The
2004-2005
The University, as evidenced in its mission statement, is committed to providing strong undergraduate programs to promote students' ethical development and capabilities as critical and independent thinkers. It is committed to expanding, transmitting, and fostering the application of knowledge for the benefit of the state, the nation and the world.
The mission of the
As stated in The School of Education Mission Statement, the unit seeks to integrate the strengths of the university with those of our partners in communities, the private sector, public agencies and the policy community to promote, together, the highest levels of learning and achievement for all students and the positive development and well-being of children, youth, adult learners, and families.
Our approach is shaped by our fundamental commitment to diversity and social justice. We seek to ensure that, through teaching, research, policy analysis and service, all children, individuals and families are fully prepared and empowered to participate in a diverse democratic society. Accordingly, programs within the School of Education (SOE) prepare candidates to become exemplary practitioners and scholars. We prepare them to access, generate, use and disseminate knowledge about teaching, learning and human development through programs structured as elements of a life-long process of candidate’s intellectual growth and professional development. We prepare them to work collaboratively with others to solve critical education and human problems in our increasingly global and diverse community. Our goals are to prepare beginning professionals who have the potential to become master teachers, to foster the development of teachers to develop mastery of the profession, and to work in partnership with districts to support and continuously improve the educational and community contexts in which all students learn and grow.
Initial certification programs at the
Preparation of beginning teachers is the foundation for the development of mastery. In 1986, the Holmes Group published a call for the re-visioning of teacher preparation, Tomorrow’s Teachers. The group specifically called for the explication of a knowledge base of teacher education. In 1989, The American Association of Colleges of Teacher Education commissioned the publication of A Knowledge Base for the Beginning Teacher (Reynolds, 1989). The project authors identified an emerging professional knowledge base for beginning teachers that has served as the basis for the development of teacher preparation programs and national standards for teaching performance. Feiman-Nemser and Remillard (1996) tentatively identified emergent themes for necessary professional knowledge for teachers. These are:
These domains of professional knowledge have been further elucidated and codified in a series of teaching standards documents, most notably the Interstate New Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium’s (INTASC) Model Standards Beginning Teacher Licensure and Development (1992).
Teachers must possess a deep, multidimensional content literacy that is built upon, but goes beyond conceptual and procedural knowledge in the content area (Bybee, 1997; Shulman, 1987). It includes understanding of the philosophical, social, and historical dimensions of the discipline, of connections within and between disciplines, and of complex connections between disciplinary knowledge, societies, and individuals (Lederman, 1993). The development of multidimensional content literacy requires broad knowledge of fine arts, literature, language, the humanities, mathematics, the natural sciences and the social sciences. It also requires the development of conceptual and procedural knowledge of a discipline – its principles, structures, tools and values. It is our belief that this type of content knowledge is best developed through a structured program of general education and a major in a discipline based on explicit pathways through the major to develop the conceptual and procedural knowledge most relevant to teaching in public school settings.
Shulman (1987) named the body of knowledge required to teach a subject pedagogical content knowledge. Teachers must possess an expertise – a conditional knowledge – that flexibly uses knowledge of both the content and of teaching and learning models to construct effective teaching and learning environments for all students that lead to learning of the concepts, principles, procedures, applications, and values of a discipline. This conditional knowledge is built upon multidimensional understandings of the discipline, of general pedagogy, and of the most effective models for learning specific content and strategies for teaching specific content. Teachers must not only be capable of defining for students the knowledge claims of a discipline. They must also be able to explain why a particular proposition is deemed necessary, why it is worth knowing, and how it relates to other propositions or concepts, both within and outside of the discipline. They must show validity, relevance and value, both in theory and in practice. We believe that content pedagogy is developed in concert with content knowledge and professional and pedagogical knowledge, and is refined in practice. This is accomplished through a sequence of early field experiences followed by a clinical practicum in the specific subject supported by a formal curriculum on teaching and learning in that discipline.
Over much of the past decade almost all
These collaborative efforts led to a common set of standards
for initial teacher preparation, the Rhode
Island Beginning Teaching Standards (RIBTS) to guide teacher preparation
institutions across the state, the Rhode Island Department of Education, and
other key stakeholders (e.g., teacher unions; districts). This collaboration
has been critical for the SOE’s efforts to
continuously improve its preparation of candidates as well as to our school and
district partners. By having all higher education institutions, schools, and
districts work toward and hold common expectations of pre-service and beginning
teachers there will be ever increasing coherence among candidates experiences
in campus-based and field experiences, and in their initial entry to
professional practice once certified. Such collaboration in the ongoing
formulation, adoption, and refinement of these standards and beliefs will help
to ensure that candidates and certified teachers continue to experience what is
being asked and experienced coherently and in ways that are grounded in the
best of the knowledge base. For example, the
The SOE has adopted a set of Core Beliefs about Teacher Education that capture knowledge, abilities and professional dispositions that candidates will attain as a result of such preparation. These core beliefs guide the review and development of our programs, the design and implementation of our courses, and the criteria, evidence and standards of our assessment system. The Core Beliefs were revised and affirmed by the faculty in December of 2002, including the faculty of advanced programs. The Graduate School of Library and Information Studies (GSLIS) endorsed and affirmed the Core Beliefs of Teacher Education, including the Diversity Vision, at its faculty meeting on February 19, 2003 as compatible with the GSLIS Educational Outcomes. Representatives of the partner districts contributed to the revision of the Core Beliefs at a meeting of the Middle Level Advisory in October 2002. (see Conceptual Framework – Minutes and Proceedings Item 1.0, Documents.).
The SOE Core Beliefs are framed as dispositions operationalized by the Rhode Island Beginning Teacher Standards, which explicate the performances that are expected of candidates. Table 1 provides a graphic representation of the alignment between the SOE Core Beliefs and the Rhode Island Beginning Teacher Standards.
The professional teaching program of the SOE is designed to prepare candidates to demonstrate the professional knowledge, skills and dispositions for beginning teachers that are explicated in the INTASC Model Standards for Beginning Teacher Licensure and Support and the Rhode Island Beginning Teacher Standards. The program enables candidates to:
Development in the program is assessed in four broad domains, identified by the Holmes Group (1986) and supported by the knowledge bases as crucial to good teaching practice. These are:
Table 2.1. Alignment
of the SOE Core Beliefs to the Rhode Island Beginning Teacher Standards
Assessment in these domains is both formative and summative,
with summative assessments occurring at key decision points in the
program. Development of the assessment
system has lead to increasing coherence within and between programs. This coherence is manifest in the curriculum maps prepared for each program. An overview of the decision points, tasks
assessed and domain assessed within each task and point is provided in Figure
1.
Commitment to Technology: The role of technology in the teacher education programs has been enhanced through the infusion of resources provided by the Rhode Island Teachers in Technology (RITTI) and Preparing Tomorrow’s Teachers to Use Technology (PT3). These grants have brought up to date training to faculty and teachers in the schools. Outcome-based tasks have recently been revised to ensure that candidates graduating the programs demonstrate their mastery of the use of technology in instruction. The Unit Plan- Content Pedagogy is an example from the Secondary Education Program.
The
Conceptual
Framework
Advanced Programs
In addition to strong undergraduate programs, the University, as evidenced in its mission statement, is committed to providing strong graduate programs that promote students' development as both master educators and educational leaders. It is committed to expanding, transmitting, and fostering the application of knowledge for the benefit of the state, the nation and the world.
As stated in The School of Education Mission Statement, the unit
seeks to integrate the strengths of the university with those of our partners in
communities, the private sector, public agencies and the public community
to promote, together, the highest levels of learning and achievement for all
students and the positive development and well-being of children, youth, adult
learners, and families.
The
School of Education offers two advanced teacher preparation programs, a Master
of Arts in Education (with Specializations in Adult, Elementary, Secondary and
Reading Education), and a Master of Arts Teacher Certification (MATCP)
program. The School's two Master's
programs also are intended to provide additional breadth and depth in the
competencies of the teacher, and provide a foundation for advanced graduate
study in education. In addition to the above graduate programs, the SOE
partners with the graduate programs in Library Media, Kinesiology, School
Psychology, & Speech & Language Pathology. Also, there is a Joint PhD in Education
program that is operated with URI's sister state
institution,
A
key aspect of the advanced program conceptual framework is that it is centered
on six (6) "themes" or threads woven throughout program design,
coursework, and assessments. These six
themes represent the essential areas of expertise or competence that
accomplished educators should possess.
They were identified by faculty to have the most relevance and
applicability to URI’s advanced program, which
intends to develop accomplished practitioners by extending and elevating the
proficiencies acquired through initial teacher training.
These themes
primarily emerged from a thorough review of the current professional literature
related to effective teacher education in contemporary
1.
Develop deeper understanding of content
(depth and breadth);
(Cochran,
DeRuiter, King, 1993), (Darling-Hammond, 1998), (
3.
Actively participate in a variety of
diverse learning communities with commitment to all students;
(
4.
Develop scholarly research skills and
contribute to new knowledge through scholarly research and interpretation;
(Burnaford, Fischer, & Hobson, 2001), (Clark, & Erikson, 2003), (Henson, 1996)
5.
Engage in professional development;
(Cohen,
McLaughlin, & Talbert, 1993), (Garet, Birman, Porter, Desimeone,
Herman, & Suk Yoon, 1999), (Garet,
Porter, Desimeone, Birman,
& Yoon, 2001)
Table 1 below lists the Advanced Program Themes the joint NCATE/SPA program assessment points, rationale for the assessment and examples of forms assessments take.
Table
1: Advanced Program Themes, Sample Assessments,
Rationale,
and Form of Assessment
|
Advanced Program Themes |
Name Assessment NCATE SPA |
Primary Supporting Research |
Rationale |
Form of Assessment (examples) |
| 1.
Develop deeper understanding of content (depth and breadth); |
1. Highly Qualified
2. Content Based Assessment |
A. Cochran, K.F., DeRuiter,
J.A., & King, R.A. (1993). Pedagogical content knowledge: An integrative model for teacher
preparation. Journal of Teacher Education B. Darling Hammond, L.
(1998). Teachers and teaching: Testing policy hypotheses from a national
commission report. Educational
Researcher, 27(1), 5-15. C. Ferguson, R. (1991).
Paying for public education: New evidence on how and why money matters. Harvard Journal of Legislation, 28,
465-498 D |
Candidates
should have a strong background in
the subject matter in order to be effective educators and promote student
learning. |
BA
list or reason Highly Qualified: BA, Content Exam, or Housse
“high objective uniform state system of evaluation”
Content
Assessment: Comprehensive examination, (e.g., Provide evidence of application
of your content specific coursework in your own classroom; content pedagogy-
assessment of student work samples
|
|
2. Assume a greater
leadership role in the educational community and become agents of educational
change |
7.
Leadership |
A. Ferguson, R.F. (1998).
Can schools narrow the black-white test score gap? In C. Jencks & M.
Phillips (Eds.). The Black-White test score gap (pp. 318-374) B. Haberman, M. (1996). Selecting
and preparing culturally competent teachers for urban schools. In J. Sikula & T. Buttery & C. |
Candidates
should during an advanced preparation program show their ability to improve
the environment in which they work.
Candidates should be agents of school and social change |
Candidates
document leadership and/or scholarly activity in their professional field. Comps
National Board Leadership Task Field
Experiences, Case Studies, Research Reports, Action Research, Portfolio Tasks
and/or Follow-Up Studies. |
| 3.
Actively participate in a variety of diverse learning communities with
commitment to all students |
5.
Effect on student learning |
A. Ferguson, R.F. (1998).
Can schools narrow the black-white test score gap? In C. Jencks & M.
Phillips (Eds.). The Black-White test score gap (pp. 318-374) B. Haberman, M. (1996). Selecting
and preparing culturally competent teachers for urban schools. In J. Sikula & T. Buttery & C. |
Candidates must help society realize the democratic
goal of equal educational opportunity for all of the learners in |
Student
work samples, National Board Task, EDC 574 |
| 4.
Develop scholarly research skills and contribute to new knowledge through scholarly
research and interpretation |
6.
Research Skills |
A. Burnaford, G.,Fischer,
J., Hobson, D. Eds. Teachers
Doing Research: The Power of Action through Inquiry. (2nd ed.),
(2001). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc. Manham:
NJ B. Clark, A., Erikson, G., eds. Teacher
Inquiry: Living the Research in Everyday Practice. Routledge Farmer, Inc. C. Henson, K.T. (1996)
Teachers as Researchers. In J. Sikula, T.J.
Buttery, & E. Guyton (Eds.), Handbook
of Research on teacher education (2nd ed., pp. 53-64). |
Candidates
should be committed to research, to improve their own knowledge and to help
shape change and reform. Research‑based
clinical teacher education should be context sensitive, cumulative and
reflective. |
EDC
574 review of research Thesis, scholarly paper or dissertation |
| 5.
Engage in professional development. |
7.
Leadership and Professional Development |
A. Cohen, D. K.,
McLaughlin, M.W., & Talbert, J.E. (Eds.) (1993). Teaching for understanding:
Challenges for policy and practice. B. Garet,
M., Birman, B., Porter, A., Desimeone,
L., Herman, R., & Suk Yoon, K. (1999) Designating effective professional
development: Lessons from the Eisenhower program. C. Garet,
M., Porter, A., Desimeone, L., Birman,
B., & Yoon, K, S. (2001). What makes professional development effective?
Results from a national sample of teachers. American Educational Research Journal, 38(4), 915-945. |
Candidates
should play a more active role in their professional development. Candidates
should model modes of thinking that include inquiry, analysis and evaluation
of their own beliefs and practices.
Candidates should be reflective practitioners who continually evaluate
the effects of their choices and actions and who continually seek
opportunities to grow professionally. |
IPlan and/or NBST Tasks |
|
6. Adapt and expand
instructional/leadership repertoire & model reflective practice. |
3.,
4., Clinical Experience |
A. Ebmeier, H. (2003). How
Supervision Influences Teacher Efficacy and Commitment: An Investigation of a
Path Model. Journal of Curriculum and
Supervision, 18(2), 110-141.
B. McKerrow, K., Dunn,
R., & Killian, J. (2003). Beyond the Turf Wars: Collaboration in
Preparing School Leaders. Education
Leadership Review, 4(1), 1-10. C. Spillane, J., Hallet, D., & Diamond, J. (2003). Forms of Capital
and the Construction of
Leadership: Instructional Leadership in Urban Elementary Schools. Sociology of Education, 76 (1), 1-17. |
Candidates expand their repertoire through research-based practice. Teacher training programs must expose
candidates to ways of teaching with technology. |
Video
Tape lesson with evaluation Internship,
Practicum or Clinical Experience |
Translated into
practice, these six themes drive course syllabi and critical performance
assessments and also provide the structure for program and unit
assessment. Instructors use these themes
to organize and deliver course content, depending on the specific nature of the
course.
Program-level matrices are maintained to identify when and where specific themes are addressed within advanced programs, and to ensure that each theme is adequately addressed throughout programs. Because these themes are grounded in the RIBTS, NBPTS and SPA propositions and standards, they provide a shorthand system for referencing specific standards. Matrices are maintained, therefore, which align or cross-reference themes with all relevant SPA standards (see MA Elementary Education Standards Alignments, MA Secondary Education Standards Alignments, MA Adult Education Standards Alignments, MA Reading Education Standards Alignments, MLIS Library and Information Studies, Library Media Standards Alignments, MS/PhD School Psychology Standards Alignments, MA/PhD Speech Pathology Standards Alignments, MS Kinesiology Standards Alignments, MM Music Education and PhD Education Standards Alignments).
Where unit
assessment is concerned, these six themes are the vehicles through which
candidates demonstrate knowledge, skills and dispositions that satisfy each
proposition. Formative and summative
assessments of individual candidates are partly based on evidence compiled in
the form of a program portfolio.
Portfolios are evaluated as candidates progress through the program.
In summary, the School's conceptual framework employs a thematic system as the principal vehicle for ensuring program consistency and unity. The six themes in this framework build upon the RIBTS standards. When applied to curriculum, instruction, practice, assessments, etc. these themes ensure that various course and program-related experiences occur within well-defined parameters, and that well-defined, high standards are applied when evaluating candidate knowledge, skills and dispositions. These themes also are the means through which candidates demonstrate their individual competencies.
Over
the years the mission of the
Consequently,
our faculty agrees that our collective and collaborative efforts should be
focused upon developing professionals who model Reflective Practice,
Facilitation of Change, and Scholarly Inquiry (McKerrow,
Dunn, & Killian, 2003). All advanced programs include these guiding
principles within the coursework and within the field work that advanced
students experience.
The
Finally, since
the focus is graduate education, it should be no surprise that our faculty have
included scholarly inquiry as one of
the foci of advanced programs. (Burnaford, Fischer, & Hobson, 2001) Our students are prepared to assume
leadership roles in solving educational and social problems within their
professional environments through the acquisition of knowledge and professional
development in a research oriented environment.
Bibliography
Beyer,
L. E., Feinburg, W. F., Pagano,
J. A., & Whitson, A. J. (1989). Preparing
teachers as professionals: The role of educational studies and other liberal
disciplines.
Brown,
A. L., Bransford, J. D., Ferrara, R. A., & Campione, J. C.
(1983). Learning, remembering and understanding. In P. H. Mussen (Ed.), Handbook
of child psychology (3rd ed.).
Burnaford,
G.,Fischer, J., Hobson, D. Eds. (2001). Teachers doing research: The power of action
through inquiry. (2nd ed.).
Bybee,
R.W. (1997). Achieving scientific literacy: From purposes to practices.
Clark,
A., Erikson, G. (Eds.). (2003). Teacher inquiry: Living the research in everyday practice.
Claugbaugh,
G. K. & Rozycki, E. G. (1990). Understanding schools: The foundations of
education.
Cochran,
K.F., DeRuiter, J.A., & King, R.A. (1993). Pedagogical
content knowledge: An integrative model
for teacher preparation. Journal of
Teacher Education, 44(4),
263-272.
Cohen, D. K.,
McLaughlin, M.W., & Talbert, J.E. (Eds.) (1993). Teaching for
understanding: Challenges for policy and
practice.
Crowther, F., Kaagen,
S. S.,
Darling Hammond, L. (1998). Teachers and teaching: Testing policy hypotheses from a national commission report. Educational Researcher, 27(1), 5-15.
Darling-Hammond,
L. (1999). Educating teachers for the next century: Rethinking practice and
policy. In G. A. Griffin (Ed.), The education of teachers.
Ebmeier,
H. (2003). How supervision influences teacher efficacy and commitment: An
investigation of a path model. Journal
of Curriculum and Supervision,
18(2), 110-141.
Fenstermacher,
G. (1986). Philosophy of research on
teaching: Three aspects. In M. C. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook
of research on teaching (3rd ed.).
Garet, M., Porter, A., Desimeone,
L., Birman, B., & Yoon, K, S. (2001). What makes
professional development effective? Results from a national sample of teachers.
American Educational Research Journal,
38(4), 915-945.
Garet, M., Birman,
B., Porter, A., Desimone, L., Herman, R., & Suk Yoon, K. (1999). Designating
effective professional development: Lessons from the Eisenhower program.
Giarelli, J.M. (1991). Philosophy, education and
the public practice. In D.P. Ericson (Ed.), Philosophy of education, 1990: Proceedings
of the 46th annual meeting of the Philosophy of Education Society.
Haberman, M. (1996). Selecting and preparing
culturally competent teachers for urban schools. In J. Sikula
& T. Buttery & E. Guyton (Eds.), Handbook
of research on teacher education. (2nd
ed.).
Henson, K.T. (1996). Teachers as
researchers. In J. Sikula, T.J. Buttery, &
The
Holmes Group. (1986, April). Tomorrow’s teachers.
Institute
for Educational Leadership. (2001). Leadership
for student learning: Redefining the teacher as leader.
Lederman,
N. et al. (1993, April). Becoming a
teacher: Balancing conceptions of subject matter and pedagogy. Paper
presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research
Association:
Leinhardt,
G. (1988). Situated knowledge and expertise in teaching. In J. Calderhead
(Ed.), Teachers’ professional learning.
Livingston,
C., & Borko, H. (1989). Expert/novice differences
in teaching: A cognitive analysis and implications for teacher education. Journal
of Teacher Education, 40 (4), 36-42.
McAninch,
S. A., & McAninch, A. R. (1996). The social foundations of education:
Retrospect and prospect. In F. B. May
(Ed.), The teacher educator’s handbook:
Building a knowledge base for the preparation of teachers.
McKerrow, K., Dunn, R., & Killian, J.
(2003). Beyond the turf wars: Collaboration in preparing school leaders. Education Leadership Review, 4(1), 1-10.
Reynolds,
M.C. (Ed.). (1989). Knowledge base for
the beginning teacher.
Schon, D. A. (1983).
The reflective practitioner: How
professionals think in action.
Shulman,
L. S. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the
new reform. Harvard Educational Review,
57(1), 1-22.
Smylie,
M. A, Bay, M., and Tozer, S. E. (1999). Preparing teachers as agents of
change. In G. A. Griffin (Ed.), The education of teachers.
Spillane, J., Hallet,
D., & Diamond, J. (2003). Forms of capital and the construction
of
leadership: Instructional leadership in urban elementary schools. Sociology of Education, 76(1), 1-17.
Tozer, S. E. (1993). Toward a new consensus among social foundations educators: Draft position paper of the American Educational Studies Association Committee on Academic Standards and Accreditation, Educational Foundations, 7(4), 5-22.
group
assessment. Group composition and performance. American Educational Research Journal, 35(4), 607-651.
York-Barr, J.
& Duke, K. (2004). What do we know about teacher leadership?
Findings
from two decades of scholarship. Review
of Educational Research, 74(3), 255-316.