The University of Akron
College of Education
National Council for the Accreditation
of Teacher Education
CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK
October 2009
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
HISTORY OF THE CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK .........................................................................
1
VISION AND MISSION STATEMENTS ............................................................................................
2
PHILOSOPHY, PURPOSES AND GOALS OF THE UNIT ...............................................................
3
COLLEGE OF EDUCATION KNOWLEDGE BASE .........................................................................
6
Theme and Core Components...................................................................................................
6
Knowledge ................................................................................................................................
8
Technology ...............................................................................................................................
12
Diversity....................................................................................................................................
14
Ethics ........................................................................................................................................
16
ALIGNMENT WITH STANDARDS AND PERFORMANCE EXPECTATIONS ............................
19
ASSESSMENT ......................................................................................................................................
20
CONCLUSION......................................................................................................................................
21
APPENDICES
APPENDIX A: OHIO STANDARDS FOR THE TEACHING PROFESSION
ALIGNMENT ...............................................................................................
22
APPENDIX B: COLLEGE OF EDUCATION REVISED DISPOSITIONS .........................
32
APPENDIX C: UNIT ASSESSMENT SYSTEM ...................................................................
33
GLOSSARY ..........................................................................................................................................
35
BIBLIOGRAPHY .................................................................................................................................
39
ii
The University of Akron
College of Education
CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK
History of the Conceptual Framework
The College of Education developed its first conceptual framework in 1987 to delineate a shared
vision for teacher education programs. At that time, the College of Education (COE) was guided by a
steering committee comprised of representatives from each of the academic departments. This steering
committee initiated an extensive review of all teacher preparation programs. This review identified 17
Beginning Teacher Competencies (BTCs) that all preservice teachers were expected to acquire during
their educational programs. Core courses were also developed to provide the knowledge base for the
newly established BTCs. The theme, Educator as Decision Maker, was identified to provide coherence to
the programs. In 1991, the Teacher Education Assembly (TEA) was created to oversee matters regarding
the new program and any future program revisions. The Teacher Education Assembly was a standing
College of Education advisory committee with all departments and programs for teacher licensure, the
College of Arts and Sciences, the College of Fine and Applied Arts, University College, and practitioners
from the P-12 sector represented. In 1996, the BTCs were aligned to the Interstate New Teacher
Assessment and Support Consortium (INTASC), and in 2000 the Ohio/INTASC standards were formally
adopted by the College of Education as the principles for initial teacher preparation program design. In
2007, Ohio approved and implemented new state standards for the Teaching Profession and for Principals
that have been aligned with Ohio/INTASC standards.
The College of Education Conceptual Framework has undergone regular review and evaluation.
During the winter of 2001, a group of stakeholders from the professional community collaborated on an
examination and a major revision of the conceptual framework for the College of Education. The group
included faculty, candidates, P-12 stakeholders, and nationally certified teachers. The goal of this review
was to revise the Conceptual Framework so that it might better reflect the current emphasis on standardsbased programs, the importance of outcomes assessment in teaching and learning, and the inclusion of
1
guiding principles for both P-12 licensure programs and other programs in the unit. In spring 2007, a
group of stakeholders from the professional community was once again convened to review the
framework for continued relevance and applicability. In fall 2007, the Professional Education Council
(PEC), formerly known as TEA, was charged with a self-study of all NCATE Standards and the
Conceptual Framework. The results of that self-study indicated that the supporting documentation for the
Conceptual Framework needed to be updated and the language needed to be more inclusive so that all
programs within the Unit were reflected. In addition, it was determined that candidate proficiencies
needed to be developed and included. Candidate proficiencies were developed and aligned with the new
state and national standards. These proficiencies were approved by College Council in spring 2008.
Dispositions were also revised and approved in spring 2008.
VISION AND MISSION STATEMENTS
University of Akron Mission Statement:
The University of Akron, a publicly assisted metropolitan institution, strives to develop
enlightened members of society. It offers comprehensive programs of instruction from associate
through doctoral levels; pursues a vigorous agenda of research in the arts, sciences and
professions; and provides service to the community. The University pursues excellence in
undergraduate and graduate education, and distinction in selected areas of graduate instruction,
inquiry, and creative activity.
College of Education Mission Statement:
The University of Akron’s College of Education is a community of professionals whose
purpose is to provide leadership for community well-being through standard-setting programs
that enhance teaching, learning, and human development; research and inquiry; and outreach.
We develop ourselves and others through continuous improvement and through a
commitment to these core components of professional practice and scholarship: Knowledge,
Technology, Diversity, and Ethics.
It is the vision of the College of Education that we will expand our contribution to evidence based
and ethical decision making in all that we hope to accomplish through our Standards Based Programs,
Research and Inquiry and Outreach as well as through congruence with the Mission University and
College Mission Statements. As noted in the University of Akron Mission Statement, “….our
metropolitan institution strives to develop enlightened members of society.” The College of Education
identifies the need to prepare candidates consistent with our Conceptual Framework theme, Educator as
2
Decision Maker. It is our belief that the term “enlightened” is congruent with the preparation of educators
who demonstrate those skills necessary to make evidence based and ethical decisions. The University of
Akron Mission Statement also indicates that we “pursue excellence in undergraduate and graduate
education and distinction in selected areas of graduate instruction, inquiry and creative activity.” As
noted above, the College of Education Conceptual Framework identifies decision making that is guided
by a solid foundation in knowledge, diversity, technology and ethics in addition to identifying those areas
which reflect our goal of excellence in standard setting programs, research and inquiry and outreach.
Therefore, both The University of Akron Mission Statement and the College of Education Conceptual
Framework seek excellence in “…education, research and other creative endeavors.” The College of
Education Conceptual Framework is specifically aligned with the College Mission Statement with the
core components of professional practice and our commitment to standard setting programs, research and
inquiry and outreach embedded within the Mission Statement.
PHILOSOPHY, PURPOSE AND GOALS OF THE UNIT
Our programs are based on the belief that all individuals can learn (Ladson-Billings, 1992) and
the learners themselves are key to the teaching and learning. We consider learning to be a dynamic and
“inquiry-based process” that occurs between the learner, teacher and environment. We believe that we
should prepare all educators as decision makers. We further believe that in order to prepare these
decision makers, they must have a solid foundation in knowledge, technology, diversity and ethics.
We believe that it is not sufficient simply to “teach about” or expose candidates to knowledge and
we believe that it is not sufficient to simply tell candidates that all students can learn. We concur with the
premise as stated by Argyris and Schon (1974) that “learning a theory of action so as to become
competent in professional practice does not consist of learning to recite the theory; the theory has not
been learned in its most important sense unless it can be put into practice” (p. 12). This premise is not
specific only to theories. Rather, this premise incorporates all forms of knowledge, skills and
dispositions. We are accountable for determining that graduates have a solid understanding of
knowledge, skills and dispositions, know how to generalize these skills to their unique needs and then
3
apply them appropriately. We acknowledge that we are also accountable to facilitate the development of
those skills necessary for lifelong learning and the motivation to continually examine previously held
beliefs against new research and innovations.
We believe the faculty play a critical role in achieving our stated aim. The faculty are a
community of professionals with wide-ranging specialties and strengths but firmly committed to the
folllowing common goals: (a) To prepare and support candidates to become professionals at all levels
and across a range of school and community settings for the challenges of the 21st century and (b) to
prepare the personnel for schools, colleges, and community agencies contributing to the positive impact
of education and strengthening the research and knowledge base of the discipline. To this end, they strive
to help candidates develop the requisite knowledge, skills, and dispositions of the profession and to guide
them in developing purposeful ways to adapt and contribute to a constantly changing society. Faculty
members have a responsibility to provide the best possible preparation and professional development for
all candidates. Further, there is an obligation to prepare these candidates with state-of-the-art knowledge
from both research and evidence based practice. Inquiry is stressed in all candidate programs.
The goal of the College of Education is to meet the comprehensive charge of our mission through
initial, advanced and allied programs. Underlying the structure and content of our programs is the
assumption that initial, advanced and the allied programs are professions in the highest sense of the word,
or as Lee Shulman (1987) characterized them,” learned profession[s].” Preparing quality teachers and
other professionals is at the center of our mission.
Within the College of Education, our goals are defined under the theme of Educator as Decision
Maker. Specifically, we strive to have outcomes that reveal that each and every one of our graduates
optimally and positively impact the well-being of those for whom they provide professional and
educational services. It is our goal that our outcome measures reflect that our graduates demonstrate
exemplary skills in the areas of knowledge, technology, diversity and ethics. It is our hope that our
graduates will be culturally aware and consider diversity issues as they make decisions that will impact
the well-being of the students, or clients, and the community. It is our goal that our graduates will always
4
adhere to the highest standards of professional conduct, ethics and standards as identified by learned
societies and licensure granting boards/departments. Lastly, it is our hope that our graduates will remain
life-long learners and continuously utilize feedback to reflect upon and improve their teaching and
services.
Our goals and outcomes are not specific only to our candidates and graduates. We also support
the scholarly research, service and teaching of our faculty members so that they may also make
significant impact upon the well being of local, state, national and international communities. It is our
goal that our administrators, faculty and staff are recognized as contributors to our metropolitan area as
well as in distant settings for their contributions to scholarly service and learning. Our goals and outcomes
are congruent with Boyer (1997) and Grossman and Loeb (2006) who recommend that universities, with
our tangible and intangible resources, respond to the needs of society and contribute to the well being of
others. Our goals and outcomes are also consistent with the observation that the educational community
is called upon to ensure that all learners obtain high quality instruction from highly qualified instructors
(Zientek, 2007). We also believe that the candidates should receive high quality instruction from the
members of the university community defined as those University of Akron Colleges outside of the
College of Education.
A systemic review of teacher education programs and productive strategies for evaluating
outcomes are increasingly important for the improvement of programs (Darling-Hammond, 2006;
Zientek, 2007). We concur with this need for on-going examination and include a goal that reflects
efforts for the continuous improvement of our programs and faculty development using assessment data
obtained from multiple sources. The university, schools, and community agencies work collaboratively
toward commonly established goals that mutually benefit all participants. We believe that improvement
comes about through this assessment and collaboration and is central to achieving the University and
College Missions.
Our goals cannot be achieved in isolation. Therefore, the university, schools, and community
agencies collaboratively work together toward commonly established goals that mutually benefit all
5
stakeholders. We believe that improvement in education comes about through this collaboration at many
different levels and sites and is central to achieving our college goals as reflected in our outcomes. Our
goals include outreach, maintenance and expansion of our collaborative relationships within the College
and University, the metropolitan community and in national or international settings.
The faculty is comprised of three groups: professional education faculty, clinical faculty and
school faculty. The professional education faculty includes individuals who teach education courses,
teach content courses, provide services to candidates or administer the unit. In addition, we have
professional education faculty who teach in higher education, counseling, and sports science and
wellness. Other professional education faculty include those who supervise field experiences, student
teaching, and internships. These are identified as clinical faculty. At times, professional faculty members
are also in the role of field and student teaching supervisors. Cooperating teachers consist of licensed
practitioners in P-12 schools and community agencies who provide on-site instruction, supervision, and
direction of candidates during field-based experience and clinical practice.
We also recognize that the College of Education and The University of Akron are part of a larger
regional, state, national and international system. We are firmly committed to being a strong presence in
these communities. Taken in total, it is our hope that all members of our unit and graduates achieve the
goals. It is our belief that we will always strive toward 100% accomplishment of these goals and
continually strive to identify our areas of excellence so that we may positively impact communities at
every level.
COLLEGE OF EDUCATION KNOWLEDGE BASE
Theme and Core Components
For more than two decades, the theme of “Educator as Decision Maker” has provided coherence
to our programs. Successful professionals in the 21st century must possess decision-making skills that
are related to problem solving and critical thinking that will enable them to understand, reflect, and make
decisions in practice relative to new research and insights from education and allied fields (Bransford &
Stein, 1994). We strongly believe that teaching is a cognitively complex act (Borko & Putman, 1996;
6
Bransford, Derry, Berliner & Hammerness, 2005) and that decision-making is a key part of the
educational process (Sergiovanni & Starratt, 1993). We concur with Fenstermacher (1986) that our
responsibility in education is to educate teachers and allied professionals to reason soundly about their
teaching as well as to perform skillfully. The role of decision-maker is critical and has shaped the model
of our programs.
We recognize that our theme of Educator as Decision Maker must be inclusive, as far as possible,
of all programs in the Unit. In order to meet the challenges of changing demands and conditions, it is
necessary to utilize reflective processes and make decisions in consideration of the context of their future
work settings. In an effort to expand our leadership for community well being and enhance our overall
effectiveness we need to continuously examine the purposes for which these decisions are made and with
which partners we will be making them.
Logical and orderly progression should guide a candidate’s passage through the program.
Inherent in all programs is the notion of building blocks, basic knowledge, skills, and dispositions that
develop optimum decision-making throughout the program. Courses, field experiences, assessments and
guidance are planned and our candidates should see them as connected in their objectives, subject matter,
and day-to-day applications of theory into practice. The educational programs include a balanced
offering of foundations in general education, intensive study in teaching, administration, counseling, and
sports science and wellness content areas, and those professional courses and other learning experiences
which attempt to combine theory and practice as applicable to specific program/course of study.
Furthermore, all Unit programs in the College of Education reflect the core components of professional
practice and scholarship identified in the Mission Statement: Knowledge, Technology, Diversity, and
Ethics. These components do not exist as separate entities but instead are incorporated in each program
and are integrated in the planning and delivering of instruction and assessing the effectiveness of our
programs and unit. An elaboration of these important components follows:
7
Knowledge
Professional Practice Candidate Proficiencies Related to Expected Knowledge, Skills, and Dispositions
for all Programs within the Unit: Initial, Advanced and Other School Personnel:
Core Component: Knowledge
Candidates will:
K1.
K2.
K3.
K4.
demonstrate knowledge of the content necessary for optimum practice and/or research in
their respective employment settings (content knowledge).
demonstrate an understanding of students’ and individuals’ cognitive, social, academic,
linguistic, physical, and emotional development to explain and present content in multiple
ways that facilitate cognitive, academic achievement, linguistic, physical and affective
development (pedagogical knowledge).
demonstrate knowledge of the interaction of subject matter and effective strategies to make
cognitive, academic achievement, linguistic, physical and affective growth attainable for all
students and individuals (pedagogical content knowledge).
demonstrate an understanding of professional, state and institutional standards, the role of
assessment, and the use of formative and summative assessments, and data to facilitate
learning and provision of effective professional services.
Educators who are effective decision makers must demonstrate the ability to synthesize,
generalize and apply content knowledge, pedagogical knowledge, professional knowledge and
pedagogical content knowledge in the educational setting. The educational setting is defined as the
context of the community and family, the building, the classroom and the individual child. As Scheeler
(2008) observes, there is a need to prepare preservice teachers in a manner that allows for the
generalization of newly acquired knowledge and skills across settings and across time. Grossman and
McDonald (2008) refer to the generalization of knowledge and skills as pedagogies of enactment.
Preservice teachers have opportunities for enactment of skills and development an attitude for enactment.
It is this ability to generalize knowledge and skills that is at the heart of the Educator as Decision
Maker theme in The University of Akron College of Education Conceptual Framework. Therefore, The
University of Akron College of Education strives to utilize the techniques identified by Scheeler (2008) to
promote retention and generalization of this body of professional, pedagogical content knowledge,
content and pedagogical knowledge past graduation, Specifically, those techniques include immediate
feedback on performance, training to mastery and allowing for significant practice of these skills. This
8
occurs at all levels of their program and is especially evident in carefully planned and scaffolded field and
clinical requirements. It is through these planned programmatic activities that knowledge is made
authentic and generalization is facilitated.
In addition, educators who are effective decision makers demonstrate the ability to apply critical
thinking skills so that they can evaluate the efficacy of scientific research (professional, content and
pedagogical) as it applies to their data- driven decisions. While knowledge synthesis, generalization, and
application require a level of inherent ability, it is also necessary to impart the skills necessary to critically
evaluate research and educational progress. Recent developments and national policy have enhanced the
emphasis upon data based decision making, analysis and critical thinking as part of the decision making
process for educators. The implementation of No Child Left Behind has increased the emphasis on
utilizing testing data for decision making purposes and for program planning and evaluation (Braden,
2007). This relatively recent innovation has resulted in a rethinking of pedagogical knowledge and
emphasizing a continuous feedback approach that will continually improve the quality of educational
services.
Teacher preparation once involved providing candidates with a body of pedagogical knowledge
about the characteristics of the learners, the characteristics of good teaching and methods by which to
integrate content into instruction. Candidates then graduated with this body of knowledge without a real
understanding of how to evaluate the efficacy of research or methods that developed after they had
graduated and were employed as professional educators. Because they were minimally instructed in
research and data analysis, they did not have the skills to evaluate practice against new and current
scientifically based research. This recent emphasis on data analysis as it impacts student learning, now
requires pre-service teachers to develop a knowledge base that will permit life-long learning, reflection
and decision making in an authentic, dynamic and ideal manner.
Darling-Hammond (2000) concluded that teachers must possess both pedagogical and content
knowledge relative to their licensure area. Because The University of Akron College of Education
embraces diversity and inclusive models of education, this body of pedagogical knowledge must be
9
expanded to include how issues of diversity may impact the manner in which content knowledge is best
disseminated. In addition, skills with technology as they apply to pedagogical knowledge are also
critically important for the pre-service teacher. Lastly, pedagogical knowledge can only be applied in a
manner that is legally and ethically sound. Taken in total, the Conceptual Framework Core Components
of Knowledge, Technology, Diversity and Ethics can be considered as dynamic, interwoven, and fluid. It
is the ability to apply these components that results in a truly effective and exemplary Educator as
Decision Maker.
Each program in the College of Education is grounded in a content knowledge base derived from
research, theory, and “wisdom of practice” in the respective fields. Incorporated in each knowledge base
is the content knowledge specific to the field. In addition, professional knowledge includes the social,
cultural, historical, and philosophical nature of the field. The field may be considered as the field of
education or the field respective to the content area. For the preparation of teachers, four types of
knowledge have been identified: content knowledge, professional knowledge, pedagogical content
knowledge, and pedagogical knowledge (Shulman, 1987). Our collaborations with faculty in Colleges of
Arts and Sciences and Fine and Applied Arts are designed to strengthen both pedagogical and content
knowledge.
We concur with Borko and Putnam (1996) that teachers must possess knowledge about teaching,
learning, and the learners. Fives and Buehl (2008) added assessing learning, motivating students, and
maximizing learning for diverse classrooms to the pedagogical knowledge needed by teachers. A
foundation of Core Courses supported by a detailed knowledge base forms the basis of all initial P-12
programs. Coursework is strategically sequenced for candidates to acquire knowledge about
understanding of the characteristics of the learning population, assessment and communication of
learning, effective and ethical classroom management and motivational strategies, and instructional
techniques to create positive and safe learning environments. All work together to produce the type of
professional teacher described by Shulman (1999): “A scholar, an intellectual, and a knowledge worker
oriented toward the interpretation, communication, and construction of such knowledge in the interests of
10
student learning” (p. xiii). In addition, the skills are taught in an authentic manner so that this knowledge
is considered as interdependent. Specifically, it was a determined that content in assessment and
classroom management would be best taught in an integrated manner thus stressing the need for the
preservice educator to embed these concepts in their day to day and sometimes hour to hour planning.
In all programs in the College of Education, our candidates learn by high quality, well planned,
and supervised field observations/ participation, clinical experiences, internships, and practica. Kennedy
(1999) states that merely observing professionals in the field does not result in better professionals. The
preservice teachers need opportunities for enactment of teaching skills in the field (Grossman &
McDonald, 2008). At The University of Akron, College of Education, our field experiences are carefully
planned and organized so that information learned within the classroom is reinforced and supported by
observation. In addition, assignments are aligned with the field experiences so that the students have the
opportunity to synthesize, generalize and apply knowledge in authentic settings. Lastly, these experiences
provide an opportunity to connect classroom learning objectives to a frame of reference for discussion
and development. This model provides an opportunity for the use of “innovative pedagogical strategies
to verify that learning is applied to real problems of practice” (National Commission on Teaching and
America’s Future, 1996).
In addition to being an integral part of candidate programs, inquiry is stressed in faculty
scholarship. It is the responsibility of the faculty not only to prepare our candidates with state-of the art
knowledge but also to contribute to this knowledge through their own research and scholarly endeavors.
The college values both qualitative and quantitative epistemologies and considers action research as an
approach especially relevant to practitioners. As indicated above, it is critical that our pre-service
educators develop those critical thinking abilities necessary to evaluate research as long as they remain in
the profession.
Taken in total, our Conceptual Framework Theme and Core Components have withstood the test
of time and continue to be supported by current research. In addition, our Core Component of
11
Knowledge has expanded such that we include those higher order skills so necessary for those preservice
educators and professionals soon to enter and make a positive impact in their respective fields.
Technology
Professional Practice Candidate Proficiencies Related to Expected Knowledge, Skills, and Dispositions
for all Programs within the Unit: Initial, Advanced and Other School Personnel:
Core Component: Technology
Candidates will:
T1.
T2.
demonstrate an ability to integrate appropriate technology to facilitate learning and
development for all students and individuals.
demonstrate an ability to use technology for assessment, analysis of data, and research to
support and enhance student learning and individual development.
Technology is reciprocally related to pedagogy and learning outcomes in that effective instruction
and curriculum determine appropriate use of technology and that technology supports effective instruction
and curriculum. “Education reformers have stressed the importance of (a) involving candidates in
challenging, authentic tasks performed with tools comparable to those of professional practitioners and
(b) leveraging the intellectual and social resources available through collaborations” (Means, 2000). It is
not sufficient that our candidates develop the knowledge and skills to use technology. We have to help
them see the potential and capabilities as well as the limitations of technology. Research has shown that
the use of technology can increase student engagement, motivation, and achievement (Kahveci &
Imamoglu, 2007; Roschelle, Pea, Hoadley, Gordin, & Means, 2000; Rovai, Ponton, Wighting & Baker,
2007) and that carefully designed instruction positively affects student achievement. Technology is also
used from a data perspective for assessment and decision-making.
The College of Education believes that the integration of technology into a learning environment
will empower candidates to move beyond traditional teaching and learning boundaries. The College of
Education will strive to provide such an environment, so that it enables a candidate to develop the
technological literacy and expertise to be a digital citizen. According to the Committee on Innovation and
Technology of the American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education (AACTE), curriculum
12
should simultaneously integrate knowledge of technology, pedagogy, and content. The Technological
Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPCK) model is a type of knowledge that teachers utilize every time
they teach (AACTE, 2008). Through this model, teachers will be able to develop problem solving skills
and a flexible understanding of teaching with technology. Teachers should be able to understand the
affordances and constraints of technology and not feel pressured to apply technological tools evenly
across the different subject areas (AACTE, 2008). “TPCK is a solid foundation for meeting the challenge
of teaching all children with technology” (AACTE, 2008, p. 51). Therefore, teacher education programs
should start their students on a path to make a life-long commitment to improve knowledge about the
context of integrating technology into the classroom.
As technology is a constantly evolving resource, it is important that we as a college develop an
ongoing vision of the use of technology for instructions and data management. One such vision for the
integration of education and technology was provided by Jonassen, Peck and Wilson (2008). It is
increasingly clear that technology is much more than hardware. The task for instructors is to effectively
utilize multiple forms of technology to support their teaching and student learning. Throughout all
programs, candidates need to experience these multiple forms of instructional technology modeled
confidently and skillfully by faculty and be afforded multiple opportunities to develop their own
knowledge and skills with technology through guided practice and performance. In preparing teachers we
believe that in affording them these multiple opportunities they gain a high confidence level to integrate
technology into their daily practice and through this “meaningful technology use can come closer to being
the norm, rather than the exception, in our K-12 classrooms” (Wang, 2004, p. 242).
13
Diversity
Professional Practice Candidate Proficiencies Related to Expected Knowledge, Skills, and Dispositions
for all Programs within the Unit: Initial, Advanced and Other School Personnel:
Core Component: Diversity
Candidates will:
D1.
D2.
demonstrate knowledge, skills and dispositions necessary to meet the individual needs of
students and individuals based on gender, socio-economic status, racial, ethnic, sexual
orientation, religion, language and exceptionalities (both disabilities and giftedness).
demonstrate dispositions that value fairness and learning for all students and individuals.
Diversity in the United States is increasing in most communities across a broad spectrum of
categories: socioeconomic status (with greater numbers in poverty), race, ethnicity, sexual orientation
religion, language, and exceptionalities (both disabilities and giftedness). Nearly 46% of the public
school population is composed of students from a minority culture (National Center for Educational
Statistics, 2005). This trend has been used to make a case for “the demographic imperative,” that is,
teacher educators and others must take action to address the inequality in opportunities and outcomes in
the educational system (Banks et al., 2005). The challenge for our society is valuing diversity and
fostering equity (Banks, 2000). We must prepare future professionals with the capability to be culturally
responsive when working with students, parents, and the community (Banks et al., 2005). Furthermore,
they must understand that “education is not an island, but part of the continent of culture” (Bruner, 1996).
The terms culturally responsive and inclusive classrooms suggest that schools and teachers need to
develop classrooms that are supportive of children and accepting of differences (Banks et al., 2005).
The University of Akron has identified diversity as a significant priority. In 2004-05, The
University of Akron developed its academic plan entitled, Design for the Future. This plan celebrates
our rich history as an institution in the areas of access and excellence. The five design principles of the
plan are Leadership, Engagement, Innovation, Inclusive Excellence and Assessment. Inclusive
Excellence is defined as “valuing differences with the intention of promoting learning, critical thinking,
and personal enrichment of students that enables them to contribute to an increasingly diverse society and
14
world as graduates of the University” (Design for the Future, 2006, p. 6). As an additional commitment
to diversity, the University created a position and hired a Chief Diversity Officer in the spring of 2008.
This hire resulted in focused opportunities for student and faculty development in the area of diversity.
COE Diversity Vision Statement
Diversity, in all its multifaceted forms and expressions, is not an end in itself. Rather, diversity is
a means to a greater educational end founded on the pursuit, creation, and transmission of knowledge to
all persons for the long-term betterment of society. Through understanding, incorporating, and embracing
diversity, the College community will promote learning, inclusiveness, acceptance, and respect for those
with differing characteristics, lifestyles, and histories. The creation of a learning environment that
welcomes College-wide diversity is deemed essential for building an exemplary educational institution.
Therefore, the College champions diversity as a value to be upheld through incorporating the following
activities into its core vision:
•
•
•
•
•
Seeking to attract and retain diverse students, faculty, staff, and administrators.
Initiating and supporting activities that enhance College-wide diversity.
Fostering the attainment of knowledge, skills, and dispositions related to understanding
diversity.
Developing a college culture that inspires, liberates, and transforms the perceptions of others
regarding the positive nature of diversity.
Forming a College community mosaic that allows persons to retain their individuality while
simultaneously contributing to the overall College-wide diversity vision.
Although diversity connotes difference, diversity is inclusiveness. It embraces, but is not limited
to, ethnicity, race, socio-economic status, gender, exceptionalities (both disabilities and giftedness),
language, religion, sexual orientation and geographic area. By building a College community that values
diversity and academic excellence , which we hold as inseparable, we are continually renewed and
enriched (College of Education Definition of Diversity).
The College incorporates cultural awareness through required courses, infusion of diversity in all
programs and provision of field and clinical experiences in diverse settings. Faculty receive professional
development through the University, Institute for Teaching and Learning, and required College of
Education activities. Candidates and faculty have opportunities to work with diverse populations on
15
campus through Gear Up, Discover Diversity, Hispanic Day, BECOME, Race Week and collaborations
with schools in our urban community, student teaching abroad, and community collaborations such as
Mobile All-Stars Combating Diabetes (MACD).
As identified above, The College of Education assesses candidate learning via the following
prescribed proficiencies: (1) Candidates will demonstrate knowledge, skills and dispositions necessary to
meet the individual needs of students and individuals based on gender, socioeconomic status, racial,
ethnic, sexual orientation, religion, language and ,exceptionalities (both disabilities and giftedness; and
(2) Candidates will demonstrate dispositions that value fairness and learning for all students and
individuals with high expectations.
Consistent with The University of Akron, the College of Education considers diversity of critical
importance in all that we hope to accomplish. This is demonstrated by the inclusion of Diversity as a core
component of our Conceptual Framework and through coursework, field and clinical experiences,
research, professional development and other diversity initiatives.
Ethics
Professional Practice Candidate Proficiencies Related to Expected Knowledge, Skills, and Dispositions
for all Programs within the Unit: Initial, Advanced and Other School Personnel:
Core Component: Ethics
Candidates will:
E1.
E2.
E3.
demonstrate an ability to collaborate and communicate with other educators,
administrators, community members, students and parents to support student learning.
demonstrate knowledge of and adherence to the roles and responsibilities of the profession
and to respective professional ethics and codes of conduct including the Licensure Code of
Professional Conduct for Ohio Educators.
demonstrate ability to reflect on their effectiveness in helping all students or individuals
learn and develop to their fullest potential.
The College of Education seeks (a) to create an ethical environment that promotes teaching and
learning and fosters effective and fair decision-making, (b) to follow high moral and ethical principles in
research, teaching, and service, and (c) to train candidates in acquiring high moral standards in their
16
development as professionals. Fundamental to the above goals is the belief that all students can learn and
all individuals can benefit from the types of teaching or strategies that our graduates offer in their
employment settings.
In accordance with The University of Akron, the College of Education seeks to promote an
ethical environment that supports (a) a culture of intellectual excellence, (b) respect for diversity, (c)
caring, (d) civility, and (e) responsibility. We have determined that these five cultural elements are
essential in promoting an environment for effective teaching and learning, and effective and fair decisionmaking.
Intellectual excellence is crucial in academic preparation and faculty must maintain high levels of
competency in content areas and pedagogical processes in order to guide candidates in developing parallel
professional competence and excellence in their areas of training. Respect for diversity creates an
environment that increases individual and organizational understanding, enlarges knowledge, and nurtures
a safe and secure environment for learning (Banks et al., 2001). Care is the primary ethic of teaching that
fosters development in both the caregiver and cared for (Mayeroff, 1971; Noddings, 2003, 2005). Caring
begins with knowing and requires listening, understanding and civil procedures to handle disagreement.
For that reason, it is essential that we promote an environment that emphasizes democratic values as a
way to handling conflict and difference, while respecting those whose views may not be shared by the
majority. Finally, we acknowledge that accepting responsibility for our decisions and assisting candidates
in accepting responsibility for their actions and choices is also essential for ethical decision-making.
Through effective interaction with candidates, faculty and staff enhance the candidates’ ability to engage
in effective decision-making and help them develop as competent professionals.
The College of Education seeks to follow high moral and ethical principles in teaching, service,
and research. We emphasize the necessity of fostering a clear moral vision that balances organizational
and collegiate goals with individual freedom and integrity in teaching, service, and research. Creation of
just and fair grading policies, research processes, and maintenance of confidentiality are fundamental
parts of this effort.
17
We also embrace the challenge posed by Hilliard (1991) to foster “the will to educate all
students.” Darling-Hammond (1997) contends “widespread success depends on the development of a
profession-wide base of knowledge along with a commitment to the success of all students” (p. 294).
This is essential in our own teacher efficacy, and an essential commitment all our candidates need to have
as they seek to be professionals in their respective fields (Bandura, 1997; Irvine, 2003; Weinstein, 2002).
In addition, it is not enough to educate all students. Rather, it is necessary to educate all students to the
maximum extent possible and to the students’ optimum level of performance.
Establishing high standards for the moral dispositions of prospective teachers is an important
mandate for teacher preparation programs (Sanger, 2008; Sherman 2006; Villegas, 2007). This
dedication to ethical environments and high moral and ethical principles is not complete without a
dedicated commitment to help our candidates learn and implement these professional standards in their
own development as professionals. As stated above, we seek to model these moral standards in our
teaching, research, and service. We also provide direct instruction, where appropriate, about the ethical
standards that guide professional practice within each of the disciplines represented through our College.
Finally, we promote an environment where ethical discourse is fostered and where our faculty, staff, and
candidates are engaged in an on-going examination of the values that shape our practice.
The College seeks to design programs that facilitate teaching and providing services in an ethical
manner. As Osgupthorpe (2008) states, there are numerous reasons for wanting teachers with good
dispositions. These reasons include the responsibility of classroom teachers to act as role models for the
students in their P-12 classrooms. To this end, the College of Education has identified and approved eight
dispositions to be assessed at specific transition points during the candidates’ programs (Appendix B).
These dispositions are assessed utilizing performance on assignments and in field experiences. The
dispositions were developed by an ad hoc committee and approved by the College of Education, College
Council in the spring of 2008. In addition to these dispositions, the College of Education developed
expectations specific to those in field settings in spring of 2007. These professional dispositions are
expected of candidates completing both undergraduate and graduate programs.
18
The systematic assessment of dispositions is essential so that the preservice educator can reflect
on his or her professional growth. While our approach to the assessment of dispositions began as a
reactive effort to identify those students who were having difficulty, we realized that dispositions should
be assessed in a regular and systematic fashion. We acknowledge that ethical behavior/dispositions are
amenable to learning given the right environment and supports. To this end, we strive to facilitate the
development of those dispositions that will be expected in their professional settings.
ALIGNMENT WITH STANDARDS AND PERFORMANCE EXPECTATIONS
The college is committed to standards-based programs that prepare teachers and other school
personnel for professional practice. The conceptual framework reflects these standards and programs are
aligned with them. At the initial preparation level, the Ohio Standards for the Teaching Profession
aligned with the Ohio Interstate New Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (Ohio/INTASC)
standards, criteria of the four PRAXIS domains, and standards developed by the national Specialized
Program Associations (SPAs) provide the framework for our programs (see Appendix A: Ohio
Standards).
Advanced programs for the continuing preparation of teacher and other personnel build upon and
extend prior knowledge and experiences that support core understanding of learning and practices that
support learning. The Ohio Standards for the Teaching Profession (Proficient Level) aligned with the five
propositions of accomplished teaching developed by the National Board for Professional Teaching
Standards form the framework of program design for teaching at this level (see Appendix A: Ohio
Standards). As with the initial preparation programs, the guidelines of professional organizations are also
used in developing each advanced program and alignment can be found in the individual program reports.
The standards for the professional practice of school leaders are grounded in the knowledge and
understanding of teaching and learning. They provide the basis for programs, assessments, and
professional development involving school leaders. Programs in education administration are based on
the Ohio Standards for Principals that have been aligned with the Educational Leadership Constituents
Council (ELCC) standards and the Interstate School Leaders License Consortium (ISLLC) standards.
19
In addition, allied programs are based on the profession’s guidelines from organizations such as
CACREP, ASHA, NASAD, NASD, and NASM, which set standards for the specific program areas.
Separate reviews by these agencies attest to the quality of these programs.
Professional standards provide a framework for thinking about program development,
implementation, and assessment at initial and advanced levels. The alignment of standards provides
coherence to all we do and directs the development of a quality assessment system.
ASSESSMENT
Assessment is a critical part of the continuous improvement cycle valued by the College of
Education. The college seeks to cultivate a culture in which assessment is an essential part of teaching
and learning. An outcomes assessment framework has been developed to provide an on-going review of
the College’s effectiveness. The program has two specific and complementary purposes based on Nine
principles of good practice for assessing learning (AAHE, 1996) with additions offered by Banta et al.
(1996) in Assessment in Practice: (a) to improve learning and performance, and (b) to improve programs,
program planning, and program development. The guiding questions for program evaluation parallel the
questions from Campbell, Melenyzer, Nettles, and Wyman (2000) and Darling-Hammond and Snyder
(2000): What do our candidates know and what can they do when they graduate? How will we assess the
extent to which our candidates have attained the standards that we have adopted? What is the overall
quality as evidenced by candidate performance? What type of evidence will we offer to indicate quality?
The performance-based assessment system recognizes that assessment works best when it is
embedded effectively within the context of unit and institutional systems (Stroble, 2000). Consistent with
NCATE Standard 2, we believe that learning needs to be authentic and connected to the practice.
Furthermore, our vision of excellence in assessment recognizes the role of assessment to support and not
merely monitor student learning (Stiggins, 2008). We concur with Darling-Hammond (2006) and Diez
(1998) that complex evidence of this learning requires multiple opportunities for candidates to
demonstrate their growing abilities in a variety of ways. As Shephard (2000) asserts, authentic learning
20
and assessment helps candidates develop the abilities to use knowledge in real world settings and the
skills and dispositions that are essential to being an effective educator in all professions.
A systematic approach to the aggregation and analysis of data at critical points in the program to
evaluate candidate learning and develop plans for improvement has been designed (Cochran-Smith,
2003). At the initial level, the points include admissions, entry to student teaching, exit from student
teaching, program completion, and follow-up assessments. At the advanced level, the points include
admissions, mid-point, program completion, and follow-up. These transition points are graphically
organized in the Assessment Models (Stroble, 2000). As indicated, these assessments reflect the
conceptual framework, state licensing standards and assessments, content and pedagogical standards for
national specialized program associations, and NCATE standards. An additional component of
assessment is the ongoing advisement our candidates receive from admissions through program
completion.
In addition, the college aggregates and analyzes data that address NCATE standards related to
support for candidate learning, which includes information regarding the field and clinical experiences,
diversity, faculty, and unit governance. Like data on candidate performance, these data provide evidence
of the current situation and are used to make improvements for the future. Evidence on candidate
learning and support for learning are employed in a systematic way to establish a continuous cycle of
improvement.
CONCLUSION
The contemporary societal mosaic presents both formidable challenges and meaningful
opportunities for the College of Education and Professional Education Unit to make a difference in the
lives of students and contribute to the well being of the broader community. We embrace these
challenges and endeavor to develop in our candidates and in ourselves the knowledge, skills, and
dispositions the future will require. With a focus on the core components Knowledge, Technology,
Diversity, and Ethics, the College strives to produce Educators as Decision Makers through our standard
setting programs, research and inquiry and outreach.
21
APPENDIX A
OHIO STANDARDS FOR THE TEACHING PROFESSION ALIGNMENTS
Standard
Number
1
1.1
Teacher Standards
UA
Conceptual
Framework
Teachers display knowledge of how
students learn and of the developmental
characteristics of age groups.
K2
K2
1.3
Teachers expect that all students will
achieve to their full potential.
D2
1.4
Teachers model respect for students’
diverse cultures, language skills and
experiences.
1.5
NCATE
Praxis II
Praxis
III
NBPTS
TEAC
Students: Teachers understand student learning and development, and respect the diversity of the students they teach.
Teachers understand what students know
and are able to do and use this
knowledge to meet the needs of all
students.
1.2
INTASC
Teachers recognize characteristics of
gifted students, students with disabilities
and at-risk students in order to assist in
appropriate identification, instruction, and
intervention.
BK1
BK3
BP2
BP3
BP4
BP5
FD3
FD4
FP2
GP3
BP1
CK1
CP2
HD1
HP1
1c
1c
1d
1d
3c
IA1
IA2
A1
1.3
IC2
IC3
IB1
IB2
A1
A2
IB4
IB5
A4
C2
1.2
2.2
1.2
IB6
D1
K2
CD1
CP3
BP3
BP4
1g
4a
IC3
FK5
HD2
HP3
CD3
CD4
GD3
CP5
CP6
1c
1g
IB1
IB6
A1
GP4
JD1
JP4
4a
4d
IIIB
IVB2
B2
BP5
CK4
CD2
BK2
BD1
BD2
BP1
1c
1d
IB2
IB4
HP2
CK2
CP1
CP3
3c
4a
IIA2
IIA4
CP4
FD5
4d
D2
1.1
1.3
B1
1.4
1.3
A1
A4
2.3
1.2
B2
C3
Value
Added
2
Content: Teachers know and understand the content area for which they have instructional responsibility.
K1
2.1
Teachers know the content they teach and
use their knowledge of content-specific
concepts, assumptions and skills to plan
instruction.
K3
2.2
Teachers understand and use contentspecific instructional strategies to
effectively teach the central concepts and
skills of the discipline.
2.3
Teachers understand school and district
curriculum priorities and the Ohio
academic content standards.
K1
2.4
Teachers understand the relationship of
knowledge within the content area to other
content areas.
K3
AK3
AP5
2.5
Teachers connect content to relevant life
experiences and career opportunities.
K3
AD3
CP5
3
AK1
AD1
DK1
DP1
1a
1b
IIB1
A2
A4
2.1
1.1
3c
AP1
AP2
AP4
AD3
EP5
DK2
1b
1.2
3b
IIB2
C1
3c
DP1
1a
C2
2.2
2.3
1.2
C4
1b
IIB1
A3
5.3
1c
A3
CP6
DK2
1c
1d
IB6
IIB2
A1
2.1
1.2
DK3 DP1 DP5
Assessment: Teachers understand and use varied assessments to inform instruction, evaluate and ensure student learning.
3.1
Teachers are knowledgeable about
assessment types, their purposes and the
data they generate.
K4
3.2
Teachers select, develop and use variety
of diagnostic, formative and summative
assessments.
K4
T2
BP1
HK2
HP1
HP3
1d
3c
IIC3
3.3
Teachers analyze data to monitor student
progress and learning to plan, differentiate
and modify instruction
K4
T2
BD2
BP1
HD1
HD2
1d
3c
IIC4
C4
HP1
HP5
3.4
Teachers collaborate and communicate
student progress with students, parents
and colleagues
E1
HP2
HP6
IIC6
C4
T2
BP1
HK1
HK3
1d
IIC1
IIC2
A5
IIC4
A5
3.1
IIC5
3c
3.3
3.4
3.2
D1
3.3
3.4
3.3
D4
3.4
3.4
3.5
Teachers involve learners in selfassessment and goal setting to address
gaps between performance and potential.
4
Instruction: Teachers plan and deliver effective instruction that advances the learning of each individual student.
E1
HD2
HP3
BP3
BP4
3.5
K2
K4
DK1
DK2
DP1
4.1
Teachers align their instructional goals
and activities with school and district
priorities and Ohio’s academic content
standards.
1b
K2
K4
BK1
BK2
DK3
DD2
1b
4.2
Teachers use information about students’
learning and performance to plan and
deliver instruction that will close the
achievement gap.
EP2
DP2
DP3
EK3
1d
4.3
Teachers communicate clear learning
goals and explicitly link learning activities
to those defined goals.
K3
4.4
Teachers apply knowledge of how
students think and learn to instructional
design and delivery.
4.5
1c
IIB1
IIB2
A2
A4
IIB1
IIB2
A1
A4
1.1
1.2
1.3
2.2
IIIA
A2
B3
C1
K1
K2
BK2
BK3
DK2
DP2
1d
K3
DP3
EK1
Teachers differentiate instruction to
support the learning needs of all students,
including students identified as gifted,
students with disabilities and at-risk
students.
K3
CK1
CK2
DP2
DP3
1c
K1
K2
BP3
DP1
4.6
Teachers create and select activities that
are designed to help students develop as
independent learners and complex
problem-solvers.
K3
K4
EP2
FP7
1d
4.7
Teachers use resources effectively,
including technology, to enhance student
learning.
K3
T1
EK2
EP2
1b
EP2
1d
4a
IIA1
IIA2
C2
C4
1.2
3.1
1.2
IB1
IB2
A4
B1
1.1
1.2
1.2
IB4
IB6
B3
C2
2.2
2.3
3.1
T2
ED1
EK1
1b
1c
IIA1
IIA4
IC3
C3
A4
B3
1.1
1.2
2.3
3.2
1.2
3.3
5
Learning Environment: Teachers create learning environments that promote high levels of learning and achievement for all students.
Teachers treat all students fairly and
establish an environment that is
respectful, supportive and caring.
K2
5.2
Teachers create an environment that is
physically and emotionally safe.
K2
5.3
Teachers motivate students to work
productively and assume responsibility for
their own learning.
K2
5.4
Teachers create learning situations in
which students work independently,
collaboratively and/or as a whole class.
K2
5.5
Teachers maintain an environment that is
conducive to learning for all students.
K2
5.1
6
CP6
CD3
CD4
FP5
D1
FP4
FP5
CD5
CP7
1g
IC4
B1
B2
1.2
1.4
1.3
B5
1.2
1.4
1.3
B4
4a
IC4
B2
D2
1.5
BP3
FK3
FP2
FP6
1b
IC3
1.5
3.2
FD3
FP1
FP7
1b
IC2
1.5
1.6
FP1
D2
FK1
1.2
3.2
D1
FD1
FP3
CD1
1d
D2
3c
IC4
4a
A1
A4
B3
B5
1.1
1.3
Collaboration and Communication: Teachers collaborate and communicate with other educators, administrators, students and parents and the community
to support student learning.
Teachers communicate clearly and
effectively.
EP5
FP4
GK4
GD2
1a
1b
IC2
IC4
A2
GD3
GP1
GP3
GP4
1d
4a
IIC6
IIIA
C1
IIIB
IIIC
GP5
E1
6.2
1b
4a
E1
6.1
D2
HP6
4d
JP2
JP4
Teachers share responsibility with parents
and caregivers to support student
learning, emotional and physical
development and mental health.
1c
1e
1f
1g
3c
4a
IVB3
D4
B3
4.1
4.3
3.4
3.4
5.1
3.4
5.3
3.4
5.5
4d
6.3
Teachers collaborate effectively with other
teachers, administrators and school and
district staff.
E1
AD3
JP5
HP6
JD3
JP2
1c
1g
4c
4d
IVB3
D3
5.1
6.4
7
Teachers collaborate effectively with the
local community and community agencies,
when and where appropriate, to promote a
positive environment for student learning.
E1
JD3
JP2
JP5
1c
1g
IVB3
D3
5.1
5.2
3.4
4c
Professional Responsibility and Growth: Teachers assume responsibility for professional growth, performance, and involvement as an individual and as a
member of a learning community.
7.1
Teachers understand, uphold and follow
professional ethics, policies and legal
codes of professional conduct.
E2
ID5
7.2
Teachers take responsibility for engaging
in continuous, purposeful professional
development.
E3
ID1
E1
7.3
Teachers are agents of change who seek
opportunities to positively impact teaching
quality, school improvements and student
achievement.
ID2
IP2
IP3
1g
IVB3
IVB4
D2
1c
IVA1
IVA2
D3
IVA3
E3
ID4
IP3
1c
IVB3
D3
1.3
4.1
3.4
4.2
4.3
D3
5.1
5.2
5.3
5.5
3.4
OHIO STANDARDS FOR PRINCIPALS ALIGNMENTS
Standard
Number
1
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
Ohio Principal Standards
UA
Conceptual
Framework
ELCC
NCATE
ISLLC
Praxis
Principals help create a shared vision and clear goals for their schools and ensure continuous progress toward achieving those goals.
Principals facilitate the
articulation and realization of a
shared vision of continuous
improvement.
K1
K2
1.1a
K4
E1
1.2c
Principals lead the process of
setting, monitoring and
achieving specific and
challenging goals that reflect
high expectations for all
students and staff.
K1
K2
1.3a
1.3b
1.4b
2.1a
1.e
K4
D1
2.2a
2.2b
2.2c
2.3a
1.f
3.2a
3.2b
6.3a
6.3b
Principals lead the change
process for continuous
improvement.
Principals anticipate, monitor,
and respond to educational
developments that affect school
issues and environments.
1.1b
1.2a
1.2b
1.e
1
1.D2
1.P1
1.P2
2.12
1.f
1.P3
1.P4
1.P6
1.P11
1
1.P5
1.P8
1.P9
2.1
2.2
1.P10
1.P13
1.P14
1.P15
2.3
2.5
1.P16
2
2.P2
2.8
3.2
1.P12
D2
6.3c
3.4
K1
T2
1.2a
1.4a
1.5a
1.5b
1.e
2
2.D5
2.P5
2.P17
1.6
2.7
D1
D2
2.1a
2.2a
2.2b
2.2c
1.f
2.P18
2.P19
2.K9
3
2.9
3.1
2.3a
2.3b
2.3c
3.1a
1.g
3.P3
3.P12
3.D2
6
3.5
3.7
3.1b
6.1a
6.1b
6.1c
3.8
4.1a
6.1d
6.1e
6.1f
6.1g
6.1h
6.2a
1.3a
1.3b
1.4a
1.4b
1.4
1.5
1.4c
4.2b
E1
K1
E3
E1
6.K5
1.e
4
1.f
6.K6
1.g
4.K1
6
6.K4
Value
Added
Standard
Number
2
2.1
2.2
Ohio Principal Standards
UA
Conceptual
Framework
ELCC
NCATE
ISLLC
Praxis
Principals support the implementation of high-quality standards-based instruction that results in higher levels of achievement for all students.
Principals ensure that the
instructional content that is
taught is aligned with the Ohio
academic content standards
and curriculum priorities in the
school and district.
Principals ensure instructional
practices are effective and
meet the needs of all students.
K1
K3
2.2b
6.1d
6.3c
1.e
2
2.K4
2.P12
2.P13
1.1
2.1
2.P14
3
3.D5
6
2.2
2.3
6.K3
6.K4
6.P4
1.e
2
2.K6
2.D1
2.D2
1.3
2.4
1.f
2.D3
5
5.D8
5.P7
2.5
2.6
4.a
6
6.K3
K4
K1
K3
2.2a
2.3a
K4
T1
4.2c
4.2d
T2
D1
2.3b
2.3c
2.7
D2
K2
2.3
Principals advocate for high
levels of learning for all
students, including students
identified as gifted, students
with disabilities and at-risk
students.
D2
D1
1.1a
1.1b
1.2a
1.2b
1.e
1
1.D1
2
2.K7
1.1
2.8
1.2c
2.1a
2.2b
4.2c
1.f
2.D1
2.D2
2.D3
2.D6
4.1c
6.3a
6.3b
6.3c
1.g
2.D8
2.P5
2.P11
2.P20
4.a
4
4.P3
4.P12
5
5.K3
5.D3
5.D4
5.P8
5.P9
5.P10
6
6.D1
2
2.K1
2.K2
2.K3
1.5
2.9
2.K9
2.K10
2.P9
3
2.1
2.11
6.D5
K1
2.4
Principals know, understand
and share relevant research.
1.2b
1.4b
2.3b
2.3c
4.2b
6.1a
6.1f
6.1h
1.e
3.P1
Value
Added
Standard
Number
Ohio Principal Standards
UA
Conceptual
Framework
K4
2.5
Principals understand,
encourage and facilitate the
effective use of data by staff.
2.6
Principals support staff as they
plan and implement researchbased professional
development.
3
E3
1.2b
2.4a
1.4b
2.4b
2.3c
NCATE
3.1a
2.4c
ISLLC
Praxis
1.e
1
1.K4
1.P11
2
2.9
3.2
1.f
2.P16
2.P17
2.P18
1.e
2
2.K8
2.D4
2.D5
2.9
3.4
1.f
2.P2
2.P7
2.P8
2.P19
3.8
1.g
5
5.P6
Principals allocate resources and manage school operations in order to ensure a safe and productive learning environment.
3.1
Principals establish and
maintain a safe school
environment.
3.2
Principals create a nurturing
learning environment that
addresses the physical and
mental health needs of all.
3.3
Principals allocate resources,
including technology, to support
student and staff learning.
3.4
K1
T2
ELCC
Principals institute procedures
and practices to support staff
and students and establish an
environment that is conducive
to learning.
K1
K2
D1
D2
K1
K2
D1
D2
K1
T1
T2
3.1b
3.2c
1.f
3.1b
2.2c
2
2.D7
3
3.K3
3.K6
3.D7
3.P6
3.P21
2
2.P12
3
3.K6
3.9
5
5.K3
5.D1
5.D3
5.5
1.e
3
3.K5
3.K8
3.D1
2.9
3.10
1.f
3.P10
3.P11
3.P20
5
4.3
4.3a
1.f
3.1c
3.3a
3.3b
3.3c
5.P5
K1
K2
2.4a
2.4b
3.1b
D1
D2
3.2a
3.2b
3.2c
3.1c
1.f
4.4d
3.11
4.3b
2
2.P19
3
3.K2
3.2
3.K4
3.D1
3.D3
3.D5
4.1a
3.D6
3.P2
3.P7
3.P22
3.4
Value
Added
OPS
2.5a
OPS
2.5b
OPS
2.5c
Standard
Number
Ohio Principal Standards
UA
Conceptual
Framework
E2
3.5
4
4.1
3.2c
4.3
3.3a
NCATE
5.3a
1.g
Principals understand, uphold
and model professional ethics,
policies and legal codes of
professional conduct.
ISLLC
Praxis
3
3.K7
3.P5
3.P23
3.9
4.4
5
5.D3
5.P8
5.P9
4.4a
4.4b
5.P10
5.P15
5.P16
6
4.4c
6.K3
6.D5
Principals Establish and sustain collaborative learning and shared leadership to promote learning and achievement of all students.
Principals promote a
collaborative learning culture
K2
D1
D2
E1
E1
4.2
ELCC
2.1a
3.2a
4.1a
3.2b
Principals share leadership with
staff, students, parents and
community members
Principals support and advance
the leadership capacity of all
educators.
K1
E3
E2
2.4a
2.4b
2.4c
4.3a
1.e
1
1.K6
3
3.P13
1.7
2.12
1.f
4
4.D2
4.D3
4.P15
5.2
5.3
1.g
4.P16
1.e
1
1.D4
1.P7
3
2.12
4.2c
1.f
3.P14
4
4.D2
4.D5
1.g
4.D8
4.P4
4.P8
4.P9
4.P15
6
6.P4
1.e
1.g
Value
Added
Standard
Number
5
Ohio Principal Standards
UA
Conceptual
Framework
NCATE
ISLLC
Value
Added
Praxis
Principals engage parents and community members in the educational process and create an environment where community resources support student
learning, achievement, and well being.
K1
T1
E1
5.1
ELCC
Principals connect the school
with the community
1.2c
1.3a
1.4a
1.5a
1.e
1
1.P7
1.D4
3
1.3
2.12
1.5b
3.2b
4.1a
4.1b
1.f
3.D6
4
4.P2
4.P4
4.2b
4.2c
4.1c
4.1d
4.1e
4.1f
1.g
4.P6
4.P7
4.P8
4.P9
4.1g
4.1h
4.2a
4.3a
4.P10
4.P15
6
6.P4
4.3b
4.3c
6.1e
6.2a
1.5a
4.1a
4.1b
4.1c
1.e
4
4.D2
4.D5
4.D6
2.12
4.2b
4.1d
4.1f
6.2a
1.f
4.D8
4.2c
5.3
4.2b
5.3
3.11
6.3a
K1
5.2
Principals involve parents and
community members in
improving student learning.
1.g
K1
5.3
E1
E1
Principals use community
resources to improve student
learning.
3.3a
3.3b
4.1a
4.1c
1.e
3
3.P10
4
4.K3
4.1d
4.1e
4.1g
4.1h
1.f
4.K5
4.D7
4.P2
4.P4
4.2d
4.3a
4.3b
4.3c
1.g
4.P6
4.P7
4.P8
4.P9
6.1b
5.4
Principals establish
expectations for the use of
culturally responsive practices
that acknowledge and value
diversity
4.P14
K1
K2
1.1a
1.1b
2.1a
2.2b
1.e
1
1.K1
1.D1
2
1.3
D1
D2
2.3b
3.2c
4.2b
4.2c
1.f
2.K7
2.D6
2.P6
4
5.3
4.2d
5.1a
5.2a
5.3a
1.g
4.K2
4.D4
4.P11
5
6.1f
6.1g
6.2a
6.3a
4.a
5.K3
5.P10
5.P12
6
6.K8
6.D2
6.3c
OPS
5.2a
OPS
5.2b
OPS
5.2c
OPS
5.2d
APPENDIX B
COLLEGE OF EDUCATION
REVISED DISPOSITIONS
•
Implement those methods that are based upon professional knowledge and training.
•
Provide those services that are within the scope of their professional training and/or consult
with appropriate personnel if a student’s needs are beyond the scope of their training.
•
Demonstrate a commitment to reflective and insightful practice by the collection and analysis
of data to inform and guide service provision.
•
Demonstrate and maintain competency and skills with diverse populations with the belief
that all students can learn and/or benefit from services. Abide by all legal and ethical
requirements as put forth by the ORC/ARC and/or professional associations.
•
Demonstrate and promote accurate, honest and truthful interactions and services that are fair
to all individuals.
•
Adhere to those specific expectations in course syllabi.
•
Model respectful interactions that establish credibility and a relationship of trust with those
for whom they provide services.
32
APPENDIX C
UNIT ASSESSMENT SYSTEM:
INITIAL TEACHER LICENSURE
33
UNIT ASSESSMENT SYSTEM:
ADVANCED PROGRAMS
34
GLOSSARY
*Advanced Programs. Programs at post baccalaureate levels for (1) the continuing education of teachers
who have previously competed initial preparation or (2) the preparation of other school professionals.
Advanced programs commonly award graduate credit and include master’s, specialist, and doctoral
degree programs as well as non-degree licensure programs offered at the post baccalaureate level.
Examples of these programs include those for teachers who are preparing for a second license at the
graduate level in a field different from the field in which they have their first license; programs for
teachers who are seeking a master’s degree in the field in which they teach; and programs not tied to
licensure, such as programs in curriculum and instruction. In addition, advanced programs include those
for other school professionals such as school counselors, school psychologists, educational
administrators, and reading specialists.
Allied Programs. Programs in the College of Education that offer professional preparation in school
counseling, technical education, higher education, sports science and wellness, and athletic training
*Assessment System. A comprehensive and integrated set of evaluation measures that provides
information for use in monitoring candidate performance and managing and improving unit operations
and programs for the preparation of professional educators.
Beginning Teacher Competencies. The knowledge, skills, and dispositions determined to be essential
for all candidates. These are not subsumed under INTASC Standards.
*Candidates. Individuals admitted to, or enrolled in, programs for the initial or advanced preparation of
teachers, teachers continuing their professional development, or other professional school professionals.
Candidates are distinguished from “students” in P–12 schools.
*Conceptual Framework. An underlying structure in a professional education unit that gives conceptual
meaning to the unit's operations through an articulated rationale and provides direction for programs,
courses, teaching, candidate performance, faculty scholarship and service, and unit accountability.
*Content (knowledge). The subject matter or discipline that teachers are being prepared to teach at the
elementary, middle level, and/or secondary levels. Content also refers to the professional field of study
(e.g., special education, early childhood, school psychology, reading, or school administration).
Core Courses. These courses form the core of pedagogical knowledge for initial teacher preparation.
The courses are in Phases and are sequential.
Developmentally Appropriate. Regardless of teaching field or program, instruction that is
developmentally appropriate begins with the characteristics of learners.
*Dispositions. Professional attitudes, values, and beliefs demonstrated through both verbal and nonverbal behaviors as educators interact with students, families, colleagues, and communities. These
positive behaviors support student learning and development. NCATE expects institutions to assess
professional dispositions based on observable behaviors in educational settings. The two professional
dispositions that NCATE expects institutions to assess are fairness and the belief that all students can
learn. Based on their mission and conceptual framework, professional education units can identify, define,
and operationalize additional professional dispositions.
35
Diversity. Differences among groups of people and individuals based on socioeconomic status, race,
ethnicity, sexual orientation, language, religion, and exceptionalities (both disabilities and giftedness),
language, religion, sexual orientation, and geographical area. The types of diversity necessary for
addressing the elements on candidate interactions with diverse faculty, candidates, and P–12 students are
stated in the rubrics for those elements.
Educator as Decision Maker. The theme adopted by the College of Education to reflect the complexity
of the nature of a role of practitioners in their practice. As a Unit, we strive to prepare candidates to use
reflective processes and make sound judgments.
Ethics. The College of Education’s commitment to creating an ethical environment that promotes a
culture of intellectual excellence, respect for diversity, caring, civility, and responsibility.
Field Experiences. A variety of early and ongoing field-based opportunities in which candidates may
observe, assist, tutor, instruct, and/or conduct research. Field experiences may occur in off-campus
settings such as schools, community centers, or homeless shelters. Field experiences are identified as
urban or suburban based upon more than one ethnicity being significantly represented according to the
US Census. As field placements are made, the candidate’s history of prior placements is determined and
future placements are based upon candidate need.
*Initial Teacher Preparation. Programs at baccalaureate or post baccalaureate levels that prepare
candidates for the first license to teach.
Inquiry. Reflected in faculty inquiry in research and scholarly activities and student inquiry in problem
solving and decision making.
*INTASC (Interstate New Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium). A project of the Council
of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO) that has developed model performance-based standards and
assessments for the licensure of teachers.
ISLLC (Interstate School Leaders License Consortium). A project of the Council of Chief State
School Officers (CCSSO). ISLLC Standards are organized around core proposition that the most critical
aspect of a school leader’s work is the continuous improvement of school learning.
*Knowledge Bases. Empirical research, disciplined inquiry, informed theory, and the wisdom of
practice.
*Licensure. The official recognition by a state governmental agency that an individual has met certain
qualifications specified by the state and is, therefore, approved to practice in an occupation as a
professional.
Metropolitan Settings. The University of Akron is located in a metropolitan setting, encompassing
urban, suburban, and rural settings.
*NBPTS (National Board for Professional Teaching Standards). An organization of teachers and
other educators, which has developed both standards and a system for assessing the performance of
experienced teachers seeking national certification.
NCATE. (National Council for the Accreditation of Teacher Education). NCATE is a coalition of
33 specialty professional associations of teachers, teacher educators, content specialists, and local and
state policy makers. All are committed to quality teaching, and together, the coalition represents over 3
36
million individuals. NCATE is the profession’s mechanism to help establish high quality teacher
preparation. Through the process of professional accreditation of schools, colleges and departments o
education, NCATE works to make a difference in the quality of teaching and teacher preparation today,
tomorrow, and for the next century.
NCTAF (National Commission for America’s Future). The national commission composed of
business, education, and business leaders with the focus on teacher education.
*Other Professional School Personnel. Educators who provide professional services other than
teaching in schools. They include, but are not limited to, principals, reading specialists, school
counselors, and school superintendents.
Outcomes Assessment. See Performance Assessment.
*Pedagogical Content Knowledge. The interaction of the subject matter and effective teaching
strategies to help students learn the subject matter. It requires a thorough understanding of the content to
teach it in multiple ways, drawing on the cultural backgrounds and prior knowledge and experiences of
students.
*Pedagogical Knowledge. The general concepts, theories, and research about effective teaching,
regardless of content areas.
*Performance Assessment. A comprehensive assessment through which candidates demonstrate their
proficiencies in subject, professional, and pedagogical knowledge, skills, and professional dispositions,
including their abilities to have positive effects on student learning.
*Portfolio. An accumulation of evidence about individual proficiencies, especially in relation to explicit
standards and rubrics, used in evaluation of competency as a teacher or other school professional.
Contents might include end-of-course evaluations and tasks used for instructional or clinical experience
purposes such as projects, journals, and observations by faculty, videos, and reflective essays on the
student teaching application.
Praxis. Praxis encompasses three categories of assessment provided by Educational Testing Service
(ETS), that are used as part of the teacher licensure process. Praxis I is taken prior to entry to the teacher
education program; Praxis II assesses Principles of Teaching and Learning and subject specialty area(s);
Praxis III assesses classroom performance.
*Professional Knowledge. The historical, economic, sociological, philosophical, and psychological
understandings of schooling and education. It also includes knowledge about learning, diversity,
technology, professional ethics, legal and policy issues, pedagogy, and the roles and responsibilities of the
profession of teaching.
*Scholarship. Systematic inquiry into the areas related to teaching, learning, and the education of
teachers and other school professionals. Scholarship includes traditional research and the systematic
study of pedagogy and the application of current research findings in new settings. Scholarship further
presupposes submission of one’s work for professional review and evaluation
*School Faculty. Licensed practitioners in P–12 schools who provide instruction, supervision, and
direction for candidates during field-based assignments.
37
*School Partners. P–12 schools that collaborate with the higher education institution in designing,
developing, and implementing field experiences, clinical practice, delivery of instruction, and research
*Standards. Written expectations for meeting a specified level of performance. Standards exist for the
content that P–12 students should know at a certain age or grade level.
*Technology, Use of. What candidates must know and understand about information technology in order
to use it in working effectively with students and professional colleagues in the (1) delivery, development,
prescription, and assessment of instruction; (2) problem solving; (3) school and classroom administration;
(4) educational research; (5) electronic information access and exchange; and (6) personal and
professional productivity
*Unit. The college, school, department, or other administrative body in colleges, universities, or other
organizations with the responsibility for managing or coordinating all programs offered for the initial and
advanced preparation of teachers and other school professionals, regardless of where these programs are
administratively housed in an institution. Also known as the “professional education unit.” The
professional education unit must include in its accreditation review all programs offered by the institution
for the purpose of preparing teachers and other school professionals to work in pre-kindergarten through
twelfth grade settings.
*Unit Head. The individual officially designated to provide leadership for the unit with the authority and
responsibility for its overall administration and operation.
*Unit Review. The process by which NCATE applies national standards for the preparation of school
personnel to the unit.
Wisdom of Practice. The pedagogical knowledge that has stood the test of time.
* From NCATE Glossary
38
BIBLIOGRAPHY
American Association for Higher Education Bulletins. (1996).
Anderman, E. M., & Murdock, T. B. (2007). The psychology of academic cheating. Burlington, MA:
Elsevier Inc.
Argyris, C., & Schon, D. (1974). Theory in practice: Increasing professional effectiveness. San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: W.H. Freeman.
Banks, J. A. (2000). An introduction to multicultural education (3rd ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Banks, J. Cochran-Smith, M., Moll, L., Richert, A., Zeichner, K., Lepage, P., et al. (2005). Teaching
diverse learners. In L. Darling-Hammond & J. Bransford (Eds.), Preparing teachers for a changing
world: What teachers should learn and be able to do (pp. 232-274). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Banks, J. A., Cookson, P., Gay, G., Hawley, W. D., Irvine, J. J., Nieto, S., Schofield, J. W., & Stephen,
W. G. (2001). Diversity within unity: Essential principles for teaching and learning in a multicultural
society. Phi Delta Kappan, 83(3), 196-198; 200-203.
Banks, J., & McGee Banks, C. A. (2004). Handbook of research in multicultural education (2nd ed.). San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Borko, H., & Putnam, R. T. (1996). Learning to teach. In D. C. Berliner & R. C Calfee (Eds.), Handbook
of Educational Psychology (pp. 673-708). New York: Macmillan
Boyer, E. (1997). Scholarship reconsidered. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Braden, J. P. (2007). Using data from high-stakes testing in program planning and evaluation. Journal of
Applied School Psychology, 23(2), 129-150.
Bransford, J. D., & Stein, B. S. (1993). The ideal problem solver: A guide to improving thinking,
learning, and creativity (2nd ed.). Worth: Gordonville.
Bransford, J., Derry, S., Berliner, D., & Hammerness, K. (2005). Theories of learning and their roles in
teaching. In L. Darling-Hammond & J. Bransford (Eds.), Preparing teachers for a changing world:
What teachers should learn and be able to do (pp. 40-87). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Brophy, J., & Alleman, J. (2007). Powerful social studies for elementary students. Belmont, CA:
Thompson/Wadsworth.
Bruner, J. S. (1996). The culture of education. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Campbell, D., Melenyzer, B., Nettles, D., & Wyman, R., Jr. (2000). Portfolio and performance
assessment in teacher education. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Cochran-Smith, M. (2003). Assessing assessment in teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education,
54(3), 187-191.
Cohen, E. G., & Lotan, R. A. (2004). Equity in heterogeneous classrooms. In J. Banks & C. Banks (Eds.),
Handbook of research on multicultural education (2nd ed., pp. 736-750). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Comer, J. P. (2004). Leave no child behind: Preparing today's youth for tomorrows world. New Haven,
CT: Yale University Press.
Committee on Innovation and Technology of the American Association of Colleges for Teacher
Education. (2008). Handbook of technological pedagogical content knowledge. New York:
Routledge.
Darling-Hammond, L. (1997). The right to learn. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.
Darling-Hammond, L. (2000). How teacher education matters. Journal of Teacher Education, 51(3), 166173.
Darling-Hammond, L., & Snyder, J. (2000). Authentic assessment of teaching in context. Teaching and
Teacher Education, 16, 523-545.
Darling-Hammond, L. (2006). Assessing teacher education: The usefulness of multiple measures for
assessing outcomes. Journal of Teacher Education, 57(2), 120-138.
Diez, M. E. (1998). Changing the practice of teacher education. Washington, DC: American Association
of Colleges for Teacher Education.
39
Evertson, C. M., & Weinstein, C. S. (2006). Handbook of classroom management: Research, practice,
and contemporary issues. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Fenstermacher, G. D., & Soltis, J. F. (2004). Approaches to teaching (4th ed.). New York: Teachers
College Press.
Fives, H., & Buehl, M. M. (2008). What do teachers believe: Developing a framework for examining
beliefs about knowledge and ability. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 33, 134-176.
Gilles, R. M. (2007). Cooperative learning: Integrating theory and practice. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Graham, S., & Hudley, C. (2005). Race and ethnicity in the study of motivation and competence. In A. J.
Elliot & C. S. Dweck (Eds.), Handbook of competence motivation (pp. 392-413). New York:
Guilford.
Grossman, P., & Loeb, S. (2006). Teacher education and society's needs. Change, 38(6), 4-4.
Grossman, P., & McDonald, M. (2008). Back to the future: Directions for research in teaching and
teacher education. American Educational Research Journal, 45(1), 184-205.
Guskey, T. R. (2007). All our children are leaning: New views on the work of Benjamin S. Bloom. In
A. M. Blankenship, R. W. Cole & P. D. Houston (Eds.), Engaging every learner (pp. 101-118).
Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Halpern, D. (2003). Thought and knowledge (3rd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Hilliard, A. (1991). Do we have to educate all children? Educational Leadership, 49(1), 31-36.
Hudley, C., & Gotfried, A. E. (2008). Academic motivation and the culture of school in childhood and
adolescence. New York: Oxford University Press.
Irvine, J. (2003). Educating teachers for diversity. New York: Teachers College Press.
Jonassen, D. H., Peck, K. L, & Wilson, B. G. (2008). Meaningful learning with technology.
Pearson/Merrill Prentice Hall: Upper Saddle River, N. J.
Karnes, F. A., & et al.(2008). Achieving excellence: Educating the gifted and talented. Upper Saddle
River: Merrill/Prentice Hall.
Kahveci, M., & Imamoglu, Y. (2007). Interactive learning in mathematics education: Review of recent
literature. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 26(2), 137-153.
Kennedy, M. M. (1999). The role of preservice teachers. In Darling-Hammond L., & Sykes, G. (Ed.),
Teaching as a learning profession (pp. 54-85). San Francisco: Teachers College Press.
Kuhn, D. (2008). Formal Operations from a twenty-first century perspective. Human Development, 51,
48-55.
Ladson-Billings, B. (1992). Reading between the lines and beyond the pages: A culturally relevant
approach to literacy teaching. Theory Into Practice, 31(4), 312-320.
Lee, C. D. (2008). The centrality of culture to the scientific study of learning and development: How an
ecological framework in educational research facilitates civic responsibility. Educational
Researcher, 37(5), 267-279.
Mayeroff, M. (1971). On caring. New York: Harper & Row.
McCombs, B. (2005). A learner-centered framework for e-learning. Teacher's College Record, 107(8),
1582-1600.
Means, B. (2000). Technology use in today’s schools. Educational Leadership, 58(4), 57-62.
National Center for Educational Statistics. (2005). The condition of education. Washington, DC: US
Department of Education, Office of Educational Research and Improvement.
National Commission on Teaching and America’s Future. (1996). What matters most: Teaching for
America’s future: Report of the national commission on teaching and America’s future. New York:
The Commission.
Noddings, N. (2003). Caring a feminist approach to ethics and moral education (2nd ed.). Berkeley, CA:
University of California Press.
Noddings, N. (2005). The challenge to care in school (2nd ed.). New York: Teachers College Press.
Obiakor, F. E. (2007). Multicultural special education: Culturally responsible teaching. Upper Saddle
River, NJ: Pearson/Merrill/Prentice Hall.
40
Osguthorpe, R. (2008). On the reasons we want teachers of good dispositions and moral character.
Journal of Teacher Education, 59(4), 288-299.
Palincscar, A., & Ladewski, B. (2006). Literacy and the learning sciences. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), The
Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 299-314). New York: Cambridge University
Press.
Pressley, M., Gaskins, I., Solic, K., & Collins, K. (2006). A portrait of Benchmark School: How a
school produces high achievement in students who previously failed. Journal of Educational
Psychology, 98(2), 282-306.
Randi, J., & Corno, L. (2007). Theory into practice: A matter of transfer. Journal of Teacher Education,
46(4), 334-332.
Ritchhart, R., & Perkins, D. (2008). Making thinking visible. Educational Leadership, 65(5), 57-61.
Roschelle, J. M., Pea, R. D., Hoadley, C. M., Gordin, D. N., & Means, B. M. (2000). Changing how and
what children learn in school with computer-based technologies. The Future of Children, Special
Issues on Children and Computer Technology, 10(2).
Rovai, A. P., Ponton, M. K., Wighting, M. J., & Baker, J. D. (2007). A comparative analysis of student
motivation in traditional classroom and e-learning courses. International Journal on E-Learning,
6(3), 413-432. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. EJ763593)
Sanger, M. N. (2008). What we need to do to prepare teachers for the moral nature of their work. Journal
of Curriculum Studies, 40(2), 169-185.
Sawyer, D. J. (2006). Dyslexia: A generation of inquiry. Topics in Language Inquiry, 30(2), 95-109.
Scheeler, M. C. (2008). Generalizing effective teaching skills: The missing link in teacher preparation.
Journal of Behavioral Education, 17(2), 145-59.
Schunk, D. H., & Zimmerman, B. J. (2008). Motivation and self-regulated learning. New York: Taylor &
Francis Group.
Sergiovanni, T. J., & Starratt, R. J. (1993). Supervision: A redefinition (5th ed.). New York: MacMillan.
Sergiovanni, T. J., & Starratt, R. J. (2002). Supervision: A redefinition (7th ed.). Boston: McGraw-Hill.
Shepard, L.A. (2000). The role of assessment in a learning culture. Educational Researcher, 29(7), 4-14.
Sherman, S. (2006). Moral dispositions in teacher education. Teacher Education Quarterly, 33(4), 41-57.
Shulman, L. S. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational
Review, 57(1), 1-22.
Shulman, L.S. (1999). Taking learning seriously. Change, 31(4), 11-17.
Stiggins, R., & Chappius, J. (2008). Enhancing student learning. Direct Administration, 44(1), 42-44.
Stroble, B. (2000). Unit assessment system. Paper commissioned by National Council of Accreditation of
Teacher Council, Washington, D. C.
Suarez-Orozco, C., Suarez-Oresco, M., & Doucet, F. (2004). The academic engagement and achievement
of Latino youth. In J. Banks & C. Banks (Eds.), Handbook of research on multicultural education
(pp. 420-437). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Villegas, A. M. (2007). Dispositions in teacher education: A look at social justice. Journal of Teacher
Education, 58(5), 370-380.
Wang, L. (2003). Impact of vicarious learning experiences and goal-setting on preservice teachers’ selfefficacy for technology integration (Doctoral dissertation, Purdue University, 2003). Dissertation
Abstracts International, 65(03), 823.
Weinstein, R. S. (2002). Reaching higher: The power of expectations in schooling. Cambridge, MA:
Harvard University Press.
Zientek, L. R. (2006). Do teachers differ by certification route? Novice teachers sense of self-efficacy,
commitment to teaching, and preparedness to teach. School Science and Mathematics, 106(8), 326327.
Zimmerman, B. J., & Dibenedetto, M. K. (2008). Mastery learning and assessment: Implications for
students and teachers in an era of high-stakes testing. Psychology in the Schools, 45(3), 206-216.
41