Developing Learning, Design, and Change in Teacher Education

Hammerness, K., Berliner, D., Cochran-Smith, M., McDonald, M., & Zeichner, K. (2005). How Teachers Learn and Develop. In L. Darling-Hammond & J. Bransford (Eds.), Preparing Teachers for a Changing World (358-389). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Hammerness, K., Grossman, P., Rust, F., & Shulman, L. (2005). The Design of Teacher Education Programs. In L. Darling-Hammond & J. Bransford (Eds.), Preparing Teachers for a Changing World (390-441). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Grossman,Pacheco, A., Michelli, N., LePage, P., Hammerness, K., & Youngs, P. (2005). Implementing Curriculum Renewal in Teacher Education: Managing Organizational and Policy Change. In L. Darling-Hammond & J. Bransford (Eds.), Preparing Teachers for a Changing World (442-479). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Chapter 10

In Chapter 10, the authors centralized their discussion on classic/contemporary theoretical underpinnings and research to examine the issues that affect teachers’ abilities to become adaptive experts. As adaptive experts, the authors believe teacher development should be in alignment with the following three principles:

1. Awareness of preconceptions: apprenticeship of observation and transmission

2. Understanding and enactment: flexibility; responsiveness; application; innovation

3. Metacognition/ managing responsibilities: knowledge; regulation; modification;

reflection

While the authors understand that teachers’ development phases can be highly erratic, they believe that some stage theories of development (i.e., introspection, student awareness, specific teaching skills, and novice to expert) may lend themselves as considerable descriptions of progressions. Other research has been provided that teachers develop in learning communities that emphasize knowledge development within teaching/professional contexts: subject matter, action, and practice. As other challenges affect the effectiveness of teachers, such as identity development, the authors propose a framework for teacher learning that illustrates the relationship of learning to teach in a community by suggesting a cyclical pattern between understanding, practices, tools, and dispositions, with the first step being towards vision development.

Reaction: In regard to theories of knowledge development, subject matter content has largely influenced my practice as a classroom teacher. There are times that I believe that I my knowledge may not be as adequate as I would like it to be. I do not mean that my students learning is negatively impacted; I would always like to research more about any topic among all subject areas. As I have transferred to different grade levels (K-2), I am expected to be able to break down difficult concepts to children that have limited background knowledge about subject matter. For example, when teaching the human body, I had to make sure to research the systems of the body (ahead of curriculum) to be careful to not establish any misconceptions the students may develop because of misinterpretation through communication. As I, the teacher, learns, I always ask myself the following: how could I be sure that my research facilitates an environment of learning that is reciprocal to balance the level of responsibility between the teacher and student to build my practice and knowledge base?

Chapter 11

In Chapter 11, the authors transcend their focus from learning to teach towards issues in designs of teacher preparation programs. Among the issue of program design, the authors outlined integral aspects of teacher education programs that have been negatively impacted:

• Connection/coherence: incongruent theories/ideas within coursework and among faculty

• Scope and sequence: subject matter (cognitive map/schema); learning process (readiness/ purposeful and critically constructive practice); productive contexts (content-focused /PLCs)

While pedagogies of teacher education are continuing to be established, the authors found that particular strategies have emerged from research that may facilitate effective learning for preservice teachers: constructive clinical experiences (mentoring; co-planning; practice; feedback; reflection; PDS; communal settings; technology) and performance assessment (microteaching; performance tasks; teaching portfolios). Also, the authors consider how components of analyzing teaching and learning, as well as their paralleled relationship. The authors consider case methods, autobiographies, and inquiry/action research projects with continual reflection as viable resources of information to impact the quality of teacher preparation.

Reaction: When learning about practice in practice, I recall my clinical experiences during my undergraduate career. I specifically remember being given opportunities to practice in classrooms while, concurrently, taking courses. As a preservice teacher, I was delighted to have the chance to “practice what was preached” in various classrooms (across grade levels and schools). For example, I had the opportunity to teach at schools that had high and low SES students and applied what I learned from classes in a varied fashion (modified practices according to population). One of the only components that I would have liked to change was my time to reflect on those experiences. Yes, I did journal my experiences; however, I wanted to discuss them with my peers and CTs. How could the component of time have been elongated and discussion fostered to enrich my learning opportunities?

Chapter 12

In Chapter 12, the authors outline how the process of advocating for curriculum renewal in teacher education could be approached with substantial background knowledge of previous/current attempts, outcomes, and future impediments. As the authors desire for policymakers to be proactive rather than remaining reactive to the issues of deficient practice from teacher preparation programs, appropriating suitable investments is seen to strengthen teacher quality. The authors derive the need for enhancing curriculum by defining three variables that plague teacher education programs:

• standards for candidates: contrasting entrance requirements

• standards for programs: accreditation inequality

• teacher education curriculum/faculty: program length; disconnected experiences (fieldwork and curriculum); lack of modeling interactive teaching; shallow curriculum; individual learning

Additionally, the authors recognize that other professions have undergone reform and teacher education may be synonymous with those; however, “actors” would have to build a united front through high-quality collaboration, such as the inclusion of PDS. As challenges naturally occur through change, the authors understand that school districts and universities may struggle with support for collaborative teacher education models by having to encourage involvement. While the authors aspire for policymakers to positively influence the teacher labor market and enact policies that fairly regulate the standards for programs (accreditation) and candidates (licensing), coherence in standards, curriculum, commitment to action of equality, and appropriate knowledge may help to provide the foundation of growth within teacher education.

Reaction: The issue of reform to create standards for candidates will always be a sensitive subject if policymakers cannot reach a consensus about what children should know. As the movement from various standards has occurred to foster a supposed “effective” curriculum, how should preservice teachers be guided towards appropriate means of being deemed as qualified? It should not be possible that here, in the “United” States, there are major discrepancies between school systems’ learning goals. It makes it difficult to increase the teacher labor market because teachers may feel that there may never be “good enough.”