Why a Hybrid “Third Space” Matters: A Conversation with Dr. Kenneth Zeichner Centering the Imperative of Authentic Community Engagement in Educator Preparation

List of Contributors. Acknowledgments. Part I: Theory, Method, and Context. Introduction. Theoretical Approaches. 1. Parameters in Acquisition: Jurgen M. Meisel (University of Hamburg). 2. Connectionist Approaches to Language Acquisition: Kim Plunkett (Oxford University). 3. The Impact of Language Socialization on Grammatical Development: Elinor Ochs (University of California at Los Angeles) and Bambi Schieffelin (New York University). Methods. 4. Individual Differences and their Implications for Theories of Language Development: Elizabeth Bates (University of California at San Diego), Philip S. Dale (University of Washington), and Donna Thal (San Diego State University). 5. Computational Analysis of Interactions: Brian MacWhinney (Carnegie Mellon University). Social and Contextual Influences. 6. Issues in the Study of Input: Finetuning, Universality, Individual and Developmental Differences, and Necessary Causes: Catherine E. Snow (Harvard University Graduate School of Education). 7. Discourse Organization and the Development of Reference to Person, Space, and Time: Maya Hickmann (Universite Rene Descartes, Paris Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, EPHE). 8. Bilingual Language Acquisition: Annick de Houwer (Belgian National Science Foundation and University of Antwerp). 9. Socialization across Contexts: Richard Ely (Boston University) and Jean Berko Gleason (Boston University). Part II: The Emergence and Consolidation of Linguistic Abilities:. Introduction. The Spoken Language: Early Speech Development. 10. Development of the Capacity for Spoken Language: John L. Locke (Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School). 11. Phonetic Abilities in the First Year of Life: Ray D. Kent (University of Wisconsin--Madison) and Giuliana Miolo (University of Wisconsin--Madison). 12. Phonological Development: Lise Menn (University of Colorado) and Carol Stoel--Gammon (University of Washington). Learning Words. 13. Early Lexical Development: Martyn Barrett (University of Surrey). 14. Later Lexical Development and Word Formation: Eve V. Clark (Stanford University). 15. The Role of Syntax in Verb Learning: Lila R. Gleitman (University of Pennsylvania) and Jane Gillette (University of Pennsylvania). Learning Grammar. 16. Reinterpreting Childrena s Sentence Comprehension: Toward a New Framework: Roberta Michnick Golinkoff (University of Delaware) and Kathy Hirsh--Pasek (Temple University). 17. Strategies in the Acquisition of Syntax: Ann M. Peters (University of Hawai'i). 18. Phrase Structure and Functional Categories: Andrew Radford (University of Essex). 19. Empty Categories and Complex Sentences: The Case of wh--Questions: Jill de Villiers (Smith College). Part III: Nonnormal Language Development. Introduction. 20. Computational Approaches to the Analysis of Language Impairment: Jon F. Miller (University of Wisconsin--Madison) and Thomas Klee (University of Newcastle upon Tyne). 21. Phonological Impairment: Laurence B. Leonard (Purdue University). 22. Grammatical Impairment: Paul Fletcher (Reading University) and Richard Ingham (University of Reading). 23. Pragmatic Impairments: Holly K. Craig (University of Michigan). 24. Language Development in Children and Adolescents with Down Syndrome: Robin S. Chapman (University of Wisconsin--Madison). 25. Lexical and Grammatical Development in Children with Early Hemisphere Damage: A Cross--sectional View from Birth to Adolescence: Julie A. Eisele (Skidmore College) and Dorothy M. Aram (Emerson College). References. Index.

AIChE JournalVolume 38, Issue 10 p. 1675-1682 Letters to the Editor Letters to the editor Warren E. Stewart, Warren E. Stewart Dept. of Chemical Engineering, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI 53706Search for more papers by this authorMichael Shapiro, Michael Shapiro Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, Technion-Israel Institute of Technology, Haifa 32000, IsarelSearch for more papers by this authorHoward Brenner, Howard Brenner Department of Chemical Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA 02139Search for more papers by this authorD. J. Gunn, D. J. Gunn Dept. of Chemical Engineering, University College, Swansea SA2 8PP, U.K.Search for more papers by this authorDieter Vortmeyer, Dieter Vortmeyer Institut fur Thermodynamik Technische Universität München, 8000 München, GermanySearch for more papers by this authorHoward Brenner, Howard Brenner Dept. of Chemical Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA 02139Search for more papers by this authorMichael Shapiro, Michael Shapiro Dept. of Chemical Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA 02139Search for more papers by this authorM. Taya, M. Taya Dept. of Mechanical Engineering, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195Search for more papers by this authorM. Dunn, M. Dunn Dept. of Mechanical Engineering, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195Search for more papers by this authorSangtae Kim, Sangtae Kim Dept. of Chemical Engineering, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI 53706Search for more papers by this author Warren E. Stewart, Warren E. Stewart Dept. of Chemical Engineering, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI 53706Search for more papers by this authorMichael Shapiro, Michael Shapiro Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, Technion-Israel Institute of Technology, Haifa 32000, IsarelSearch for more papers by this authorHoward Brenner, Howard Brenner Department of Chemical Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA 02139Search for more papers by this authorD. J. Gunn, D. J. Gunn Dept. of Chemical Engineering, University College, Swansea SA2 8PP, U.K.Search for more papers by this authorDieter Vortmeyer, Dieter Vortmeyer Institut fur Thermodynamik Technische Universität München, 8000 München, GermanySearch for more papers by this authorHoward Brenner, Howard Brenner Dept. of Chemical Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA 02139Search for more papers by this authorMichael Shapiro, Michael Shapiro Dept. of Chemical Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA 02139Search for more papers by this authorM. Taya, M. Taya Dept. of Mechanical Engineering, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195Search for more papers by this authorM. Dunn, M. Dunn Dept. of Mechanical Engineering, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195Search for more papers by this authorSangtae Kim, Sangtae Kim Dept. of Chemical Engineering, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI 53706Search for more papers by this author First published: October 1992 https://doi.org/10.1002/aic.690381020Citations: 3Read the full textAboutPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share a linkShare onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditWechat Citing Literature Volume38, Issue10October 1992Pages 1675-1682 RelatedInformation

This chapter was prepared as a baseline document for the Capacity and Networking Project, CANP 2012. In this document a synthesis of the main aspects of the historical context of the preparation of teachers, the structures for the initial preparation of Mathematics teachers, the contents of teacher preparation based on the programs offered by institutions that have such programs, a discussion on programs of continuing teacher development, the most recent developments in initial and continuing teacher preparation, and the main strengths, weaknesses, threats and challenges of teacher preparation in the Dominican Republic are presented. It is important to emphasize the impact that reforms and constitutional changes have had on education. Therefore, in this report, the analysis of the historical context has been organized in four stages that have been identified by experts on the history of Dominican education (Almánzar in Trayectoria de la formación del docente dominicano. SEE, Santo Domingo, 2008; Fiallo and Germán in La formación de maestros y maestras en República Dominicana. Búho, Santo Domingo, 1999) who have identified the most important aspects of educational legislation related to teacher preparation. Also, it should be pointed out that the Dominican education system is structured into four levels: initial, elementary, secondary and post-secondary. The Ministry of Education (MINERD) is in charge of the initial, elementary and secondary levels. The Ministry of Higher Education, Science and Technology (MESCYT) directs post-secondary education. Currently in the Dominican Republic there are 42 institutions of post-secondary education and 22 (52 %) of them offer programs in Elementary Education and 15 (36 %) offer programs in Secondary Education with a major in Physics and Mathematics. These institutions base their teacher preparation programs on regulations established by the Institute for the Preparation and Development of Teachers (INAFOCAM). This organization, under the MINERD, is also responsible for establishing the profile of entering students, as well as graduates, and for indicating the number of credits in preparation programs and the distribution of practicum and theoretical hours for each subject. The MINERD is responsible for continuing teacher development in collaboration with the continuing preparation department of the MESCYT. It is important to consider the situation described in this report to understand the working conditions of Dominican teachers.

Введение. В статье рассматриваются итоги модернизации педагогического образования на ее этапах начиная с 1992 г. и по настоящее время. Приведены основные результаты и эффекты реализации Комплексного проекта модернизации педагогического образования. Определены основные контексты изменений в подготовке будущих педагогов, представлены изменения в подготовке педагогических кадров на уровне бакалавриата, магистратуры и аспирантуры в аспекте этих контекстов. Описаны профессиональные и социальнопедагогические проекты, которые реализуются в Омском государственном педагогическом университете на этапе входа, подготовки будущих педагогов и на этапе удержания их в профессии. Материалы и методы. Основными методами исследования являются теоретикометодологический анализ нормативных документов в сфере высшего образования, научных трудов, научнометодической литературы, посвященной модернизации педагогического образования, проектного управления в вузе, анализ продуктов деятельности участников апробации модулей, интервью участников проектной деятельности, выявление потенциальных проблем подготовки будущих педагогов. Результаты. Выявлены и описаны результаты изменений в подготовке будущих учителей на этапах модернизации эффекты реализации Комплексного проекта модернизации педагогического образования, предложены изменения в подготовке педагогов на всех уровнях педагогического образования, представлена практика контекстного управления университетом через стратегические проекты педагогического университета на этапе входа, подготовки будущих педагогов и на этапе удержания их в профессии. Обсуждение. Опыт участия Омского государственного педагогического университета в реализации Комплексного проекта по модернизации педагогического образования обеспечивает необходимый задел, диктует необходимость продолжения данной работы с тем, чтобы интегративные результаты проекта стали основой для достижения целей следующего этапа модернизации, по обеспечению системных изменений в подготовке педагогических кадров. Заключение. Делается вывод о том, что изменения в подготовке педагогов, вызванные модернизационными процессами в педагогическом образовании и формированием Национальной системы учительского роста требуют реализации проектного подхода в управлении педагогическим университетом и разработке механизмов достижения нового качества педагогического образования. Основные положения: выделены результаты и эффекты реализации Комплексного проекта модернизации педагогического образования обозначены изменения в подготовке будущих педагогов при формировании НСУР. Introduction. The article shows the results of modernization of pedagogical education on its steps since 1992 until now. The main results and effects of the realization of Complex Project of modernization of pedagogical education. The main contexts of changes in the preparation of future teachers are defined. The changes in professional preparation of teachers on Bachelor, Master and PhD degree levels are shown in the aspects of these contexts. The professional and socialpedagogical projects of Omsk State Pedagogical University which are being implemented on the Entrance, preparation and rentation levels in profession are described. Materials and methods. The basic methods are theoretical and methodological analysis of governing documents of Higher education, research papers, and works dedicated to methods of teaching, modernization of pedagogical education, university project management system, analysis of the results of works of participation in testing modules, interview of participation in projects, identification potential problems in preparation of future teachers. Results. Results of changes in preparation of future teachers on steps of modernization effects of realization of Complex project of modernization pedagogical education are described, the changes in preparation of future teachers on all levels of pedagogical education are recommended. The practice of context management of a university through strategic projects on level of Entrance preparation and rentation in profession is described. Discussion. The experience of realization the project of modernization of teacher education of Omsk State Pedagogical University forces the continuation of integrationthe results of the project within the new step of modernization. Conclusions. It is concluded that the changes in preparation of teachers which are called by modernization of pedagogical education and formation of NSTPD produce a need for project approach in management of pedagogical university and development of mechanisms of getting new quality of pedagogical education. Highlights: Results and effects of realization of Complex project of modernization of pedagogical education are defined. Changes in preparation of future teachers in the process of NSTPD development are formulated.

Recently Published Dissertations on Community and Junior Colleges

Введение. На сегодняшний день изменяются требования к высшему педагогическому образованию, что обусловлено социальным заказом государства и социума, стремительно изменяющимися условиями жизни и деятельности. Одним из требований к современному учителю является наличие способности и готовности действовать и принимать решения на основе профессиональных этики, морали, долга и ценностных ориентаций. Данное требование обусловливает необходимость разработки такой системы формирования профессионально-деонтологической готовности педагогов, которая будет способствовать их успешной деятельности в условиях современного профессионально-педагогического ландшафта и изменений, происходящих в обществе и системе образования. Материалы и методы. В качестве теоретико-методологической основы системы формирования профессионально-деонтологической готовности будущих учителей определены системный, деятельностный и контекстно-аксиологический подходы в их диалектическом единстве и взаимодействии. В ходе разработки системы использованы такие методы научного исследования, как целеполагание, анализ и синтез, индукция и дедукция, абстрагирование, моделирование, педагогическое проектирование. Результаты. Автором обоснована необходимость разработки системы формирования профессионально-деонтологической готовности будущих учителей, а также представлено содержание данной системы. Также автором представлено содержание модулей программы факультативного профессионально-деонтологического курса «Профессия педагога: призвание и долг», реализуемого в образовательном процессе вуза. Обсуждение. Анализ работ ученых в русле тематики исследования подтвердил необходимость и целесообразность разработки проблемы формирования профессионально-деонтологической готовности педагогов. Сделан вывод о том, что предложенные автором и отраженные в других исследованиях взгляды на феномен профессионально-деонтологической подготовки учителей в основном похожи и коррелируют друг с другом. Однако, разработанная автором система охватывает понятие профессионально-деонтологической готовности, а не компетенции, которое характеризуется большей сложностью и комплексностью в своем содержании. Заключение. Автором обобщено содержание системы, представлено краткое резюме по каждому из блоков разработанной системы: нормативно-правовому, мотивационно-ориентационному, содержательно-когнитивному, процессуально-деятельностному и рефлексивно-аналитическому. Делается вывод о направленности разработанной системы на повышение качества высшего педагогического образования посредством формирования профессионально-деонтологической готовности будущих педагогов. Ключевые слова: формирование; профессионально-деонтологическая готовность; система; нормативно-правовой блок; мотивационно-ориентационный блок; содержательно-когнитивный блок; процессуально-деятельностный блок; рефлексивно-аналитический блок; высшая школа; будущий учитель. Основные положения: – система формирования профессионально-деонтологической готовности будущих учителей предполагает наличие нормативно-правового, мотивационно-ориентационного, содержательно-когнитивного, процессуально-деятельностного и рефлексивно-аналитического блоков; – гипотетически представлена программа факультативного профессионально-деонтологического курса «Профессия педагога: призвание и долг». Introduction. Today, the requirements for higher pedagogical education are changing, which is due to the social order of the state and society, rapidly changing conditions of life and activity. One of the requirements for a modern teacher is the ability and readiness to act and make decisions based on professional ethics, morality, duty and value orientations. This requirement determines the need to develop a system for the formation of professional and deontological readiness of teachers that will contribute to their successful activity in the conditions of the modern professional and pedagogical landscape and changes occurring in society and the education system. Materials and methods. The systemic, activity-based and contextual-axiological approaches in their dialectical unity and interaction are defined as the theoretical and methodological basis of the system for forming the professional and deontological readiness of future teachers. In the course of developing the system, such methods of scientific research as goal-setting, analysis and synthesis, induction and deduction, abstraction, modeling, and pedagogical design were used. Results. The author substantiates the need to develop a system for the formation of professional-deontological readiness of future teachers, and presents the content of this system. The author also presents the content of the modules of the program of the optional professional-deontological course “The Profession of Teacher: Mission and Duty”, implemented in the educational process of the university. Discussion. The analysis of the works of scientists in the context of the research topic confirmed the necessity and expediency of developing the problem of formation of professional-deontological readiness of teachers. It was concluded that the views on the phenomenon of professional and deontological training of teachers proposed by the author and reflected in other studies are basically similar and correlate with each other. However, the system developed by the author covers the concept of professional-deontological readiness, and not competence, which is characterized by greater complexity and comprehensiveness in its content. Conclusion. The author summarizes the contents of the system, presents a brief summary for each of the blocks of the developed system: normative-legal, motivational-orientational, content-cognitive, procedural-activity and reflexive-analytical. A conclusion is made about the focus of the developed system on improving the quality of higher pedagogical education through the formation of professional-deontological readiness of future teachers. Keywords: Formation; Professional-deontological readiness; System; Normative-legal block; Motivational-orientational block; Content-cognitive block; Procedural-activity block; Reflexive-analytical block; Higher education; Future teacher. Highlights: A system for developing professional and deontological readiness of teachers has been developed, consisting of normative-legal, motivational-orientation, content-cognitive, procedural-activity and reflexive-analytical blocks; The program of the optional professional-deontological course “The Profession of Teacher: Mission and Duty” is presented.

Technology holds an important role in the development and preparation of teachers, and this role has become ever more critical with the recent move to virtual and hybrid learning across the world. Teachers must be prepared to adopt and purposefully use technology, often with little training or instruction in the field. This chapter describes the integration and use of technology as an embedded tool to leverage in the preparation of pre-service teachers using three distinct strategies within a program in the northeastern United States. The authors will share their experiences in the execution of these strategies that target the development of flexible, intentional, and reflective teachers who can enter the workforce ready to use technology both for their own professional development and as a tool for student learning.

Notes on Contributors. Preface. Part I: Knowledge and Skepticism. Introduction, Matthias Steup (St. Cloud State University). 1. Is Knowledge Closed under Known Entailment?. The Case against Closure, Fred Dretske (Stanford University and the University of Wisconsin). The Case for Closure, John Hawthorne (Rutgers University). Reply to Hawthorne, Fred Dretske (Stanford University and the University of Wisconsin). 2. Is Knowledge Contextual?. Contextualism Contested, Earl Conee (University of Rochester). Contextualism Defended, Stewart Cohen (Arizona State University). Contextualism Contested Some More, Earl Conee (University of Rochester)Contextualism Defended Some More, Stewart Cohen (Arizona State University). 3. Can Skepticism Be Refuted?. The Refutation of Skepticism, Jonathan Vogel (Amherst College). The Challenge of Refuting Skepticism, Richard Fumerton (University of Iowa). 4. Is There A Priori Knowledge?. In Defense of the a Priori, Laurence BonJour (University of Washington). There Is no a Priori, Michael Devitt (City University of New York). Reply to Devitt, Laurence BonJour (University of Washington). Reply to BonJour, Michael Devitt (City University of New York). Last Rejoinder, Laurence BonJour (University of Washington). References. Part II: Foundational Knowledge. Introduction, Matthias Steup (St. Cloud State University). 5. Is Infinitism the Solution to the Regress Problem?. Infinitism Is the Solution to the Regress Problem, Peter Klein (Rutgers University)Infinitism Is not the Solution to the Regress Problem, Carl Ginet (Cornell University). Reply to Ginet, Peter Klein (Rutgers University). Reply to Klein, Carl Ginet (Cornell University). 6. Can Beliefs Be Justified through Coherence Alone?. Non--foundationalist Epistemology: Holism, Coherence, and Tenability, Catherine Z. Elgin (Harvard Graduate School of Education). Why Coherence Is not Enough: In Defense of Moderate Foundationalism, James van Cleve (Brown University). 7. Is There Immediate Justification?. There Is Immediate Justification, James Pryor (Princeton University). Doing Without Immediate Justification, Michael Williams (Johns Hopkins University). 8. Does Perceptual Experience Have Conceptual Content?. Perceptual Experience Has Conceptual Content, Bill Brewer (Oxford University)Perception and Conceptual Content, Alex Byrne (Massachusetts Institute of Technology). Part III: Justification. Introduction, Matthias Steup (St. Cloud State University). 9. Is Justification Internal?. Justification Is not Internal, John Greco (Fordham University). Justification Is Internal, Richard Feldman (University of Rochester). 10. Is Truth the Primary Epistemic Goal?. Truth Is not the Primary Epistemic Goal, Jonathan Kvanvig (University of Missouri). Truth as the Primary Epistemic Goal: A Working Hypothesis, Marian David (University of Notre Dame). 11. Is Justified Belief Responsible Belief?. Justified Belief as Responsible Belief, Richard Foley (New York University). Obligation, Entitlement, and Rationality, Nicholas Wolterstorff (Yale University)Response to Wolterstorff, Richard Foley (New York University). Response to Foley, Nicholas Wolterstorff (Yale University). Index

Authors

The article touches upon the problems of organization and semantic direction of professional education of elementary school teachers on the territory of Ukraine at the time of Russian Empire and the Soviet period. The specifics of degree education of future teachers is defined: the way of formation, development, factors, which cause their changes.The periodization of this process, created by O. Shkvyr is suggested. The role of famous people of the past time in formation and development of fundamental preparation of teachers is mentioned. For example, M. Lomonosov, who suggested to create a special pedagogical educational institution , developed and substantiated mandatory requirements towards practical activity of teachers; K. Ushynskiy , as the author of the first systems of preparation of folk school teachers , recommendations concerning organization of the teachers' seminarium activity and the content of future preparation of folk school teachers. Some aspects touch upon the experience of educational institutions, where professional preparation of teachers for elementary school took place, are also described in this article. Legislative documents and scientific- pedagogical literature, which illustrate the state and content of professional preparation of future teachers of the elementary school on different stages of the society development , are analyzed. Key words: a teacher of the elementary school, content of education, a period, professional preparation, development, formation, degree education.

Secretary of Education Rod Paige's report to Congress on the status of teacher quality in the nation, Meeting the Highly Qualified Teachers Challenge, was released to the public in early June 2002 (U.S. Department of Education, 2002). This is the first of the annual reports on teacher quality that are now required as per the reauthorization of Title II of the Higher Education Act (HEA) in 1998, which also requires states to report annually on the quality of teacher preparation programs, which in turn depends on institutional reporting to states on the qualifications of all teacher candidates recommended for certification. Although the report is worth a thorough read, its conclusion is perfectly captured by its heading, A Broken System, in the executive summary: Schools of education and formal teacher training programs are failing to produce the types of highly qualified teachers that the No Child Left Behind Act demands (U.S. Department of Education, 2002, p. viii). The report argues that states' academic standards for teachers are low, whereas the barriers that keep out qualified prospective teachers who have not completed collegiate teacher preparation are high. The report concludes that states must transform certification requirements, basing their programs on rigorous academic content, eliminating cumbersome requirements not based on scientific evidence, and doing more to attract highly qualified candidates from a variety of fields (U.S. Department of Education, 2002, p. viii). The report also argues that alternate route programs are the model option for fixing the broken system which, if widely implemented, would solve the teacher quality and teacher supply problems simultaneously. There are a number of ways to respond to the secretary's report, some more visceral than others. I suggest in this editorial that four critiques are essential: an empirical critique, a conceptual critique, a social justice critique, and a political critique. An Empirical Critique The secretary's report is clear in its conclusions about what does and does not count in high-quality teaching: summary, we have found that rigorous research indicates that verbal ability and content knowledge are the most important attributes of highly qualified teachers. In addition there is little evidence that education school coursework leads to improved student achievement (U.S. Department of Education, 2002, p. 19). One major problem with the secretary's report is that many of its conclusions differ fundamentally from those of other reviews of research on teacher preparation, including the recent, widely circulated synthesis of research on teacher preparation by Wilson, Floden, and Ferrini-Mundy (2001), which was funded by the U.S. Department of Education through the Center for Teaching and Policy at the University of Washington and summarized in the previous issue of JTE (Wilson, Floden, & Ferrini-Mundy, 2002). Heap (2002) explicitly notes the discrepancy between the secretary's report and the Wilson synthesis. Heap points out that unlike the secretary's report, the Wilson synthesis concludes that: the often-claimed link between college study of subject matter and teaching quality is not so clear; there is evidence that teacher education does contribute to teaching quality; and, alternate route studies are inconclusive because of completely inconsistent definitions of traditional and alternative. The secretary's report also makes no mention of other syntheses and empirical studies (although published in reputable peer-reviewed journals) that conclude that there are teacher qualifications (in addition to subject matter knowledge and verbal ability) that are related to student achievement. These qualifications include: knowledge of teaching and learning gained through teacher preparation courses and experiences, teaching experience, and teacher certification status (e. …

Click to increase image sizeClick to decrease image size Additional informationNotes on contributorsNorman R. SchulzeNorman R. Schulze (BS, physics, University of Chicago, 1958) works for the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). He was one of the early staff members at the Manned Spacecraft Center in Houston, where he was responsible for the management of the Gemini spacecraft’s propulsion system. He has performed systems analysis on many of NASA’s advanced spacecraft programs, including the space shuttle. A current interest is the development of fusion energy for space missions.J. Reece RothJ. Reece Roth (SB, physics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 1959; PhD, engineering physics, Cornell University, 1963) is a faculty member of the electrical engineering department of the University of Tennessee-Knoxville. He previously worked at NASA Lewis Research Center, where he was the principal investigator of the Lewis Electric Field Bumpy Torus Project until 1978.D. GalambosD. Galambos (PhD, nuclear engineering, University of Illinois, 1983) is a member of the Computing and Telecommunications Division at Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) and works at the Fusion Engineering Design Center (FEDC). His interests include systems analysis of tokamaks, plasma edge modeling, and advanced fuel fusion.Y.-K. Martin PengY.-K. Martin Peng (BS, electrical engineering, National Taiwan University, 1967; MS, 1971, and PhD, 1974, applied physics, Stanford University) is a member of the Fusion Energy Division at ORNL and is the plasma engineering manager of the FEDC. His research efforts include plasma engineering studies of the Compact Ignition Tokamak and advanced tokamak reactor concepts and promotion of high-beta spherical tori studies.George H. MileyGeorge H. Miley (PhD, University of Michigan, 1958) is a professor in the Department of Nuclear Engineering at the University of Illinois. In addition to research on fusion, he is well known for his research on energy conversion and nuclearpumped lasers.Heinrich HoraHeinrich Hora [Diplom-Physiker, Martin Luther University, Federal Republic of Germany (FRG), 1956; Dr. Rer. Nat., Friedrich Schiller University, FRG; DSc, University of New South Wales, Australia, 1981] has been professor and head of the Department of Theoretical Physics at the University of New South Wales since 1975. His current research interests include laser/plasma interaction theory (nonlinear forces, absorption, particle acceleration, first self-focusing theories), photodetectors, semiconductor lasers, FEL, and extreme states of matter.Lorenzo CicchitelliLorenzo Cicchitelli (BSc, theoretical physics, 1983, and PhD, 1988, University of New South Wales, Australia) is a research scientist at the Centre of Safety Science, University of New South Wales. His research interests include laser/plasma interaction on classical as well as quantum electrodynamics.Gregorios V. KasotakisGregorios V. Kasotakis (Graduate, physics, National and Capodistrian University of Athens, Greece, 1982) has been working on a postgraduate project at the University of New South Wales since 1987. His research has led to publications on the problems of inertial fusion confinement, numerically evaluating optimized fusion gains, and fuel depletion for deuterium-tritium and for clean fusion fuel.Robert J. SterlingRobert J. Sterling (BSc, 1962, and MSc, 1963, University of Australia-Sydney; PhD, University of Queensland, Australia, 1969; Dip. Tert. Ed, University of New England, Australia, 1977) has been at the main University of New South Wales campus at Kensington in Sydney since 1980. His research interests include ionospheric physics, tides in the upper atmosphere, and laser/plasma interactions.Michael L. BrowneMichael L. Browne (PhD, control, University of Manchester Institute of Science and Technology, United Kingdom, 1974) worked on the Joint European Torus (JET) from 1978 to 1980, where he was responsible for implementation of various aspects of machine control. In 1987, he joined the Next European Torus Team, where he has been responsible for the design of the architecture for the central control system and for the development of plasma feedback controls.Francesco BombiFrancesco Bombi (MS, electronics engineering, 1966, and PhD, automatic control, 1970, Padua University, Italy) led the JET Control and Data Acquisition System Division until 1984. He is now a full professor at Padua University. His current research interests include computer control system architecture and software engineering.John MandrekasJohn Mandrekas (Dipl., mechanical and electrical engineering, National Technical University of Athens, Greece, 1979; MS, 1984, and PhD, 1987, nuclear engineering, University of Illinois) is a research scientist at the Fusion Research Center, Georgia Institute of Technology (GIT). His current research interests include neutral beam current drive and impurity transport in tokamaks, stability and burn control of fusion reactors, and theoretical plasma physics.W. M. StaceyW. M. Stacey (BS, physics, 1959, and MS, nuclear science, 1963, GIT; PhD, nuclear engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 1966) is Callaway Professor of Nuclear Engineering at GIT and serves as senior U.S. participant to the International Atomic Energy Agency International Tokamak Reactor Workshop.Augusta AiroldiAugusta Airoldi (Laurea in Fisica, Universita’ di Milano, Italy, 1962) is a computational plasma physicist at the Istituto di Fisica del Plasma of National Research Council (IFP-CNR). Her research interests are mainly in plasma/wave interaction in the electron cyclotron range both in heating modeling and in emission phenomena. She is currently involved in Ignitor simulations.Giovanna CenacchiGiovanna Cenacchi (Laurea in Fisica, Universita’ di Bologna, Italy, 1963) is a computational plasma physicist at ENEA, the Italian Atomic Energy Agency. She has worked primarily in the computational modeling of magnetohydrodynamic equilibria and transport processes in toroidal plasmas. She has also been involved in computational problems related to the toroidal magnet and the poloidal system for the Ignitor project.Satoshi NishioSatoshi Nishio (BS, mechanical engineering, Keio University, Japan, 1976) is a research scientist at the Fusion Experimental Reactor Team of the Japan Atomic Energy Research Institute (JAERI). He is engaged in code development for transient electromagnetic analysis of the tokamak machine. From 1976 to 1981, he worked in the design analysis of the JT-60 toroidal field coil system. Since 1981, he has been engaged in design activities for the International Tokamak Reactor (INTOR), the Fusion Experimental Reactor, and the International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor (ITER).Kichiro ShinyaKichiro Shinya (BS, 1968; MS, 1970; and PhD, 1973, plasma science, Tokyo Institute of Technology, Japan) is a chief research scientist at the Energy Science and Technology Laboratory, Toshiba Research and Development Center. He is responsible for code development for magnetohydrodynamic analysis and noninductive current drive of tokamak plasmas. From 1978 to 1980 and from 1988 to 1990, he was a visiting researcher at JAERI and he worked on INTOR and ITER design. His career includes the experiment and analysis at Doublet-Ill from 1980 through 1982.Michael J. GougeMichael J. Gouge (BS, physics, U.S. Naval Academy, 1973; PhD, physics, University of Tennessee, 1984) is a research staff member in the Fusion Energy Division at Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL). His primary research interest is the development of plasma fueling systems for present and future magnetic fusion confinement experiments.Wayne A. HoulbergWayne A. Houlberg (PhD, nuclear engineering, University of Wisconsin, 1977) is a staff member in the Fusion Energy Division at ORNL. His primary research interest is in the development of physics and computational models for toroidal plasmas and the extension of these models to reactor conditions.Stanley L. MiloraStanley L. Milora (BS, aerospace engineering, Pennsylvania State University, 1965; PhD, aeronautics and astronautics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 1972) is a research staff member in the Fusion Energy Division at ORNL. He is group leader of the plasma fueling program and program manager for fusion plasma technologies. His primary research interest is the development of innovative plasma fueling systems for magnetic fusion, especially pneumatic pellet injectors, and the transport physics of pellet-fueled plasmas.Thanh Q. HuaThanh Q. Hua (BS, 1982; MS, 1984; and PhD, 1986, nuclear engineering, University of Washington) is a staff member of the Fusion Power Program and Engineering Division at Argonne National Laboratory (ANL). His current research interests include liquid-metal magnetohydrodynamic (MHD) and heat transfer analysis for fusion reactor blankets.Basil F. PicologlouBasil F. Picologlou (PhD, Purdue University, 1972) is a staff member of the Engineering Division at ANL and a co-principal investigator (with C. B. Reed) of ANL’s Liquid-Metal MHD Program. His current research interests include fluid mechanics, thermal sciences, and MHD, and their application toward improved designs of liquid-metal-cooled blankets.Mamoru MatsuokaMamoru Matsuoka (M. Eng., electronic engineering, Nagoya University, Japan, 1979) is a research scientist in the Department of JT-60 Facility (DJF) at the Japan Atomic Energy Research Institute (JAERI). He was involved in developing the power supply and the magnetic system (reflecting magnet, magnetic shields, etc.) for the JT-60 neutral beam injectors (NBIs). He was also engaged in the neutral beam current drive experiments in the DIII-D tokamak under U.S.-Japan cooperation. He is currently engaged in developing the JT-60 NBI as well as neutral beam heating experiments in the JT-60.Hiroshi HoriikeHiroshi Horiike (Dr. Eng., nuclear engineering, Osaka University, Japan, 1982) is a senior scientist in the DJF at JAERI. He has worked mainly in developing the ion source and the JT-60 NBI and is currently engaged in the upgrading of the JT-60 torus system.Takao ItohTakao Itoh (Dr., physics, Tokai University, Japan, 1975) is a research scientist in the Department of Large Tokamak Research (DLTR) at JAERI. He has worked in developing the magnetic system for the JT-60 NBI and is currently engaged in developing a helium beam injector for the active beam diagnostic system for the JT-60.Mikito KawaiMikito Kawai (B. Eng., electrical engineering, Kiriu Technical College, Gunma University, Japan, 1973) is an engineer in the DTF at JAERI. He is engaged in developing the control system for the JT-60 NBI.Mitsuru KikuchiMitsuru Kikuchi (Dr., nuclear engineering, University of Tokyo, Japan, 1981) is a senior scientist in the DLTR at JAERI. He is engaged in the JT-60 experiments with a special interest in bootstrap current.Masaaki KuriyamaMasaaki Kuriyama (Dr. Eng., mechanical engineering, Tokyo Institute of Technology, Japan, 1976) is a principal engineer in the DTF at JAERI. He works in developing the JT-60 NBI system.Makoto MizunoMakoto Mizuno (M. Eng., electronics engineering, Nagoya University, Japan, 1981) is a research scientist in the DTF at JAERI. He worked on developing the motor generator system delivering ac power to the JT-60 heating systems and is currently engaged in developing a power supply system for neutral beam systems.Shigeru TanakaShigeru Tanaka (Dr. Eng., instrumentation engineering, Keio University, Japan, 1983) is a senior scientist in the Department of Thermonuclear Fusion Research at JAERI. He worked on developing the ion source and the JT-60 NBI and is currently engaged in research for the International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor and Fusion Experimental Reactor.R. N. DexterR. N. Dexter (PhD, University of Wisconsin, 1955) was project manager of the Madison Symmetric Torus (MST) construction. He is a solid-state physicist with research interests in plasma turbulence and confinement and in the diagnosis of high-temperature plasmas.D. W. KerstD. W. Kerst (PhD, University of Wisconsin, 1937) is an emeritus professor of physics who was active in accelerator research before turning to plasma physics in 1957. He was the inventor of the betatron and coinventor of the toroidal multipole.T. W. LovellT. W. Lovell is engineering manager for the MST project. He is a long-time member of the Wisconsin Plasma Physics staff and has contributed to the Tokapole II, Levitated Octupole, and numerous other projects.S. C. PragerS. C. Prager (PhD, Columbia University, 1975) is a professor of physics at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. He previously worked at General Atomics and has performed research on reversed-field pinch (RFP), tokamak, octupole, and linear plasmas.J. C. SprottJ. C. Sprott (PhD, University of Wisconsin, 1969) is professor of physics at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. He previously worked at Oak Ridge National Laboratory and has been involved with multipole, mirror, tokamak, and RFP research.Shigeo NumataShigeo Numata (M. Eng., nuclear engineering, Kyoto University, Japan, 1984) is a researcher at the Shimizu Corporation Institute of Technology. He has worked in the areas of neutron spectroscopy and radiation shielding. His current interests are material interaction and decontamination of tritium in buildings.Yasuhiko FujiiYasuhiko Fujii (Dr. Eng., nuclear engineering, Tokyo Institute of Technology, Japan, 1973) is an associate professor at the Tokyo Institute of Technology. His current interest is in the area of fusion chemistry.Makoto OkamotoMakoto Okamoto (Dr. Eng., nuclear engineering, Tokyo Institute of Technology, Japan, 1966) is a professor in the nuclear reactor research laboratory at Tokyo Institute of Technology.Steven J. PietSteven J. Piet [BS and MS, 1979, and ScD, 1982, nuclear engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT)] is a member of the fusion safety program of EG&G Idaho at the Idaho National Engineering Laboratory. His major interests and responsibilities include International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor (ITER), activation product behavior, arid risk assessments. He is currently part of the permanent ITER team, focusing on enhancing and optimizing safety in the ITER conceptual design.Edward T. ChengEdward T. Cheng (PhD, nuclear engineering, University of Wisconsin, 1976) has been a member of the development and technology group in the Fusion Division of General Atomics since 1978. His interests are in neutronics, radioactivity, and blanket engineering. He is currently coordinating the nuclear data needs activities for the development of magnetically confined fusion energy.Steve FetterSteve Fetter (SB, physics, MIT; PhD, energy and resources, University of California-Berkeley) is an assistant professor in the School of Public Affairs and an affiliated faculty member in the Laboratory for Plasma Research at the University of Maryland. His research interests include national security policy, space policy, and environmental policy.J. Stephen HerringJ. Stephen Herring (BS, mechanical engineering and electrical engineering, 1971, and PhD, nuclear engineering, 1979, MIT) is a senior engineering specialist in the Fusion Safety Program at the Idaho National Engineering Laboratory. His research interests include safety-related transients in superconducting magnet sets and fusion waste management.J. Rand McNallyJ. Rand McNally (PhD, physics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 1943) is retired from the senior research staff in the Fusion Energy Division of Oak Ridge National Laboratory. His research interests include atomic physics, plasma physics, and nuclear fusion in which fields he has published well over 100 technical articles. He is now a fusion energy consultant.Wladyslaw ZakowiczWladyslaw Zakowicz (MS, Warsaw University, Poland, 1966; PhD, Institute of Nuclear Research, Poland, 1973) has been at the Institute of Physics of the Polish Academy of Sciences since 1975. He has also worked at Pittsburgh University, Stanford University, Brookhaven National Laboratory, and the University of Arizona. His interests include quantum and classical optics and laser accelerators.Yeong E. KimYeong E. Kim (BS, chemistry and mathematics, Lincoln Memorial University, 1959; PhD, physics, University of California-Berkeley, 1963) has been a professor of physics at Purdue University since 1967. His interests are in theoretical nuclear physics, gravitational theory, theoretical geophysics, and nuclear fusion.Robert A. RiceRobert A. Rice (BS, physics, Case Western Reserve University, 1988; MS, physics, Purdue University, 1990) is a graduate research assistant in the Department of Physics at Purdue University. His research interests include theoretical nuclear physics and the few-nucleon problem.Gary S. ChulickGary S. Chulick (BS, 1977, and MS, 1979, John Carroll University; PhD, physics, Case Western Reserve University, 1988) is a postdoctoral research associate in the Department of Physics at Purdue University. His current research interests are in theoretical nuclear physics and geophysics.K. KumarK. Kumar [B. Tech., Indian Institute of Technology (Kanpur), India, 1969; MS, Stevens Institute of Technology, 1971; ScD, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), 1975] is chief of the Materials Science and Technology Section at the Charles Stark Draper Laboratory (CSDL). His research has spanned many diverse areas of materials science and engineering.I. S. HwangI. S. Hwang (PhD, nuclear materials engineering, MIT, 1987) is a research scientist in the Department of Materials Science and Engineering at MIT. His research areas include basic mechanisms of environment-assisted cracking phenomena in aqueous environments, high-temperature electrochemistry, and the effects of irradiation on corrosion and cracking. He has been active in the development of cryogenic structural materials for nuclear fusion applications.R. G. BallingerR. G. Ballinger (SB, mechanical engineering, Worcester Polytechnic Institute, 1976; SM, nuclear engineering, 1977; SM, materials science, 1978; and ScD, nuclear materials engineering, 1982, MIT) is an associate professor nuclear engineering and materials science and engineering at MIT. His areas of specialization include environmental effects on material behavior, the effect of radiation on aqueous chemistry, and materials development for cryogenic structural applications. He has been active in the cold fusion controversy and has testified before Congress on the subject.C. R. DauwalterC. R. Dauwalter (BS, mechanical engineering, 1955, and MS, aeronautics and astronautics, 1971, MIT) has been with CSDL since 1957. He has been involved in the design and development of electromagnetic components for high-performance gyroscopes and accelerometers for inertial guidance systems. He has also been involved in the development of advanced gyroscopes and accelerometers.A. StecykA. Stecyk has been a member of the technical staff at CSDL since 1967. His interests include design of test instrumentation, electro-optical design, and micromechanical measurements of length and subarcsecond angles. He is responsible for the design and experimental work of the CSDL Cold Fusion Laboratory.Joaquin SevillaJoaquin Sevilla (physics, Universidad Autonoma de Madrid, Spain, 1986) is currently working in the applied physics department of the Universidad Autonoma of Madrid. His interests include cold fusion and related problems.Francisco FernandezFrancisco Fernandez (physics, Universidad Autonoma of Madrid, Spain, 1988) is currently working in the applied physics department of the Universidad Autonoma of Madrid. His interests include cold fusion and related problems.Beatriz EscarpizoBeatriz Escarpizo (chemistry, Universidad Autonoma of Madrid, Spain, 1987) is currently working in the applied physics department of the Universidad Autonoma of Madrid. Her interests include cold fusion and related problems.Carlos SánchezCarlos Sánchez (PhD, 1968) has been a full professor in the applied physics department of the Universidad Autonoma of Madrid since 1986. His interests include defects in solids, optical and electrical properties of semiconductors, solar energy conversion and storage, photoelectrochemical devices, hydrogen production, and metal hydrides.Kenneth A. RitleyKenneth A. Ritley is a member of the positron-solids interaction group in the physics department at Brookhaven National Laboratory (BNL). In addition to his recent interest in palladium-deuterium electrochemical systems, his professional interests have included models of the cohesive energy in high-temperature superconductors. He is currently investigating the application of a monoenergetic positron beam to the study of liquid metals.Kelvin G. LynnKelvin G. Lynn is a physics group leader and head of the Applied Physics Division at BNL. His interests have included surface physics and the use of positrons in studying surface and near-surface defects. He has been actively involved with cold fusion research since the first reports of this phenomenon in March 1989.Peter DullPeter Dull has spent a year visiting at BNL from Valparaiso University in Indiana. In addition to his recent research on cold fusion phenomena, he has recently completed a comparative study of positron moderator designs.Marc H. WeberMarc H. Weber (no photograph available) is currently on the faculty of the University of Bielefeld in the Federal Republic of Germany. In addition to work in the specular reflection of positronium, he has recently designed a system for low-level neutron emission studies and is currently interested in utilizing the high-intensity positron source for e+-H studies at BNL.Michael CarrollMichael Carroll is a member of the positron-solids interaction group at BNL. His professional interests include designing and evaluating electronics for use in experimental physics, and he maintains a strong interest in the detection of gravitational radiation.James J. HurstJames J. Hurst is a senior materials science associate in the Department of Applied Science at BNL. In addition to his recent interest in the metallurgical properties of palladium, his research interests have included studies of crystal growth.

Foreign experience of problem of professional development of future specialists is examined in the article, professional preparation of future teachers of labor studies and technologies is analyzed in particular. A study of scientific materials is undertaken in relation to experience of professional development of future teachers of technologies in countries, that is distinguished by the high level of pedagogical education, - to the USA, Great Britain and Poland. Exactly these countries on the draught of many years demonstrate the high indexes of quality education in relation to professional preparation of future teachers and them professional development in further pedagogical activity. The special attention is deserved by schools of professional development of teachers of technologies in the USA, that not only prepare future teachers but also care of professional development of practical teachers-workers, increase of level of their pedagogical activity. Also, it is marked in the article, that at higher school of Great Britain there is support of the state from development of technology, that shows up in providing of standards and software with the aim of realization of competence approach and professional self-development of future teachers and teachers that work. Different vector of forms of organization of educational process at higher school of Great Britain assist a free choice the student of certain form of studies or their combination, to academic mobility with taking into account of his inclinations and making and professional increase of the future specialist. On the basis of analysis of professional preparation at higher school of Poland investigational, that professional development of future specialist comes true through at level to the licentiate and master's degree studios and provided by configuration of approach of the systems from introduction of the Polish system of vocational orientation on studies on speciality to realization of practical preparation with introduction of the modern practice-oriented forms and methods of studies in the conditions of application of interactive technologies in the subject-subject interaction with the teacher of higher school and orientation on self-realization, achievement of success on the stage professional preparation and further professional to development. The results of logical-systemic analysis of scientifically-pedagogical literature in relation to professional development of future teachers of technologies in foreign countries allow to assert that scientists show the increase personal interest the problem of preparation of teachers in other countries. Keywords: professional development, future teacher of labor studies and technologies, specialist, professional preparation, foreign experience

Authors

Authors