CHI TIẾT NGHIÊN CỨU …
Tiêu đề
Description of the unified elementary special education Proteach program
Tác giả
Ross D.D.; Lane H.B.; McCallum C.
Năm xuất bản
2005
Source title
Preparing for Inclusive Teaching: Meeting The Challenges of Teacher Education Reform
Số trích dẫn
3
DOI
Liên kết
Tóm tắt
The University of Florida has had theoretically grounded, innovative teacher education programs since the development in the mid-1970s of the Childhood Education Program, a program grounded in perceptual psychology (Combs, Blume, Newman, & Wass, 1974). In the early 1980s program faculty engaged in a major program restructuring to create one of the first five-year teacher education programs in the country (Ross & Bondy, 1996; Ross, Johnson, & Smith, 1992; Ross & Krogh, 1988). The original inquiry-based Proteach program stressed themes of developing knowledge of content, drawing on research-based knowledge about teaching, and developing reflective practitioners. In addition, faculty modeled an inquiry orientation for students by continually studying the process and impact of the program. During the '80s and early '90s, feedback from program graduates increasingly indicated graduates' concerns about meeting the needs of a diverse student population, including children with disabilities, children of poverty, and children from diverse cultural backgrounds. In response, faculty altered both content and process in the teacher education program and initiated some pilot teacher education programs that combined elementary and special education (Bondy, Ross, Sindelar, & Griffin, 1995). In the early '90s, reports about the state of teacher education in America began to detail similar problems elsewhere and to suggest changes necessary to prepare teachers to teach complex subject matter to an increasingly diverse student population (Goodlad, 1990; Holmes, 1995; National Commission on Teaching and America's Future, 1996). In 2000, Valli and Rennert-Ariev statistically compared major reform reports in order to identify agreement or disagreement among them. While teacher education reform reports have been criticized for being fragmented and idiosyncratic, consistency exists among the largest reports. Valli and Rennert-Ariev claim the most prominent organizations (Holmes Group, National Council for the Accreditation of Teacher Education or NCATE, Center for Educational Renewal, and National Education Association's Teacher Education Initiative) have the strongest rates of agreement. These reports recommend that programs emphasize Vision, Content Standards, Extended Programs, Professional Development Schools, Authentic Pedagogy, and Performance Assessment. While reform reports were not the origin of the Proteach design, they provided faculty with background knowledge for designing the program, and program components are aligned with these recommendations. Many of these changes require that teacher educators learn to work collaboratively with a variety of constituents so that the work of teaching and teacher education represents the multiple relevant perspectives. For example, the literature recommends stronger linkages between general education, special education, and foundations of education faculties (Holmes, 1995; National Council on Teaching and America's Future or NCTAF, 1996) between college of education faculty and liberal arts and sciences faculties (Holmes, 1995), and between teacher education faculty and school faculties (Goodlad, 1990; NCTAF, 1996). In addition, these reports along with new NCATE guidelines stress performance assessment of teacher education graduates, a task that requires collaboration and coordination by teacher education faculty. However, the current climate of universities, particularly large Research I universities, favors individual rather than collaborative endeavors, making it hard to incorporate multiple perspectives (see chapter 2). The Holmes Group (1995) reports that in a survey of faculty reactions to proposed changes in teacher education, "survey items that projected the creation of complex programs requiring greater levels of collaboration were perceived as a threat to the traditional autonomy enjoyed within research communities" (p. 19). In the spring of 1995 a faculty committee was appointed to reconceptualize the elementary and special education teacher education programs at the University of Florida to create one program with a dual emphasis on elementary and special education. This chapter provides a description of the results of a 4-year effort to re-create a teacher education program that implements the reforms advocated in the teacher education reform reports. © 2005 State University of New York. All rights reserved.
Từ khóa
Tài liệu tham khảo
Aiken I.P., Day B.D., Early field experiences in preservice teacher education: Research and student perspectives, Action in Teacher Education, 21, 3, pp. 7-12, (1999); Bondy E.G., Ross D.C., Sindelar P., Elementary and special educators learning to work together: Team building processes, Teacher Education Special Education, 18, 2, pp. 91-102, (1995); Buck G., Morsink C., Griffin C., Hines T., Lenk L., Preservice training: The role of field-based experiences in the preparation of effective special educators, Teacher Education and Special Education, 15, 2, pp. 1-16, (1992); Combs A.W., Blume R.A., Newman A.J., Wass H.L., The Professional Education of Teachers, (1974); Dewey J., Democracy and Education, (1916); Dwyer C.A., Development of the Knowledge Base for the PRAXIS III: Classroom Performance Assessment Criteria, (1994); Dwyer C.A., Stufflebeam D., Teacher evaluation, Handbook of Educational Psychology, pp. 765-784, (1996); Fishkin J.S., Democracy and Deliberation: New Directions for Democratic Reform, (1991); Goodlad J., Foreword, Designing Group Work: Strategies for the Heterogeneous Classroom, (1986); Goodlad J., Teachers for Our Nation's Schools, (1990); Goodman J., Elementary Schooling for Critical Democracy, (1992); Harlin R.P., Developing future professionals: Influences of literacy coursework and field experiences, Reading Research and Instruction, 38, pp. 351-370, (1999); Tomorrow's Schools of Education, (1995); Lilly M.S., Research on teacher licensure and state approval of teacher education programs, Teacher Education and Special Education, 15, pp. 148-160, (1992); Miller M.J., Critical Teacher Shortage Areas 2000-2001, (2000); What Matters Most: Teaching for America's Future, (1996); Parker W.C., Educating the Democratic Mind, (1996); Pugach M., Unifying the preservice preparation of teachers, Controversial Issues Confronting Special Education: Divergent Perspectives, pp. 255-270, (1992); Reynolds M.C., Wang M.C., Walberg H.J., The necessary restructuring of special and regular education, Exceptional Children, 53, pp. 391-398, (1987); Ross D.D., Bondy E., The continuing reform of a teacher education program: A case study, Currents of Reform in Preservice Teacher Education, pp. 62-79, (1996); Ross D.D., Bondy E., Kyle D.W., Reflective Teaching for Student Empowerment, (1993); Ross D.D., Johnson M., Smith W., Developing a professional teacher at the university of Florida, Case Studies and Critiques of Reflective Teacher Education Programs, pp. 24-39, (1992); Ross D.D., Krogh S.L., From paper to program: A story from elementary PROTEACH, Peabody Journal of Education, 65, 2, pp. 19-34, (1988); Skrtic T.M., Behind Special Education: A Critical Analysis of Professional Culture and School Organization, (1991); Stainback S., Stainback W., Facilitating merger through personnel preparation, Teacher Education and Special Education, 10, pp. 185-190, (1987); Valli L., Rennert-Ariev P.L., Identifying consensus in teacher education reform documents: A proposed framework and action implications, Journal of Teacher Education, 51, 1, pp. 5-17, (2000); Webb R., Sherman R., Schooling and Society, (1989); Wiggins R.A., Follo E.J., Development of knowledge, attitudes, and commitment to teach diverse student populations, Journal of Teacher Education, 50, 2, pp. 94-105, (1999)
Nơi xuất bản
State University of New York Press
Hình thức xuất bản
Book chapter
Open Access
Nguồn
Scopus