Holmes Group Research Articles

Organizational Models for Teacher Learning

From the earliest reports regarding middle level education to the most recent ones, teacher learning has been central to effective middle level schools. Alexander, Williams, Compton, Hines, and Prescott (1968) asserted, Even the most enthusiastic and well-qualified teachers must have the support of congenial organizational framework, abundant resources, pertinent inservice programs, and appropriate procedures to assure continued optimum performance (p. 88). In the seminal Turning Points document, the Carnegie Council on Adolescent Development (1989) highlighted how teachers working collectively can solve problems, experience professional support and less isolation, and coordinate instructional programs. In Turning Points 2000: Educating Adolescents in the 21st Century, Jackson and Davis (2000) recommended that middle level schools not only be staffed with teachers who are expert at teaching young adolescents but also engage teachers in ongoing, targeted professional development opportunities. More recently in This We Believe: Keys to Educating Young Adolescents, National Middle School Association (NMSA, now Association for Middle Level Education [AMLE], 2010) named ongoing professional development as one of its 16 tenets, explaining, is ... initiatives (p. 30).It is important that professional development experiences provide continued participation over an extended period of time, collaborative approaches, and ongoing assessment of the effectiveness of the professional development initiatives. (p. 30)Professional development experiences can take many forms, yet collaborative organizational models, in particular, can facilitate teachers' discussions about professional readings, student work and data, instructional practices and assessment techniques, and school improvement goals. The professionalization of teaching is dependent upon teachers having opportunities to contribute to the development of their own knowledge, engage in collegial relationships, and grow intellectually throughout the process (Holmes Group, 1986). Such collegiality among teachers can exist teachers work together on shared project toward some shared goal through mutually constructed contributions (Angelle & Anfara, 2008, p. 52). Despite the focus on collaborative teacher learning, too many teachers, including middle grades teachers, still work in isolation and engage solely in individual professional development.The purpose of this article is to explore organizational models for teacher learning that are being used in middle level schools, including common planning time, professional learning communities, and critical friends groups. After offering brief definition of each model of teacher learning, we describe the theoretical underpinnings of the models, summarize the relevant research regarding the use of these models, and offer concluding remarks with implications for middle level education.Agreeing on language regarding the organizational models that support teacher learning is good starting point. First, common planning time is a regularly scheduled time during the school day when teachers who teach the same students meet for joint planning, parent conferences, materials preparation, and student evaluation (Kellough & Kellough, 2008, p. 394). It affords interdisciplinary teams of teachers- teachers from different content areas (e.g., language arts, mathematics, science, social studies)-time to collaborate. Second, professional learning communities are collaborative teams of teachers who routinely analyze their practice for the purpose of improving student achievement (DuFour, DuFour, & Eaker, 2008). Often, they are organized in discipline-specific groups or teams. Third, critical friends groups are groups of teachers who gather regularly to consider ways to improve student learning through collaboration and inquiry. Unique to critical friends groups is the use of structured protocols. …

The Intersection of Policy, Reform, and Teacher Education

For over a decade, teacher education has been at the crosshairs of educational reform and policy mandates. At the conclusion of a report on the impact of the Holmes Group in the late 1990s, Fullan, Galluzzo, Morris, and Watson (1998) wrote, Never before has teacher education experienced such a massive outpouring of political and fiscal (p. 68). If teacher education was experiencing an outpouring of political and fiscal action in the late 1990s, then what we are experiencing in the beginning of the second decade of the 2000s must be a monumental flood. The impact of policy on the teacher education reform agenda has reached crisis proportions in 2011 and sent the profession into a reactive mode. The impetus for changing teacher education arises from many concerns, not the least of which is that teaching diverse learners in a highly technical and media-rich society requires the learning of new, highly sophisticated strategies (Darling-Hammond & McLaughlin, 1999). Furthermore, teacher education exists in an environment where there are wide achievement gaps among diverse student groups. International comparisons continue to show that U.S. students are not competing at expected levels, especially in mathematics and science where we rank lower than some third world countries (U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2011). Many students exiting classrooms are not prepared for success in postsecondary education and do not have the appropriate skills and abilities needed for today's jobs. The public outcry regarding the performance of our students and the quality of our schools has targeted teachers as one explanation for students' poor performance in schools and sparked a wide-ranging discussion about variation in teacher effectiveness. Because studies and reports establish the importance of individual teachers in student achievement, sources of variation in quality have been under scrutiny. One source of variation in teacher performance, teacher preparation, is a recent target. The ensuing debates about what experiences are necessary to produce high-quality teachers have permeated state and federal policy and mandates. The fact that research is not robust or is at best mixed about what produces a high-quality teacher only added fuel to the debates (Cochran-Smith & Fries, 2009) and lead to calls for reform in teacher preparation at local, state, and national levels. Policy affecting teacher education evolves from a wide range of sources, including public perceptions and attitudes, federal initiatives, current trends in public schools and higher education, the visions and whims of politicians, and the profession's own initiatives. No matter how it emerges, it is not unusual for policy ebbs and flows to result in major reforms or restructuring of programs and curriculum as the teacher education community attempts to respond to federal and state political wishes and to the attitudes and perspectives of legislators and the public. At other times, policy emerges from educational reform and restructuring. A summary of the pressures currently buffeting the teacher education profession and a contrast of two disparate influential movements illustrate the intersection of policy, reform, and teacher education. Pressures on Teacher Education The No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) of 2001 and its efforts to define a highly qualified teacher were followed by Race to the Top (RTTT), which brought a renewed emphasis on accountability. The two large federal efforts that focused primarily on PreK-12 education serve as bookends to a series of federal and state pressures on teacher education. There were many ways that NCLB influenced and affected teacher education, but one feature of the policy fueled an already established political debate on teacher preparation (Kaplin & Owings, 2003). NCLB attempted to define highly qualified teachers by focusing on the subject matter preparation of current and future teachers. …

Response to Section IV: What's Needed Now: Issues of Professional Development School Accountability and Sustainability in Today's Complex Educational Environment

The concept of Professional Development Schools assumes that improving teaching ultimately depends on providing teachers with opportunities to contribute to the development of knowledge in their profession, to form collegial relationships beyond their immediate working environment, and to grow intellectually as they mature professionally. The idea of such collaborative sites also recognizes that the university-based research and instruction in education must have strong roots in the practice of teaching if they are to maintain their intellectual vitality and credibility with the profession. Professional Development Schools, then, would provide a structured partnership for developing the teaching profession and ultimately improving students’ learning. (Holmes Group, 1986)

Adrift on a Sea of Uncertainty: Preserving Uniformity in Patent Law Post-Vornado Through Deference to the Federal Circuit

Congress created the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in 1982, and granted that court exclusive appellate jurisdiction over civil actions arising under patent law. Congress's primary goals in creating the Federal Circuit were to produce a more uniform patent jurisprudence and to reduce forum shopping based on favorable patent law. But in the 2002 decision of Holmes Group, Inc. v. Vornado Air Circulation Systems, the Supreme Court held that patent counterclaims alone could not create Federal Circuit jurisdiction. This decision not only overruled the Federal Circuit's longstanding jurisdictional rule, but also opened the door for Regional Circuit Courts of Appeals (RCCOAs) to decide appeals where patent claims appear only as counterclaims. Because RCCOAs generally do not defer to the decisions of coordinate federal courts (what can be termed the rule of no deference), RCCOAs will be able to independently develop patent caselaw - threatening the goals for which the Federal Circuit was created. To date, the scholarly response to Vornado's problems has focused on approaches expanding the Federal Circuit's jurisdiction. Commentators addressing deference to the Federal Circuit's patent precedents have either assumed that deference is impossible or impractical, or have mentioned deference as an option only in passing. No one yet has analyzed in detail the case for deference to the Federal Circuit. This article provides that analysis. It explains why the traditional justifications for the rule of no deference are inapplicable here, why deference to the Federal Circuit serves Congressional intent, and why the reasons for such deference compare favorably to established exceptions to the rule of no deference. The article also suggests a particular scope and level of deference, and explains deference's superiority as a long-term solution over jurisdictional modifications. The article should be particularly useful to practitioners and judges faced with these issues in the short-term, and should facilitate inquiry by legislators and academics into a long-term resolution.

The difficulties of inclusive pedagogy for initial teacher education and some thoughts on the way forward

In most western countries, the problems of effective university-controlled and largely university-based initial teacher education (ITE) have been apparent for many decades: whatever is achieved in the university, the teaching practices and attitudes that student–teachers usually learn to adopt are those currently dominant in the schools. So it is difficult to introduce innovations such as inclusive pedagogy through conventional ITE programmes. The solution to this problem is widely recognised to be the much stronger involvement of schools in ITE partnerships (e.g. the Holmes Group's Professional Development Schools in the USA, the Oxford internship scheme in England, the long-forgotten Learning to Teach (1978) Sneddon Report in Scotland); but research and experience have suggested that real barriers stand in the way of the kind of partnership that is needed. Nonetheless, given the opportunity, the resources and most of all the necessary respect, the teaching profession has much more to offer than twentieth century teacher educators were generally willing to accept; and if an open and exploratory approach is adopted, there is every reason for optimism.

The Possibilities of Situated Learning for Teacher Preparation: The Professional Development Partnership

How do we learn to teach music? Do we learn by mastering body of musical knowledge and skills? What about the knowledge base presented to us in philosophy or psychology of education courses? Must we observe students in their music classrooms so that we acquire more direct understanding of typical development? Does this observation constitute learning to teach? Surprisingly, little research has focused on the question of how we learn to teach music, in spite of the relatively long history of formalized music teacher preparation in the United States. Jean Lave and Etienne Wenger have proposed theory of situated learning, building on the idea of apprenticeship, which may help us. Lave and Wenger describe situated learning as participation in community of practice, which they define as a set of relations among persons, activity, and world ... A community of practice is an intrinsic condition for the existence of knowledge, not least because it provides the interpretive support necessary for making sense of its heritage.I They caution that situated learning is not pedagogical strategy; it is theory, or way to understand learning. Several models of music teacher preparation draw on this theory. They attempt to prepare preservice teachers for the realities of contemporary schooling through significant field-based experiences during the initial stages of learning to teach. Small cohort groups of preservice music teachers are based together at the same school site, under the combined supervision of one experienced school music teacher and university professor. One version of this kind of preparation is the Professional Development Partnership, described in more detail in the resources in the Suggested Reading list and modeled after what the Holmes Group has called Professional Development School (PDS): By spending extended amounts of time at school prior to student teaching, preservice music teachers can develop clearer image of the kind of teachers they want to be.

Developing a writing workshop classroom: Collaboration between a charter school principal, second‐grade teacher, and university professor

School and university partnerships are not a new concept. The professional development school movement is promoted by a variety of researchers and organizations, such as Goodlad (1990), the Holmes Group (1986), and the Carnegie Foundation (1986), with recommendations for university and public school collaborations. This article describes the ongoing collaborative process in which a charter school principal, a second‐grade teacher, and a university professor encourage students to become thoughtful and confident writers, while developing a writing workshop in East Texas.

Taking Stock in 2006

In her history of education research, Ellen Lagemann (2000) suggested that during the 20th century, education had a romance with quantification (p. ix) that was reflected in its penchant for counting, measuring, and calculating in order to resemble the hard sciences as closely as possible. In this editorial, I argue that although education has in no way broken off its love affair with quantification, its current paramour is evidence, and the affair is hot and heavy in teacher education. In fact, it is not an exaggeration to say that evidence--or at least talk about evidence--is now everywhere in teacher education research, policy, and practice. This editorial describes and critiques the current focus on evidence, making the argument that although it has great potential to improve teacher education, it also has troubling aspects that need to be acknowledged and debated. (1) EVIDENCE EVERYWHERE Teacher education's current preoccupation with evidence is consistent with the way the standards movement has evolved and with the trend toward evidence-based practice in education writ large. It is important to note, however, that although there have long been several lines of research related to the effects of teacher education (Cochran-Smith & Fries, 2005; Kennedy, 1999), the current intense focus on evidence in teacher education practice and policy is a significant departure from far and recent past. The major reforms of the 1980s and early 1990s, for example, demanded that teacher education be more coherent and intellectually rigorous (e.g., Carnegie Forum on Education and the Economy, 1986; Holmes Group, 1986), whereas reformers like John Goodlad (1990) argued that school renewal and teacher education reform should proceed simultaneously based on moral purposes. During this same time period, revised National Council for the Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE) accreditation standards pushed teacher education to concentrate on the professional knowledge base and be explicit about the conceptual frameworks that guided programs (Christensen, 1996). None of these reforms had much to do with evidence. Currently however, in debates about large-scale teacher education policies and in the federal and state regulations related to individual teacher programs and pathways, evidence is front and center. For example, advocates of differing teacher education pathways often support their positions by citing empirical evidence that they claim demonstrates a positive relationship between particular pathways and school outcomes and conversely, reject the positions of their opponents on the grounds that the opponent's evidence is flimsy or faulty (e.g., Ballou & Podgursky, 2000; Darling-Hammond, 2000). Along similar lines, critics of collegiate teacher education and state certification often make their arguments on the basis of the claim that there is an absence of evidence about their efficacy (e.g., Abell Foundation, 2001; Hess, 2001) and thus conclude that new approaches are needed. The Title II teacher quality reporting requirements that went into effect in 1998 following the reauthorization of the Higher Education Act are perhaps the most striking example of the current emphasis on evidence in teacher education. Title II requires that all states provide annual evidence to the federal government about the quality of teacher preparation, which in turn depends on institutions providing annual evidence to the state about the qualifications (especially scores on state teacher tests) of every candidate recommended for certification. The fourth annual report to Congress on teacher quality (U.S. Department of Education, 2005)--the issued by Secretary of Education Margaret Spellings--stated that the collection of objective from every state regarding teacher and certification has made possible the first national systematic and comprehensive data resource about teacher preparation (p. …

Two Decades of Professional Development School Development in the United States. What Have We Learned? Where Do We Go from Here?

In the close to 20 years since the Holmes Group first introduced the term professional development school (PDS), PDSs have grown in the United States from a concept to become a cornerstone of serious attempts to simultaneously improve teacher education and public schools. In the course of this maturation process, PDSs have come in from the margins and there has been a coalescence and a codification of what it means to be a PDS, along with a growth in networks to support and help develop PDSs. A sharper focus on the impacts of PDSs has evolved, especially on P-12 students, and, overall, there are now stronger conceptualizations about assessment in PDSs, connecting PDS processes to desired outcomes for students, pre–service teachers and experienced educators. Finally, there has been an increase in attention, and some slow movement toward using PDSs to address the diversity and equity challenges of the country. The article addresses these trends, and the implications - challenges and opportunities – they present for the future of PDSs.

Professional Development Schools Revisited

The Professional Development School (PDS) concept was developed by the Holmes Group (now known as the Holmes Partnership) in response to a national call for educational reform. More recent reform agendas question the effectiveness of the PDS model. This article examines the changes that are occurring in the Temple University PDS in Philadelphia, where the state had taken over public schools. Temple University is serving as the manager of six schools. The resulting effect on both the professional development of teachers and student learning is uncertain. However, the challenges and opportunities to enhance the current PDS structure are promising.

'Arising Under' Jurisdiction and Uniformity in Patent Law

Congress created the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in 1982, in part, to establish nationwide uniformity in patent law. The law governing the Federal Circuit's appellate jurisdiction was recently addressed by the Supreme Court's decision in Holmes Group, Inc. v. Vornado Circulation Systems, Inc. The Court held in Holmes that the Federal Circuit's appellate jurisdiction is governed by the well pleaded complaint rule and specifically rejected counterclaims as a vehicle to vesting appellate jurisdiction with the Federal Circuit. The Supreme Court's decision opens the door for claims of patent infringement under 35 U.S.C. Section 271, and other patent claims, to be reviewed by regional circuits, instead of the Federal Circuit. The impact of Holmes will also be felt with respect to a federal district court's removal jurisdiction and exclusive jurisdiction over patent counterclaims. The door is clearly open for the development of substantive patent law outside of the hands of the Federal Circuit and, perhaps even more importantly, outside of the federal courts. The very uniformity Congress attempted to introduce through its creation of the Federal Circuit and a federal patent law system may become undone by the Supreme Court's decision in Holmes. This Article addresses the potential non-uniformity in patent law Holmes may create and concludes that the potential for such a development is real. To prevent these situations from occurring, the effect of Holmes on the Federal Circuit's appellate jurisdiction and federal courts' jurisdiction must be limited and regional circuits and state courts must look to the Federal Circuit for guidance on patent law issues. This Article concludes that the only real solution is a legislative response, with Congress amending Section 1338 in such a way to return the Federal Circuit's appellate jurisdiction, and federal district court's original and exclusive jurisdiction, to their pre-Holmes form.

The professional development school partnership

The 1980s brought some fundamental changes to American public schools. The first wave of reform stressed academic rigor and teacher accountability, while the second wave emphasized professionalization. This emphasis resulted in the Professional Development School (PDS). The Holmes Group prioritized the relationship between teachers and principals, and partnerships between teachers, principals, and university faculty for the improvement of teaching and learning. From this PDS purpose identified by the Holmes Group, this pilot study examines the perceived effectiveness of PDS on teachers’ practice as realized by a purposeful sample of Midwest PDS teachers and principals. PDS has improved teacher practice in several areas. However, teachers’ and principals’ perceptions of teacher practice are not congruent. The teacher, administrator, and university faculty relationship has potential to improve teaching and learning, but it has yet to be realized.

A Festo Feast

Biotechnology Law ReportVol. 21, No. 6 ForewordA Festo FeastRobert A. BohrerRobert A. BohrerSearch for more papers by this authorPublished Online:5 Jul 2004https://doi.org/10.1089/073003102761697882AboutSectionsPDF/EPUB ToolsPermissionsDownload CitationsTrack CitationsAdd to favorites Back To Publication ShareShare onFacebookTwitterLinked InRedditEmail "A Festo Feast." , 21(6), p. 511FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 21Issue 6Dec 2002 To cite this article:Robert A. Bohrer.A Festo Feast.Biotechnology Law Report.Dec 2002.511-511.http://doi.org/10.1089/073003102761697882Published in Volume: 21 Issue 6: July 5, 2004PDF download

Complicating the Case for Teacher Education: Asking Different Questions

The purpose of this case study was to analyze the way the Professional Development School (PDS) model was institutionalized at a large research university in the mid-west. Data was gathered through interviews with key players (Professors, Administrators and Master teachers), document analysis and critical discourse analysis of the surrounding texts. Texts included research produced through the PDS, foundational literature such as Holmes Group documents and scholarly literature about PDS. This article presents the themes and foundational concepts that emerged from the data and suggests a number of interesting conclusions. Overall, it is clear that PDS is a very complicated reform model and that there is a tendency to valorize institutional efforts and results. Also, the origin of the reform model indicates a top-down implementation that involves an exclusivist gendered model of professionalization and suggests that only ‘good teachers’ were invited and that failure occurred but was not well documented.

Teacher Leaders in Professional Development Schools

Professional Development Schools (PDSs), first proposed by the Holmes Group in 1986, have been seen as a potentially promising approach to improving the currency of university faculty, the relevancy of pre-service teachers’ experiences, and the involvement of practicing teachers in teaching and learning conversations of inquiry.

Mentoring, not Monitoring: Mediating a Whole-School Model in Supervising Preservice Teachers

This article offers a case study of a whole-school model for supervising preservice teachers that is related to the principles of professional development schools (Holmes Group, 1990) and Zeichner's (1992) notions of rethinking student teachers' practicum experience. The article draws on constructivist notions of learning to teach; in particular, reference is made to Vygotsky's (1978) sense of mediating a stimulus where in a social-cultural context a person's knowledge is created, examined, and transformed rather than simply absorbed and transmitted. The case study highlights the particular details of this whole-school model and connects these to five main empirical descriptors that were generated from data triangulated from preservice teachers' journals, evaluation forms, group meetings, and correspondence from cooperating teachers. The descriptors show how the whole-school model evolved and how the role of university facilitator shifted from monitoring to mentoring in the teacher preparation process. This change in relationship disrupted the isolating clinical model of supervision where the university facilitator and cooperating teacher, in an uneasy relationship, are perceived by preservice teachers as having power over them: "telling" the preservice teacher with little perceived opportunity for negotiation.

Team Teaching a Graduate Course: Case Study: A Clinical Research Course

The word collaboration has been a real mantra in education over the last decade. Of course, it is not a new idea in teacher education; John Dewey advocated collaboration among teachers in the early part of last century. Dewey's focus, however, like the recent push, was centered on school/university partnerships, recently advocated by bod ies such as the Holmes Group (1986, 1995), the Renaissance Group (1993), and the National Commission on Teach

Identifying Consensus in Teacher Education Reform Documents: A Proposed Framework and Action Implications

Since the publication of A Nation at Risk (National Commission on Excellence in Education, 1983), dialogue on school improvement has increasingly focused on the improvement of teacher preparation. In the mid-1980s, three reform documents, A Call for Change in Teacher Education (National Commission on Excellence in Teacher Education [NCETE], 1985), Tomorrow's Teachers (Holmes Group, 1986), and A Nation Prepared: Teachers for the 21st Century (Carnegie Forum, 1986), signaled a new direction for the literature on school reform. No longer solely concerned with the lack of curriculum standards and academic rigor in American schools, the authors of these documents shifted the focus to teachers and the quality of their preparation. In the 1990s, additional documents drifted in and out of the teacher education debate. But this wide array of proposals, coupled with the lack of coordinated effort among sponsoring groups, has obscured the degree to which reform agendas are compatible. Given the proliferation of proposals, with each carrying its own set of assumptions and objectives, the body of teacher education reform literature as a whole appears fragmented and the individual proposals, idiosyncratic. Recommendations advocated by some are ignored or even opposed by others. Some analysts see convergence of opinion: proposals that are philosophically, programmatically, and/or strategically compatible (Fullan, Galluzzo, Morris, & Watson, 1998). Others see mostly differences: proposals that vary both in terms of their assessment of the current quality of teacher education programs as well as in terms of how they should be changed (Howey & Zimpher, 1989, p. 1). No one, however, has systematically identified areas of agreement and disagreement across the major proposals or the strength of the consensus. Because all proposals have their unique institutional and political histories, varying assessments of problems and reform strategies are understandable (Tom, 1997). Reform proposals are written for different purposes, constituencies, and contexts. The Holmes Group, for example, began as a commission of deans from major research-oriented schools of education, whereas the Carnegie Forum was a task force of education, business, and government leaders. Both the Holmes Group and the Carnegie Forum helped set the terms for the initial debate on teacher education reform, pressing for the abolition of the undergraduate education major and the implementation of rigorous academic and performance-based standards for students and teachers. National organizations such as the Project 30 Alliance (1991) and the Renaissance Group (1996) have brought together university faculty and administrators from arts and sciences and faculty and administrators from education units to advocate for their conception of quality teacher education. These groups have published both reform recommendations and descriptions of programs at their participating institutions. The reform ideas advocated by the Center for Educational Renewal (CER) draw on empirical data, although the postulates themselves derive more from core members' judgments of the proper role of schools and teachers than from the empirical base (Goodlad, 1990, 1994). Most recently, the National Commission on Teaching and America's Future (NCTAF, 1996), composed of business, education, and political leaders, has occupied the focal point for discourse about teacher education. The first of NCTAF's two major publications, What Matters Most: Teaching for America's Future (NCTAF, 1996), has detailed necessary steps in preparing knowledgeable, skillful, and committed teachers; it argues for policies and practices to support quality teachers. The second report, Doing What Matters Most: Investing in Quality Teaching (1997), summarizes national progress toward the goals outlined in the first report and reframes some of its previous recommendations in light of policy changes and data on both the conditions of teaching and the characteristics of effective teacher education programs. …

The Holmes Group: A Private College Plausibility Study

The Holmes Group: A Private College Plausibility Study

Whither Selects of Education? A Reaction: For All the Wrong Reasons

In a few pages, John Goodlad dredges up the demon of status deprivation that has beset him for nearly a half century. Why can't schools, colleges, and departments of education (SCDEs) be valued and loved and respected like other professional schools? What is it about teacher education that makes SCDEs a pariah on so many campuses? Why do so many SCDEs flee from their professional role? Goodlad has a set of remedies--seven conditions or lessons derived from 19 postulates (presuppositions) and grounded on four moral principles, here labeled the humanitarian narrative. He informs those remedies from learnings gleaned from nearly a half century of attempting to build viable SCDEs as well as the experience of fashioning the National Network for Educational Renewal (NNER). From these experiences he also offers a set of structural remedies from Partner Schools to Centers of Pedagogy designed to respond to the conditions he portrays and possibilities he sees for the future. I read initially whither as a question about whether these unique and besieged institutions could possibly survive far into the coming millennium. I then considered the title and, knowing how carefully Goodlad uses words, consulted my dictionary. I learned that whither asks to what situation, position, degree, or end one will go. It became clear that Goodlad is suggesting that only if SCDEs are prepared to adopt both the humanitarian narrative and the set of conditions he describes will they survive long into the 21st century. In 1958, in his role of Director of Teacher Education at the University of Chicago, Goodlad addressed the teacher education establishment. In the aftermath of World War II and as a result of the Soviet launch of Sputnik, he observed, teacher education has been subjected to ... devastating blasts, and argued that its future depended upon remedying the deficiencies years ago diagnosed by its own most thoughtful leaders (p. 109). One of the solutions he proclaimed was that the main channels of American academic life must concern themselves seriously with teacher education (p. 110). He talked of the university as an inhospitable place for teacher education and offered a set of remedies that he has consistently returned to each time he has spoken or written about teacher education. He has expanded on them or refined the set of solutions, but there is a remarkable consistency about what he said then and what he offers today as the solution to the problem of status deprivation. As he has moved from Chicago to Atlanta, from Los Angeles to Seattle, Goodlad has been persistent in arguing for a set of core principles and a new structure for teacher education need (p. 112) to overcome the problem of status deprivation. In Goodlad's (1990) major contribution to the field, Teachers for Our Nation's Schools, he examined the strange, elusive relationship between general approval and specific rejection (p. 70) of teacher education and queried why policymakers and college leaders so little love SCDEs. As evidence of failure to respond, Goodlad asserts that the public and academy have failed repeatedly to respond to the needs of teacher education since the 1960s. He cites Conant (1963), Smith (1980), Clifford and Guthrie (1988), and Judge (1982) as having addressed major problems of teacher education relative to higher education but concludes that college and university leaders failed to respond. Here, as elsewhere, he is asking why this neglect. (It is interesting to note Conant's acknowledgment that Goodlad provided him with the essential knowledge of the details of teacher training. (Conant, 1962, p. v) He leaves unexamined whether these four studies were seminal or what was done to bring them to the attention of policymakers and college and university leaders. I question why he selected these four studies and not the Holmes Group (1995) trilogy, several AACTE documents (particularly Howsam, Corrigan, Denemak, & Nash, 1976), or the more recent work of the National Commission on Teaching and America's Future. …