University-based Teacher Education Research Articles

The Influences of University-Based Coursework on Field Experience

This study explored the influence of university-based teacher education courses on preservice teachers as they engaged in the field-based portion of their preparation. Forty-two preservice teachers contributed reflective writings about the successes and challenges they faced during field experiences in light of knowledge and skills learned during their university-based coursework. Participants’ self-reflective writings were coded and analyzed for emerging themes that cut across all responses. The results indicated a shift from concerns about performance of teaching tasks in the classroom to concerns about the performance of students in terms of learning. This shift was consistent with a goal of the preservice program, namely, helping preservice teachers focus on student learning.

From Coherence in Theory to Coherence in Practice

Historically, one of the central concerns that has plagued the field of teacher education is the observation that fragmentation characterizes the experience of learning to teach. Too often, university-based teacher education programs consist of a set of disconnected individual courses; separate clinical work from coursework; and lack a vision of teaching and learning. Therefore, some teacher educators have argued that creating structurally and conceptually coherent programs will result in more powerful learning for prospective teachers. Yet, although empirical work on such programs is growing, there is little research on the nature of coherence and on how it might develop. To that end, this article documents one teacher education program's efforts to become more coherent, focusing on the ways in which the program tries to become more coherent and on the challenges of coherence. The article concludes with implications for teacher education program design and evaluation, with a focus on the power, complexity, and problems of coherence.

From Coherence in Theory to Coherence in Practice

Historically, one of the central concerns that has plagued the field of teacher education is the observation that fragmentation characterizes the experience of learning to teach. Too often, university-based teacher education programs consist of a set of disconnected individual courses; separate clinical work from coursework; and lack a vision of teaching and learning. Therefore, some teacher educators have argued that creating structurally and conceptually coherent programs will result in more powerful learning for prospective teachers. Yet, although empirical work on such programs is growing, there is little research on the nature of coherence and on how it might develop. To that end, this article documents one teacher education program's efforts to become more coherent, focusing on the ways in which the program tries to become more coherent and on the challenges of coherence. The article concludes with implications for teacher education program design and evaluation, with a focus on the power, complexity, and problems of coherence.

Reflections of a University-Based Teacher Educator on the Future of College- and University-Based Teacher Education

Drawing on his nearly 30 years as a university teacher educator, the author reflects about the future of college- and university-based teacher education in the United States in light of recent attacks on education schools. The author argues that university and college teacher educators should do four things: (a) work to redefine the debate about the relative merits of alternative and traditional certification programs, (b) work to broaden the goals of teacher education beyond raising scores on standardized achievement tests, (c) change the center of gravity in teacher education to provide a stronger role for schools and communities in the education of teachers, and (d) take teacher education seriously as an institutional responsibility or do not do it.

From Teacher to Teacher Educator: Experiences, expectations, and expatriation

This paper reports a study of two beginning teacher educators making the transition from classroom teacher to university-based teacher educator. A hybrid qualitative methodology, combining case stu...

Examining teachers' beliefs through action research: guidance and counseling/pastoral care reflected in the cross-cultural mirror

The TRIO Project (Teacher Training & Research for Individuals & Organisations) began with the notion that cross-cultural reflection could be an effective tool by which teachers could examine their personal belief systems about learning, teaching and pupil guidance. University-based teacher educators from four countries, the Netherlands, Russia, the United States and the United Kingdom, worked collaboratively to create this 3-year project. They first had teachers systematically examine their own teaching practices at the local level using action research strategies and then brought them together in an annual international workshop, where the teachers from all four countries were able to reflect upon their work and their pedagogical belief systems using a cross-cultural lens. This article describes the process used to facilitate that exchange, and what was learned by both teachers and teacher-educators about the value of cross-cultural reflective practice leading to personal and professional growth.

How Changes in Entry Requirements Alter the Teacher Workforce and Affect Student Achievement

We are in the midst of what amounts to a national experiment in how best to attract, prepare, and retain teachers, particularly for high-poverty urban schools. Using data on students and teachers in grades 3–8, this study assesses the effects of pathways into teaching in New York City on the teacher workforce and on student achievement. We ask whether teachers who enter through new routes, with reduced coursework prior to teaching, are more or less effective at improving student achievement. When compared to teachers who completed a university-based teacher education program, teachers with reduced coursework prior to entry often provide smaller initial gains in both mathematics and English language arts. Most differences disappear as the cohort matures, and many of the differences are not large in magnitude, typically 2 to 5 percent of a standard deviation. The variation in effectiveness within pathways is far greater than the average differences between pathways.

Quality requirements for teacher educators

This study deals with the quality requirements that are needed for teacher educators. The tasks teacher educators have to do and the competencies they should possess (a professional profile), according to their fellow teacher educators, were identified. On the basis of a literature search on tasks and competencies of teacher educators, we made a first overview of tasks and competencies. Next, we conducted a Delphi study in three rounds, during which we held open-ended interviews and sent out two rounds of questionnaires. The resulting profile consists of five task areas and four areas of competence. For university-based teacher educators, a sixth task area (carrying out research) has been added.

Taking Stock in 2005

During the summer of 2004, a new study of the impact of Teach for America (TFA) teachers on pupils' achievement was released by Mathematica Policy Research, Incorporated. Taking stock in 2005, this editorial uses the new TFA study to make several points about research on teacher preparation programs in general and about how this research is often used and misused in the discourse about teacher preparation reform. editorial begins by reviewing two previous studies of TFA, noting that although they asked similar questions, they reached directly opposing conclusions and, not surprisingly, engendered directly opposing critique from those with differing political and professional agendas. Then the editorial briefly describes the Mathematica study, arguing that although it was not designed to compare the effectiveness of teachers prepared in university-based teacher education programs with that of teachers who entered teaching through alternate routes, it is nonetheless being constructed that way in the larger political discourse. editorial makes the argument that the new study is more indication that we need to get beyond the teacher education horse race, which pits route, program, or structural arrangement against another to declare the winner or the one best approach to teacher preparation. Instead, we need to focus directly on the essential ingredients in the preparation of all teachers and the ways these interact with what teacher candidates bring and with the contexts of programs and schools to produce desirable outcomes. ASSESSING THE IMPACT OF TFA TEACHERS: PREVIOUS STUDIES In June 2004, a major national study (Decker, Mayer, & Glazerman, 2004) of the impact of TFA, an alternate teacher recruitment and training program, was released by Mathematica, an independent research firm that provides analyses of the socioeconomic issues that drive public policy. Not surprisingly, the Mathematica study generated immediate response. Since its inception in 1989, TFA has been a hot-button issue among teacher education researchers and practitioners and among educational policy makers. Indeed, in many of the most contentious debates, TFA has been constructed as both the poster child for alternate routes into teaching (even though it is technically not an alternate route but a teacher recruitment and initial training program) and a major battleground for larger discussions about who should teach, what they should know, how and where they should be prepared, and who should decide. Mathematica study is not the first analysis of the impact of TFA teachers on pupils' achievement as indicated by test scores. Raymond, Fletcher, and Luque (2001), for example, studied TFA teachers for the Center for Research on Education Outcomes (CREDO), a research group of the Hoover Institute. This study compared new TFA teachers hired in Houston with other new teachers hired there and concluded that TFA teachers were at least as good as others in terms of pupils' test scores and better than other new teachers in raising pupils' math test scores. foreword to the study, written by Chester Finn and Marci Kanstoroom, concluded, The TFA program, we learn from this study, proves that it's not necessary to spend an extended period in an to be effective in a K-12 classroom (p. ix). Spokespersons for major national organizations supporting professional teacher preparation were quick to critique the study, pointing out that because Houston has an unusually large number of uncertified teachers (including teachers without even a bachelor's degree), the study actually compared TFA teachers with teachers who were less well-qualified than they were. Critics concluded therefore that the study did not really prove anything about the effectiveness of teachers prepared in ed school programs in comparison with teachers entering through alternate routes. Critics also pointed out that the exceedingly high attrition rate of TFA teachers in the Houston study (60% to 100% after 2 years) was a major concern. …

Moving beyond collusion: clinical faculty and university/public school partnership

Drawing on interviews with clinical and university-based teacher educators and administrators, the authors explore the challenges of building and sustaining collaborative university/school partnerships. Using the concept of “communities of practice” (Communities of practice: learning, meaning, and identity, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 1998), the authors describe how clinical and university-based teacher educators share a set of assumptions about their respective roles—described as a form of “collusion”—that confirms status differences as well as the value of transmissive models of teaching. These assumptions undermine the goal of collaboration. The authors argue that the process involved in forming university/school partnerships needs to be understood less as an administrative and motivational problem than a question of identity formation and of relationship building.

Science-specialist Student-teachers Consider Promoting Technological Design Projects: Contributions of Multi-media Case Methods.

In school science, students often experience simplistic representations of knowledge-building practices in science and technology – which, in reality, are complex, unpredictable and theory-limited. While there are a great variety of reasons (many of which are beyond teachers' direct control), this occurs partly because teachers of science generally have not had such realistic experiences. While student-teachers can develop this kind of ‘meta-scientific’ literacy in university-based science teacher education programmes, this depends on the extent to which activities are legitimised through close associations with authentic school contexts. In this paper, we report effects on science-specialist student-teachers' conceptions about science and technology, and corresponding priorities for school science, after interacting with a case documentary that depicted students collaborating in development and evaluation of pneumatic-controlled robotic arms. Data, including video footage of student-teachers' interactions with cases and audio recordings of interviews with them and their teacher, indicated that many student-teachers developed more naturalistic perspectives on knowledge development in science and technology and corresponding pedagogical priorities. At the same time, most also recommended an ‘apprenticeship’ for students, gradually moving them from unrealistic (e.g., following a linear model for technological design) to more realistic (e.g., accommodating flexibility in design, while pointing out such limits to creativity as techno-determinism) problem solving contexts.

Surviving the Legitimacy Challenge

Now is the time, the authors argue, for schools of education, in conjunction with school and community partners, to get serious about creating good examples of professional practice and preparation. Failure to do so will put the whole enterprise of teacher education in jeopardy. TEACHER educators live in a new world. This is a world of accountability, competition, alternatives, and serious questioning of the need for university-based teacher education. Even five years ago, it was unthinkable that university teacher education programs would be facing serious challenges to their legitimacy and importance. Many teacher education faculty members still deny that such a threat exists, but they are wrong. Those of us who have been working seriously on teacher education reform for the past 15 or so years have until recently viewed this work as an internal university agenda -- how to improve our campus-based programs. The game has changed radically. In Texas, where we work, school districts, regional educational service centers, community colleges, and for-profit companies now provide almost one-third of the teacher education programs. In the last legislative session, a bill was narrowly defeated that would have allowed Texas school districts to hire anyone they thought could do the job, regardless of credentials, and then decide what teacher education these teachers needed. We have lost our exclusive franchise, and most states are in similar situations or not far behind. Teaching as a Profession Politicians, the media, and scholars are currently polarized over the issue of teacher education reform. Either they advocate the professionalization of teaching or they push for the deregulation of teacher preparation and an end to the monopoly that institutions of higher education have held in this area.1 This debate grows out of public concern and agreement that 1) there is a teacher shortage and 2) a teacher shortage would be detrimental to the education of the youths of the United States. Institutions of higher education have been primarily responsible for the training and supply of effective, qualified teachers but are having increasing difficulty meeting the demand in many states. The drive to professionalize teaching and teacher education has been spearheaded by the National Commission on Teaching and America's Future and forwarded through the joint efforts of the National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education, the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards, and the Interstate New Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium.2 These projects reflect a broad-based effort to develop a consistent nationwide approach to teacher education based on high standards for the initial preparation, licensing, and certification of teachers. Proponents of teacher education advocate standards-based teacher preparation and professional development as well as teacher assessments based on performance across the professional life span. On the other side of the argument, those who advocate the deregulation of teacher preparation maintain that the requirements of state licensing agencies and schools of education are unnecessary hurdles that prevent qualified, bright people from entering the field of teaching. They promote alternative programs as viable routes into teaching and want to establish local control for determining the qualifications of teachers. Under this approach, districts would have the freedom to determine the hiring criteria for their teachers, and anyone with content knowledge and a bachelor's degree could be quickly placed in the classroom without having any formal pedagogical training. The issue at hand is whether or not the profession of teaching is indeed a profession and whether or not becoming a teacher requires learning a specialized body of pedagogical knowledge and a specialized set of skills. Teacher educators maintain that teaching is a profession as legitimate as the medical profession or the legal profession. …

What a Difference a Definition Makes

On January 8, 2002, President Bush signed into law the reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA), which The Washington Post referred to as the broadest rewriting of federal education policy in decades and Washington's top bipartisan achievement of 2001 (Milbank, 2002). In other news stories and editorials, the bill has been referred to as a triumph--the culmination of exhaustive efforts by both houses of Congress and concessions from both political parties (Robelen, 2002). Called the No Child Left Behind Act, the bill pays homage to Bush's campaign focus on education (Broder, 2001). The revised ESEA significantly increases both the federal role in precollegiate education and the overall amount of federal dollars earmarked for this purpose. The bill, which directly targets poor students and struggling schools by shifting funding formulas, requires mandatory annual testing of students from third through eighth grade and makes schools accountable by tracking test results, reporting to parents, and disaggregating results by race, gender, and other factors. Although the bill's supporters claim it represents unprecedented consensus, it has also raised concerns. A September letter from the National Conference of State Legislatures to Congress, for example, called the bill an egregious example of a top-down, one-size-fits-all federal reform (Education Week, 2001), sharply questioning that annual statewide testing in multiple subjects is necessary for effective state accountability system. Others are concerned that the heavy-handed emphasis on testing will lead to manipulation of the system and narrowing of the curriculum. Commenting that the bill ought to be called the No Child Left Untested Act, Robert Schaeffer of FairTest argued that mandatory testing will not show schools where to invest resources but will, on the contrary, take money away from initiatives not directly tested and will penalize (not help) struggling students (Toppo, 2002). Policy analysts have raised questions about the bill as a lever for state education reform, pointing out that although a number of states are still not in compliance with 1994 ESEA requirements, Title I funds have never been withheld from a state for noncompliance (Robelen, 2001). Other concerns include the bill's imbalance between mandates and funding and its inadequate attention to special education as well as the possibility of stigmatizing poor and minority students, the incapacity of the testing industry to keep up with the mandatory testing program, and the new layers of federal regulations that are likely to duplicate state efforts. Of particular interest to the teacher education community is the bill's provision that every state ensure that all teachers are and are receiving high-quality professional (Section 1119). Highly qualified teachers are defined as those who have obtained full state certification (including through alternate routes) or have passed a state teacher licensing exam (Section 9101). It is worth noting that this provision of the bill implies that college- and university-based teacher education is neither the sole nor required mode of preparation for teaching, cementing into this new federal legislation the legitimacy of current alternate routes that bypass traditional SCDE preparation in more than 40 states (Zeichner & Shulte, 2001). According to ESEA definitions, high-quality professional development may involve partnerships with higher education institutions that give teachers the opportunity to work with experienced teachers and college faculty but must, by definition, improve teachers' subject matter knowledge, align with state standards, and improve teachers' understanding of instructional strategies on scientifically based research (Section 9101). Again this definition leaves ambiguous (and perhaps makes superfluous) the role of colleges and universities in the preparation of highly qualified teachers at the same time that it elevates scientifically based research. …

Further Comment: Pragmatizing the Imaginary: A Response to a Fictionalized Case Study of Teaching

In the Voices Inside Schools section of its Fall 2000 issue, the Harvard Educational Review published an article entitled, "Historical Perspective as an Important Element of Teachers' Knowledge: A Sonata-Form Case Study of Equity Issues in a Chemistry Classroom." The article was coauthored by Zachary Dean Sconiers, a middle school science teacher, and Jerry Rosiek, a university-based teacher educator and research methodologist.

Working as Partners: School teachers' experiences as university-based teacher educators

A qualitative study was undertaken of 25 teachers who have taken time away from schools or early childhood centres to work on short-term contracts in a university college of education preservice teacher education programme. The study considers their perceptions of the experience and how this might impact on the partnerships between colleges and schools or early childhood centres. Findings suggest that there are benefits and difficulties associated with short-term contracts. However, overall participants found that teaching in a preservice teacher education programme was a very valuable professional experience and that it enhanced their ability to support student teachers more effectively.

Unsung Heroes: Exploring the roles of school-based professional experience coordinators in Australian preservice teacher education

The literature on practicum in preservice teacher education provides varied and detailed accounts of the roles of the student teacher, the supervising teacher, and the university-based teacher educator. However, the school-based professional experience coordinator, usually the principal or deputy principal, has been dismissed as an administrative outsider to the essential triad of supervision. Feedback from the field suggested that the coordinator's role may in fact be crucial in ensuring that practicum is an occasion for quality learning. This paper reports on a study to explore ways in which a small selection of professional experience coordinators contribute to the establishment, support and appraisal of high quality practicum experience in a variety of settings. The research fills a gap in the existing literature on the practicum by providing some illumination of the varied ways the school-based coordinator role is filled. In addition, the paper raises questions about selection and support of coordinators, about ownership of the practicum, and argues for a reconceptualisation of the practicum as the site where all shareholders engage in the partnership, with continual opportunities for construction, reconstruction and renewal of the teaching profession.

Caring and Empowerment: A teacher educator's reflection on an ethical dilemma

Despite a growing interest in the lives and work of teacher educators, there has been little explicit examination of the ethical dimensions of their professional practice - or of the ethical dimensions of teaching in higher education in general. This article contributes to efforts to address these oversights. More specifically, it documents aspects of my reflection on an enduring ethical dilemma I encounter as a university-based teacher educator; How to enact my commitment to professional practice grounded in an ethos of caring (Noddings, 1984) for my students, without being drawn into the abyss of endless and ultimately disempowering emotional labour that caring can entail (Bateson, 1989)? In attempting to resolve this dilemma I identify an alternative conceptualisation of caring as mutual empowerment and draw on Tom's (1997) notions of deliberative relationships, transparency of practice and presence. Although the context of this article is teacher education, I believe that these notions have relevance for university teachers in most disciplines, and especially for those preparing students for entry into the 'caring professions'.

The Future of Teacher Education: Principles and prospects (1)

Teacher educators everywhere experience, and are concerned about, strained university-school relations. As feelings of unease and uncertainty intensify, pressures increase to re-jig teacher education programmes. Consequently, variations on the theme of teachers and teacher educators working together have emerged recently in an attempt to bridge the gulf between campus and the schools. These revisions can easily delude teacher educators into thinking that criticisms of teacher education have been countered and that the future is secured. Another interpretation is that these developments are signals that the logic of the traditional model is out of step with the times. Such signals point to the transformation and redefinition of institutions for a new kind of society. Relationships with historic partners-schools, employers, parents and teachers' unions-take on new meanings as universities and teacher education undergo reorganisation. Under these conditions, the leadership role of teacher education loses its legitimacy. Claims that university-based teacher education generates definitive teaching-related research and is the clearing-house for powerful knowledge about teaching and curriculum are no longer credible beyond the university. Further, universities and school systems increasingly judge their success by participation in an expanded global market. The inevitable outcome is a high degree of competition between (and variety in) teacher education programmes. In that environment, and with few political allies, the university-based teacher education model cannot easily survive as the principal form of teacher pre-service preparation. The challenge for teacher educators is to engage the forces that drive institutional change rather than expecting existing practices to guarantee the future. This paper proposes some principles for new approaches to teacher education that lie beyond present models. The inexorability of change and the unpredictability of the future are ideal conditions for recreating teacher education rather than celebrating its demise.

Two Routes to Certification: What Do Student Teachers Think?

Alternate routes to certification have assumed increasing importance for teacher education since A Nation At Risk (National Commission on Excellence in Education, 1983) brought teaching and teacher education under public attack. There are an increasing number of alternate routes to teaching--including state, university and college, and district-based initiatives--as well as programs such as Teach for America (Feistritzer & Chester, 1998). Alternate routes may be linked to the university, but they typically seek to fast-track or circumvent traditional university-based teacher education. Some see alternate routes as a serious threat to university sponsored professional preparation (Roth, 1986). Others maintain that the issue is not over professional preparation per se but over the timing and institutional context for teacher preparation, and about the mix of professional knowledge and skills to be acquired (Stoddart & Floden, 1996, p. 90). Alternate routes are established for a variety of reasons (Feistritzer & Chester, 1998): to provide accessibility to the teaching workforce for nontraditional entrants, attract teachers to underserved geographical areas, recruit teachers for subject areas of perennial shortage such as science and math, attract high potential individuals who might otherwise pursue different careers (Darling-Hammond & Cobb, 1996). In California in particular, they have arisen to lessen the historical shortage of special education and bilingual teachers (Gunderson & Karage, 1992; Institute for Education Reform, 1996; McKibben & Schrup, 1995). In California, the Commission on Teacher Credentialing and teacher education programs at public and private institutions have historically discouraged the use of emergency permit teachers (EPTs) as an entry into teaching. The preferred route has been for preservice students to complete their field experiences, including student teaching, in the classrooms of credentialed teachers. However, beginning in 1996, class-size reduction opened hundreds of classrooms to alternate-route teachers, that is, teachers with little or no professional preparation prior to assuming teaching responsibilities. Districts no longer needed to show special hardship to put EPTs in classrooms (McKibben, 1996). A large percentage of EPTs are walk-ons, possessors of an undergraduate degree who have passed the required basic skills test but lack professional preparation. Some come from private and parochial schools seeking larger salaries and improved benefits; they bring teaching experience, but most are uncredentialed. A small number of people who left teaching years earlier are returning to the field, but their credentials long ago expired. Preservice program students who take emergency permit positions before they complete their professional preparation are a large source of uncredentialed teachers. In the changed climate of teacher hiring in California, preservice programs with the traditional structure of coursework followed by student teaching face the predicament of how to accommodate students who take emergency permit jobs before completing the program. Programs ask, How can student teaching be accomplished when the student is already a classroom teacher? How do traditional notions of student teaching conflict with program students who have skipped student teaching and begun teaching before program completion? What is the role of a university-supervised student teaching semester for program students who are classroom teachers of record, some of them teachers of several semesters' experience by the time they get to the student teaching phase of the program? In this article, we report a 2-year study of a preservice program that, since 1996, has used both emergency permit teaching and traditional student teaching as the culminating field experience in the professional preparation sequence. Our purpose in this study was to investigate the perceptions traditional student teachers (STs) and EPTs hold of their different ways of completing their professional preparation. …

Paradise Unrealized: Teacher Educators and the Costs and Benefits of School/University Partnerships

Considering progress in establishing partnership or professional development schools, Goodlad (1994) wrote that reports of success tend to be of paradise envisioned, not gained (p. 218). The partnership literature is filled with positive statements written during the formative stages of partnership development, but scholars have begun to take a more sobering view (see Abdul-Haqq, 1998) as the complexity of the undertaking has become more fully appreciated. Labaree (1995) argues that educational reform runs in cycles and that enthusiasm wanes over time. Getting a partnership off the ground engenders commitment. The program energizes faculty. But over time, disquieting and unexpected problems emerge: teachers and faculty tire; a new phase in partnership follows as teachers and university teacher education faculty reconsider their initial commitment. We believe a real danger exists that this reform effort will go the way of other reforms that ... have failed to take root. Most remain just interesting ideas (Pogrow, 1996, p. 657). Paradise envisioned is seldom paradise realized. Creating a genuine partnership between universities and schools demands a fundamental reconsideration of the roles and functions provided by all organizations that have an interest in and responsibility for teacher development (Robinson & Darling-Hammond, 1994, p. 204). This is a daunting challenge. For 15 years, faculty at Brigham Young University (BYU) have striven to meet it. In so doing, faculty roles have changed. A critical juncture has been reached, a point where hardheaded realism has replaced initial enthusiasm. Faculty are asking critical questions: What are the costs and benefits of the program? What is needed to sustain it over the long haul? In posing these questions, the faculty have no intention to back away from partnerships. Indeed, it is the current strength of the partnership and faculty commitment that enables them to ask cost questions openly. In this article, we forthrightly air problems in the belief that doing so will assist us and others in the effort to form sustainable partnerships. This is a study of partnership development after initial enthusiasm fades. We explore the benefits, but mostly seek to locate the costs of partnership for university faculty. We do so in the hope of more successfully ameliorating those costs. In addition to its openly critical tone, this study is unique in at least three ways. First, program costs and benefits are linked--but not causally--to specific contextual and program elements. This linkage enables a sharper analysis than is commonly presented in partnership studies. Second, the BYU partnership effort is massive, representing the efforts of a teacher education program annually graduating 360 elementary teacher candidates and involving 46 elementary schools. Much of the research on professional development schools or partnerships reports on relatively small programs. Third, we assessed personal and family impact. University based teacher education faculty spouses completed surveys in which they described the impact of the 1994 program changes on their spouses and family life. The research team decided to survey spouses when they realized that the cost of changing professional roles to family and personal life may not be readily apparent even to faculty members. Positive or negative program impact on a family likely influences long-term program viability as well as the quality of one's professional and personal life. Background Partner schools are schools engaged simultaneously and jointly with colleges and universities in the renewal of both themselves and the educator preparation programs of which they are an integral part (Osguthorpe, Harris, Harris, & Black, 1995, p. xii). The initial drive toward partnership at BYU reflected Goodlad's (1993) belief stated that the bumping together of university and school cultures would have a positive effect on both institutions (p. …