Using Cohorts as an Organizational Structure in Teacher Education: Examining the Impact on Candidates’ Perceptions of Preparation

Teachers' Sense of Efficacy: An Important Factor in School Improvement

Luxembourg is known for its diversity as a multilingual country with a rapidly changing context. The use of different languages in the school system elicits challenges and opportunities for both students and teachers and, consequently, teacher education. This chapter presents data from the development of a workshop focusing on Science and Language, which takes place in a school-university partnership that supports elementary science teacher education in Luxembourg—the SciTeach Center. Through exploring the dynamics of the team of researchers and teachers, it is revealed how its collaborative structure based on co-developing and co-teaching professional learning opportunities can create spaces for boundary-spanning. Therefore, grounded in sociocultural perspectives and using tools from critical ethnography and participatory research lenses, this contribution presents a case study of boundary-spanning within a school-university partnership as we analyze our own boundary-spanning as a professor, a doctoral researcher and an elementary teacher.

Stage 1: Survival During Stage 1, which may last throughout the first full year of teaching, the teacher's main concern is whether she can survive. This preoccupation with survival may be expressed in questions the teacher asks: "Can I get through the day in one piece? Without losing a child? Can I make it until the end of the week? Until the next vacation? Can I really do this kind of work day after day? Will I be accepted by my colleagues?" Such questions are well expressed in Ryan's enlightening collection of accounts of first-year teaching experiences (3).

Since the late 20th century, school–university partnerships have been promoted as collaborative efforts in teacher education. Traditionally, in such partnerships, university teacher educators oversaw cooperating teachers who supervised pre-service teachers (PSTs) in a hierarchical structure. In parallel with a growing movement for teacher educators to adopt activist roles challenging societal oppressions, recent shifts have recognised cooperating teachers as co-educators who collaborate and share knowledge. This paper explores this school–university partnership by questioning: (a) What were the learning journeys experienced by the cooperating teachers in a school–university partnership? and (b) To what extent did their learning journeys align with the concept of activist teacher educators? Designed as participatory action research (PAR), this project was established between public schools and one university engaged in the Institutional Programme of Teaching Initiation (PIBID) in Brazil. Participants included a university lecturer and two cooperating teachers. Throughout the 18-month duration of the project, data were collected from various sources, including weekly meetings, participants’ diaries, final interviews, and artefacts produced by the group. Through thematic analysis, three themes were developed: (a) creating democratic spaces with PSTs, (b) practitioner inquiry as a means to transform teaching practice, and (c) micro-social changes to improve the profession, demonstrated through activism in new PIBID projects or initiatives with education administration. This study underscores the role of cooperating teachers as activist educators in fostering collaborative and social justice-oriented teacher education processes, contributing to ongoing discourse on reflective practice and collaborative partnerships.

PurposeTeacher effectiveness in diverse school environments depends highly on the multicultural education courses provided by Educator Preparation Programs (EPP). Research measuring new teachers’ (i.e. teachers having 0-3 years of teaching experience) effectiveness as a result of EPPs’ multicultural education courses is limited. The purpose of this study was to examine if any association occurred between the number of multicultural courses offered to pre-service teacher candidates by EPPs and their graduates rating of effectiveness, as it pertains to creating a culturally diverse classroom environment.Design/methodology/approachUsing data from the North Carolina Department of Public Instruction (NCDPI) and public EPPs course catalogs for North Carolina, this descriptive study investigates multicultural education course offerings and recent teacher graduate data for North Carolina for 2015, as it pertains to creating culturally diverse learning environments for students of color.FindingsThe results indicate that multiple EPPs in North Carolina are not providing multicultural courses for their pre-service teachers, and that novice teachers in North Carolina are lacking the ability to produce diverse learning environments for students of color at a high capacity as defined by the North Carolina Teacher Effectiveness definition.Research limitations/implicationsData were retrieved from 2015. In the current year, EPPs could have boosted their offerings of multicultural courses since that time.Social implicationsIt is anticipated that the lack course offerings by EPPs will directly reflect new teachers’ ability to create respectful learning environment for students of color, suggesting that EPPs may be counterproductive towards teacher candidates’ understanding of race in the classroom.Originality/valueThis study’s originality exists in its ability to begin to connect new teachers’ productivity with regards for promoting diversity or multiculturalism and the multicultural courses offered by EPPs.

PurposeSchool–university partnerships are important in teacher education to ensure PK-12 preservice teachers gain teaching experience prior to becoming teachers of record. Drawing on Ball and Cohen’s (1999) concept of “practice-based teacher education,” this three-year qualitative study examines the results of an intentionally reciprocal school–university partnership centered on a practice-based learning, field-based course. The following question guided this research: Having designed and facilitated a school–university partnership centered on reciprocity, what factors contributed to and/or took away from this commitment?Design/methodology/approachThe current study examined three data sources, namely: (1) seven semi-structured focus group interviews with a teacher educator, sixth-grade teachers (n = 4) and a principal; (2) eight question/answer sessions between preservice teachers and partnering secondary teachers and (3)one focus group between the two authors. Data were analyzed using reflexive thematic analysis.FindingsThis study’s findings highlight the reciprocal nature of the school–university partnership, showcasing the positive outcomes and challenges faced by stakeholders. Clear communication and ongoing dialogue were identified as key elements to establishing and maintaining a reciprocal relationship. Additionally, emphasis on shared learning experiences between partners were found valuable and important to maintaining benefit to all partners. Relationship development also remained an important and positive outcome of this partnership. Additionally, there were challenges related to time, and schedule constraints were evident in the partnership. Moreover, ongoing reflection and a willingness to adjust and change based on experiences and lessons learned ensured participants recognized the importance of ongoing iteration and calibration to address challenges and enhance the partnership.Research limitations/implicationsBecause of the chosen research approach, the research results may lack generalizability.Originality/valueThe paper includes implications for the development of other school–university partnerships that prioritize reciprocity, highlighting an often assumed, but not always examined, component necessary to the success of school–university partnerships.

Background: An established body of research illuminates the benefits of school-university partnerships as opportunities for teachers’ professional development. Concomitantly, studies highlight power imbalances between schools and universities, challenges may form from the hierarchical structures within those partnerships. Consequently, it remains necessary to consider partnerships that foster democratic and collective agency amongst all actors involved in those partnerships in order to advance changes in the teaching profession. This paper is grounded in Sachs’ notions of viewing the teaching profession as democratic and managerial (2001; 2016). In this current paper, rather than presenting democratic and managerial approaches as two separate entities, they are presented here as a continuum on which university lecturers, mentor-teachers, and pre-service teachers, navigate, constantly facing diverse challenges to structure a democratic school-university partnership. Purpose: This study explored a school-university partnership in physical education teacher education. Specifically, we were interested in what features contributed to (or hindered) the development of mentor teachers’ (MT), teacher educators’, and pre-service teachers’ (PST) democratic professionalism. Method: An 18-month school-university partnership in the Institutional Program of Teaching Initiation, Brazil, was the project’s focus. The action research participants were 19 PSTs, two MTs, a teacher educator-facilitator, and a critical friend. Data sources included: weekly meetings with the PIBID group (43), between MTs and facilitator (39), and facilitator and critical friend (8); mid and final-term PST focus groups; interviews (14); and diaries (22). Reflexive and inductive thematic analysis were used to analyze the data. Findings: Three themes reflect how this school-university partnership cultivated teachers’ democratic professionalism. These themes are (1) enacting democratic practices as a group, (2) fostering participants’ agency, and (3) addressing power inequalities in a democratic space. The first theme includes diverse strategies (e.g. listening-to-respond, respecting affective connections, and acknowledging PSTs’ learning pace) developed within the project. The second theme relates to the challenges, the engagement in critical reflection, and the constant struggles against inequalities in the group context. The third theme concerns participants’ recognition of the partnership as a democratic space, albeit carrying power inequalities (e.g. organization of the program, context of education, and hierarchical relationships). Conclusion: The school-university partnership created spaces for participants to learn together about the teaching profession. A democratic structure included teachers as co-leaders of the program, PSTs’ needs as the starting point of action, and a critical and reflective approach as a practice of the group. Educating (future) teachers to disrupt a managerial view of their profession is necessary. By seeking collaboration, collective action, and the fostering of a less hierarchical and more egalitarian space, participants experimented and engaged with a democratic view of the teaching profession.

ABSTRACTThe authors conducted an online survey of elementary teacher education programs within a large midwestern state to assess preservice teachers’ and teacher educators’ beliefs about and preparedness to teach financial literacy. Very few preservice teachers had meaningful experiences with personal finance in high school, college, or personal decision making. No teacher educators reported ever teaching financial literacy in their higher education roles. Only 13% of teacher educators and 25% of preservice teachers thought that it was very important to teach financial literacy in elementary education. Most teacher education faculty and preservice teachers reported that they were not well qualified to use state economics standards or the JumpStart standards for financial literacy. Preservice teachers were more confident in meeting financial literacy standards than teacher educators. Both preservice teachers and teacher educators expressed openness to collaborating with other faculty members, members of the financial service industry, and parents to teach financial literacy. Follow-up phone interviews affirmed that elementary preservice teachers and teacher educators value social studies education (and financial literacy) less than reading and mathematics education. Qualitative results also suggest that elementary preservice teachers and teacher educators would like more easily accessible resources for teaching financial literacy.

Assessment could not be done without an organized infrastructure of personnel and software. This study examined this infrastructure in educator preparation programs (EPPs) across one state in the southeast United States. The results are compared to a similar survey conducted in the same state ten years ago to identify changes over time. Several findings emerged. Personnel leading assessment efforts in EPPs have assessment as only one of several other job duties they perform. A variety of assessment management systems (AMSs) are used across institutions, with most in use for over a decade. EPPs tend to use their AMS to collect student artifacts and enable the evaluations of those artifacts, then export this data to other software for analysis and reporting. The primary need in assessment systems is (and has been for some time) additional personnel resources. Implications of these for both EPPs and AMS vendors are discussed.

This chapter reports on empirical study that examined the impact of two distinctive university–school partnerships involving two teacher educators, pre-service teachers, in-service teachers and their primary-aged students from two regional primary schools. The study took place in Gippsland, Australia and was underpinned by a science education subject embedded in a Bachelor of Education degree that involved the delivery of science lessons by pre-service teachers with children in outdoor settings. In asking the question how can a university–school partnership shape and inform science teaching and science teacher education, the chapter draws on a data set of focus group and individual interviews with pre-service and in-service teachers. The chapter contends that university–school partnerships make an important contribution to education, particularly in relation to science teaching and science teacher education. We contend the place-based partnership frameworks will be of interest to those teacher educators and in-service teachers looking to enrich and renew educational practice more broadly, as well as in the science domain.

In 2010, the National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE) published the Blue Ribbon Report focusing on expanding and improving clinical education. This report was then operationalized by the Association for Colleges for Teacher Education’s (AACTE) Clinical Practice Commission’s (CPC) report in 2018. Both documents place an emphasis on clinical education as the primary structure in which teacher preparation stands. As a result, educator preparation programs (EPPs) have been given guidance on defining clinical practice (CP), creating a common lexicon for CP concepts, improving research-based CP experiences, and designing pathways in which EPPs can implement CP strategies. This chapter aims to describe a unique program and partnership with an International\Teacher Preparation Touring Program based in Winchcombe, England that includes a full-time two-week clinical component. The clinical practice experience places students in elementary and secondary schools, and schools for students with disabilities in the Cotswold region of England. Although the travel abroad component of the program is over approximately three weeks, the program spans almost an entire academic year and further enriches the relationship between Monmouth University University’s educator preparation program and the CPC proclamations outlined in the 2018 report (AACTE, 2018).

The Elementary School Journal Volume 81, Number 1 ? 1980 by The University of Chicago 0013-5984/81/8101-0008$0o1.00 In colleges and universities across the country, prospective and practicing teachers and administrators take courses on planning-curriculum-planning and instructional planning. During the courses, teachers and administrators usually study an objectives-first model of curriculumplanning. This model has four steps. Planners are expected to 1. Formulate objectives 2. Choose appropriate learning activities

Throughout the many examples of school-university partnerships presented in this collection, there are multiple models and designs that constitute a partnership. When we began to develop this edited volume, we had insights into how school-university partnerships within initial teacher education were being formed, as well as a clear understanding of key indicators informing effective partnerships. By the final stages of curating this edited collection, inspired by the innovation we were seeing across Australia, more questions arose relating to the fundamental aspects of partnership design. Is a policy framework necessary for a school-university partnership to be successful? Would school-university partnerships be explored without initial teacher education accreditation requirements mandating formal agreements? Do schools initiate partnerships with universities? Should the focus of school-university partnerships centre around the number of pre-service teacher professional placements in schools? This final chapter explores these provocations and poses further considerations in the hope of advancing discussions on successful school-university partnerships.

Educator preparation programs (EPPs) play an important role in preparing teachers to work with disabled students. However, many teachers do not feel well prepared to do so. This study examined the factors that influenced how six teacher educators incorporated disability into the curriculum of a general educator preparation program. I looked at systemic influences, such as certification and degree requirements, as well as teacher educators’ personal exposure to and professional experiences with disability. I used a case study methodology and interpreted findings through the disability studies in education (DSE) framework. Documents were collected from various institutions and from the instructors who taught in the EPP. Additionally, I conducted semi-structured interviews with a purposive sample of instructors in the program for more detail and depth. The results of the study suggested that disability is addressed minimally in the required EPP curriculum, state guidelines for EPPs, and teacher certification exam preparation materials. Additionally, teacher educators largely did not have personal exposure to disability or the experiences with disabled students that would help them feel confident in teaching disability-related topics. As such, they are unsure how to incorporate disability in their own curriculum, but they felt like it was important to do so. Potential strategies for increasing the confidence of teacher educators related to teaching about disability, as well as potential barriers, are discussed.

Educator preparation programs experienced extreme challenges during the COVID-19 pandemic, as many universities and K-12 schools moved to fully online or hybrid instructional models. These abrupt changes significantly limited preservice teachers’ opportunities to engage in classroom-based practice teaching experiences, which are a bedrock of educator preparation programs to support preservice teachers in learning how to teach effectively. In this study, we examined the usability and viability of integrating simulated teaching experiences, which occur in an online, virtual classroom environment consisting of five student avatars, into elementary science method courses during the COVID-19 pandemic to prepare preservice science teachers to engage in one critical science teaching practice: facilitating discussions that engage students in scientific argumentation. This study uses qualitative content analysis of survey data and a focus group interview to identify patterns and themes in how four elementary science teacher educators and 49 of their preservice teachers perceived the use of this tool within elementary science teacher education, particularly the opportunities and challenges this tool afforded during the pandemic and possibilities for use in the post-COVID era. Study findings suggest that these elementary science teacher educators and preservice teachers perceived the simulated teaching experience as valuable for supporting teacher learning, addressing COVID-related challenges, and tackling perennial challenges in science teacher education. They also noted challenges related to implementation and concerns with future access. A discussion of key factors that may support and hinder the use of such tools within elementary science teacher education and implications for leveraging lessons learned post-COVID are included.