WHAT DO WE KNOW ABOUT THE CHARACTERISTICS OF GOOD TEACHER EDUCATION PROGRAMS?

1. WHAT DO WE KNOW ABOUT THE CHARACTERISTICS OF GOOD TEACHER EDUCATION PROGRAMS? KEN ZEICHNER UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-MADISON MAY, 2006

2. THE HOPES OF SOME THAT RESEARCH ON TEACHING AND TEACHER EDUCATION WILL BE ABLE TO PROVIDE CLEAR ANSWERS ABOUT WHAT WE SHOULD DO IN TEACHER EDUCATION (EVIDENCE-BASED OR RESEARCH-BASED PRACTICE).

3. THE INFLUENCE OF RESEARCH ON POLICY AND PRACTICE • ALTHOUGH RESEARCH CAN MAKE IMPORTANT CONTRIBUTIONS TO POLICY AND PRACTICE IN TEACHER EDUCATION, ITS INFLUENCE IS MEDIATED BY MORAL, ETHICAL, AND POLITICAL CONSIDERATIONS. • RESEARCH CAN HELP US THINK ABOUT TEACHER EDUCATION IN USEFUL WAYS, BUT IT CANNOT TELL US WHAT TO DO EVEN UNDER THE BEST OF CIRCUMSTANCES.

4. JOHN GOODLAD, 1990 CONDITIONS OF EXEMPLARY TEACHER EDUCATION PROGRAMS ARE TIED TO MORAL POSITIONS ABOUT THE NATURE OF TEACHING, LEARNING, SCHOOLING AND SOCIETY AND ARE NOT SUBJECT TO PROOF BY EMPIRICAL TESTS.

5. TEACHING AND TEACHER EDUCATION ARE INHERENTLY COMPLEX AND ARE NOT REDUCIBLE TO SIMPLE PRESCRIPTIONS FOR PRACTICE.

6. COMMENTS ON THE SCIENCE OF MEDICINE WE LOOK FOR MEDICINE TO BE AN ORDERLY FIELD OF KNOWLEDGE AND PROCEDURE. BUT IT IS NOT. IT IS AN IMPERFECT SCIENCE, AN ENTERPRISE OF CONSTANTLY CHANGING KNOWLEDGE, UNCERTAIN INFORMATION, FALLIBLE INDIVIDUALS, AND AT THE SAME TIME LIVES ON THE LINE. THERE IS A SCIENCE IN WHAT WE DO, YES, BUT ALSO HABIT, INTUITION, AND SOMETIMES PLAIN OLD GUESSING. THE GAP BETWEEN WHAT WE KNOW AND WHAT WE AIM FOR PERSISTS. AND THIS GAP COMPLICATES EVERYTHING WE DO (GWANDE, 2002).

7. WHAT MAKES A TEACHER EDUCATION PROGRAM GOOD?

8. VIEW OF TEACHING AND LEARNING • TEACHERS AS ADAPTIVE EXPERTS VS. TEACHERS AS COMPLIANT IMPLEMENTERS OF SCRIPTS (THE “GOOD ENOUGH TEACHER.”). • LEARNING AS PERFORMANCE ON STANDARDIZED ACHIEVEMENT TESTS VS. LEARNING AS MUCH MORE THAN TEST SCORES (PROBLEM SOLVING, AESTHETICS, CIVIC, SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT…)

9. OVERSIMPLIFIED VIEW OF EXCELLENCE-#1 ATTEMPTING TO CONNECT THE SURFACE FEATURES OF TEACHER EDUCATION PROGRAMS (E.G., THEIR LENGTH) TO VARIOUS TEACHER AND STUDENT OUTCOMES WITHOUT ACCOUNTING FOR THE CHARACTERISTICS THAT CANDIDATES BRING TO THEIR PREPARATION.

10. RAYMOND AND FLETCHER STUDY OF TFA 2002 (HOUSTON) MANY QUESTIONS REMAIN AND IT WOULD BE IMPRUDENT TO EXTRAPOLATE TOO GENERALLY FROM THIS ANALYSIS. WE CANNOT SAY, FOR EXAMPLE, WHAT ASPECTS OF TFA AND OTHER TEACHERS ACCOUNT FOR THE DIFFERENCES IN THE PERFORMANCE OF THEIR STUDENTS. THE EVALUATION FOCUSED ON TFA AS A WHOLE, SO WE DO NOT KNOW IF THE EFFECTIVENESS OF TFA TEACHERS IS DUE TO THE TYPE OF PEOPLE BEING RECRUITED, THE DIFFERENCE IN ACADEMIC BACKGROUND, THE SUPPORT PROVIDED BY TFA, THE ACP TRAINING, OR A COMBINATION OF FACTORS.”

11. OVERSIMPLIFIED VIEW OF EXCELLENCE-#2 ATTEMPTING TO DEFINE THE CHARACTERISTICS OF GOOD TEACHER EDUCATION PROGRAMS BY THE MERE PRESENCE OR ABSENCE OF CERTAIN PROGRAM ELEMENTS WITHOUT ADDRESSING HOW THESE ELEMENTS ARE DEFINED AND USED AND FOR WHAT PURPOSES.

12. ELABORATING PROGRAM ELEMENTS- MENTORING • HOW MENTORS ARE CHOSEN. • IN THE SAME SCHOOL? • IN THE SAME DISCIPLINE? • TYPE OF PREPARATION AND SUPPORT. • CONNECTION TO TEACHER EVALUATION. • WHAT ACTUALLY HAPPENS.

13. MENTORING ACTIVITIES VALUED BY CANDIDATES IN THE SRI STUDY • WATCHING LESSONS DEMONSTRATED BY MENTORS. • PLANNING LESSONS TOGETHER WITH THE MENTORS. • TALKING WITH THE MENTORS ABOUT SPECIFIC STUDENTS. • RECEIVING CURRICULUM MATERIALS FROM MENTORS.

14. ELABORATING PROGRAM ELEMENTS- PORTFOLIOS • PURPOSES • HOW CONCEPTUALIZED AND INTRODUCED. • HOW THEY ARE IMPLEMENTED (E.G., IS THERE DISCUSSION OF ARTIFACTS?). • HOW THE WORK IS SUPPORTED. • THE PROGRAM CONTEXT IN WHICH PORTFOLIOS ARE USED.

15. OVERSIMPLIFIED VIEW OF EXCELLENCE-#3 ATTEMPTING TO LINK PARTICULAR KINDS OF TEACHER EDUCATION PROGRAMS AS PLANNED AND WRITTEN ABOUT TO OUTCOMES WITHOUT EXAMINING HOW THESE PROGRAMS ARE EXPERIENCED BY DIFFERENT CANDIDATES.

16. PROGRAMS AS PLANNED VS. AS DELIVERED • TELT STUDY OF A “5-YEAR” PROGRAM. • MENTORING EXPERIENCED BY BEGINNING TEACHERS IN SEVERAL STUDIES (E.G., 13% TFA 11% N.J. REPORTED NO MENTOR SUPPORT IN SRI STUDY). • MY OWN EXPERIENCE AS AN INTERN IN THE URBAN TEACHER PREPARATION PROGRAM.

17. SRI STUDY FINDINGS ON MENTORING THE STRUCTURE OF MOST PROGRAMS’ MENTORING COMPONENT LEAVES FAR TOO MUCH TO CHANCE: AVAILABILITY OF THE MENTOR TO PROVIDE SUPPORT… MOST PROGRAMS DO NOT HAVE A DETAILED PROCESS FOR SELECTING MENTORS, NOR DO THEY INVEST SIGNIFICANT TIME OR MONEY INTO TRAINING MENTORS ON WHAT SPECIFIC ACTIVITIES OR SUPPORTS ARE MOST EFFECTIVE IN TRAINING NEW TEACHERS.

18. WHAT DO WE NEED TO KNOW ABOUT A TEACHER EDUCATION PROGRAM WHEN THINKING ABOUT PROGRAM EFFECTIVENESS?

19. EXISTING RESEARCH THE EXISTING RESEARCH ON THE EFFECTIVENESS OF DIFFERENT PATHWAYS INTO TEACHING HAS DESCRIBED PROGRAMS MOSTLY IN TERMS OF THEIR SURFACE CHARACTERISTICS.

20. DOMINANT COMPARISONS 4-YEAR VS. 5-YEAR PROGRAMS GRADUATE VS. UNDERGRADUATE PROGRAMS. TRADITIONAL VS ALTERNATIVE PROGRAMS

21. PROBLEMS IN DEFINING PROGRAMS BY THEIR STRUCTURE • INCONSISTENT DEFINITIONS OF PARTICULAR TYPES (E.G., ALTERNATIVE CERTIFICATION) • VARIATION BY INSTITUTIONAL TYPE (GOODLAD, 1990). • VARIATION BY STATE POLICY CONTEXT. • VARIATION BY DISCIPLINES (E.G. MATH ED VS SOCIAL STUDIES ED). • SIGNIFICANT VARIATION WITHIN PROGRAMS AS TO HOW CANDIDATES EXPERIENCE A PROGRAM.

22. DEFINING A TEACHER EDUCATION PROGRAM • TWO CURRENT STUDIES (NYC PATHWAYS AND MATHEMATICA STUDY REPRESENT AN IMPROVEMENT OVER DOMINANT RESEARCH PRACTICE. E.G., MATHEMATICA STUDY ADMISISONS PROCESS- HIGHLY SELECTIVE VS. LESS SELECTIVE. REQUIRED PROFESSIONAL EDUCATION COURSE LOAD- MINIMAL VS. SUBSTANTIAL.

23. NYC PATHWAYS INTO TEACHING STUDY PROGRAM CHARACTERISTICS • PROGRAM MISSION AND COHERENCE. - ARTICULATES A CLEAR VISION OF T&L. -CRITERIA USED TO EVALUATE IN STG ARE CONSISTENT WITH WHAT TAUGHT IN METHODS CLASSES. • PROGRAM FACULTY • PREPARATION ABOUT LEARNERS. • FIELD EXPERIENCES.

24. A FRAMEWORK FOR DESCRIBING A TEACHER EDUCATION PROGRAM • VIEW OF TEACHING, LEARNING SCHOOLING, THE TEACHER’S ROLE AND LEARNING TO TEACH. • HOW CLEARLY DEFINED? • HOW WIDELY SHARED? • DEGREE OF COMMITMENT TO THEM?

25. 2. ADMISSIONS PROCESS • CONTENT OF ADMISSIONS CRITERIA. • DEGREE OF SELECTIVITY. • LINK TO PROGRAM MISSION.

26. 3. CURRICULUM AND COURSEWORK. • EMPHASIS ON DIFFERENT ASPECTS (E.G., SUBJECT MATTER PEDAGOGY).. • PLACEMENT WITHIN THE PROGRAM OF DIFFERENT CURRICULAR COMPONENTS. • CONNECTION TO PROGRAM MISSION. • REPRESENTATION OF DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVES IN THE CURRICULUM. • ACADEMIC RIGOR. • HOW MUCH BEFORE BECOMING TOR.

27. 4. FIELD EXPERIENCES • NUMBER, LENGTH AND PLACEMENT IN THE CURRICULUM. • RELATIONSHIP OF WHAT IS EXPERIENCED TO WHAT IS TAUGHT IN THE COURSES. • NATURE AND QUALITY OF MENTORING AND ASSESSMENT.

28. 5. INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES. • WHAT ARE THE STRATEGIES? • ARE THE STRATEGIES ADVOCATED FOR CANDIDATES MODELED IN THE PROGRAM? • HOW ARE THE STRATEGIES USED? FOR WHAT PURPOSES? HOW ARE THEY INTRODUCED AND SUPPORTED?

29. 6. INTERNAL ORGANIZATIONAL FEATURES. • USE OF STUDENT COHORTS OR NOT. • STAFFING- HORIZONTAL/VERTICAL. • WHO ARE THE TEACHER EDUCATORS AND HOW ARE THEY PREPARED AND SUPPORTED IN THEIR ROLES?

30. 7. USE OF DATA • HOW ARE DATA COLLECTED ABOUT THE PROGRAM AND THEN USED TO INFORM DECISIONS ABOUT THE PROGRAM?

31. PROGRAM CHARACTERISTICS THAT MAY MATTER DARLING-HAMMOND 2006 (LEARNER-CENTERED AND LEARNING-CENTERED TEACHING). • SHARED AND CLEAR UNDERSTANDING AMONG FACULTY, STUDENTS, AND SCHOOL PERSONNEL ABOUT GOOD TEACHING THAT PERMEATES ALL COURSES AND FIELD EXPERIENCES. • WELL-DEFINED STANDARDS OF PRACTICE ARE USED TO GUIDE AND EVALUATE CANDIDATES’ COURSEWORK AND CLINICAL WORK.

32. EXTENDED CLINICAL EXPERIENCES ARE CAREFULLY DEVELOPED TO SUPPORT THE IDEAS AND PRACTICES PRESENTED IN SIMULTANEOUS, CLOSELY INTERWOVEN COURSEWORK. • EXPLICIT STRATEGIES TO HELP CANDIDATES (1) CONFRONT THEIR OWN DEEP-SEATED BELIEFS AND ASSUMPTIONS ABOUT LEARNING AND STUDENTS AND (2) LEARN ABOUT THE EXPERIENCES OF PEOPLE DIFFERENT FROM THEMSELVES.

33. STRONG RELATIONSHIPS, COMMON KNOWLEDGE, AND SHARED BELIEFS LINK SCHOOL AND UNIVERSITY-BASED FACULTY. • CASE STUDY METHODS, TEACHER RESEARCH, PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENTS AND PORTFOLIO EVALUATION APPLY LEARNING TO REAL PROBLEMS OF PRACTICE.

34. CURRICULUM IS GROUNDED IN KNOWLEDGE OF CHILD AND ADOLESCENT DEVELOPMENT, LEARNING, SOCIAL CONTEXTS, AND SUBJECT MATTER PEDAGOGY, TAUGHT IN THE CONTEXT OF PRACTICE.

35. CHARACTERISTICS OF EFFECTIVE PROGRAMS IN THE TELT STUDY CHANGES IN CANDIDATE ORIENTATIONS TOWARD PROGRAM GOALS. (TRADITIONAL MANAGEMENT ORIENTED VS. REFORM ORIENTED). FOUR FACTORS ASSOCIATED WITH FUNDAMENTAL CHANGES IN TEACHER BELIEFS AND PRACTICES.. TEACHERS NEED: • A CHANCE TO CONSIDER WHY THE NEW PRACTICES ARE BETTER THAN CONVENTIONAL ONES. • OPPORTUNITIES TO SEE EXAMPLES OF THE NEW PRACTICES. • EXPERIENCE IN LEARNING THE NEW PRACTICES FIRSTHAND. • ON-SITE ASSISTANCE AND SUPPORT IN LEARNING TO PUT THE NEW PRACTICES IN PLACE.

36. TELT PROGRAMS THAT HAD SIMILAR STRUCTURES (E.G., FOUR-YEAR UNDERGRADUATE) SOMETIMES HAD REMARKABLY DIFFERENT INFLUENCES ON TEACHER LEARNING. PROGRAM S WITH DIFFERENT STRUCTURES SOMETIMES HAD VERY SIMILAR INFLUENCES ON TEACHERS. DEPENDING ON THE SUBSTANCE OF THE PROGRAM

37. KEY PROGRAM ELEMENTS –SRI STUDY • THE SCHOOL CONTEXT - COLLEGIAL RELATIONSHIPS IN WHICH “TEACHERS ANALYZE STUDENT WORK SAMPLES TOGETHER, SEEK EACH OTHER’S ADVICE ABOUT INSTRUCTIONAL ISSUES AND PROBLEMS, OBSERVED EACH OTHER’S CLASSROOMS AND OFFERRED FEEDBACK AND/OR EXCHANGE IDEAS AND DISCUSS STUDENT ASSESSMENT DATA TO MAKE DECISIONS ABOUT INSTRUCTION.”

38. SRI STUDY CONTINUED • THE SCHOOL CONTEXT -STRONG LEADERSHIP, ADEQUATE SUPPLIES AND MATERIALS. • COURSEWORK • MENTORING • CANDIDATE BACKGROUND CHARACTERISTICS- PREVIOUS CLASSROOM EXPERIENCE AND UNIVERSITY SELECTIVITY.

39. MUCH OF WHAT IS BELIEVED TO BE ASSOCIATED WITH PROGRAM EXCELLENCE WITH REGARD TO PARTICULAR GOALS CANNOT CURRENTLY BE SUPPORTED WITH EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE.

40. CONCLUSIONS ABOUT RESEARCH ON TEACHER EDUCATION PROGRAMS • THERE WILL ALWAYS BE A RANGE OF QUALITY WITHIN ANY MODEL. • THE SEARCH FOR THE MOST EFFECTIVE PROGRAM MODEL WILL FAIL. • THE PROGRAM IS THE WRONG LEVEL OF ANALYSIS-FOCUS SHOULD BE ON PROGRAM CHARACTERISTICS. • ELABORATING THE FEATURES OF EFFECTIVE PROGRAM CHARACTERISTICS FOR MEETING PARTICULAR GOALS, FOR PARTICULAR POPULATIONS, AND CONTEXTS IS IMPORTANT.