Professional Education Program
(PEP)
Conceptual
Framework
4.1 Vision and
Mission
I
am proud to say that as a community and as an institution, Stony Brook's
students,
faculty, and staff truly embody the words "All Together Now." We have
been
all together in our generosity, our concern for others, and most notably, in
our diversity.
(Stony Brook President Shirley Strum Kenny, September, 2001)
The State University at Stony Brook was originally established in 1957 as a college for the preparation of secondary school teachers of mathematics and science. In the forty-five years since its founding, the University has grown tremendously, and it is now recognized as one of the nation's important centers of learning and scholarship¡ªcarrying out the mandate given by the State Board of Regents in 1960 to become a university that would "stand with the finest in the country." In this period, the faculty has grown from about 175 to its current level of 1,682, and its student body has grown from about 1,000 to over 20,000.
The Carnegie Foundation has identified Stony Brook as one of the nation's 70 leading research institutions; The Rise of American Research Universities (Graham and Diamond, 1997) placed Stony Brook right after the University of California at Berkeley as one of the best public institutions of higher learning in the United States. Funding for Stony Brook's research programs has grown faster than at almost any other university, making it the major research campus in SUNY, which is itself the largest public university system in the country. As a member of the Association of American Universities (AAU) since May 2001, Stony Brook has reached the top echelon of American Universities in just forty-five years.
Stony Brook University is situated in Suffolk County on eastern Long Island; it is the only SUNY University Center on Long Island and in the New York City metropolitan area. The University, which is the largest single-site employer on Long Island with more than 12,500 employees, is an integral part of the Long Island community. The recent inauguration of the Stony Brook University Manhattan site has further strengthened the University¡¯s presence and partnership endeavors in New York City.
Stony Brook University reflects the diversity of its surrounding community. Suffolk County has experienced a dramatic growth in its linguistically and culturally diverse population and has become a microcosm of the growing diversity across the country. It has the largest Hispanic population in the state, outside of New York City, and its Asian population has more than tripled in the past two decades. The University, which draws many of its students from the surrounding area, serves a highly diverse student body. Stony Brook's student population represents 140 countries. Nearly one third (32.2%) of its undergraduate population of students come from homes where languages other than English are spoken. Of its full-time graduate students, nearly half are native speakers of other languages.
Within its context of dramatic growth, Stony Brook has consistently offered
excellent instructional programs in a broad spectrum of academic subjects, and
it has also secured considerable outside funding to integrate research into
undergraduate teaching/learning programs. Internationally renowned faculty
members teach courses from the undergraduate to the doctoral level in more than
100 undergraduate and graduate degree programs.
The mission that has guided the University during this period of growth is to:
After years of building the University to its present level of diversified acclaim, Stony Brook is re-committing increased funding and resources to its original mission of teacher preparation. Stony Brook University¡¯s paradigm for teacher education and educational administration diverges from those prevalent in other institutions. Its uniqueness and strength are inherent in its university-wide, distributed model that places the six Teacher Education programs and the two Educational Administration programs in their respective academic departments at the University. This departmentally-based model ensures academic rigor in the discipline, the integration of pedagogical theory and practice, and close contact to faculty and research opportunities for graduate and undergraduate students, as proposed in the Boyer Commission Report on recommended enhancements in undergraduate programs located at Carnegie Category I Research Universities (Boyer, 1998). Education faculty appointments within their respective academic departments in the College of Arts and Sciences provide fertile academic environments for research and scholarship. Faculty and teacher candidates engage in a range of department-based experiences that include research-based learning, scholarly investigations, broad use of technology and multimedia, and professional development activities with both colleagues and peers.
Education faculty are also members of The Professional Education Program (PEP), which was established to coordinate the Stony Brook teacher education and educational administration programs and to promote academic, professional, scholarly and intellectual excellence in the preparation of P-12 professionals.
PEP¡¯s purpose is to bring together the diverse educational units on our campus, each one a part of an academic department, and form them into a coherent unit, with coherent principles, goals, outcomes and assessments. PEP promotes cross-disciplinary discourse and curriculum development, and it brings faculty and teacher candidates together for joint exploration of shared concerns, goals and visions. PEP provides a forum for faculty to broaden the diverse disciplinary and pedagogical perspectives of their programs, and it provides opportunities for cross-fertilization of pedagogic ideas, ideals and practices for faculty and their teacher candidates.
The PEP paradigm for teacher education and educational administration provides a framework that promotes professional excellence and growth for faculty and teacher candidates, fosters diverse disciplinary perspectives and learning communities, and cultivates lifelong inquiry and learning, leadership, and professional service. Each teacher preparation program brings forth its own unique disciplinary perspectives and approaches into PEP for joint research and investigation of shared concerns for teacher candidates and alumni. Our paradigm strengthens the integration of disciplinary content and pedagogy within and across departments. It enhances appreciation of diverse academic perspectives and it strengthens collaborative partnerships. This is the context that drives our Conceptual Framework, and our vision and goals in building a united, yet inherently diverse, professional community that includes faculty, teacher candidates, alumni, educational personnel and P-12 students in partnering schools. PEP provides a unifying vision and philosophy, and fosters a cohesive approach for research-based curriculum design, assessment systems, and unified programs for fieldwork and clinical practice.
The underlying theme of PEP's Conceptual Framework and vision is our desire to become a global leader in the professional development of educators by creating diverse learning environments that underscore the symbiosis of research, teaching, life-long learning, community service, and leadership. PEP¡¯s vision is rooted in three major themes. These three themes are deeply embedded within our practices and provide the principles that outline our structure. They provide the bases for our pedagogical research; they guide our reflective practices; and they support our partnerships, both within the university and within the broader community. Our three themes are: Professional Excellence and Growth; Community and Diversity; Leadership and Service.
PEP's vision has emerged from collaboration across disciplines through a meeting of minds, diverse academic perspectives, and cumulative professional expertise and experience. It encapsulates the diverse perspectives that forge our professional community and delineates our shared vision and goals that drive our practices at Stony Brook University. Our vision incorporates the knowledge and experience of our colleagues in P-12 schools, our alumni, and our teacher candidates across disciplines.
To realize our vision, we have identified a number of concrete mission objectives.
Our mission is aligned with Stony Brook University's mission. It is also aligned with the State University of New York¡¯s mission and vision for teacher education, with New York State standards for educators and programs, and with national, and professional standards (see Appendix A).
4.1.1 Crafting
and Aligning our Conceptual Framework
It is reasonable to expect
teachers to be responsible stewards of the schools in which they teach. They and they alone are in a position
to make sure that programs and structures do not atrophy¡ªthat they evolve over
time as a result of reflection, dialogue, actions, and continuing evaluation of
actions. Teachers are to schools as gardeners are to gardens¡ªtenders not only
of the plants but of the soil in which they grow.
(Goodlad, 1990, p. 44).
Our Conceptual Framework reflects Stony Brook¡¯s diverse disciplinary and pedagogical perspectives. It represents joint exploration of shared concerns, goals, and visions. The document was crafted and evolved through cross-disciplinary discourse and communication among Stony Brook faculty and stakeholders, including teacher candidates, alumni, P-12 administrators and teachers. These meetings generated numerous discussions that also included our steering committees, task forces, PEP Advisory Board, faculty meetings, cooperating teachers and teacher candidates. Ideas, input, and the cumulative experiences of all involved have been integrated and are interwoven within this document. This Conceptual Framework has been developed to guide our instruction and curricular reforms, and it will continue to evolve as we move towards the realization of our mission.
This Conceptual Framework is grounded in current research in pedagogy and in the disciplines. It is aligned with Stony Brook¡¯s institutional mission, State University of New York¡¯s A New Vision in Teacher Education, New York State learning standards and Code of Ethics. It is aligned with national standards for teacher education programs that include the National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE), the National Educators Association (NEA) Code of Ethics, and the standards of professional associations that drive our six teacher education programs and two educational administration programs across disciplines. These are: National Council for the Social Studies (NCSS), National Council of Teachers of English (NCTE), National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM), National Science Teachers Association (NSTA), National Policy Board for Educational Administration (NPBEA), and Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages (TESOL). Our benchmarks for teacher candidate proficiencies have been aligned with the Interstate New Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (INTASC) standards and our vision for their future as practicing teachers has been aligned with the National Board for Professional Teacher Standards (NBPTS). Finally, our benchmarks for faculty have been aligned with the Association for Teacher Educators (ATE) standards (see Appendices A, B and C).
4.1.2 Coherence and Implementation of the
Conceptual Framework
The Conceptual Framework provides the shared vision for our operations in all aspects of the teacher education program. It provides direction, focus, and coherence for all our activities. It articulates our commitments and goals, and our expectations from the faculty, teacher candidates, and programs. Table 1 illustrates the ways in which the design and implementation of the Conceptual Framework are aligned with NCATE's indicators. These underscore the shared vision among diverse programs and disciplines, the coherence among the Conceptual Framework, curriculum, instruction, and assessment, the professional commitments and dispositions, commitment to diversity and to technology, and alignment with the institutional mission and with state and national standards.
Aligning the Conceptual
Framework Design and Implementation with NCATE Indicators
|
NCATE Indicators |
Conceptual Framework |
Implementation |
|
Shared Vision |
Shared vision, mission, and
goals across programs. Aligned with Institutional
mission, with current research, state
and national standards. Partnerships with schools. |
PEP - Unifies education
programs across disciplines. Fieldwork and clinical
practice partnerships. Assessment System. |
|
Coherence |
Shared philosophy for
curriculum, instruction, field
experiences, clinical practice, and assessment
across disciplines. Coherence among the
Conceptual Framework, curriculum,
instruction, and assessment. |
Courses aligned to standards
and developmentally linked.
Faculty collaboration within and
across disciplines. The learning
labs. Common core courses for all programs. Coordinated
fieldwork and clinical practice. |
|
Professional Commitments and & Dispositions |
Shared themes: Professional Excellence and
Growth. Community and Diversity. Leadership and Service. Shared Pathways: Research, Reflection, and Partnership. Alignments with State,
National, and Professional Standards
and Codes of Ethics. |
Programs based in research within and across
disciplines. Strong fieldwork components that include students from diverse backgrounds and special needs. Alignments with state, national and professional standards. Career placement. Community outreach. |
|
Commitment to Diversity |
Central theme: Community and
Diversity Fieldwork and clinical
practice in diverse contexts. Integration of diversity into curriculum and instruction, and assessment system. |
Partnership with diverse
schools on Long Island and NYC. Camps for students of
diversity of backgrounds and needs. Learning labs. |
|
Commitment to Technology |
Technology integrated across curriculum, instruction,
field experiences, clinical
practice, and assessment across
disciplines. |
Blackboard use in courses. PEP lab, on-line learning communities; PEP website - a forum for learning
communities. PowerPoint presentations and electronic portfolios. |
|
Candidate Proficiencies
Aligned With Professional and State Standards |
Assessment system is aligned
with institutional, state, and
professional standards. |
Diverse assessment
instruments aligned with standards. Standards-based curriculum
and lesson development. |
4.2 Philosophy,
Purposes and Goals
SUNY¡¯s prominence and long tradition of educating teachers
for the state¡¯s elementary and secondary schools imposes a special
responsibility to assure that we, as a system and as individual institutions,
are fulfilling the promise of excellence.
(SUNY
Provost Peter Salins, 2001)
Our philosophy stems from our realization that the vision educators instill in their students emanates from their own educational experiences, and that this occurs at all levels. We believe that education is a continuing and ongoing process for everyone, and that educators must continue their own growth and education throughout their lives. We view education as a continuing process.
PEP¡¯s purpose is to ensure that Stony Brook University does an excellent job in all of its programs of preparing teacher candidates for their careers.
In very broad outline, we see our three themes and our three pathways as the foundation on which we have built and continue to build our pedagogical structure. Our main goal is to integrate and implement our three themes of professional excellence and growth, community and diversity, and leadership and service, with our three pathways of research, reflection and partnership, and to imbue our teacher candidates with the ideals that these themes and pathways represent.
We believe that educational practice must be informed by research, which is an ongoing process, with ever-changing results and ideas. We believe that Stony Brook, as a research university, should contribute to this development of new ideas and new facts, and should contribute to the storage and dissemination of research results. We believe that educators at every level must be aware of their own selves, their own actions, their own thoughts, and must have the capacity to reflect on their own attitudes. We believe that educators must be aware of the diversity of people, backgrounds and styles of learning, and must take a leadership role in helping each of their students to find his or her own path of learning.
We strive to educate future generations of educators by creating pathways of Research, Reflection and Partnership that will bring our graduates to a vision of themselves as engaged in a lifelong commitment to our three themes of Professional Excellence and Growth, Community and Diversity, and Leadership and Service. Our collective vision of some of the major interconnections among these pathways and themes is given in Table 2.
Our goals of excellence and professional growth, commitment to community and diversity, and of leadership and service are goals for PEP, our faculty, our teacher candidates, and our programs. These goals grow out of our vision and our mission. They are aligned with the standards for excellence for teacher educators (Association of Teacher Educators (ATE)), and with the standards for practicing teachers that focus on the effectiveness, knowledge, skills, dispositions, and commitments of the accomplished teacher (National Board for Professional Teaching Standards (NBPTS)); see Table 3.
Table 2
Symbiosis of PEP Themes and Pathways for Excellence in Teacher
Education
|
PEP Themes |
Pathways for Excellence |
||
|
|
Research |
Reflection |
Partnership |
|
Professional
Excellence And Growth |
-Classroom-based research to inform teaching practice -Access to library of resources (e.g. books, periodicals, classroom lessons and materials) -Learning Labs -Links to standards |
-Self assessment -Peer roundtables -Faculty debriefings -Blackboard postings -Fieldwork and Clinical Practice assessments -Portfolio assessments -Transcripts and GPA -Testimonials -Awards -Links to Code of Ethics and other standards |
-Professional and personal vision as a lifelong learner -Collaboration within and across disciplines -Memberships and participation in societies and professional associations -Attendance at state, national, and international seminars, workshops, and conferences -Links to standards |
|
Community and
Diversity |
-Collaboration within and across disciplines |
-Journal reflections on field experiences -Peer roundtables -Faculty debriefings -Blackboard postings -Fieldwork and Clinical Practice assessments -Portfolio assessments -Alumni surveys -Principal surveys -Testimonials -Awards |
-Advocacy -Memberships in community organizations -Learning Labs |
|
Leadership and
Service |
-Community forums and task forces -Advisory committees -Awareness and understanding of educational issues -Leadership roles in professional community |
-Annual professional self assessment -Professional growth plan -Testimonials -Awards |
-Life long plan and educational philosophy -Mentoring and coaching -Offices held and contributions made to community organizations, societies, and professional associations |
Table 3
|
Themes & Pathways |
ATE |
NBPTS |
|
Professional Excellence &
Growth Community and Diversity Leadership & Service |
1 - Model professional practices 2 - Inquiry & contribution to scholarly activity 3 - Commitment to life-long professional development 4 - Provide leadership in all aspects of teacher education 6 - Advocate high quality &
diversity 7 - Improve the profession |
1 - Committed to students & learning 2 - Know the subject and how to teach students |
|
Research |
1 - Model professional practices 2 - Inquiry & contribution to scholarly activity |
1 - Committed to students & learning 2 - Know the subject and how to teach students |
|
Reflection |
3 - Reflect on practice 4 - Evaluate programs to educate teachers |
3 - Manage & monitor instruction 4 - Think systematically about practice |
|
Partnership |
5 - Collaborate regularly |
5 - Members of learning communities |
4.3 Knowledge
Bases
If
teachers are to prepare an ever more diverse group of students for much more
challenging work¨C for framing problems,
finding, integrating and synthesizing
information; creating new solutions;
learning on their own; and working
cooperatively¨C they will need
substantially more knowledge and radically different
skills than most now have and most schools of education now develop.
(Darling-Hammond,
1997)
The vision educators instill in their students emanates from their own educational experiences. When teacher education programs engage teacher candidates in interdisciplinary inquiry, experiential and diverse collaborative partnerships, reflective practice, and focused goals, they become more inclined to create such learning environments for their own students throughout the course of their professional careers. Stony Brook¡¯s distributed model of teacher education promotes research, reflection, and partnership, in all aspects of its programs. It provides faculty and teacher candidates with rich contexts for research-based investigation and discourse within and across disciplines. It offers diverse contexts for fieldwork, clinical practice, and community service experiences, and channels for reflective practice. These cumulative experiences enhance teacher candidates¡¯ leadership skills and guide the formulation of their own professional vision.
Research
The Research University owes every
student an integrated educational experience
in which the totality is deeper and more
comprehensive than can be measured by
earned credits. The research
university¡¯s ability to create such an integrated
education will produce a particular kind
of individual, one equipped with a spirit
of inquiry and a zest for problem
solving; one possessed of the skill in communication
that is the hallmark of clear thinking
as well as mastery of language; one informed
by a rich and diverse experience. It is that kind of individual that will
provide the
scientific, technological, academic,
political, and creative leadership for the next century.
(Reinventing Undergraduate Education: A Blueprint for America¡¯s Research University. The Boyer Commission on Educating Undergraduates in the Research University)
The search for research-based exemplary practices in the preparation of teacher candidates and P-12 students across disciplines has engaged educators in the development, implementation, and evaluation of multiple approaches and diverse emphases. These have included humanistic approaches (Moskowitz, 1978; Gattegno, 1976; Curran, 1960, 1976) that underscore the role of community and interpersonal relationships in the learning process (Stevick, 1990; Freeman & Richards, 1993) and cooperative learning approaches (Johnson and Johnson, 1984; Kessler, 1992) that introduce partnerships in learning and teaching to enrich learning experiences through collaborations within communities of learners (Nunan, 1992; Brumby & Wada, 1990). The shift from teacher-centered approaches to an emphasis on the centrality of learners (Nunan, 1988) has led to a renewed interest in constructivist approaches and in socially constructed knowledge rooted in the work of Piaget (1954, 1967, 1970 ) and Vygotsky (1962). The constructivist approach, widely discussed in the educational literature (Driver, 1983; DeVries & Kohlberg, 1987; Forman & Kuschner, 1977; Kamii, 1981, 1985; Kuhn, Langer, Kohlberg, & Haan, 1977; Russel, 1992; Sigel, Brozinsky, & Golinkoff, 1981) emphasizes learners¡¯ autonomy and the construction of knowledge through inquiry and reflection that converge on past and present experience (Duckworth, 1987; Fosnot, 1989; Grennon Brooks and Brooks, 1993; Resnick, 1987; Tobin, 1993).
Stony Brook University's well-established reputation of excellence in research within and across disciplines provides faculty and teacher candidates with environments rich in myriad opportunities for professional growth and life-long learning within and across academic departments and centers at the University. The professional experience and the areas of expertise, including technological expertise, of our faculty and staff are broad and diverse. Substantial grant funded research and outreach projects further enhance the experience of teacher candidates whose courses include research opportunities, contexts for interaction with students and faculty within and across the respective departments, and broad use of multimedia and technology. Education faculty appointments within their respective academic departments in the College of Arts and Sciences provide fertile academic environments for research and scholarship. Faculty and teacher candidates engage in a broad range of experiences that include research-based discourse, scholarly investigations, and professional development activities with colleagues and with peers.
Teacher education at Stony Brook reflects a commitment to teaching and learning as investigatory endeavors that demand conceptualization and theory building within research traditions. The perspective that underpins our programs is one that fuses the discipline with its societal and technological links. Teacher candidates are admitted to each of the teacher education programs only after they have demonstrated both the intellectual capacity and the curiosity to learn more and at greater breadth and depth than what they will teach. Successful completion of the teacher education program at Stony Brook requires the teacher candidates to demonstrate understanding of their content specialty, general principles of the discipline and its pedagogy, human development, research methodology appropriate to questions posed, and instructional strategies rooted in theory. Teacher candidates explore curriculum as a negotiated process, teaching as a learner-centered endeavor, and assessment as a way to improve learning and teaching. Teacher candidates explore theory as they engage in extensive fieldwork and clinical practice in P-12 community schools and in the two university interdisciplinary learning and teaching laboratories (Kaufman, 1997; Kaufman, 2000; Kaufman & Grennon Brooks, 1996). The PEP Multidisciplinary Discover Lab was established to expand clinical practice opportunities for teacher candidates of all disciplines. The lab presents an exploratory learning environment that is grounded in constructivist approaches to teaching and learning. It is organized thematically around interactive exhibits and inquiry-based activities created by teacher candidates for elementary and secondary school students and teachers. As teacher candidates facilitate learning for P-12 students, they also question the effectiveness of their practice and conduct their own action research into learning and teaching issues.
Reflection
It is wonderful to reflect on my reflections and see the
progress that is taking place! I am grateful to see that I am always learning,
growing and experiencing a big and important process.
(Stony
Brook Teacher Candidate, 2000)
Teacher candidates' prior experiences as students contribute to their beliefs about teaching and learning and shape their teaching behavior (Shavelson & Stern, 1981; Pajares, 1992; Lortie, 1975; Horwitz, 1985; Johnson, 1993; Pennington, 1990; Johnson, 1992). These belief systems form a central part of teacher candidates¡¯ identity and are very resistant to changes imposed from outside their own experience (Shavelson & Stern, 1981; Pajares, 1992; Hollingsworth, 1989; Zeichner & Tabachnick, 1981). Experiential learning is paramount in bringing about change and development in teachers' prior beliefs and behavior (Pennington, 1995; Richardson, 1990). Hence, the academic and clinical experience that teacher education programs provide for teacher candidates, has the greatest impact on change and development of prior beliefs and behavior (Guskey, 1986; Richardson, 1990). Reflection, doubt, and inquiry further promote the integration of these experiences into teacher candidates' own teaching schema (Larsen-Freeman, 1983; Zeichner & Liston, 1987).
PEP faculty are reflective practitioners and principled role models who are committed to teaching excellence, professional development, service, and scholarship. The faculty align their practices with the Code of Ethics of the Education Profession enacted by the National Education Association (NEA Code of Ethics as adopted by the NEA Representative Assembly in 1975). Furthermore, they enhance teacher candidates' deeper understanding of the professional code of ethics as stipulated in the New York State Code of Ethics (Draft, December 2001, see Appendix B). Reflective practice is integrated into all aspects of the teacher education program and is designed to enhance teacher candidates' professional growth and life-long learning. Reflection, in the form of discussion, observation (Freeman, 1982), and journals (Porter, et al., 1990; Rhodes & Christian, 1993), allows teacher candidates to improve and develop performance-based skills (Lasley, 1981; Cruickshank, 1985; Metcalf & Cruickshank, 1991; Rosenshine, 1987; Rowe, 1986) as well as more general awareness of self, students, and classroom decision-making (Freeman, 1989; Gebhard, 1990; Gore, 1987; Newman, 1990; Richards, 1987; Richards & Crookes, 1988; Richards & Lockhart, 1994; Richards & Nunan, 1990). Videotapes and portfolios provide additional channels for reflection and evaluation. Videotapes provide visual evidence for processes of teaching and learning and are used as instruments for self and peer assessment and for studying the success of new curricula and levels of student engagement. Process portfolios (Graves & Sunstein, 1992; Harp, 1991; Tierney et al., 1991) demonstrate the professional growth of teachers over the course of their participation in the program.
Partnership
An important part of a teacher¡¯s work is
to make connections with other people¡¯s
ways of giving meaning to the same
experience.
(Duckworth, 1987, p.105)
Teachers construct knowledge by sharing experiences, ideas and concerns about teaching and learning with peers through collaborative conversations (Hollingsworth, 1992). Partnerships provide peer support (Shaw, 1992; Underhill, 1992) and raise awareness of multiple perspectives. The thrust for integration and discourse across disciplines has gained momentum in recent years and has received strong support from professional educational organizations that include the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (1989), the American Association for the Advancement of Science (1989), and language educators who advocate content-based language instruction (Brinton, Snow, & Wesche, 1989; Cantoni-Harvey, 1987; Chamot & O'Malley, 1987; Crandall, 1993; Mohan, 1986; Short, 1993; Snow, Met, and Genesee, 1989). Collaboration fosters learners' responsibility and autonomy, and acknowledges the importance of community and social relationships in the learning process (e.g., Stevick, 1990: 23 ff; Freeman & Richards, 1993). Cooperative learning (Johnson and Johnson, 1984; Kessler, 1992) enhances construction of knowledge within communities of learners who engage in activities that include posing questions, formulating hypotheses, and discussing issues. These contribute to both learning (Nunan, 1992; Kessler, 1992) and teaching (Brumby & Wada, 1990).
The student body at Stony Brook is widely diverse, with close to one-third of its undergraduates, including many teacher candidates, coming from homes in which a language other than English is spoken. Comfort with linguistic, social, ethnic, racial, and individual differences, and flexibility to teach and learn within diverse contexts, is intrinsic to our educational context. Our teacher candidates do their fieldwork and clinical practice in the nearby diverse community, including schools with students from 27 language backgrounds in a single building. In such settings, our teacher candidates learn to build partnerships with students from diverse backgrounds, and learn to lead them on their own pathways to growth and learning.
Stony Brook's distributed paradigm for teacher education enhances partnerships among units and departments across the university on a variety of projects and initiatives. The broad spectrum of interests and expertise in disciplinary content and pedagogy within departments greatly enrich teacher education at Stony Brook. The combined academic and clinical practice experiences enhance interdisciplinary perspectives and diversity of partnership opportunities for teacher candidates. These include partnerships with peers within and across disciplines, with sponsor and cooperating teachers, with alumni, and with other educational personnel in the community. PEP plays a critical role in providing year-round outreach activities for local school districts through its Multidisciplinary learning and teaching laboratory, partnership-building seminars, and summer day and residential camps.
4.4 Candidate Proficiencies
The educator, believing in the worth and
dignity of each human being, recognizes
the supreme importance of the pursuit of
truth, devotion to excellence, and the
nurture of
the democratic principles. Essential to these goals is the protection of
freedom to learn and to teach, and the
guarantee of equal educational opportunity
for all. The educator accepts the
responsibility to adhere to the highest ethical standards.
(Preamble to the Code of Ethics of the Education Profession, NEA, 1975, (Appendix B)).
We have established the following candidate proficiencies to inform our curriculum and instruction, and to provide standards that teacher candidates must meet if they are to provide a quality education to their own students. These candidate proficiencies are aligned with the mission of Stony Brook University and with that of its Professional Education Program. They are also aligned with New York State standards and with INTASC standards for beginning teacher licensing (Appendix C). We strive to prepare teacher candidates who:
1. Are knowledgeable in the discipline and its pedagogy.
2. Integrate their understanding of human development to design diverse learning experiences that promote intellectual, social and personal development.
3. Understand and appreciate the impact of linguistic, cultural, and social diversity and create varied learning experiences to accommodate differences.
4. Use multiple instructional strategies creatively to develop learners' critical thinking, cognitive and performance skills, and intellectual curiosity.
5. Understand group dynamics and use cooperative learning to enhance individual academic and social learning within diverse communities of learners.
6. Are able to use and integrate technology effectively to enhance their own learning and to design learning experiences to support student learning.
7. Combine knowledge of the discipline, pedagogy, and community to design learning
experiences.
8. Understand and apply multiple modes of assessment to both evaluate learners and to inform and improve instruction.
9. Reflect on learning and teaching to grow professionally, are committed to education as a profession, and are flexible, open to constructive criticism, intellectually curious, and personable.
10. Foster collegial and communal partnerships for student learning and well-being, and are life-long learners who embrace continuing professional development.
As shown on the chart below, our pathways of research, reflection and partnership can be used to lead our student candidates to these proficiencies. These pathways, and the resultant proficiencies, are aligned with PEP¡¯s core themes of professional excellence and growth, community and diversity, and leadership and service. They are aligned with PEP¡¯s mission and with the Stony Brook University mission, with New York State standards, and NCATE's standards for teacher education programs. The pathways are further aligned with national standards for teacher candidates (INTASC), and for practicing teachers (NBPTS) (Appendix C). Alignment with professional associations across disciplines and state and national professional Codes of Ethics (New York State's and NEA) have also been ensured. A sampling of alignment appears in Table 4.
Aligning with Candidate Proficiencies and National
Standards
|
PEP
Pathways |
PEP
Candidate
Proficiencies |
INTASC
Standards |
NBPTS
Standards |
|
Research |
1 - Knowledge of discipline and its
pedagogy 2 - Knowledge of human
development 3 - Understand diversity 4 - Use multiple instructional strategies 5 - Understand group dynamics 6 - Integrate technology 7 - Combine discipline, pedagogy and community 8 - Understand assessment |
1 - Discipline and learning experiences 2 - Child development 3 - Learner diversity 4 - Multiple strategies 5 - Group motivation and
behavior 6 - Communication strategies and media 7 - Subject, students, community, and
curriculum 8 - Assessment |
1 - Committed to students and their learning 2 - Know subject and how to teach 3 - Manage and monitor learning |
|
Reflection |
8 - Understand assessment 9 - Reflect on learning and
teaching |
9 - Reflects and evaluates |
4 - Think systematically |
|
Partnership |
5 - Understand group dynamics 7 - Combine discipline, pedagogy and community 10 - Collegial and communal partnerships |
5 - Group motivation and behavior 7 - Subject, students, community, and curriculum 10 - Colleagues, parents and
agencies |
5 - Members of learning communities |
4.5 Description of the system for assessing candidate
proficiencies
The PEP assessment system has evolved in conjunction with the drafting of both the Conceptual Framework and the Candidate Performance Proficiencies, and it is described in detail in Precondition 5.
Our assessment system serves multiple interrelated purposes. It is designed to:
1. Insure that teacher candidates admitted to the program meet minimum standards necessary both for their own success and for the success of their future students;
2. Assess candidate learning analytically with respect to the individual candidate proficiencies and provide a holistic assessment of the teacher candidate¡¯s growth and development as he or she progresses through the program;
3. Integrate assessment and instruction so as to provide candidates with ongoing feedback to facilitate their own learning;
4. Provide students with multiple opportunities and modes of demonstrating the requisite proficiencies and with clearly defined criteria to guide their efforts;
5. Insure the quality of candidate performance by requiring them to meet prescribed levels of proficiency at established gatepoints in order to remain in good standing and to progress through the program;
6. Insure that program graduates who are recommended for certification meet or exceed the standards of their unit, PEP, INTASC, New York State, and the relevant professional associations across disciplines, and accreditation organizations;
7. Provide data that can be used for the continuous evaluation and improvement of program structure, faculty performance, and assessment system design.
Our system of candidate assessment is driven by our Candidate Proficiencies, which are described in Section 4.4. These proficiencies reflect PEP's educational philosophy, and define the knowledge, dispositions and abilities that we believe prospective teachers must demonstrate. With respect to candidate assessment, our basic goal is to employ a limited number of well-designed, reliable and authentic assessments to yield meaningful information on critical candidate knowledge, skills and abilities, which can be used for formative and summative purposes. The results of candidate assessment play an integral role in the assessment of program quality and faculty performance. However, we also rely upon standardized test scores, feedback from program graduates, cooperating teachers, and local school districts, and ongoing faculty research to monitor and improve the quality of our programs. We are in the process of establishing procedures to insure that the data gathered is used in a timely manner for all of these purposes.
The principal instruments that we employ to achieve the goals described above include:
1. A review of the qualifications of students seeking admission to the program. Admission decisions are based primarily on the basis of program-specific GPA requirements, grades in specific content courses, and an application essay which permits the program to initially assess candidate communication skills and dispositions.
2. The ongoing assessment of candidate academic performance. Candidates must maintain program-specific GPAs (which are generally higher than University major requirements) in their majors, and in their methods courses (in most of our programs, the requirement for the methods courses is that the candidates must earn at least a B- [B for graduate students] in methods courses) in order to remain in good standing and progress through the program.
3. The use of standardized test scores, as well as grades in content courses, to demonstrate mastery of content area knowledge. Candidates will be required to pass both the Liberal Arts and Sciences Test (LAST) and the relevant Content Specialty Test (CST) to qualify for student teaching (effective for candidates student teaching in Fall 2003). This requirement reflects changes in New York State regulations, which require candidates applying for certification after February 2, 2004 to pass both tests (as well as the Assessment of Teaching Skills/Written (ATS/W, which PEP requires candidates to take during student teaching) to qualify for initial certification.
4. The continuous assessment of candidate development and performance in relation to PEP and INTASC standards on the basis of lesson observation forms aligned with PEP candidate proficiencies; forms designed to track candidate development in relation to a number of specific performance indicators as they progress through the program; work samples to provide performance evidence of candidate ability to effectively deliver standards-based instruction; and instruments to assess candidate performance in relation to the content standards adopted by the relevant specialty professional organizations.
5. A cumulative professional portfolio, developed by candidates across the three-semester professional education sequence, to measure and facilitate their progress towards PEP Candidate Proficiencies and the relevant disciplinary standards.
6. The direct and indirect assessment of program quality by program completers, cooperating teachers, and the schools that employ our graduates.
All of the individual assessments are aligned with the ten candidate proficiencies described in section 4.4. Our system of candidate standards and standards-based performance assessments insures that our graduates have mastered the requisite knowledge of content and pedagogy and that they are capable of applying this knowledge in diverse, authentic contexts to effectively promote P-12 student learning. This assessment-feedback loop between curriculum and instruction, teacher candidate learning, and P-12 student learning is the basic mechanism for establishing accountability towards the public, employers, teacher candidates, P-12 students, and ourselves.
One of the most important of these authentic, standards-based assessments is the work sample, which serves as the summative evaluation at the end of student teaching. We have designed a modified version of the teacher work sample recently developed by the Renaissance Partnership, (Girod, 2002). The work samples provide a holistic, dynamic assessment of the entire spectrum of knowledge, skills and performance abilities that we expect of our graduates, including: 1) content knowledge, 2) knowledge of pedagogical theory, 3) the ability to analyze the complex of factors that determine the learning context, 4) the ability to design standards-based learning goals that engage students in meaningful learning, 5) the ability to employ multiple learning strategies that respond to individual student differences while helping all students to meet the learning goals embedded in the curriculum, 6) the ability to apply a variety of assessments to promote student learning and to modify instruction in accordance with individual student needs, 7) the ability to assess and diagnose patterns of student learning, and 8) the ability of candidates to reflect upon and modify their classroom practice in a manner that will inculcate in them habits of life-long learning.
Candidates are also required to maintain a portfolio that tracks and facilitates their development across the three-semester professional development sequence. The portfolio should contain a sample of the candidate's work that will demonstrate that the candidate has satisfied both the PEP candidate proficiencies and the relevant disciplinary standards. The portfolio should provide a snapshot of the candidate¡¯s knowledge and ability at specific points in time. It should also contain materials that will permit the assessment of the candidate¡¯s development over a sustained period of time.
Although portfolios are customized by each program, portfolios in all programs generally contain a statement of teaching philosophy, which is revised as the candidate moves through the program; lesson plans, thematic units, and other teaching artifacts, including the work sample; reflective commentaries on lesson plans, field experience, and student teaching; projects or papers required in methods courses; academic papers demonstrating knowledge of content and/or pedagogy or writing skills; and copies of candidate assessments completed by methods and student teaching instructors.
The presentation and defense of this professional portfolio, which incorporates the work sample, formalizes and systematizes the process of reflection with regard to the teacher candidate¡¯s entire professional education. The portfolio and the oral defense thereof require teacher candidates to demonstrate that they have become reflective practitioners in relation to both PEP candidate proficiencies and the subject matter standards of their respective disciplines.
This system of internal assessments is complemented and validated by external assessments, which also help us to assess program quality and faculty achievement. Experienced cooperating teachers work closely with teacher candidates in developing their skills and assessing their classroom performance. We are also working to involve cooperating teachers more closely in the assessment of candidate work samples and portfolios.
Program quality is assessed in a variety of ways. While candidate scores on standardized tests provide one measure of program effectiveness, we also ask program completers, alumni, cooperating teachers, and the school districts that employ our graduates to evaluate the quality of our graduates, the structure of our program, and our effectiveness in preparing candidates to implement standards-based instruction in area classrooms. These surveys, together with the regular meetings of our Advisory Board, provide an important mechanism for identifying the strengths and weaknesses of our program and gauging the quality of our program relative to those of competing institutions. In addition to these various sources of external feedback, faculty research keeps us abreast of developments in educational theory and thus provides a benchmark by which we monitor and improve the quality of our programs.
All of these assessment initiatives generate an immense amount of data that must be aggregated and analyzed before it can serve any useful purpose. To store and process this information, we have commissioned the construction of an assessment database with a web-based user interface to facilitate data entry and access. We expect this information system to be fully operational beginning in spring 2003.
References
American Association for the Advancement of Science. (1989). Science for all Americans: A project 2061 Report on literacy goals in science, mathematics, and technology. Washington, DC: American Association for the Advancement of Science.
Association for Teacher Educators, Standards for Teacher Educators, 2001.
The Boyer Commission on Educating Undergraduates in the Research University. Reinventing Undergraduate Education: A Blueprint of America¡¯s Research University, 1998.
Brinton, D. M., Snow,
M. A., & Wesche, M. B. (1989). Content-based
second language
instruction. New York: Harper and Row.
Brumby, S., & Wada, M. (1990). Team teaching. London: Longman.
Cantoni-Harvey, G. (1987). Content-area language instruction: Approaches and strategies. Reading, MA: Addison Wesley.
Chamot, A.U. & O'Malley, J.M. (1987). The cognitive academic
language learning approach: a bridge to the mainstream. TESOL Quarterly 21,
227-249.
Crandall,
J. (1993) Content-centered learning in the United States. Annual Review of Applied
Linguistics, 13, 111-126.
Cruikshank, D.R. (1985). Uses and benefits of reflective teaching. Phi Delta Kappan 66, 704-706.
Curran, C. A.
(1960). Community language
learning.
Reprinted in R.W. Blair (Ed.), (1982). Innovative approaches to language teaching (118-133). New York: Newbury House.
Curran, C. A.
(1976). Counseling-learning in
second language. East
Dubuque, IL: Counseling Learning.
Darling-Hammond, L. (1997). School reform at the
crossroads: Confronting the central issues of teaching. Educational Policy 11(2): 151-166.
DeVries, R. & Kohlberg, L.
(1987). Programs of early education: The
constructivist view, NY: Longman.
Driver, R. (1983). The pupil scientist? Philadelphia: Open University Press.
Duckworth,
E. (1987). ¡°The having of wonderful
ideas¡± and other essays on teaching and
learning. New York: Teachers College.
Forman,
G. and Kuschner, D. (1977). The Child's
Construction of Knowledge. Belmont, CA: Wadworth Co.
Fosnot, C. (1989). Enquiring
teachers, enquiring learners: A
constructivist approach for teaching.
New York: Teacher's College
Press.
Freeman, D. (1982). Observing teachers: Three approaches to in-service training
and development. TESOL Quarterly 16, 21-28.
Freeman, D. (1989). Teacher training, development, and decision making: A model of teaching and related strategies for language teacher education. TESOL Quarterly 23, 27-45.
Freeman, D. & Richards, J. C. (1993). Conception of teaching and the education of second
language teachers. TESOL Quarterly, 27, 193-216.
Gattegno, C. (1976). The common sense of teaching foreign languages. New York: Educational Solutions.
Gebhard, J. G. (1990). Interaction in a teaching practicum. In Richards & Nunan (Eds.). (118-131).
Girod, G.R. (Ed.) (2002). Connecting teaching and learning: A handbook for teacher educators on teacher work sample methodology. Washington DC: West Oregon University and AACTE Publications.
Goodlad, John. I. (1990). Teachers For Our Nation¡¯s Schools. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Gore, J. M. (1987). Reflecting on reflective teaching. Journal of Teacher Education 38 (2), 33-39.
Graham and Diamond. (1997). The Rise of American Research Universities. Johns Hopkins University Press.
Graves, D. & Sunstein, B. (Eds.)(1992). Portfolio Portraits. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Grennon Brooks, J. & Brooks, M. (1993). The case for constructivist classrooms. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Guskey, T. (1986). Staff development and the process of teacher change. Educational Researcher 15 (4), 5-12.
Harp B. (Ed.) (1991). Assessment and Evaluation in Whole Language Programs. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Hollingsworth, S. (1989). Prior beliefs and cognitive change in learning to teach. American Educational Research Journal 26, 160-189.
Hollingsworth, S. (1992). Learning to teach through collaborative conversation: A feminist approach. American Educational Research Journal 29, 373-404.
Horwitz, E. (1985). Using student beliefs about language learning and teaching in the foreign language methods course. Foreign Language Annals 18, 333-340.
Interstate New Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (INTASC) standards for teacher candidates.
Johnson, D.W., and Johnson, R.T. (1984). Circles of learning: Cooperation in the classroom.
Alexandria, VA.: ASCD.
Johnson, K.E.
(1992). The relationship
between teachers' beliefs and practices during literacy instruction for
non-native speakers of English. Journal of Reading Behavior 24, 83-108.
Johnson,
K.E. (1993). Learning
to teach during the TESOL practicum.
Paper presented at the 27th Annual TESOL Convention, Atlanta.
Kamii, C.
(1981). Application of Piaget's theory to
education: The preoperational level. In I.E. Sigel, D.M. Brozinsky, &
R.M. Golinkoff (Eds.), New directions in
Piagetian theory and practice (pp. 231-265). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum.
Kamii, C. (1985). Young children re-invent arithmetic. New York: Teachers College Press.
Kessler, C. (Ed.). (1992). Cooperative language learning. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice
Hall Regents.
Kaufman, D. & Grennon Brooks, J. (1996). Interdisciplinary collaboration in teacher education: A constructivist approach. TESOL Quarterly, 30, 231-251.
Kaufman, D. (1997). Collaborative approaches in preparing teachers for content-based and language enhanced settings. In The content-based classroom: Perspectives on integrating language and content. M.A Snow and D.M. Brinton (Eds.), Longman, pp. 175-186.
Kaufman, D. (2000). Developing professionals: Interwoven visions and partnerships. In Case Studies in TESOL Practice: Teacher Education. K. Johnson (Ed.). Alexandria, VA: TESOL, pp. 51-69.
Kuhn, D., Langer, J., Kohlberg, L., & Haan, N.S. (1977). The development of formal operations in logical and moral judgment. The Genetic Psychology Monographs, 95, 97-188.
Larsen-Freeman, D. (1983). Training teachers or educating a teacher. In Alatis, J.E., Stern, H.H., & Strevens, P. (Eds.). Georgetown University Round Table on Language and Linguistics 1983: Applied linguistics and the preparation of second language teachers. (264-276). Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
Lasley, T.J. (1981). Research perspectives on classroom management. Journal of Teacher Education 32 (2), 14-17.
Lortie, D.C. (1975). Schoolteacher: A sociological study. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Metcalf, K.K. & Cruikshank, D.R. (1991). Can teachers be trained to make clear presentations? Journal of Educational Research 85, 107-116.
Mohan, B.A. (1986) Language and content. Reading, MA: Addison Wesley.
Moskowitz, G. (1978). Caring and sharing in the foreign language classroom: A sourcebook on humanistic techniques. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
National Board for Professional Teacher Standards (NBPTS) for practicing teachers.
National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE) standards for teacher education programs.
National Council for the Social Studies (NCSS) standards for teachers of Social Studies.
National Council of Teacher of English (NCTE) standards for teachers of English.
National Council of Teacher of Mathematics (NCTM) standards for teachers of Mathematics.
National
Education Association (NEA) Code of Ethics http://www.nea.org/aboutnea/code.html
National Policy Board for Educational Administration
(NPBEA) standards for educational administration.
National Science Teacher Association (NSTA) standards for teachers of Science.
Newman,
J. (1990). Finding
our own way: Teachers exploring their assumptions.
Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Nunan, D. (1988). The learner-centered curriculum. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Nunan, D. (Ed.). (1992). Collaborative language learning and teaching. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Pajares, F.M. (1992). Teachers' beliefs and educational research: Cleaning up a messy construct. Review of Educational Research 62, 307-332.
Pennington, M.C. (1990). A professional development focus for the language teaching practicum. In Richards & Nunan (Eds.). (132-151).
Pennington, M. (1995). The teacher change cycle. TESOL Quarterly, 29, 705-732.
Piaget, J. (1954). The Construction of Reality in the Child. New York: Basic Books.
Piaget, J. (1967). The Child's Conception of the World. Totowa, NJ: Littlefield, Adams and Co.
Piaget, J. (1970). The Science of Education and the Psychology of the Child. NY: Basic Books.
Porter, P.A., Goldstein, L., Leatherman, J., & Conrad, S. (1990). An ongoing dialogue: Learning logs for teacher preparation. In Richards & Nunan (Eds). Second language teacher education. New York: CUP. (227-240).
Resnick, L.B. (1987). Constructing
knowledge in school. In L. S. Liben (Ed.), Development
and learning: Conflict or congruence? (pp.19-50). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Rhodes, N. & Christian, D. (1993). Teachers and teacher educators learning through dialogue journals. In Freeman & Cornwell (Eds.). New ways in teacher education. (142-146).Alexandria, VA: TESOL.
Richards, J. 1987. The dilemma of teacher education in TESOL. TESOL Quarterly 21, 209-226.
Richards, J. & Crookes, G. (1988). The practicum in TESOL. TESOL Quarterly 22, 9-27.
Richards, J. & Nunan, D. (Eds.). (1990). Second language teacher education. New York:
Cambridge University Press.
Richards, J., & Lockhart, C. (1994). Reflective teaching in second language classrooms.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Richardson, V. (1990). Significant and worthwhile change in teaching practice. Educational
Researcher, 19 (7), 10-18.
Rosenshine, B. (1987). Explicit teaching and teacher training. Journal of Teacher Education 38 (3), 34-36.
Rowe, M. B. (1986). Wait time: Slowing down may be a way of speeding up! Journal of Teacher Education 37 (1), 43-50.
Russel, T. (1992). Learning to teach science: Constructivism, reflection and learning from experience. In K. Tobin (Ed.), The practice of constructivism in science education. Washington, DC. American Association for the Advancement of Science Press.
Shavelson, R.J. & Stern, P. (1981). Research on teachers' pedagogical thoughts, judgments, decisions, and behavior. Review of Educational Research 51, 455-498.
Shaw, P.A. (1992). Cooperative learning in graduate programs for language teacher preparation. In Kessler (Ed.). (175-202).
Short, D. (1993). Assessing integrated language and content instruction. TESOL Quarterly, 27,
627-656.
Sigel, I.E., Brozinsky, D.M., Golinkoff, R.M (1981). New directions in Piagetian theory and
practice, Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Snow, M.A., Met, M., & Genesee, F., (1989). A conceptual framework for the integration of language and content in second and foreign language instruction. TESOL Quarterly 23, 201-217.
Stevick, E. W. (1990). Humanism in language teaching. Oxford: OUP.
SUNY A New Vision in Teacher Education. Action Agenda. Office of the Provost and Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs, http://www.sysadm.suny.edu/provost, 2001.
Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages (TESOL) standards for teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages. www.tesol.org.
Tierney R., Carter M. and Desai L. (1991). Portfolio Assessment in the Reading Writing Classroom. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Tobin, K (Ed.). (1993). The practice of constructivism in science education. Hillsdale, NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Underhill, A. (1992). The role of groups in developing teacher self-awareness. ELTJ, 46, 71-80.
Vygotsky, L.S. (1962). Thought and language. Cambridge: Massachusetts Institute of
Technology Press.
Zeichner, K.M. & Tabachnick, B.R. (1981). Are the effects of university teacher education 'washed out' by school experience? Journal of Teacher Education 32 (3), 7-11.
Zeichner, K.M. & Liston, D.P. (1987). Teaching student teachers to reflect. Harvard Educational Review 57, 23-47.
Appendix A
Alignment of
the Conceptual Framework - Selected List of Standards
AA/EEO - Diversity - http://naples.cc.sunysb.edu/Pres/aaeeo.nsf
AA/EEO Policy and Procedures - http://notes.cc.sunysb.edu/Pres/aaeeo/nsf/pages/policy
Academic Policies and Regulations ¨C http://notes.cc.sunysb.edu/Pres/aaeeo/nsf/pages/policies
College of Arts and Sciences Senate ¨C http://ws.cc.sunysb.edu/senatecas/
Provost Salins Vision - http://www.sysadm.sunyed/provost/initiatives/Teachered.htm
Regulations for Students - Student Polity Association - http://notes.cc.sunysb.edu/OSA/Polity.nsf.
Research Policies/Procedures - http://www.research.sunysb.edu/research/policies/camppol.html
Stony Brook University Five Year Plan - http://www.stonybrook.edu/pres/5yrplan/
Stony Brook University Mission ¨C http://ws.cs.sunysb.edu/pres/mission.htm
Stony Brook University Senate - http://naples.cc.sunysb.edu/Admin/usenate.nsf
Education Administrator Standards - http://www.ncate.org/newsbrfs/newedadminstds.htm
International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE) ¨C Technology Standards for School Administrators (TSSA) - http://cnets.iste.org/tssa/view_standards.html
National Council of Teacher of English (NCTE) standards for teachers of English - http://www.ncte.org/standards/
National Council of Teacher of Mathematics (NCTM) standards for teachers of Mathematics -
http://www.nctm.org/standards/
National Council for the Social Studies (NCSS) standards for teachers of Social Studies -
http://www.ncss.org/standards/teachers/home.shtml
National Policy Board for Educational Administration (NPBEA) standards for educational administration - http://www.npbea.org/
National Science Teacher Association (NSTA) standards for teachers of Science-
http://www.nvc.vt.edu/nsta-ncate/november98.htm
Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages (TESOL) standards for teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages - http://www.tesol.org/assoc/p12standards/index.html
Association of Teacher Educators (ATE) standards for teacher education faculty -
http://www.siu.edu/departments/coe/ate/
Interstate New Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (INTASC) standards for teacher candidates - http://www.ccsso.org/intascst.html
The National Board for Professional Teacher Standards (NBPTS) for practicing teachers ¨Chttp://www.nbpts.org/
National Education Association (NEA) Code of Ethics - http://www.nea.org/aboutnea/code.html
National Council For Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE) Standards for Teacher Education Programs - http://www.ncate.org/standard/m_stds.htm
Instructions and Procedures ¨C http://www.highered.nysed.gov/ocue/material.htm
Re-vision ¨C http://www.emsc.nysed.gov/ciai/describe.html
English Language Arts ¨C http://www.nysatl.nysed.gov/engstand.html
Languages Other Than English ¨C http://www/musat;/mused/gov/lotestand.html
Mathematics, Science and Technology ¨C http://www.nysatl.nysed.gov/mathstand.html
Social Studies ¨C http://www.nysatl.nysed.gov/ssstand.html
ATE Standards for Field Experience ¨C http://www.siu.ecu/departments/coe/ate/
PEP Field and Clinical Practice - http://naples.cc.sunysb.edu/Prov/pep.nsf/pages/clinic
Appendix
B
Codes
of Ethics
Code of Ethics Adapted from National Education Association
The faculty aligns itself with the NEA Code of Ethics of the Education Profession as we:
1. make true
statements related to competency and qualifications when applying for
employment;
2. assist in
becoming future educators only persons known to be qualified with respect to
character, education, or other relevant attributes;
3. discourage and
report unqualified educators in the unauthorized practice of teaching;
4. respect their
colleagues¡¯ privacy rights, unless disclosure serves a compelling professional
purpose or is required by law;
5. refrain from
making false or malicious statements about their colleagues;
6. refuse
gratuity, gift, or favor that might impair or appear to influence professional
decisions and actions.
Commitment to the Teacher Candidate
The faculty aligns itself with the NEA Code of Ethics of the Education Profession as we:
1. encourage
our students to become independent in the pursuit of learning;
2. expose our students to various points of views;
3. do our utmost to help our students succeed;
4. protect our students from conditions harmful to learning or to
their health and safety;
5. expose our students to positive reinforcement;
6. respect all our teacher
candidates, regardless of their race, color, creed, gender, national origin,
marital status, political or religious beliefs, abilities and special needs,
family, social or cultural background, or sexual orientation;
7. endeavor to
help our students receive benefits commensurate with their needs and
qualifications;
8. refrain from
misusing professional relationships for private advantage;
9. refrain from
disclosing information about students, unless disclosure serves a compelling
purpose or is required by law.
Appendix
B (continued)
New York State Code of Ethics
New York State Code of Ethics (Draft, October, 2001) sets clear expectations and principles that guide practice and inspire professional excellence for teachers and teacher candidates. Our faculty and teacher candidates adhere to the code of ethics as summarized below.
Principle 1: Teachers nurture the intellectual, physical, emotional, social, and civic potential of each
student.
Principle 2: Teachers create, support, and maintain challenging learning environments for all.
Principle 3: Teachers commit to their own learning in order to develop their practice.
Principle 4: Teachers collaborate with colleagues and other professionals in the interest of student
learning.
Principle 5: Teachers collaborate with parents and community, building trust and respecting
confidentiality.
Principle 6: Teachers advance the intellectual and ethical foundation of the learning community.
|
1. Nurture the intellectual, physical, emotional, social, and civic potential of each student. |
Integrate intellectual, physical, emotional, social and civic learning. Respect the inherent dignity and worth of each individual. Help students to value their own identity. Learn about students¡¯ cultural heritage, and practice social and civic responsibilities. Help students to reflect on their own learning and connect it to their life experience. Engage students in activities that encourage diverse approaches and solutions to issues. Foster development of students who can analyze, synthesize, evaluate and communicate information effectively. |
|
2. Create, support, and maintain challenging learning environments for all. |
Apply professional knowledge to promote student learning. Know the curriculum and utilize a range of strategies and assessments to address differences. Develop and implement programs based upon a strong understanding of human development and learning theory. Support a challenging learning environment. Advocate for resources to teach to higher levels of learning. Establish and maintain standards of behavior and civility. Become role models, and display the habits of mind and work necessary to develop and apply knowledge while simultaneously displaying a curiosity and enthusiasm for learning. Invite students to become active, inquisitive, and discerning individuals who reflect upon and monitor their own learning. |
|
3. Commit to their own learning in order to develop their practice. |
Recognize that professional knowledge and development are the foundations of their practice. Know their subject matter, and understand how students learn. Respect the reciprocal nature of learning between teachers and students. Engage in a variety of individual and collaborative learning experiences essential to developing professionally and to promote student learning. Draw on and contribute to various forms of educational research to improve their own practice. |
|
4. Collaborate with colleagues and other professionals in the interest of student learning. |
Encourage and support colleagues to build and maintain high standards. Participate in decisions regarding curriculum, instruction and assessment. Share responsibility for the governance of schools. Cooperate with community agencies in using resources and building comprehensive services in support of students. Respect fellow professionals and believe that all have the right to teach and learn in a professional and supportive environment. Accept roles in new teacher preparation and induction, and in professional development for all staff. |
|
5. Collaborate with parents and community, building trust and respecting confidentiality. |
Partner with parents and other members of the community to enhance school programs and to promote student learning. Recognize how cultural and linguistic heritage, gender, family and community shape experience and learning. Respect the private nature of the special knowledge they have about students and their families and use that knowledge only in the students¡¯ best interests. Advocate for fair opportunity for all children. |
|
6. Advance the intellectual and ethical foundation of the learning community. |
Recognize the obligations of the trust placed in them. Share the responsibility for understanding what is known, pursuing further knowledge, contributing to the generation of knowledge, and translating knowledge into comprehensible forms. Help students understand that knowledge is often complex and sometimes paradoxical. Become confidantes, mentors and advocates for their students¡¯ growth and development. Embody intellectual honesty, diplomacy, tact and fairness as models for youth and the public. |
Appendix C
Standards for Teacher Candidates
http://www.ccsso.org/intasc.html
Standard One: Subject Matter
The teacher understands the central concepts, tools of inquiry, and structures of the discipline(s) he or she teaches and can create learning experiences that make these aspects of subject matter meaningful to students.
Standard Two: Student Learning
The teacher understands how children and youth learn and develop and can provide learning opportunities that support their intellectual, social and personal development.
Standard Three: Diverse Learners
The teacher understands how learners differ in their approaches to learning and creates instructional opportunities that are adapted to learners from diverse cultural backgrounds and with exceptionalities.
Standard Four: Instructional Strategies
The teacher understands and uses a variety of instructional strategies to encourage the students¡¯ development of critical thinking, problem solving, and performance skills.
Standard Five: Learning Environment
The teacher uses an understanding of individual and group motivation and behavior to create a learning environment that encourages positive social interaction, active engagement in learning, and self-motivation.
Standard Six: Communication
The teacher uses knowledge of effective verbal, non-verbal and media communication techniques to foster active inquiry, collaboration, and supportive interaction in the classroom.
Standard Seven: Planning Instruction
The teacher plans and manages instruction based upon knowledge of subject matter, students, the community, and curriculum goals.
Standard Eight: Assessment
The teacher understands and uses formal and informal assessment strategies to evaluate and ensure the continuous intellectual, social, and physical development of his/her learners.
Appendix C (continued)
Standards for Teacher Candidates/INTASC
Standards (continued)
Standard Nine: Reflection and Professional Development
The teacher is a reflective practitioner who continually evaluates the effects of her/his choices and actions on others (students, parents, and other professionals in the learning community) and who actively seeks out opportunities to grow professionally.
Standard Ten: Collaboration, Ethics, and Relationships
A teacher communicates and interacts with parents/guardians, families, school colleagues, and the community to support the students¡¯ learning and well being.
Standards for
Teachers
http://www.nbpts.org/standards
The NBPTS Standards for every field and developmental level are centered on five core
Propositions:
1. Teachers are committed to students and their learning.
2. Teachers know the subjects they teach and how to teach those subjects to students.
3. Teachers are responsible for managing and monitoring student learning.
4. Teachers think systematically about their practice and learn from experience.
5. Teachers are members of learning communities.
Appendix C (continued)
Standards for Teacher Educators
Association for Teacher Educators (ATE)
Standards
http://www.siu.edu/-ate/standards/Testandards.htm
1. Model professional teaching practices that demonstrate knowledge, skills, and attitudes reflecting the best available practices in teacher education.
2. Inquire into and contribute to one or more areas of scholarly activity that are related to teaching, learning, and/or teacher education.
3. Inquire systematically into, and reflect on, their own practice and demonstrate commitment to lifelong professional development.
4. Provide leadership in developing, implementing, and evaluating programs for educating teachers that embrace diversity, and are rigorous, relevant, and grounded in accepted theory, research and best practice.
5. Collaborate regularly and in significant ways with representatives of schools, universities, state education agencies, professional associations, and communities to improve teaching, learning and teacher education.
6. Serve as informed, constructively critical advocates for high-quality education for all students, public understanding of educational issues, and excellence and diversity in the teaching and teacher education professions.
7. Contribute to improving the teacher education profession.
Glossary
AAU Association
of American Universities
ATE Association
of Teacher Educators
INTASC Interstate
New Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium
ISTE International
Society for Technology in Education
NBPTS National
Board for Professional Teacher Standards
NCATE National
Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education
NCSS National
Council for the Social Studies
NCTE National
Council of Teachers of English
NCTM National
Council of Teachers of Mathematics
NEA National
Educators Association
NPBEA National
Policy Board for Educational Administration
NSTA National
Science Teacher Association
NYC New
York City
NYS New
York State
OCUE Office
of College and University Evaluation
PEP Professional
Education Program
SUNY State
University of New York
SUTEC SUNY
Urban Teacher Education Center
TESOL Teachers
of English to Speakers of Other Languages
TSSA Technology
Standards for School Administrators