phi Delta Kappan. 72(3), 184-194. Grant, C. (1989). Urban teachers: Their new colleagues and curriculum. Phi Delta Kappan. 70(10), 764-770. Grant, C. & Secada, W. (1989). Preparing teachers for diversity. In W. Houston, M. Haberman, & 1. Sikula (Eds). Handbook ofResearch on Teacher Education. New York: Macmillan. Haberman, M. (1987). Recruiting and selecting teachers for urban schools. ERIC/CUE Urban Diversity Series, No. 95. New York: ERIC/ Association of Teacher Educators. Haberman, M. & Rickards, W. (1990). Urban teachers who quit; Why they leave and what they do. Urban Education, 25(3), 297-303. Volume IV, Number 1

Hale-Benson, J. (1988). Black childrtn: Their roots, culture, and learning styles. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press. Hare, V. &. Borchardt, K. (1984). Direct instruction of summarization skills. Reading Research Quarterly, 20, 62-78. Heller, M. (1986). How do you know what you know? Metacognitive modeling in the content areas. Journal 0/ Reading, 29,415-422. Herman, B. (1977). Winchester: A community school for the urbanadv~taged. Fastback 101. Indiana: Phi Delta Kappan Educational Foundation. Larke, P. (1990). Cultural diversity awareness inventory: Assessing the sensitivity of preservice teachers. Action in Teacher Education, 12(3), 23-30. Larke, P., Wiseman, D., &. Bradely, C. (1990). The minority mentorship project: Changing attitudes of preservice teachers for diverse classrooms. Action in Teacher Education, 12(3),5-12. Manzo, A. (1985). Expansion modules for the Request, CAT, GRP, and REAP reading/studying procedures. Journal 0/Reading, 28,498-502. Montero-Siebmth, M. (1989). Restructuring teachers' knowledge for urban settings. The Journal 0/Negro Education, 58(3), 332-344. Ornstein, A. &. Levine, D. (1989). Social class, race, and school achievement: Problems and prospects. Journal o/Teacher Education, 40(5), 17-23. Rist, R. (1970). Student social class and teacher expectations: The selffu]fj])jng prophecy in ghetto education. Harvard Educational Review, 40(3), 411-449. Schulman, J. (1989). Blue freeways: Traveling the alternate route with big-city teacher trainees. Journal o/Teacher Education, 40(5), 2-8. Snider, J. (1983). How to study in high school. Rhode Island: Jamestown Publishers. The Holmes Group. (1986). Tomorrow's Teachers. East Lansing, MI: Author. Tillman, J. (1989). Preparing effective classroom teachers for urban schools: A quintessential role for NCATE. Action in Teacher Education, 11(2),39-40. Walberg, H., Bakalsi, J., Bast, J., &. Baer, S. (1989). Reconstructing the Nation's Worst Schools. Phi Delta Kappan, 70(10), 802-805. Weiner, L. (1990). Preparing the Brightest/or Urban Schools Urban Education, 25(3), 258-273. Weinstein, C. (1987). Fostering learning autonomy through the use of learning strategies. Journalo/Reading, 30, 590-595. Welch, 0., Hodges, C., &. Warden, K. (1989). Developing the scholar's ethos in minority high school students: The vita1link to academic achievement. Urban Education, 24(1), 59-76.

37 GATBways to Teacher Education

â&#x20AC;˘ ear Mr. Seer tary # adapted from a paper presented by Jerry Robbins at the 1990 meeting of the Southeastern Association o/Teacher Educators on behalf0/ an anonymous, eccentric academician whose tongue is in his cheek -part 0/ the time

Jerry Robbins, Dean, College ofEducation, Eastern Michigan University Mr. Lamar Alexander Secretary of Education Washington, D.C. Dear Mr. Secretary:

The files in your office will show that I wrote to your third predecessor, Mr. Bell, in 1985, although the only response that I got was a letter acknowledging receipt from the Administrative Assistant to the Deputy Assistant Under Secretary for Mail Room Services. I wrote at that time a critique of A Nation at Risk, a work which has many fallacies. As an example, one conclusion in this report was that schools are dreadful places for children. Another conclusion was that children ought to spend more time in school. I wrote to say that it seemed to me that, if schools were dreadful places for children, we should be talking about sbortenjni the school day and the school year, so as to reduce the amount of damage being done to the kids. Your files will show that I wrote again in 1988 to your second predecessor, Mr. Bennett. Again, I heard only from the same person in the mail room. Among other things, I was writing to commend Mr. Bennett on his support of the fine arts through his eloquent statement that "Take it from ...a soul that will not cease longing to hear Ritchie Balens and Buddy Holly just one more time, that rock 'n roll and a good education are not incompatible." By the way, later, while Mr. Bennett was our "Drug Czar," he was quoted as saying that he had asked Roger Rabbitt to intercede in a con troverVolume IV, Number 1 38

sial matter. What has Mr. Bennett been smoking lately? Undoubtedly, such approaches as these are what persuaded the University of Southern Mississippi to have Mr. Bennett on its faculty at one time. I wrote to your immediate predecessor, Mr. Lauro Cavazos, again with no substantive answer. I wrote to comment on the bad press that Mr. Cavazos received while he was in office. A wire-service repon gave him an F among the members of the cabinet, describing him as "low energy" and "invisible in the Cabinet." . But Mr. Cavazos brought these things on himself. For example, he continued the use of the infamous "Wall Chart" of the progress of states in education. I prefer to think of this as the "Off-The Wall-Chart." For example, Mr. Cavazos used data from this chart to argue that the greatest single possible reform was school choice. He pointed to Minnesota as an example of the success of school choice and he suggested that its choice law accounted for it having the lowest dropout rate in the country and a high average on collegeenttance test scores. I observed to then-Secretary Cavazos that Minnesota had the lowest dropout rate long before passing its school-choice law which has been little used, anyway. I have read that, since enacting the choice law, Minnesota's test scores have lOne down. Former Secretary Cavazos also had bad press on the student loan business. His predecessor, Mr. Bennett, taught us to look to the classics for solutions to our problems. Let's take a "classic" at random, such as the story of Epictetus and his pupil Anian. Epictetus - that marvelous Greek philosopher - born about A.D. 50, shortly before George Bums entered show business - was a slave as a boy, and it's hard for slaves to get student loans. Anian, too, did not receive any student loans, as far as we know, because, like Epictetus, he also lacked a last name, one of the fltSt things most bankers ask. Somehow, I don't see a solution to the student loan mess in this quick look at the classics. I conceded to Secretary Cavazos that the student loan situation was complicated. It seemed obvious to me that he needed a blue-ribbon group to advise him on this matter. I suggested the creation of an advisory group to be called the Federal Financial Forum for the Future. I observed that we couldn't call that group the "4-F," because that sounds like an undesirable Selective Service classification--or a very strange shoe size. So, I suggested that we create an appropriate acronym by taking the firstlWo letters of each word and, with a bit of liberty, call this group the "FeFiFoFum." However, if the "FeFiFoFum" didn't come up with a solution, I recommended to Mr. Cavazos the services of the South Carolina Home for the Befuddled - which is located in Columbia - where the need is the greatest. I now write to you, Mr. Secretary Alexander, out of continuing concern about the so-called reform movement. The reform movement in education in this country has gone berserk, and it gets "berserker" all the time. Starting 39 GATEways to Teacher Education

with A Nation at Risk in 1983, we have had over 400 reform reports issuedso far- with no end in sight. At the national level, we've had the reports of the Carnegie Forum, the National Governor's Council, The Holmes Group, the presidential summit (which wasn't attended by Secretary Cavazos), the report of the National Assessment of Educational Progress (Acceleratina Academic Achievement), and a host of others. At regional levels, we've had reports from groups like the Southern Regional Education Board. Most, if not all, of the states have had at least one "blue ribbon" commission studying education and promoting reform. We've had proposals to reform elementary education and secondary education and vocational education. There have been proposals to reform higher education in general and various portions of it in particular - the undergraduate curriculum, the liberal arts core, teacher education, and administtator preparation - to name just a few. In some cases we are called on to constitute reform in other ways, such as to reform science teaching or geography insttuction or writing insttuction. Now we have before us a bizarre proposal in the form of "America 2000," around which we are called to build reforms. Among other things, "America 2()()()" assumes that American business and other private donors will furnish at least $150 million to make this plan work. Think of that! Many segments of the American corporate community now work hard to keep their school taxes low, so it's difficult to see the motivation for the corporate community to cut profits even thinner. And, under "America 2000," we are to develop a whole new national achievement test sttucture. It seems that if we just test kids enough, all will get right with the school systems. Again, it is proposed that we create differential pay for teachers, although, again, it is not addressed who will pay the administtative costs and the additional salary money. The merit pay scheme has fallen by the wayside in a number of states that have already considered it seriously, including your home state of Tennessee, Mr. Secretary. Under "America 2000" every congressional district will get a bit of "pork," with a "New American School" to be created in each. Just what is it, Mr. Secretary, that is supposed to happen in these schools that isn't already happening in good schools across the country? Only a tiny fraction of the kids can attend these schools, so what happens to the other kids? Is it assumed that American teachers and principals don't know how to do a good job and have it be shown. That assumption may be ttue if the parts of the program supporting alternative certification for teachers and principals come to pass as well. If we are to let virtually anyone off the streets into the classrooms and the offices of our schools, it's easy to see why we would need some place to show them what classrooms and school buildings are supposed to be like. You have been quoted, Mr. Secretary, as favoring extending the school Volmne IV, Nmnber 1 40

day and school year by making such ~xtensions optional and by charging parents for the extra instruction. Let's see. That means that parents who can afford to pay will be the ones to buy extra education for their children and those who can't afford to pay will do without. The rich get richer. I can just see the concerned, but financially struggling, parent who says, "I have $104.63 in my savings account; how many extra hours of schooling can I buy for my bright kid?" I can just see the wealthy parent who says, "How much would it cost to take the brat off my hands 24 hours a day, seven days a week?" I can just see the reconfkeeping involved in dealing with the 9th grader who has a "B" in 9,872 minutes of first-year Spanish and the other 9th grader who has an "A" in 9,000 minutes of first-year Spanish. Which one speaks the most Spanish? Or do we determine that by a written, standardized test? It wouldn't be so bad if these calls for reform were consistent with each other. But they aren't. They are not only inconsistent, but they often contradict each other. The great philosopher Erma Bombeck said that the greatest hoax that Madison Avenue has played on this country is that, with pantyhose, "one size fits all." I argue that the same applies to education - anyone socalled reform does not fit all states, does not fit all school disbicts, does not fit all teachers, does not fit all students, and does not fit all teacher preparation programs. , ~eform is in a mess. Let's start with the teachers. In Texas and Arkansas; in the name of reform it was determined that all that stood in the way of near-perfection in the schools was the need to weed out the illiterates in the classrooms. This has been done - on a one-time basis - by giving all teachers in those states a literacy test and by not renewing the contracts of those who couldn't prove that they could read and write. This has now been accomplished. Interestingly, almost everyone passed the test--except for a few coaches and superintendents - so presumably all is well in those states. Educational reform has been accomplished - or has it? In New Jersey and several other states, the royal road to reform of teaching has been to require all incoming teachers to have a baccalaureate degree in a traditional academic subject. So, the best preparation in abose states for teaching kindergarten, for example, is to have a degree in French literature. Reform is well under way as the teaching force changes--or is it? In some states, it has been determined that the way to get better teachers is to raise the standards for entry into undergraduate teacher education programs, such as to require a 3.0 GPA. Other states, though (Texas and Virginia, for example), appear to have determined that undergraduate courses in pedagogy are harmful to prospective teachers. In such states, there has been legislative or board action to prevent damage to prospective teachers by prohibiting them from taking very much pedagogy during their tender undergraduate years. Georgia - which vies with Florida to be the first to adopt many things 41 GATEways to Teacher Education

that come along in the reform movement - and states a lot of them - has, in a wonderful fit of illogic, determined that if you want to be a teacher of mathematics through conventional processes, there are a lot of screening, safeguards, and hurdles to jump. But, if you want to become a teacher of mathematics in Georgia through non-conventional processes, all you have to do is have a bachelor's degree in math, pass a test to show that you know as much math as the kids, get someone to hire you, and take some staff development courses. We are in the process of populating the classrooms of Georgia with two very different kinds of teachers, both kinds there as a result of public policy decisions. Wouldn't it be nice if we knew that one set of public policy decisions was better than the other or if either set of public policy decisions was any good? In Tennessee and Alabama, among other states, there was a playing around with the idea of a "career ladder," a thinly disguised method of merit pay. In concept, this notion holds that a major way to improve the schools is to pay a relatively few highly-productive teachers more money than the other teaChers. This notion assumes, like Reaganomics, that there will be a "trickle down" and that somehow all the other teachers will become motivated to do more and better. The cost of establishing and maintaining the "career ladder," along with the cost of the rewards to a few, does not seem to be reasonable in terms of the effects produced. To raise the amount of funding to the level where appreciable numbers of deserving teachers can be affected seems to require considerably more resources than are in sight. Fortunately, the states considering this notion seem to have come to their senses. Unfortunately, you, Mr. Secretary, have raised this matter again, as part of the "America 2000" Education Strategy. The voucher system or choice plan under way in Minnesota and under serious consideration or implementation in such other states as Arkansas is a thinly disguised way of taking teacher's jobs away from them. If kids and their parents don't like their school or teacher, they take their voucher and go somewhere else. Schools and teachers that have no kids left presumable close down. I suppose those displaced teachers get hired somewhere else (remember, we have a teacher shortage) and the process repeats indefinitely, with little that is changed except for the expense involved in administering the voucher system. Unfortunately, Mr. Secretary, the "choice" system is one of the central features of your administration's "America 2000" proposal. David Imig, AACTE Executive Director, quoted his second-grade teacher friend Joanne as saying, "So, the kids whose parents have the time and smarts to enroll their kids elsewhere will be pulled out of this school leaving me with the kids who either shouldn't or don't want to be here?" Werner Rogers, Georgia's State Superintendent, is concerned that the "choice proposal will only widen the gap between the opportunities available Volume IV. Number 1 42

to the haves and have-nots. School choice inevitably would foster inequities among schools, a concept struck down by the U.S. Supreme Court in 1954. The inequities of choice would be based on class, not race." Lewis Finch, a Colorado superintendent, told Congress that "unrestricted choice could dash all hope for equal education opportunity for many students." Richard Elmore of Harvard holds that "competition is not a very influential factor in improving educational quality." We also hear discussions of the establishment of proprietary K-12 schools, to be funded not only by the vouchers under "choice," but through advertising of the sponsoring company's (and other's) products and services to the youngsters. Mr. Secretary, we hear a lot from your administtation about the need to teach values in our schools. Values are as much "caught" as they are "taught. tt Are the values reflected in the "choice" movement the ones we want to inculcate in our youth? The Holmes Group and the Carnegie Forum have determined that beginning teachers should have an academic baccalaureate degree and a pedagogical masters degree. When you figure out how that would work in practice - at least in Georgia - it would have the interesting effect that these beginning masters degree teachers would have lm1h less subject matter and less pedagogy than is now the case for master's degree teachers. So here is an element of reform that is, for Heaven's sake, saying, at least in the effect if would have in Georgia. that .badlless pedagogy and less subject matter are desirable - a classic case of the application of the Law of Unintended Consequences. Has anybody bothered to ask the hiring officials what they think about such a situation? How many districts want to hire non-experienced masters degree teachers, less well prepared than current masters degree teachers, and pay them on the masters pay scale? In Georgia and elsewhere in our pan of the countty, very few, I suspect The silliness compounds, Mr. Secretary, when you relate supply and demand to the proposals. The teacher sho~ge, acute now in many states and headed for acuteness throughout the countty, is one that will be worsened by these proposals. What beginning teacher, acting rationally on his/her best economic interests will pay the expenses and forego a year's income for a fiveyear program instead of a four-year program if she/he has a choice in the matter? In the name of reform, it is being proposed to make a critical teacher shortage much worse. The Carnegie forum has determined that a national certification will do the trick for the improvement of the profession and through that, the improvement of education. The Carnegie Forum proposes to spend millions to reinvent essentially the Georgia TPAI and its clones in other southern states. Interestingly, Georgia, having reformed education through the TPAI for over a 43 GATEway. 10 Teacher Education

decade, has now abandoned it Nevertheless, millions of dollars are being spent to create a comprehensive perfonnance evaluation process to be administered to a tiny fraction of the millions of teachers in the country, so that, at great cost and expense, teaching will become "professionalize" and all will be right with the world. The Holmes Group says that professional development schools are a major part of the answer, at least for the small portion of teachers that come from major research universities. Such a pity that we have abandoned all but a few of our old "laboratory schools," now that Judy Lanier and company tells us that we should re-create them. NCATE says that having a well-defined knowledge base is a major part of what is needed. This is an interesting idea that deserves to be tested. It is, however, not unlike the notion of taking massive doses of Vitamin C to prevent colds; it probably won't hurt anything, it probably won't do you much good over whatever you are doing now, and you might think that it helps. Surrounding all of these so-called refonns is the notion that teachers and prospective teachers should be tested and evaluated much more than has been the case in the past--and that the results of this testing will weed out the incompetents. One part of the refonn movement is telling us that we need better teachers and, if the standards and the screening devices have the effect of producing fewer teachers, so be it Other voices are telling us about the great national teacher shortage that is upon us. Mr. Secretary, shouldn't these views be reconciled before we march off on 路some new major set of public policies? . Similarly, one branch of the refonn movement is calling for more minorities in teaching and another branch of the reform movement is calling for a number of steps that have the effect of screening out relatively large numbers of minorities. Mr. Secretary, these views must be reconciled. Poor kids. We've worked for decades to reduce the drop-out rate. Now many of the reformers, including Mr. Bennett, your second predecessor, have proposed to put into place for everyone a traditional, college-bound curriculum which many of the kids can't handle. Today, we have students who don't belong in traditional high school classes and don't want to be there. And we wonder why they don't do well on tests. And yet your proposal, Mr. Secretary, calls for more testing but no tangible support for remedial or developmental or alternative teaching - except to say that parents should be able to "purchase" it.

Interesting, much of the impetus for a more rigorous secondary curriculum is coming from the business community, which wants a better-trained work force and which has steered many of the refonn movements to date. However, this may be one of those movements that is counter-intuitive; that is, a drastically more rigorous curriculum may have the effect of "pushing" kids out of turning kids off from school at an even earlier age, not to mention the Volume IV, Number 1 44

effects of the academic pressure on ad,?lescent suicide, drug and alcohol problems, and other methods of withdrawal and escapism. There could be in the future an even less able work force if we implement the wrong amount or kind of curriculum change. On the other hand, we are told by refonners that more attention to reading and writing is the answer, on another hand that more mathematics and science is the answer, on another that Latin and the classics are what is needed, on another that we must make children economically or geographically literate, and on yei another - a favorite of your second predecessor, Mr. Bennett - that we don't give up enough attention to the humanities. The National Geographic Society found that 75 percent of the people it surveyed couldn't find the Persian Gulf, nearly half couldn't find Central America and more than half couldn't come close to guessing the current U.S. Population. (Not even the Census Bureau knows what the 1990 U.S. population was!) H that sounds discouraging, Mr. Secretary, cheer up. The results are almost the same as those from a test given 42 years ago, back in the "good ole days" of American public education. We may be as dumb as we were then, but at least we aren't getting any dumber, and we have raised far more and diverse students to that level. Other studies show similar results in subjects other than geography. The "rising tide of mediocrity" - averageness - floats all ships. I don't think that prayer iil the schools for kids is the issue, Mr. Secretary; I think that prayer for the teachers and administrators, seeking Divine Revelation as to what sense to make of all this, is of great importance. Whatever one is for or against in education can be found somewhere in the refonn movement. All this is too much. Mr. Secretary, read "Reforming Again, Again, and Again" by Larry Cuban in the January 1990 Educational Researcher. Next to none of the so-called refonn movement is research-based or even good long-range public policy. It reminds me of the famous saying from your fellow Republican, President Dwight D. Eisenhower, that "Things are more like they are now than they ever have been before." Such conttadictory and consistent recommendations can't lead to good public policy as to how we are to have better schools and better teaching and learning. Mr. Secretary, let's stop the teacher-bashing that is going on. Products of the American public school system walked off with a disproportionate share of the most recent Nobel Prizes - as they always do. Products of the American public school systems have put man-made objects at the edges of the solar system. Americans are reading twice as many books as they were 10 years ago and there are twice as many general circulation magazines. Attendance at museums, art galleries, and cultural performing events breaks new records every year. We may not be able to fmd the Persian Gulf on a map, but almost all Americans are aware of the problems with the ozone and two out of three know what acid rain is. Schools are reaching hundreds of thousands of students 4S GATEways to Teacher Education

that, in fonner generations, would have been out on the streets or in the " fields. The perceived decline in ACT and SAT scores can largely be explained by the changing pool of test takers. Read the"October 1990 issue of the Phi Delta Kappan, Mr. Secretary, if you contin"ue to be worried about this. The PSAT nonning sample has remained stable since 1960. Mr. Secretary, I am furious ,bout the teacher bashing that occurs in Acceleratini Academic Achievement, which was funded by your office and releases not many months ago with considerable fanfare. On page 66, half the kids reponed that they didn't do experimental things in science; the teachers were chastised for poor instructional practice. On page 67, half the teachers reported that they had no access to science laboratory equipment. Comment: silence. Mr. Secretary for heavens sake, do something to get those teachers some science equipment instead of blaming the teachers for poor instructional practices. On page 55, teachers were criticized for poor methodology in teaching reading. The stated source of the information for this criticism? A group of 4th graders! Many of us in education don't even have confidence in our bosses or our students in education to be valid evaluators or instructional practice, much less 4th graders! On page 60, teachers of writing at the 8th grade level were criticized for their lack of assigning and grading expository writing. Was there a comment about how much teacher time this would take? Of course not. On page 72, "Information from (several) studies suggests that social studies classes tend to be teacher-directed, with most infonnation coming from textbooks, lectures, and films." One article was cited as the source of this information, and it appeared in 1983 in the Journal ofReading. Mr. Secretary, again I call for a reform of reform. I call for orderly action and transition. But we need your leadership, Mr. Secretary, to bring it about. Mr. Secretary, what this country needs is not a good five-cent cigar, but a refonn of reforms. (I use the "five cent cigar" figure of speech, Mr. Secretary, to show that I am familiar with the kinds of items that appear in "The list" in Hirsch's Cultural Literacy. Demonstrations of this familiarity should cause you to take my suggestions seriously.) Mr. Secretary, what we most need is an office in the federal Department of Education that is totally devoted to the reform movement and through which all federal and national reform interests are channelled. In particular, I urge you to create, for this purpose, an "Educational Innovative and Enhancement of Instruction Office." For short, I will refer to this as the "E.I.E.I.O." I further suggest that the "E.I.E.I.O" work under the direction of an advisory board, to be called the Council for Reform and Progress, or C.R.A.P., with one major advocate of each of the major reform thrusts that have been identified so far. Then, you give the C.R.A.P. two tasks to accomplish. The Volmne IV, Nmnber 1

first task would be to determine the priority order for refonn actions to take place. The second task would be to determine a generally acceptable way to pay for each such refonn action. Let the C.R.A.P. supported by the E.I.E.I.O, work on these two tasks for, say, the next twenty years, at which time the C.R.A.P. would issue a handsomely bound, slick-paper report. In the meantime, Mr. Secretary, send money to families, kids, classrooms, building, districts, states, and teacher preparati~n programs to help do better those things we already know and agree on that are of value in the education process: Then Mr. Secretary, get out of the way of the teachers, administrators, and teacher educators who are building, as fast as resources penn it, the finest educational system for all children that the world has ever known.â&#x20AC;˘

47 GATEways to Teacher Education

GATEways to Teacher Education GATEways to Teacher Education is published jointly by the Georgia Association of Teacher Educators and Georgia State University College of Education. The journal is published annually and is devoted to the discussion of theory, practice, research, and issues related to teacher education, including teaching and learning, induction, in-service education, and pre-service education. Views expressed in articles are not necessarily those of the editor, nor are they necessarily the position of the two publishing organizations. The cost of a copy of the journal is $6.00. The following are the criteria for submitting a manuscript: APA style not more than 15 pages, double-spaced four copies clipped, not stapled together one copy submitted on floppy computer disc using WordPerfect or compatible word processing author's name on the title page only title included on the flfSt page of the manuscript absttact not to exceed 150 words (two copies) autobiographical sketch of the author(s) (3-5 sentences) 3x5 index card with complete name, address, and telephone number(s) of the contact person

Submit manuscripts to Edith Guyton, Editor, GATEways to Teacher Education, Georgia State University, Department of Early Childhood Education, University Plaza, Atlanta, GA 30303-3083.

Volume IV, Number 1