A new responsibility of teacher education programs

1954 ◽  
Vol 47 (2) ◽  
pp. 66-70
Author(s):  
Lee Emerson Boyer

During the past decade widespread revision of mathematics courses of study on the state level has taken place. One outstanding characteristic of these revisions, taken as a whole, is that in their attempt to correct educational ills of many years’ standing they suggest flexible mathematics programs for all high school pupils throughout their stay in high school. These programs are varied and planned to meet the needs of various types of pupils.

2013 ◽  
Vol 115 (12) ◽  
pp. 1-34
Author(s):  
Audrey Amrein-Beardsley ◽  
Joshua H. Barnett ◽  
Tirupalavanam G. Ganesh

Background Via the reauthorization of the Higher Education Act (HEA), stronger accountability proponents are now knocking on the doors of the colleges of education that prepare teachers and, many argue, prepare teachers ineffectively. This is raising questions about how effective and necessary teacher education programs indeed are. While research continues to evidence that teachers have a large impact on student achievement, the examination of teacher education programs is a rational backward mapping of understanding how teachers impact students. Nonetheless, whether and how evaluations of teacher education programs should be conducted is yet another hotly debated issue in the profession. Purpose The purpose of this project is to describe how one of the largest teacher education programs in the nation has taken a lead position toward evaluating itself, and has begun to take responsibility for its impact on the public school system. This research also presents the process of establishing a self-evaluation initiative across the state of Arizona and provides a roadmap for how other colleges and universities might begin a similar process. Setting and Participants This work focuses on the Teacher Preparation Research and Evaluation Project (T-PREP) that spawned via the collaborative efforts among the deans and representative faculty from Arizona State University (ASU), Northern Arizona University (NAU), and the University of Arizona (UofA). The colleges of education located within each respective university are the colleges that train the vast majority of educators in the state of Arizona. Participants also included other key stakeholders in the state of Arizona, including the deans and representative faculty from the aforementioned colleges of education, leaders representing the Arizona Department of Education (ADE), and other key leaders and constituents involved in the state's education system (e.g., the state's union and school board leaders and representatives). Research Design This serves as a case study example of how others might conduct such self-examinations at the collaborative and the institutional level, as well as more local levels. Conclusions This work resulted in a set of seven “beyond excuses” imperatives that participants involved in the T-PREP consortium developed and participants at the local level carried forward. The seven key imperatives are important for other colleges of education to consider as they too embark on pathways toward examining their teacher education programs and using evaluation results in both formative and summative ways.


PMLA ◽  
1966 ◽  
Vol 81 (2) ◽  
pp. 3-6 ◽  
Author(s):  
F. André Paquette

No person who has served as a state foreign language consultant can long ignore what is surely one of the most pressing and complex problems facing our profession: the preparation of teachers. During the three years when I was a state consultant, I spent about two-thirds of my time visiting schools and working directly with classroom teachers. I remember my first visit to a classroom vividly; I was introduced as, “the inspector from the state department of education,” a phrase indicative of the “high esteem” in which state department personnel were held.


Education ◽  
2013 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christopher M. Span

This annotated bibliography concentrates on the history of education in the United States. This history can be divided into two distinct areas: teacher training, and scholarship and research. Well before 1860, history of education, as a course of study, was associated with the professional education training of American teachers. To date, nearly all teacher education programs in the United States still incorporate the history of American education—even if only as part of a social foundations course—as a course requirement in its preservice teacher education programs. The assumption is that providing teachers with a general overview or survey of the most important developments in the history of education in the United States allows them to be self-reflective about the past and better understand the society in which they will teach. As a field of research, history of education has its earliest beginnings in the late 19th century, but by the mid-20th century it was a well-established field of study.


2019 ◽  
Vol 40 (2) ◽  
pp. 47-69
Author(s):  
Paul Berger ◽  
Karen Inootik ◽  
Rebecca Jones ◽  
Jennifer Kadjukiv

We describe findings from participatory research conducted by a southern-based researcher from Thunder Bay, Ontario, and Nunavut Arctic College’s Teacher Education Program students. Together, they interviewed 128 high school students from 11 communities to determine what attracts Inuit youth to teaching and what might discourage them from becoming teachers. The research was based on the premise that Nunavut’s schools cannot be Inuit schools without many more Inuit teachers. We found that many Inuit youth have considered becoming teachers, but they face barriers to doing so. They expressed concerns about housing, finances, leaving their home communities, and their own academic preparedness. Many lacked information about teacher education programs. We recommend addressing these concerns, in part, by using Nunavut Teacher Education Program students to educate high school students about the program and to encourage them to become teachers.


2021 ◽  
Vol 46 (4) ◽  
pp. 35-62
Author(s):  
Christine A. Ormond ◽  

This paper explains how an original conceptual framework model for mathematics pedagogy, the Australian Curriculum Conceptual Rubric (ACCR), has continued to be used successfully by the author in pre-service and in-service teacher education programs over the past ten years or more. Now further enhanced by a deeper reflection upon Peter Sullivan’s Six Principles (2011) for the effective teaching of classroom mathematics, the ACCR is based on four preparatory “big questions” that the teachers may ask of themselves and their students. The model is also a sequenced system of conceptual “rubrics” whose aim is to encourage, in new teachers especially, a beginning sense of hierarchical mathematics concept building and connectedness. Using Sullivan’s Principles for corroboration, the ACCR presents some useful ideas for helping teachers to keep track of the important elements of practical, effective teaching, and to use engaging and meaningful language in their classrooms.


2019 ◽  
Vol 121 (13) ◽  
pp. 1-22
Author(s):  
Mary Louise Gomez ◽  
Amy Johnson Lachuk

Questions this chapter addresses include: What changes have teacher education programs attempted in the past in order to ameliorate the emotional struggles that prospective and new teachers undergo? What successes have been realized in these programs, and what criticisms have been made? How may teacher educators avoid what some scholars have called “false empathy” and encourage real compassion and knowledge of their students’ families, homes, and cultures so they may be more knowledgeable and skillful in communicating with students? How might future programs be improved in course work, field experiences, and other ongoing experiences of viewing, reading, and interacting with others? How can emotion be used as a mechanism for critical reflection about teachers’ identities and their understandings of youth identities?


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document