1

The Reflective Practitioner:

Conceptual Framework

for

The Master of Arts in Education

Truman State University

2

Revision Committee:

Sheila Berkowitz

Pete Kelly

Robert Martin, Chair

Wendy Miner

Bev Perrachione

Tom Pickering

Thomas Trimborn

Wynne Wilbur

Paul Yoder

3

CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK OF THE REFLECTIVE PRACTITIONER

Table of Contents

INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................................................ 4 Synopsis SECTION 1: VISION & MISSION OF THE UNIVERSITY AND PROFESSIONAL EDUCATION UNIT..... 5 A. Historical Perspectives B. Truman State University’s Liberal Arts Mission and the Mission of the Unit

C. The Reflective Practitioner Model and the Master of Arts in Education SECTION 2: PHILOSOPHIES, PURPOSES, AND GOALS OF THE UNIT……………………..………… 10 A. Philosophies and Goals for Teacher Education at Truman State University B. Foundations of Reflective Practice C. Program Coherence SECTION 3: KNOWLEDGE BASES.......................................................................................................................................................17 A. Content Knowledge

The Liberal Arts Degree Preparation In Teaching Majors

B. Pedagogical Knowledge Content Standards Assessments And Accountability Focus On Student Learning Knowledge Of Curriculum And Educational Contexts Wisdom Of Practice

SECTION 4: CANDIDATE PROFICIENCIES

1 ALIGNED WITH PROFESSIONAL, STATE, AND

INSTITUTIONAL STANDARDS…………………………………………………………………….…....…….. 26 Portfolio Assessment

SECTION 5. SYSTEMS FOR ASSESSING CANDIDATES AND PROGRAM………………………..…..........................................................................................................32 M.A.E. Assessment flow chart Area 1: Pre-Admission Assessment

Area 2: Assessment for Admission Area 3: Pre-Internship Assessment. Area 4: Internship Assessment Area 5: Assessment of Capstone and Graduate Requirements The Process The Unit Follows To Assess Unit Operations How The Conceptual Framework Was Generated And Evaluated REFERENCES......................................................................................................................................... 39

4

Conceptual Framework for the Reflective Practitioner

INTRODUCTION

Synopsis

The essence of the Department of Education rests in its identity as a part of Truman State

University and the institution’s commitment to a liberal arts and sciences education. All of our documents

can be best understood in the context of our roots to that commitment. Although we are a graduate

program, we teach and participate in many of the departments across the University, including the

interdisciplinary studies program. Our program consists of four intertwined threads:

1. To work with students who have (1) deep knowledge of a content area through

majoring in that area (there is no undergraduate education major at Truman). Members of the

education faculty participate in the teaching of many of the majors, in the liberal arts program and

in the interdisciplinary program.

2. To work with students with a strong background in the liberal arts and sciences (we

participate in providing this background in the liberal arts by teaching classes in a wide variety of

departments and in the interdisciplinary studies program).

3. In our own graduate level education program, we guide our graduate level pre-service

teachers in developing pedagogical knowledge and a reflective approach to working with public

school students so that they can effectively share their deep knowledge of content and the liberal

arts.

4. We serve as university supervisors to interns doing full semester or full year

internships where they typically have temporary certification as teachers and are able to take on

all responsibilities of certified teachers.

To make room in our program for deep content knowledge and an intensive mentoring process,

we strive to make education courses intensive and few in number. Our approach is to give each faculty

member and each specialty area (Art, Elementary, English, Exercise Science, Foreign Language (French

and Spanish), Mathematics, Music, Science, Social Science, Special Education) responsibility and the

power to make decisions coupled with a focus on measuring results. Much like a large medical practice

might give its physicians the maximum amount of freedom to practice the best possible medicine, while

holding each responsible for results, we strive to provide each of the specialty areas in the M.A.E. the

maximum amount of flexibility it needs to meet its responsibility to produce the best possible results.

The competence of our graduates can be seen in high achievement on the Praxis (median score

5

at or above required for graduation), willingness of school districts to place all interns in either full

semester or full year internships (essentially first year teachers at full pay), in the high percentage of

graduates we place in teaching positions, and especially the quality of student learning that takes place in

the classrooms of our interns, as evidenced by assessments performed by interns and documented in

their research projects and in their certification portfolios. In addition to overall admissions standards for

the M.A.E., individual specialty areas maintain requirements relevant to success in those disciplines. We

examine what we are doing by collecting and using data to make decisions about our overall structure

and the structure of each of our specialty areas. We assess our graduates across all the specialty areas

through five gateway assessments: (1) pre-admissions clinical experiences assessments, (2) candidate

admissions application, (3) pre-internship assessments, (4) the internship assessments, and (5) the

online portfolio, the research project document, and the praxis. Our goal is to keep both the flexibility we

now have and the strong responsibility faculty members feel for their own specialty areas and at the same

time ensure the cohesiveness of the overall program for the Master of Arts in Education. The remainder

of this document, as well as our other supporting documents, demonstrate how all the pieces fit together

and how we examine these pieces in a systematic manner.

SECTION 1:

VISION AND MISSION OF THE UNIVERSITY AND PROFESSIONAL EDUCATION UNIT

The unique character of the teacher education program derives from Truman State University’s

development as a liberal arts and science university and from the collegiality of its interdisciplinary faculty

located in a variety of academic departments and their shared commitment to the nation’s schools. The

vision of the Department of Education, in harmony within the mission of a liberal arts and sciences

university, is to develop professionals who are able to make informed decisions and facilitate learning in a

diverse society through reflective practice based on critical analysis, reasoning, and strategic

understanding (INTASC Principle 9 and MoSTEP1.2.9.) Because of the pluralistic nature of our society,

the real world contexts of today’s classrooms are unique, uncertain, and filled with value conflicts

(INTASC Principle 3 and MoSTEP 1.2.3) Like Schoen (1988), we believe that in these unique contexts,

education professionals cannot rely solely on their stores of previously acquired professional knowledge.

Today’s teachers must be prepared for critical thinking, inquiry and continuing reflection on their

practice (Serafini, 2002; Bintz & Dillard, 2007). Sound professional judgments require a commitment to

the continuous process of critical analysis and reasoning (Shulman,1986b). In the following section we

briefly describe the University and the Department missions and how they empower this vision. Next, we

present the philosophies, purposes, professional commitments and dispositions that are necessary to

realize this vision. We then describe the knowledge bases that support the conceptual framework of the

6

reflective practitioner. The last two sections examine the unit’s performance expectations and the

systems used to assess candidates.

A. Historical Perspectives

Truman State University has a long history of excellence in teacher education. Founded in 1867 as a

private school to prepare young adults for teaching and commerce, the institution transitioned in 1870 to

Missouri’s first state-supported “institution of higher education established for the primary purpose of

preparing teachers for public schools,” (General/Graduate Catalog, 2005-2007, p. 9). In 1919 the name

was changed to Northeast Missouri State Teachers College, again emphasizing teacher preparation as

the primary purpose of the college. The mission of preparing teachers for Missouri’s schools, particularly

schools in northeast Missouri was primary in the work of Missouri State Teachers College into the 1940’s

and early 1950’s, though by the 1950’s growth in enrollment related to postwar veterans’ programs and

the region’s need for expanded program offerings from its university led to additional program areas and

an expanded mission of the college. In ensuing years the mission of the university continued to expand

to include broad-based liberal arts and sciences programs, along with programs in fields such as

business, nursing, as well as professional specialties related to teaching (counseling and communication

disorders, e.g.).

By 1972, in response to the need for graduate programs in northeast Missouri, the institution had

developed master’s degree programs and was ready for the next name change to Northeast Missouri

State University. During this era of name change and re-examination of mission and identity, the

university maintained a strong commitment to preparing public school teachers for northeast Missouri.

In 1985 the university marked another major milestone when by act of the Missouri General

Assembly, the university changed from an open-enrollment regional state university to a highly selective

statewide public liberal arts and sciences university. Regional focus expanded to statewide focus, and

multi-purpose curricula and program-design transitioned to more focused emphasis on liberal learning.

Thus, as a result of the legislative action and curriculum and program changes that had occurred,

Missouri had its own state university where foundational learning in liberal arts and sciences was the

focus of education. With the change in mission to a greater emphasis on applicant qualifications and a

focus on liberal arts and sciences, the university became more selective in its enrollment. In March 1993

Truman State University became “Missouri’s only public university opting to achieve the Missouri

Coordinating Board for Higher Education’s highly selective mission category.” (General/Graduate Catalog

2007-08, p 7). On July 1, 1996 the university became Truman State University. The new name reflected

a university that indeed had a statewide mission and that was unique in the state of Missouri. Selectivity

7

in admissions has resulted in a student body that is highly qualified academically. Students who choose

to pursue degrees leading to admission to the M.A.E. degree are well prepared for their advanced studies

in education. The university is widely recognized for its arts and science curriculum and its highly

qualified students. Truman’s Master of Arts in Education degree reflects not only the mission of the

university, but also the commitment of the university to quality in teacher preparation. Thus, the university

continues its one-hundred-plus years of focus on preparation of teachers.

Currently the Master of Arts in Education Degree (M.A.E.) is the only education degree offered at

the university. A graduate dean and Graduate Council consisting of representatives from all the graduate

programs at the university are involved in program policy for the unit. M.A.E. programs for elementary

education and special education, as well as core courses are housed in the Education Department.

Programs for secondary education are housed within the departments appropriate to their specialty area.

Hence, education faculty in the secondary areas are members of departments across the university; by

necessity they work closely with their departmental colleagues in their area of specialty. To insure

inclusive and collaborative governance in teacher education, teacher education faculty from the other

departments are full voting members of the Education Department and have a full voice in program

development, curriculum, and assessment. When we refer to “education faculty” in our documents, we

refer to all faculty directly involved in working with our master’s degree candidates, even though those

faculty hold appointments in their respective departments. All decisions are made as an education

faculty. Members of the education faculty have served as faculty representatives, committee members,

and even as department chairs in their own academic departments. We see this embedding of education

faculty with departments across the university as a major strength (Levine, 2006).

B. Truman State University’s Liberal Arts Mission and the Mission of the Unit

Successful societies in the 21st century will increasingly require thinkers and problem solvers who can

work in teams, who have learned how to learn and who expect to continue to learn throughout their lives

(Shulman, 2004). The Education faculty is committed to the development of teachers who can meet

these needs. Additionally, we are challenged to do all these things in a society characterized by diversity.

This challenge fits well with the mission of Truman State University to prepare liberal arts and science

graduates with a depth of knowledge in their disciplines. The University mission statement reads, in part,

“The mission of Truman State University is to offer an exemplary…education, grounded in the liberal arts

and sciences.” In fulfilling that mission, as stated in the 2008-2009 General/Graduate Catalog (online),

Truman State University seeks to ignite the individual’s curiosity about the natural and social universe and

then aid him or her in developing the skills and personal resources to channel knowledge into productive,

satisfying activity. In pursuing these goals, the University seeks to cultivate in its students:

8

intellectual integrity, celebration of difference and diversity, informed ethical values, and

courageous aspiration toward the best for oneself, one’s family, one’s society, and the world;

a sense of the joys and uses of creative and critical thought, including skills of intellectual

problem-solving through effective reading and research, clear writing, and articulate speech; and

the willingness and ability to exercise personal and intellectual leadership in his or her chosen

field of endeavor.

This portion of the University mission statement is, in itself, a reflection of the values and skills we seek to

develop in our candidates. Building on the University mission statement, the special mission of the

Education faculty within Truman State University is to educate professionals who are reflective

practitioners: decision makers rather than followers, facilitators and evaluators of learning rather than

simply providers of information.

C. The Reflective Practitioner Model and the Master of Arts in Education

As our mission, we have chosen to develop reflective practitioners. The reflective practitioner

model embodies and extends the mission of the university, as quoted above. A part of this mission is to

provide tomorrow’s teachers with a deep understanding of their own disciplines, of best practice within

their disciplines, and of connections among disciplines. In the following section we outline what we

believe to be the philosophies, purposes, professional commitments, and dispositions of professionals

who are reflective practitioners.

Educators have long recognized the value of reflection in assessing experience and learning from

experience. The teacher as critical thinker and the importance of critical thinking in the work of teaching

are clearly presented in the work of Dewey’s How We Think (1911), an early champion of critical thinking

in education. Dewey emphasized that learning resulted from a cycle of experience, reflection and

assessment. Reflective practitioners do more than learn from experience. They learn from critical

reflection on experience (Shulman, 2004).

Over twenty years ago on Jan. 1, 1986, legislation went into effect that changed the University

mission from a regional university to a statewide public liberal arts and science university. In 1990, the

M.A.E. became fully operational and the education faculty adopted Schoen’s (1987) reflective practitioner

model as its framework. The Reflective Practitioner Model fits well with Truman’s focus on liberal learning.

One indicator of this grounding is the completion of a liberal arts degree in a content area. Thus, an

overarching goal of teacher education at Truman is to prepare teachers who have:

1) a broad liberal education,

2) thorough content knowledge in the area(s) of certification,

9

3) knowledge, skills, and dispositions embodied in the INTASC principles, and MOSTEP quality

indicators.

4) a discipline of reflection and problem solving.

It is the fourth factor, the discipline of reflection and problem solving that gives unity and direction to

teacher education at Truman State University.

Reflective practice is at the heart of teacher preparation at Truman State University. The four

areas of preparation listed above fit well within the vision and mission of the university. As Missouri’s

public liberal arts and sciences university, Truman’s mission is to provide a strong and comprehensive

liberal arts and sciences curriculum and to ensure that program graduates have completed a strong

program of liberal education. The significance of liberal arts and sciences in the mission of the university

is clear in the mission statement and in the “core” liberal arts and sciences curriculum required in all

degree programs. Candidates who are admitted to the M.A.E. have completed Truman’s general

education program and are well-prepared for advanced study at the graduate level.

In 1997, the Reflective Practitioner Framework was revised. In 2002 the Reflective Practitioner

Conceptual Framework was again revised. In the Fall of 2007, work on new revision of the Reflective

Practitioner Framework began. The earlier versions clearly identified reflective practice as the organizing

element that gives focus and cohesion to teacher education at Truman. Subsequent to each revision,

faculty have continued to implement the Reflective Practitioner Model, with documentation of candidates’

development of dispositions, knowledge, and performance in meeting program objectives, through a

variety of experiences and assessments, culminating in the creation of an internship-based research

project and an internship-based online portfolio with an emphasis on identifying, planning, meeting, and

assessing students needs in regard to learning and development. The capstone of the internship and the

M.A.E. is the online portfolio which is intended to demonstrate the required competencies outlined by the

Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Education for beginning teachers, and are closely

aligned with the INTASC standards.

10

SECTION 2

PHILOSOPHIES, PURPOSES, PROFESSIONAL COMMITMENTS AND DISPOSITIONS

A. Philosophies and Goals for Teacher Education at Truman State University

Our commitment to developing reflective practitioners with a liberal education flows from our

observation that because learning environments are uncertain, dynamic, and problematic, rather than

certain, static, and given (Zeichner, 1983, p. 7), teachers and other school practitioners need to create

“learning experiences that enable students to construct their own knowledge in powerful ways” (Darling-

Hammond & Cobb, 1996). Professional educators need to be designers of learning experiences and

facilitators of learning. They need to take a reflective stance to evaluate the level at which students are

reaching important targeted outcomes and the instructional strategies most effective in reaching those

outcomes (Kinsella, 2001; Daniels, 2002; Serafini, 2002) (INTASC Principle 9 and MoSTEP 1.2.9).

We believe that learners acquire knowledge by constructing meaning, not by internalizing it

directly from the world (Zoubeida & D’Ambrosio, 1996; Levine, 2006). That is, meaning and

understanding are always those of the learner (Maturana & Varela 1992; Piaget, 1975, 1973; and Von

Glasersfeld 1984, 1988, 1995). These principles take on special importance for the reflective practitioner.

For example, the importance of social learning, of prior experience, and of multiple forms of knowledge all

affect how learners construct meaning (and therefore require continual reflection); they are not simply

components of an automatic process (Leinhard, 1992; Daniels, 2002).

B. Foundations of Reflective Practice

The education faculty views the reflective professional as one who is committed to reflective

practice involving a cycle of observation, description, analysis, evaluation to achieve strategic

understanding and to make professional judgments (aligned to INTASC Principle 9 and MoSTEP 1.2.9)

(Shulman, 1987; Reiman, 1999; Bintz & Dillard, 2007). Developing the characteristics of reflective

practitioners requires that candidates develop reflective dispositions. We believe that reflective

dispositions can best be developed by involving students in a variety of experiences that require them to

learn and use reflective strategies. Candidates are not blank slates that come to teaching prepared to

think as professionals; rather they come to teaching with their existing ways of thinking, feeling, and

acting (Kinsella, 2001). Taking on new thinking, feeling, and acting is an experiential, reflective,

interactive process that goes far beyond listening to lectures and taking tests (Daniels, 2002). For

example, merely to read (or even to write papers on) research and scholarship does not touch the core of

pre-service practitioners’ understanding of learning and the facilitation of learning (Bird, 1991). As

11

Loughran (2002) notes, when practitioners see their professional experiences through others’ eyes

(reframing), they can then restructure their ideas about learners’ preconceptions, about how learners

acquire knowledge, and about what methods may work best to help students construct knowledge

(Zoubeida & D’ambrosio, 1996). Evidence that reflective practice can encourage the development of

reflective practitioners can be found in a study by Grow-Maienza and Howard (1995) who found evidence

that eighty percent of selected interns who completed a Master of Arts in Education case study as their

research option showed a more advanced developmental stage of teaching than would otherwise be

predicted (Aligned to INTASC Principle 1 and MoSTEP 1.2.1).

We believe that ideal educational practice is reflective practice that rests on the assumption that

curriculum, as well as understanding, is always in the process of developing (Bintz & Dillard, 2007)

(Aligned to INTASC Principle 1 and MoSTEP 1.2.1). Education professionals develop their practice when

they change some element of it in response to a practical problem. In encouraging pre-service

professionals to reflect, it is essential to provide the opportunity to consider ideas and metaphors that

differ from their own (Aligned to INTASC Principles 9 and 10 and MoSTEP 1.2.9 and 1.2.10).

Encouraging learning conversations (Harri-Augstein & Thomas, 1991) is essential in producing the

disequilibrium (Piaget, 1973; Daniels, 2002) necessary for pre-service professionals to seriously consider

models and metaphors different from their own (Bird, 1991). Reflective practice conversations among

practicing educators lead to higher practitioner efficacy—belief that the practitioner “has the skills

necessary to effect positive changes”—and thus to increased student learning (Chase, Germundsen,

Brownstein, Distad, 2001, p.143). Methods of encouraging learning conversations include a variety of

techniques, including one-on-one interaction and cooperative learning methods described by Johnson

and Johnson (1993), Kagan (1991) and Slavin (1994), as well as peer coaching as described by Daniels

(2002) (Aligned to INTASC Principles 1, 2, 3, 4 and MoSTEP 1.2.1, 1.2.2, 1.2.3, 1.2.5). Reflection is also

encouraged through the ways in which education faculty engage teacher candidates in active learning, in

learning conversations with professionals and peers (Harri-Augstein & Thomas, 1991), in modeling the

reflective process (Loughran, 1995 and 1996), and through providing integrated field experiences that

involve reflection throughout the program. Finally, we ensure reflection at the master’s level through

capstone experiences, such as the online portfolio, and the research project (Shulman, 2004).

One goal of our programs is to help students develop dispositions that involve examining and

changing perceptions (aligned to INTASC Principles 9 and 10 and MoSTEP 1.2.9 and 1.2.10). LaBoskey

(1993) notes that pre-service professionals enter professional programs with preconceptions about the

role of practitioners. We are committed to helping pre-service professionals reorganize their perceptions

and dispositions, primarily by fostering inquiry about the education professional’s role in general, and the

pre-service educational professional’s own performance in particular (Miner, 2002).

Facilitating student learning and evaluating the results of that learning is more complex than

12

delivering information. Becoming professionals involves not only learning new information and new

methods, but also involves identifying and reflecting on one’s own beliefs. We agree with Tom (1980) that

the mastery of a repertoire of skills for facilitating learning does not guarantee that the novice will be able

to make proper judgments about what ought to be done in a particular situation. If preservice

professionals are to develop in their understanding of theory and practice, they must embark on the

difficult task of uncovering and examining their own metaphors for practicing professionals (Bullough,

Knowles, and Grauw, 1991). Candidates need to be involved in this process throughout their preparation

by critically examining their own images of working with students in light of those presented by research

in the profession (INTASC Principles 1, 9, 10 and MoSTEP 1.2.1, 1.2.9, 1.2.10). Like Dewey (1904), we

believe the goal of professional education is to “graduate novices disposed to becoming lifelong students”

of reflective practice (Cruickshank 1987, p. 1) (aligned to INTASC Principle 9).

As schools continue to embrace authentic instruction and authentic performance assessments,

we believe the model of the reflective practitioner will continue to grow in importance in our programs.

Without reflection and evaluation, instruction can easily devolve into “good activities” which do not support

the objectives for learning (Cohen, 1995). The design and implementation of authentic instruction

requires the ability to formulate tasks and assessments that involve K-12 students in higher-order thinking

and problem solving (Wiggins, 2005,1996-1997, 1996, 1995; Shephard, 1995). The process of

designing complex assessments to measure high-level learning requires a planning process that can then

be used in the subsequent round of planning, implementing, and evaluating instruction. To achieve these

results, candidates need extensive experience in school settings and practice in systematically utilizing

evidence to make informed judgments.(Bintz & Dillard, 2007)(aligned to INTASC Principles 4, 9, 10 and

MoSTEP 1.2.5, 1.2.9, 1.2.10). Finally, candidates need to reflect on the results of their performance and

that of their students/clients to understand the personal and professional significance of the experiences.

Our overall guiding view is that a reflective practitioner engages in a continuous process of

observing, reflecting, and then, taking into account both research and the wisdom of practice, making

decisions and evaluating results. This process includes all of the following practices and dispositions:

• A reflective practitioner recognizes that subject matter knowledge is “complex and ever-evolving”

and s/he searches for what is new in the field.

• A reflective practitioner values student viewpoints, and communicates this valuing to candidates.

• A reflective practitioner values human diversity and conveys this outlook to students.

• A reflective practitioner fosters critical thinking and independent problem solving, for their

students/clients and themselves.

• A reflective practitioner understands the importance of peer input in student learning and utilizes this

knowledge to promote a positive learning environment.

13

• A reflective practitioner understands that self motivation is important for personal and academic

growth and development.

• A reflective practitioner grasps the importance of facilitating students’ ability to communicate in

multiple ways.

• A reflective practitioner understands that continuing assessment is vital, and that knowledge and

utilization of multiple assessment strategies is central to successful student learning and

development.

• A reflective practitioner values critical analysis, reasoning, and strategic understanding as praxis.

• A reflective practitioner seeks out others for discussion, assistance, and advice on student

performance and behavior.

In summary, the purpose of the Master of Arts in Education is to produce reflective practitioners

who engage in critical analysis, reasoning and strategic understanding, and professional judgment.

Figure 1., Acquiring a Reflective Stance, summarizes the process of becoming a reflective practitioner as

a spiral process in which coursework and field experiences lead to a critical analysis of events (including

analysis of one’s own preconceptions), reasoning about those events to achieve strategic understanding

of events, and the development of professional judgment leading to reflective practice. As represented by

Figure 1., learning to be a reflective practitioner is a dynamic process in which all three elements

(analysis, reasoning, and judgment) develop interactively.

14

2C. Program Coherence

Program coherence is maintained first of all through our policies and through the implementation

of those policies. The policies of our program are shaped by the expectation of Truman State University

and of the education department that above all we maintain the excellence of the overall program and

that each student is required to meet a standard of excellence in knowledge, in teaching skill, and

15

disposition. Because we are a small program, education faculty, especially specialty area faculty, know

students well. State guidelines, especially the MOSTEP standards are embedded in our courses, in field

experiences, and in our assessments. Policies relative to GPA’s and content hours are part of our unit

and institutional policies regarding undergraduate and graduate governance. At Truman, given its

dedication to being a selective institution and to achieving excellence in the liberal arts and sciences, our

policies have to fit into the overall institutional expectations for admissions, for program excellence.

Specific policies are embedded in the discussions in each section of this document. We carry out our

policies (and maintain program coherence) through the procedures to govern the program, structure the

curriculum, and carry out our assessment program.

Governance coherence

As part of our approach to maintaining program coherence, Education faculty meet monthly

during the academic year and consider all pending issues. Policies and Procedures are in place and in

writing which guide these meetings and extensive minutes are kept for all meetings. Though education

faculty are spread throughout the university across many different departments, all education faculty meet

as a group once a month as part of the education department, and all education faculty have a vote.

Among the policies which insure consistency is the requirement that all decisions require 2/3 affirmative

vote of those present, provided that a quorum is present. In particular, the 2/3 vote needed to approve

any motion insures that extensive reflection and discussion take place on all issues on which there is

controversy and also insures that the education faculty comes as close as humanly possible to reaching

consensus and that the education faculty will move as a group to implement all motions that are passed.

The policies and procedures of the Education Faculty, as evidenced by the examples above, maintain a

flow of identification of issues, reflection, decision making, implementation, and reconsideration of every

aspect of the M.A.E.

Curriculum Coherence

Curriculum coherence is part of program coherence. All M.A.E. candidates meet the same

criteria for field experiences and take the same educational foundation courses which include clinical

experiences (ED393), philosophical foundations (ED389), and educational psychology (ED593) as well as

training in technology (all foundation courses). All students take a methods course on the graduate level

in their specialty area, typically taught by an intern supervisor in the specialty area, ensuring coherence

between the study of methods (XXX608) and their application in the internship. In addition to the

education core that all students take, each specialty area is aligned with the state and national standards

for that area. The faculty in each specialty area belong to the department in which the specialty

coursework is carried out; all specialty coursework is approved by the entire education faculty as well as

by department in which the specialty coursework is taught. The same faculty who teach the specialty

coursework are typically engaged in the supervision of interns. Thus, the interconnectedness of faculty to

16

their own specialty area, their supervision of interns in the specialty, and their connection to the total

program through a deliberation and approval process which includes all education faculty ensures that

every aspect of every specialty is reviewed by the entire education faculty. The specifics of curriculum

coherence are presented in the following section (Section 3, Knowledge Bases), and in particular Table 2:

Pedagogical Knowledge Course Alignment, and in Section 4: Candidate Proficiencies Aligned with

Professional, State, and Institutional Standards.

Assessment Coherence

The final component of program coherence is the assessment systems and how we use them.

The M.A.E. has clearly articulated assessment systems that use data generated from a variety of sources

to make decisions about individual candidates and about the program. Reports from assessment data

are provided to the faculty each semester (or yearly as appropriate) as they become available as part of

monthly meetings held by the education faculty during the academic year. Reports are discussed in

faculty meetings and are used as a basis for decision making. The centerpiece of this process is the five

assessment systems which make up the M.A.E. Gateway Assessments described in Section 5 (see

Figure 2., M.A.E. Gateway Assessments). The assessments are sequential with each assessment

occurring at a specific time in the candidates’ progress toward completion of the M.A.E. degree.

Because the success of the M.A.E. rests in part on the foundation of undergraduate course work and

clinical experiences, the Gateway Assessments extend down into the undergraduate junior year where

clinical experiences (ED393) provide the opportunity for the Pre-admissions Assessment. The

Admissions Assessment typically takes place in the senior year. The Internship Assessment takes place

during the M.A.E. proper, followed by the capstone assessment consisting of the documented research

project and the online portfolio. Taking the Praxis and meeting the target criterion completes the

sequence. As part of this final gateway, M.A.E. graduates complete a diversity survey and a survey on

their experience at both the undergraduate and the graduate levels. These assessments assure

coherence between the undergraduate experience and the graduate experience; they also ensure

coherence among the M.A.E. specialty areas. In Section 5, the internal coherence for each assessment

system is summarized in five tables, each providing a description of (1) the student requirement for each

assessment, (2) the indicator(s) collected, and (3) the process by which data are collected. These tables

provide a clear behavioral, data-driven plan that can easily be monitored, reviewed, and changed as the

M.A.E. evolves to meet new changing national and state criteria, changing internal expectations by the

education faculty and by Truman State University, as well as the changing needs and expectations of

public schools in Missouri and the surrounding states.

17

SECTION 3

KNOWLEDGE BASES

The teacher education program at Truman is based on content knowledge and pedagogical

knowledge. While it is useful to view these areas separately, they are not discretely acquired.

Candidates acquire knowledge and understanding in content and pedagogy as they progress through the

teacher education program. Acquisition of knowledge and skills is based on holistic learning experiences

and a spiral curriculum in which candidates learn information, principles, and application of increasing

complexity as they construct meaning and deepen their skills through study and field experiences. Our

goal is for candidates to deepen their content knowledge and expand their understanding of teaching and

learning in P-12 schools as they progress through the program. The spiral curriculum culminates in the

internship. During the internship, candidates function as teachers for a full semester or a full year.

Reflection and self-assessment are integral elements of the internship and part of the overall candidate

and program assessment system. Assessments throughout the program, but especially during the

internship, enable candidates to demonstrate ability to teach in a P-12 setting and to use their knowledge

and skills to affect student learning. The following discussion begins with a brief consideration of how

state and university policies shape the program. The remainder of the section elaborates how the

foundational knowledge and performance bases for all teacher education students at Truman are

embedded in the coursework.

How State, University, and Unit Policies Drive the Unit Understanding how state, university, and unit policies drive the unit is helpful in understanding our

focus on reflection, in-depth knowledge, and best practice. The first factor which drives our policies is our

participation in the University, including the involvement of education faculty who teach in their own

disciplines in departments populated by faculty not in education. We begin with the fact that education

faculty teach in both the education department and other university departments and their programs. As a

result of our participation in the overall programs at Truman State University, our policies are shaped by

the expectation of the university and of the departments in which education faculty participate. Decisions

made by the unit are subject to review by all the departments of the University, especially those in which

education faculty teach. At Truman State University, given its dedication to achievement throughout the

university, our policies relative to student achievement have to fit into the overall institutional expectations

for admissions and for graduation. Policies relative to GPA’s, content hours, the length of the internship (a

minimum of one semester) are part of our unit and institutional policies regarding undergraduate and

graduate degrees. In addition to very specific expectations of each department for its students, there is

an overall expectation at Truman that, above all we maintain the excellence of the overall program and

18

that students in the education programs be required to meet a standard of excellence which is parallel to

achievement levels across the university. The second influence strongly shaping our program are the

requirements of State of Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (DESE), in

particular, the MoSTEP standards. We have embedded State guidelines, especially the MOSTEP

standards, in all education coursework, in field experiences, and in assessments (see individual syllabi).

The third influence on how the program is carried out are the policies of the unit itself. The delivery

system for content and pedagogical knowledge has been developed historically by the unit in

collaboration with the liberal arts undergraduate programs for which Truman is known. In the following

section we begin with a brief discussion of the liberal arts degree which forms the base of candidates’

content knowledge.

A. Content Knowledge

The Liberal Arts Degree

Truman State University is accredited by the North Central Association and is known for its

assessment program. Teacher education candidates at Truman must complete a baccalaureate degree

as a prerequisite to the M.A.E. program. Most candidates complete that degree at Truman with a major

from liberal arts and sciences. Those who do not (mainly transfer students) must complete a general

education program equivalent to that required for all Truman undergraduate degrees, plus a major in the

teaching (or related) area for secondary education or equivalent liberal arts and sciences and specialty

area courses as required for elementary education. Thus, M.A.E. candidates at Truman acquire and

demonstrate content knowledge in the baccalaureate degree program, including courses in a major. In

addition, candidates complete graduate courses in their areas of certification as part of the M.A.E.

requirements.

Preparation in Teaching Areas

A key rationale for the existence of the M.A.E. is to create teachers who are highly qualified, in

part, because they have a bachelor’s degree in a content area. As stated above, all candidates are

required to complete a baccalaureate degree in the liberal arts and sciences that includes a strong

general education component. Candidates for a subject area certification (music, art, and all secondary

school teaching areas) have met the requirements for an undergraduate degree in that area. Candidates

for elementary education and for special education have met the requirements for an undergraduate

degree in an area related to teaching in their specialty area. All M.A.E. candidates take graduate courses

in their area(s) of certification, as required in the Master of Arts in Education program (M.A.E.).

19

B. Pedagogical Knowledge

Content Standards

The current emphasis on grade level and subject area standards, with accountability through

state and federal testing programs, must be reflected in teacher education programs in order to prepare

candidates to work successfully in schools and school districts. The M.A.E. prepares candidates to use

standards in planning curriculum and assessing student learning. Truman’s program prepares

candidates to use differentiated instruction for education of all learners, including those with disabilities.

Composition of classes in terms of socioeconomic levels of students, ethnic and language background,

parent expectations and involvement, and community standards are key factors in the educational context

of schools and classrooms. Candidates study teaching in view of the contexts, and their ability to apply

pedagogical knowledge is demonstrated in the online portfolios.

Candidates learn to view curriculum not only as content, skills, attitudes, and beliefs from subject

areas but also as what students do in learning. Thus, unit planning and lesson planning include

emphasis on 1) teaching/learning activities that engage students actively in learning, and 2) assessment

that informs instruction and verifies student learning. In planning and evaluating learning experiences,

candidates reflect on the sources of curriculum and the effectiveness of methods and materials.

Emphasis is on reflection, instruction, and assessment. Ability to apply this learning can be found in

candidates’ online portfolios, including documentation of their research projects.

Accountability for Student Achievement

Accountability in terms of student learning as assessed by state and national tests has become a

driving force in curriculum and teaching in the United States. Teachers in school districts across the

country teach with assessment as their focus; assessment drives instruction. Test results affect not only

students’ decisions about their placement and further education assessment also affects teacher

decisions, as well as school and district decisions. In the current environment of public education,

teachers are moved from one school to another, schools are closed or taken over by private enterprise,

and districts are taken over by state education agencies--mainly on the basis of test results. In view of

the preeminence of test results in decisions about students, teachers, schools, and school districts,

teacher education programs must present candidates with tools for understanding and responding to

mandates, laws, and procedures for student assessment.

Teacher education programs at Truman include grounding in assessment as an integral part of

teaching and learning (formative assessment) and as a means of evaluating students, teachers, schools,

20

and school districts for decisions. Summative evaluation is associated with the term frequently used in

education today—high-stakes testing. In preparing to teach, candidates must learn the terminology of

processes of student assessment, formative and summative, and must learn to interpret and use test

results. Truman’s program includes a graduate course in educational assessment. Candidates learn

purposes of assessment, the importance of assessment in lesson design and teaching, and the ways in

which testing requirements and programs drive curriculum. Emphasis is on multiple assessments, using

assessment results in curriculum planning, and constructing classroom assessments based on learning

objectives.

Teacher educators realize that the most widely used indicator of teacher success in schools

today is student achievement. Achievement, most often demonstrated through test performance, is the

criterion for success of both students and teachers. Thus, it is not surprising that a major goal of teacher

education programs is to prepare teachers who can enable students to learn and to demonstrate learning

by achievement on high-stakes achievement tests. National accrediting agencies and state education

departments insist on links between what candidates in teacher education programs do in the classroom

and evidence of student learning.

Increasing student achievement requires ability to design lessons, to teach to objectives and to

assess student learning in terms of objectives. Candidates learn to apply knowledge of curriculum and

teaching methods in clinical field experiences prior to the internship and during the internship. Under

supervision of classroom teachers and mentors they learn to engage students in learning activities and

use pretest and posttest information to make reflective decisions about learning. Candidates also learn to

analyze students’ written work and other performance assessments to document student learning. This

learning on the part of candidates involves application and practice in planning, teaching, and

assessment. Knowledge and performance skills are the focus of required courses in curriculum and

assessment and a basis for analysis and reflection of teaching during the internship.

Knowledge Of Curriculum And Educational Contexts

We consider the study of teaching and schooling as an academic field with its own integrity and

body of knowledge. In this section we present the core professional educations courses that all

candidates take and we describe how these course fulfill our mission to prepare reflective teachers.

These courses (including the internship) treat the elements of curriculum and the knowledge of

educational contexts in a spiral fashion. The following table of catalog course descriptions are a typical

progression through the core professional teacher education courses:

Table 1

Courses and Course Descriptions of Core M.A.E. Courses

21

ED 389 - Foundations of Education

An overview of historical, legal, philosophical, political, and social aspects of public

education and of teaching as a career. (INTASC Standard 2 and MoSTEP 1.2.2).

ED 393 - Clinical Experiences in Teaching

A course designed to provide a basic readiness for teaching, preliminary to the

Management of Instruction course. ED 393 is an introduction to “what to teach and

how to teach” with three articulated components: seminar, clinical, and field. (A field

experience of 45-60 clock hours is required through concurrent enrollment in ED 393

Classroom Experiences.) (INTASC Standard 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 and MoSTEP

1.2.1, 1.2.2, 1.2.3, 1.2.4, 1.2.5, 1.2.6, 1.2.7, 1.2.8, 1.2.9, 1.2.10, 1.2.11).

ED 593 - Psychological Foundations of Education

Covers aspects of psychological theory and life span development applicable to

teaching at all grade levels. Emphasis on social, emotional, and cognitive

development, learning, motivation, student characteristics, critical thinking, classroom

management, and use of technology as a tool for learning. (INTASC 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7,

8, 9 MoSTEP 1.2.1, 1.2.2, 1.2.3, 1.2.4, 1.2.5, 1.2.6, 1.2.7, 1.2.8, 1.2.9, 1.2.11).

ED603G - Learning Strategies for Print Discourse

This course examines theories of comprehension and retention and the application of

strategies to be used with comprehension of expository and artistic prose writing.

(INTASC 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 9 MoSTEP1.2.1; 1.2.2; 1.2.3; 1.2.4; 1.2.5; 1.2.7; 1.2.9;

1.2.11).

ED 605G -

Psychology

of

Exceptional

Children

An examination of the educator’s rights and responsibilities in educating students with

gifted and handicapped conditions; current philosophy and terminology in gifted and

special education programs; and the programming implications of students from

culturally diverse backgrounds. (INTASC Principles 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 9, 10, and MoSTEP

1.2.1, 1.2.2, 1.2.3, 1.2.5, 1.2.7, 1.2.8, 1.2.9, 1.2.10).

XX608

Management

of Instruction.

Development of basic philosophical, planning, and implementation skills related to the

design and teaching of the concepts of the discipline specialty to secondary school

students. The course is a direct preparatory experience for the responsibilities of the

internship and is offered under a 608G number in each teaching specialty, e.g., ENG

608G (English), SCED 608G (Science), SSTE 608G (Social Science), and so on.

Students are advised to check with their respective College or School for course

availability and field experience requirements. (INTASC Principles 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 8, 9,

10, and MoSTEP 1.2.1, 1.2.2, 1.2.3, 1.2.4, 1.2.5, 1.2.6, 1.2.7, 1.2.8, 1.2.9, 1.2.10).

ED 601G - Measurement and Evaluation

General principles of measurement and the evaluation of student achievement and

teacher/program effectiveness. The major themes of the course are assessment,

validity, reliability and utility. Emphasis is on construction and analysis of classroom

measures and interpretation of standardized measurement results, as well as the

proper use of measurements for sound reflective decision-making. Use of

22

spreadsheets is required. . (INTASC Principles 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, and MoSTEP

1.2.1, 1.2.2, 1.2.3, 1.2.4, 1.2.6, 1.2.8, 1.2.9, 1.2.11).

XX607

Applied

Educational

Psychology.

Examines learning, attitudes, motivation, and human relations as they apply to

teaching taken concurrently with ED 609G. (INTASC 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 and

MoSTEP 1.2.1, 1.2.2, 1.2.3, 1.2.4, 1.2.5, 1.2.6, 1.2.7, 1.2.8, 1.2.9, 1.2.10, 1.2.11).

ED 609G - Teaching Internship

A minimum of a public school semester of full-time participation as a junior member of

a school faculty under the guidance of mentor teachers, administrators, and University

representatives. Extensive experience is provided in all facets of a teacher’s role.

Seminars conducted by University personnel assist interns in assessing their

experiences, in refining their performance, and in completing University coursework

that includes field components. Students who complete a one-semester internship

must enroll for a minimum of 8 hours of ED 609G. All students who complete a full year

internship must enroll for a minimum of 8 hours of ED 609G each semester of the

internship. The maximum number of credit hours allowed for a full-year internship is

17. Students who complete a practicum for an additional certification area must enroll

for a minimum of 3 hours of ED 609G. (INTASC 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10

MoStep 1.2.1, 1.2.2, 1.2.3, 1.2.4, 1.2.5, 1.2.6, 1.2.7, 1.2.8, 1.2.9, 1.2.10, 1.2.11).

ED 632G - Research/Applied Educational Psychology

Examines research methodologies, designs, collecting and analyzing data, and writing

and presenting findings through completion of an action research project. Online

portfolio is completed and active on-line participation is required. This course is an

optional replacement for ED 607G and ED 681G. (INTASC 1, 2, 4, 8, 9 MoSTEP 1.2.1,

1.2.2, 1.2.5, 1.2.8, 1.2.9).

ED 681G - Research Study in Education

The student, in consultation with his/her internship supervisor, will design and carry out

an empirical research study. All MAE students are required to take ED 681G for at

least one hour of credit to complete the MAE degree. Music and Exercise Science

students will be exempt from enrollment in ED 681G.

The M.A.E. core described above involves course work to engage candidates in the study of curriculum

and instruction and to develop readiness for working with students. Candidates learn principles of

measurement and evaluation of student progress. With a focus on student diversity, candidates also

learn appropriate practitioner strategies and relevant student learning strategies, as well as appropriate

uses of technology. The core professional education courses which all candidates take are generally

taken beginning in the undergraduate junior year and completed during the year of graduate study, with

the internship usually being taken during the final semester. Over this three-year period (sometimes four

years), we see our candidates develop in their understanding of students, of the learning process, and of

the teaching process (including the use of technology). We think of the development that takes place as

23

a spiral process in which clinical experiences throw light on the study of teaching and learning in the core

professional education courses, and these courses return to the study of teaching and learning, each time

at a deeper level. The idea, then, of the spiral curriculum is that as candidates advance through their

coursework they will reconsider key knowledge and skills, but at a higher level. In Table 2 below, we

show where key ideas and skills are addressed.

Table 2:

Pedagogical Knowledge Course Alignment

Pedagogical Knowledge Course

Learn basics of curriculum and instruction and develop a basic readiness for teaching. (INTASC Principle 7 and MoSTEP 1.2.4)

ED393, ED593 ED608

Consider how principles of learning, human development, motivation, and other aspects of educational psychology apply to teaching and learning. (Attention to INTASC Principles 2 and 5, MoSTEP 1.2.2 and 1.2.6)

ED393 ED593 ED607/ED632

Acquire knowledge and consider issues related to physical, sexual, intellectual, moral, emotional and social development of the adolescent (INTASC Principle 2 and MoSTEP 1.2.2)

ED500 (Optional Elective) ED593

Learn principles of measurement and the evaluation of student progress related to the pedagogical process (INTASC Principles 8 and 9 and MoSTEP 1.2.8 and 1.2.9)

ED601

Learn and consider when and how to use appropriate teaching and learning strategies for all students (INTASC Principle 4 and MoSTEP 1.2.5).

ED393 ED593 ED603

Plan, teach, assess, and make reflective decisions based on observations and outcomes.

ED607/ED632 ED609

Learn and use technology in instruction (detail presented below in Table 3). ED393, ED593 ED601, ED603 ED/XX608, ED609 online Portfolio (Exit requirement)

Knowledge of Technology

The policy of Truman State University is to embed technology in all courses wherever it may be

appropriate. As a result, our students can expect to be involved in using technology throughout their

undergraduate careers. In addition, the policy of the unit is that technology should be embedded in a

spiral fashion throughout the coursework and culminating in the online portfolio. The unit policy is that:

Pre-service teachers will be able to select technology and technology applications, including

software, that best supports instruction and assessment (MoSTEP 1.2.4, 1.2.11).

24

Pre-service teachers will understand the importance of selective discrimination of credible

Internet sites and will use technology to promote the development of critical thinking and

problem solving to help all students learn (MoSTEP 1.2.5.1 , 1.2.5.2, 1.2.11.1, 1.2.11.4 and

INTASC 4).

Pre-service teachers will plan and design effective learning experiences supported by

informational and instructional technology to maximize student learning and support the

diverse needs of learners (MoSTEP 1.2.11.2 and 1.2.11.3 and INTASC 1, 3, 6, and 7).

Pre-service teachers will understand and assist their future students in understanding global,

local, social, ethical, legal, and human issues surrounding the use of technology (MoSTEP

1.2.11.6). Since rapid advances in technology are changing the dynamics of teaching and

learning, effective use of technology in education will aid in the promotion of life-long learning

for both the pre-service teachers and their future students (MoSTEP 1.2.11.5 and INTASC 9).

Wisdom of Practice

The final component of pedagogy derives from the maxims that guide reflective practice. It

includes concepts for planning, implementing, and evaluating professional practice; time on task; student

diversity; and empathy for learners. The clinical component of the professional studies core is integrated

across pre-internship field experiences, professional course work, and internships. Through multiple field

placements, candidates have opportunities to interact with students from a variety of backgrounds and

with a variety of needs. As such, the clinical component strengthens the professional qualities needed to

ensure competence in school settings.

Professional development is further ensured through research on issues related to schooling.

The research component is the capstone reflective experience for candidates in the Professional

Education Unit. For example, during their internships, candidates in the M.A.E. program investigate a

research question, studying their own decisions, methods, and actions, to measure their effects on the

development of all students’ academic and attitudinal achievement. Various courses and strategies are

used throughout the programs to bring about the ability to make sound professional judgments based on

critical analysis, reasoning, and strategic understanding. In Table 3, the elements of this component are

described.

25

Table 3

Elements of The Wisdom of Practice

Knowledge of Practice Course

Make classroom/clinical observations and reflect on their meaning. ED393

Learn theories, principles, and research findings from learning and human

development and how they apply in the classroom and in the lives of students

outside the classroom.

ED593

Learn principles and practices of making observations leading to valid

professional judgments about instruction, student learning, and educational

programs.

ED601

Acquire understanding and skill in meeting the needs of students from diverse

backgrounds.

ED603 , ED605,

ED607/ED632

ED608,

ED609.

Formulate, carry out, reflect upon, and report on plans and decisions regarding

instruction and classroom management, as well as assisting in school research

issues.

ED607/ED632

ED609,

online Portfolio

Develop and assess plans and teaching strategies based on careful reasoning

and critical analysis of the curriculum and the context in which it will be taught.

ED/XX608, ED603,

online Portfolio;

Research Project

Summary

In summary, skills for reflective professional practitioners are developed through the acquisition

and integration of undergraduate major and graduate specialty studies, and through course work in

professional components and field experiences, including the internships. Reflection on professional

practice is encouraged throughout the program. Development of content knowledge, knowledge of

curriculum and educational contexts, pedagogical knowledge, and practical wisdom lead to the

development of abilities in critical analysis, reasoning, and strategic understanding which inform

professional judgment. The policies of the university drive the program’s focus on liberal education and

excellence in content knowledge; the policies of the State of Missouri drive the program’s focus on MO-

STEP standards (which are parallel to the INTASC standards); the policies of the unit focus on carrying

out the mission of the University, the state standards (especially the MO-STEP standards), and its own

focus on developing reflective practitioners.

26

SECTION 4

CANDIDATE PROFICIENCIES

ALIGNED WITH PROFESSIONAL, STATE, AND INSTITUTIONAL STANDARDS

Standards

Candidate proficiencies align with the standards of Truman State University as a liberal arts

institution. In order to graduate from Truman State University, all students are required to meet all

standards for a liberal arts education. Students coming from other institutions with a bachelors

degree in hand are required to meet the same standards (as determined by a transcript analysis) as

Truman students. Admission to the M.A.E. is aligned with the standards of Truman State University

for graduate admission, an alignment which is ensured by the graduate school of Truman State

University.

We align candidate proficiencies with Missouri Teacher Education Program (MoSTEP)

standards in all education courses, the internship, and the online portfolio. Each education course

syllabus shows how it aligns with MoSTEP standards. The online portfolio required by the M.A.E. of

all candidates is also aligned with the MoSTEP standards. The expectations we have of candidates

as reflective practitioners are built into the MoSTEP (and INTASC) standards. Nevertheless, we have

developed our own language, aligned with MoSTEP and INTASC standards, to describe the key

expectations we have of our candidates. These expectations reflect our emphasis on the liberal arts,

on content preparation, and on the ideas of reflective practice as developed by Don Schoen (1987)

and Lee Shulman (1986a, 1986b, 1987, 2004). Specifics of alignment to state and national

standards are provided in the following section.

Reflective Practitioner Expectations Aligned with Standards and Evidence

The Reflective Practitioner Program has six major expectations of the candidates. These are

defined throughout the coursework, clinical experiences, research project, and the online portfolio. Each

of the six is discussed briefly below, followed by a table showing the alignments of this expectation to

INTASC and MO-STEP with additional columns showing alignment to coursework and the portfolio.

1. Candidates design instructional plans based on thorough knowledge and understanding of the

concepts and content of their disciplines. One of the strengths of the M.A.E. candidates is that they

already have undergraduate degrees and are taking additional coursework in their specialty area at the

graduate level. The focus on instructional planning is developmental in that students begin designing

lessons in ED393 as undergraduates. They continue this focus in the graduate program. A strength of

their graduate experience is that each of the specialty areas has its own Management of Instruction

27

course in which the instructor has expertise in the specialty area and teaches content specific pedagogy.

Reflective

Practitioner

INTASC

Standards

Mo-Step

Standards

Coursework Portfolio

1. Candidates

design

instructional plans

based on thorough

knowledge and

understanding of

the concepts and

content of their

disciplines.

STANDARD 1: CONTENT PEDAGOGY The teacher understands the central concepts, tools of inquiry, and structures of the discipline he or she teaches and can create learning experiences that make these aspects of subject matter meaningful for students.

Quality Indicator 1.2.1: The pre-service teacher understands the central concepts, tools of inquiry and structures of the discipline(s) within the context of a global society and creates learning experiences that make these aspects of subject matter meaningful for students.

Competence is evidenced by coursework at the undergraduate and graduate levels (including clinical experiences) with DESE MoStep 1.2.1. See individual syllabi for

evidence of

alignment.

MoStep Alignment of online portfolio with DESE Standard 1.2.1 See individual online portfolios for evidence of alignment.

2. Candidates create learning opportunities based on understanding of diversity and of how students

learn and develop. We see diversity and development as related. This focus is a theme which flows

through a number of courses, including ED393 (clinical experiences), ED389 (educational foundations),

and ED593 (psychological foundations). During the internship, reflections developed by the interns

explicitly address this standard.

Reflective Practitioner

INTASC Standards Mo-Step Standards Coursework Portfolio

2. Candidates

create

learning

opportunities

based on

understandin

STANDARD 2: STUDENT DEVELOPMENT The teacher understands how children learn and develop, and can provide learning opportunities that support a child’s intellectual, social, and personal development.

Quality Indicator 1.2.2: The pre-service teacher understands how students learn and develop, and provides learning opportunities that support the intellectual, social, and personal development of all students.

Competence is evidenced by coursework (including clinical experiences) with DESE MoStep 1.2.2 1.2.3

MoStep Alignment of online portfolio with DESE Standard 1.2.2 1.2.3 See individual

28

g of diversity

and of how

students

learn and

develop.

STANDARD 3: DIVERSE LEARNERS The teacher understands how students differ in their approaches to learning and creates instructional opportunities that are adapted to diverse learners.

Quality Indicator 1.2.3: The pre-service teacher understands how students differ in their approaches to learning and creates instructional opportunities that are adapted to diverse learners.

See individual syllabi for evidence of alignment.

online portfolios for evidence of alignment

3. Candidates understand issues of motivation and behavior and use this knowledge to establish learning environments that foster active, collaborative learning to develop critical thinking, problem solving, and performance skills. We see motivation as flowing from involvement of students in the process of learning. In particular ED393 and ED593 both address motivation, critical thinking, problem solving, and performance skills. XX608 addresses the practical matter of designing lessons which actively involve students.

Reflective Practitioner INTASC Standards Mo-Step

Standards

Coursework Portfolio

3. Candidates understand

issues of motivation and

behavior and use this

knowledge to establish

learning environments

that foster active,

collaborative learning to

develop critical thinking,

problem

solving, and

performance skills.

STANDARD 5: MOTIVATION AND MANAGEMENT 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.

Quality Indicator 1.2.6: The pre-service 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

Competence is evidenced by coursework (including clinical experiences) with DESE MoStep 1.2.2 1.2.3 See individual syllabi for evidence of alignment.

MoStep Alignment of online portfolio with DESE Standard 1.2.2 1.2.3 See individual online portfolios for evidence of alignment

4. Candidates understand effective verbal, nonverbal, and media-communication/technology

techniques and use them to promote learning and positive interaction. We see language as the primary

medium through which teaching and learning are carried. In particular, we see student use of technology

as a means of promoting higher order thinking and problem-solving as well as a medium through which

they can communicate the results of their efforts.

Reflective Practitioner

INTASC Standards

Mo-Step Standards Coursework Portfolio

4. Candidates

Understand

STANDARD 6: COMMUNICATION AND TECHNOLOGY

Quality Indicator 1.2.7: The pre-service teacher models effective verbal, nonverbal, and media

Competence is evidenced by coursework (including

MoStep Alignment of online portfolio with

29

effective verbal,

nonverbal, and

media-

communication/

technology

techniques and

use them to

promote learning

and positive

interaction.

The teacher uses knowledge of effective verbal, nonverbal, and media communication techniques to foster active inquiry, collaboration, and supportive interaction in the classroom.

communication techniques to foster active inquiry, collaboration, and supportive interaction in the classroom. Quality Indicator 1.2.11: The pre-service teacher understands the theory and application of technology in educational settings and has adequate technological skills to create meaningful learning opportunities for all students.

clinical experiences) with DESE MoStep 1.2.7 1.2.11 See individual syllabi for evidence of alignment.

DESE Standard 1.2.7 1.2.11 See individual online portfolios for evidence of alignment.

5. Candidates are reflective practitioners who design instruction to address curriculum goals and

who use assessment to make adjustments to benefit both their students’ growth and their own

professional growth. We see student growth and professional growth as related. We look for evidence

of professional growth in the internship and the portfolio, but also through coursework.

Reflective Practitioner

INTASC Standards Mo-Step Standards Coursework Portfolio

5. Candidates are

reflective

practitioners who

design instruction

to address

curriculum goals

and use

assessment in

their practice and

make adjustments

to benefit both their

students’ growth

and their own

professional

growth.

STANDARD 7: PLANNING The teacher plans instruction based upon knowledge of subject matter, students, the community, and curriculum goals.

Quality Indicator 1.2.4: The pre-service teacher recognizes the importance of long-range planning and curriculum development and develops, implements, and evaluates curriculum based upon student, district, and state performance standards.

Competence is evidenced by coursework (including clinical experiences) with DESE MoStep 1.2.4 1.2.8 1.2.9 See individual syllabi for evidence of alignment.

MoStep Alignment of online portfolio with DESE Standard 1.2.4 1.2.8 1.2.9 See individual online portfolios for evidence of alignment

STANDARD 8: ASSESSMENT The teacher understands and uses formal and informal assessment strategies to evaluate and ensure the continuous intellectual, social, and physical development of the learner.

Quality Indicator 1.2.8: The pre-service teacher understands and uses formal and informal assessment strategies to evaluate and ensure the continuous intellectual, social, and physical development of the learner.

STANDARD 9: REFLECTIVE PRACTICE: PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT

Quality Indicator 1.2.9: The pre-service teacher is a reflective practitioner who continually assesses

30

The teacher is a reflective practitioner who continually evaluates the effects of his or her choices and actions on others and who actively seeks out opportunities to grow professionally.

the effects of choices and actions on others. This reflective practitioner actively seeks out opportunities to grow professionally and utilizes the assessment and professional growth to generate more learning for more students.

6.Candidates engage in effective relationships with students and other stakeholders to ensure the

success of their students. The relationship of candidates to learners and other stakeholders, especially

parents, is part of the process of motivating and involving students in the learning process. We especially

look for evidence of this in the internship, but also in other clinical experiences and in the relationship of

candidates to their peers and professors as they proceed through the program. The structure and culture

of the M.A.E., bringing together small groups of students who take coursework together in their specialty

areas also promotes the importance of relationships in professional life and gives professors a chance to

evaluate candidates abilities to work well with others.

Reflective Practitioner

INTASC Standards

Mo-Step Standards

Coursework Portfolio

6. Candidates

engage in effective

relationships with

students and other

stakeholders to

ensure the

success of their

students.

STANDARD 10: SCHOOL AND COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT The teacher fosters relationships with school colleagues, parents, and agencies in the larger community to support students’ learning and well being.

Quality Indicator 1.2.10: The pre-service teacher fosters relationships with school colleagues, parents, and educational partners in the larger community to support student learning and well-being.

Competence is evidenced by coursework (including clinical experiences) with DESE MoStep 1.2.10). See individual syllabi for evidence of alignment.

MoStep Alignment of online portfolio with DESE Standard 1.2.10 See individual online portfolios for evidence of alignment.

The Online Portfolio and Its Assessment

Our expectations are most fully realized by candidates and assessed by us in the internship and

the online portfolio. Candidates use the MoSTEP standards in preparing their online portfolios and these

portfolios are reviewed by the intern’s University supervisor in the specialty area and then again by the

Education Department Chair. All candidates must meet the MoSTEP standards for the portfolio before

31

they are allowed to graduate.

The Research Project

Included in the online portfolio is a research project designed to give candidates experience in

designing research projects that will prepare them to make better decisions as reflective practitioners.

Research projects are assessed by the faculty member supervising the research, a second faculty

reader, and the Education Department Chair.

32

SECTION 5

THE SYSTEMS USED TO ASSESS CANDIDATES AND PROGRAMS

The Professional Education Unit assesses candidate progress through multiple measures. These

measures include course grades, observations, field experience evaluations, standardized test scores,

grade point averages, personal and professional references, candidate self assessments, conference

evaluations, portfolios, technology development, and research. The Unit also assesses programs

through multiple measures. These include surveys, questionnaires, and aggregated and disaggregated

data of candidate performance.

Candidates are assessed at the undergraduate, graduate, and post-graduate levels. At the

undergraduate level, pipeline data, course grades, and field experience evaluations are collected and

analyzed. At the point of admission, all applicants are evaluated on the basis of test scores (GRE

scores), personal statements, reference letters, undergraduate grade point averages (cumulative, as well

as discipline specific), and grades in pre-requisite undergraduate education courses. At the graduate

level, the assessment plan evaluates candidates through course grades, approval for internship at the

XX608 Management of Instruction checkpoint, and internship checkpoints (internship site visit record,

intern self-assessment form, performance based teacher evaluation, and summative evaluation).

Graduation requirement assessments include successful completion of the internship, standardized test

score (PRAXIS II examination), a research option, and the online portfolio.

M.A.E. program assessments include course evaluations at undergraduate and graduate levels,

conference day assessments, survey of internship mentors, program exit questionnaire, university exit

questionnaire, portfolios examined by accrediting/program approval site teams, and standardized test

scores of graduates.

The Five Gateway Assessment Systems

We assess candidates using five gateway assessments: pre-admission clinical experiences at

the undergraduate level, admission to the graduate program, pre-internship, internship, and post-

internship and graduation. The five areas are visualized in the chart below, followed by an explanation of

each area and a matrix summarizing each assessment.

33

Figure 2: M.A.E. Gateway Assessments

Area 1: Pre-Admission Assessment

We begin our assessment of most candidates long before they apply to the M.A.E.. By providing

undergraduates with an opportunity to complete both clinical and academic coursework prior to admission

to the M.A.E., the Education Department provides undergraduates the opportunity to fully prepare

themselves to do advanced clinical and academic coursework in the M.A.E. (or other education degrees

at other colleges and universities). Students interested in becoming teachers participate in exploratory

clinical experiences (a requirement to enter ED393, Clinical Experiences). Those who complete the

exploratory clinical experiences satisfactorily and who meet the grade point requirements, can be

admitted to the ED393 Clinical Experiences course which involves them in further clinical experiences

appropriate to prepare them to apply to specific specialty areas in the M.A.E. (or to other programs across

the state). Matrix 1: Pre-Admission Assessment summarizes the assessments carried out during these

experiences:

Pre-Admission Assessment

Requirement Indicator Process

34

Clinical experience required for admission to ED393

Observation report Exploratory field experiences cover page signed by Mentor & administrator

Documents submitted by student.

ED393 clinical experience required during ED393

Time logs; Clinical experiences checklist; Truman instructor sight visit report Mentor sight visit report Mentor final evaluation

Documents submitted by student and Truman instructor.

Alternative gateway Transcripts and syllabi Evidence of equivalent experience supplied to field experiences office

Area 2: Assessment for Admission

As a unit, we have a set of criteria which include meeting admission requirements of the graduate school,

of the unit, and of the individual specialty areas. These are:

1. A strong liberal arts and sciences baccalaureate degree with at least a 2.75 cumulative gpa (3.0

preferred) or the equivalent baccalaureate degree for candidates who complete undergraduate

degrees at other schools.

2. For secondary candidates, a minimum 2.5 certification gpa in the target certification area and a

major (or the equivalent) in the certification area.

3. Submission of GRE scores.

4. Submission of three letters of recommendations.

5. Additional admissions requirements for specific specialty areas, as appropriate to teaching

excellence in area are submitted.

6. Submission of Application Forms to the office of the Graduate School. (The Graduate School is

responsible for all graduate programs at Truman State University.

The assessments used for admissions are summarized in Matrix 2: Assessment for Admission:

35

Assessment for Admission

Requirement Indicator Process

General requirements for all candidates admitted to the M.A.E.

A strong liberal arts and sciences baccalaureate degree with at least a 2.75 cumulative gpa (3.0 preferred) For secondary candidates, a minimum 2.5 certification gpa in the target certification area and a major (or the equivalent) in the certification area GRE scores submitted Three letters of recommendations submitted. Application forms submitted

Data are collected by graduate office and distributed to each specialty area; they analyze the information and make recommendations to Dept. Chair who makes recommendations to the graduate dean. The graduate dean notifies students. Students may request the admission committee convene to examine their denial.

Specific requirements for candidates admitted to specific specialty area areas

To maintain the quality of teachers in specific programs, additional requirements must be met by candidates applying to those programs.

Each specialty area examines the data provided by the candidates and makes a recommendation regarding admission to the chair of the specialty area department who then forwards the recommendation to the chair of the Department of Education and then to the Graduate Dean.

Area 3: Pre-internship Assessment

During their graduate coursework, students often complete field experience hours in several

courses. As a unit, it is not consistent that everyone complete the same amount of pre-internship field

experience hours in courses except ED 393, which students generally take prior to admission to the

graduate program. In ED 393, students are evaluated by their course instructors and mentor teachers.

Pre-Internship Assessment

Requirement Indicator Process

ED 393 clinical experiences

Mentor surveys Collected by the field experience office. Surveys are examined by the professors who teach the course and mentor ratings are incorporated as 10% of the student’s grade. Surveys are archived in the students’ files.

Content Knowledge

Course grades Faculty examine GPA from undergraduate degree to determine admission.

XX608 Management of Instruction

Instructor recommendation

Instructor assessment of candidate readiness for internship, including clinical experiences required by individual specialty area XX608 requirements.

Internship Assessment

A variety of assessment instruments are used during the internship. Candidates are evaluated by

their university supervisor and by the mentor teacher. The university supervisor works with the mentor

36

teacher and intern to develop professional development goals and if needed, a performance goal chart.

Internship Assessment

Requirement Indicator Process

Formative evaluations of intern by University Supervisor

Site Visit Forms Collected by the field experience office, totaled by faculty and the number and amt. of time of visits. Filed with student materials

Summative evaluation of intern by University Supervisor

Final evaluation form

Collected by the field experience office and filed.

Performance Based Teacher Evaluation (PBTE)

PBTE form Submitted to the field experience office and filed.

Team Meetings to assess intern progress

Intern supervisor report

Submitted to the field experience office and filed.

Area 5: Assessment of Capstone and Graduate Requirements

In addition to completing all course requirements, M.A.E. candidates, in order to graduate, must

fulfill the following requirements:

Candidates must complete a diversity survey and an M.A.E. survey which are used to gather

data on candidate diversity and candidate experiences during the M.A.E.. Data is supplied to

the education faculty and to the Graduate Council.

Candidates must pass the Praxis in their certification area with a score at or above the

median score (as required by Truman’s standards, which are higher than the state

standards).

Candidates must complete an online portfolio which includes reflections and evidence of

meeting the DESE MoSTEP Quality Indicators.

Capstone and Graduation Requirements Assessment

Requirement Indicator Process

Diversity and M.A.E. Survey

Completed survey

Sent by mail from Graduate Office and returned to Education Department secretary.

Graduate Exit Survey

Completed survey

Completed online.

Exam Praxis in area of certification

Students take the test. Scores are submitted to the certification analyst, who notifies the faculty and Dept. Chair. If students don’t pass, they meet with the Dept. Chair and work out an individual study plan.

37

Online Portfolio Online Portfolio Students work with faculty to complete the portfolio. Faculty use the rubric to check the proficiencies.

Research Research document

Research project completed during internship and incorporated into the online portfolio

The Process The Unit Follows To Assess Unit Operations

The five assessment systems described above are part of a cyclic process that involves

education faculty individually, as members of overlapping groups, and as a whole faculty charged with

reflecting on and making decisions based on experiences and data. The procedures we use are both

flexible and systematic. While the governance structure provides the substrate of how we make

decisions, the actual procedures we use continually evolve as we work to address new opportunities and

new challenges. For example, although the faculty in the specialty areas other than elementary and

special education are actually housed in academic departments, the education department voted to give

all education faculty voting rights within the education department. Another innovation which has served

to systematically improve reflection and decision making is a bylaw requiring a two-meeting process by

which to implement policy change—decisions are presented as information items at one meeting and

action items during the next subsequent meeting, providing ample time for faculty reflection and

discussion. All decisions require a two-thirds majority of all present in order to pass a bill. Still another

example is that any individual faculty member or faculty group can bring forth a bill or a proposal. This

has promoted individual initiative and gives a leadership role to all faculty.

In the process of making program decisions, wherever possible the education faculty collects and

evaluates data on a case-by-case basis. One device to explore the efficacy of proposed changes has

been to approve pilot programs, collect data on those programs and then determine, as a faculty, the

desirability and viability of those changes based on the data. For example, ED632, the current online

graduate course involving interns in designing and carrying out research project was implemented as a

pilot over a three semester period. Data was collected during those semesters and subsequent

evaluation by the faculty led to approval of the online course as an option for fulfillment of the research

requirement.

Because all decisions affecting undergraduate course work are submitted to Undergraduate

Council or to the Graduate Council and then to Faculty Senate for approval--university wide governance

bodies concerned with quality, the education faculty are continually assessing how their decisions will

enhance the overall quality of the degrees at Truman. This insures multi-level review not only by all

education faculty of all program and specialty area changes, but also insures review by the Departments

38

to which specialty area faculty belong. These multiple reviews by faculty within the education department

and by the University Graduate Council, Undergraduate Council, and Faculty Senate is a true reflective

process where questions are asked about the effect that changes will have on the quality of the M.A.E.

and on the overall quality of the University. In other words, all decisions involving coursework or program

changes are vetted by the individual specialty areas, the education faculty, and the entire faculty of the

University through the Undergraduate, Graduate Councils, and Faculty Senate. While these decisions

take place within the structure of the governance process, it is also the case that how we make decisions

is based on the cumulative set of procedures which support a culture of cooperative assessment,

decision-making, and implementation.

39

References

Andrew, M. (1997). Selected Results - Benchmark Project 1990-1995. Symposium presented at annual meeting of AACTE, Phoenix, AZ.

Andrew, M. D. And Schwab, R. L. (1995). Has reform in teacher education influenced teacher

performance? An outcome assessment of graduates of an eleven-university consortium. Action in Teacher Education, XVII(3), 43-53.

Apple, M. (1983). Curricular form and the logic of technical control: The building of the possessive

individual. In M. Apple and L. Weis (eds.) Ideology and Practice in Education, 143-66, Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.

Bintz,W. and Dillard, J. (2007). Teachers as reflective Practitioners: Examining Teacher Stories of

Curricular Change in a 4th Grade Classroom. Reading Horizons Journal, 47,(3), 203-221.

Bird, T. (1991). Making conversations about teaching and learning in an introductory teacher education

course. East Lansing, MI: The National Center for Research on Teacher Learning. Brophy, J. and Good, T. (1986). Teacher behavior and student achievement. Handbook of Research on

Teaching (3rd ed.). New York, NY: MacMillan Publishing Company. Bullough, R. V., Knowles, J. G. & Grauw, N. (1991). Emerging as a teacher. London: Routledge. Carnegie Commission on Education and the Economy. (1986). Report of the task force on teaching as a

profession. Princeton, NJ: Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching. Chase, B., Germundsen, R., Brownstein, J. C., Distad, L. S. (Spring, 2001). Making the Connection

Between Increased Student Learning and Reflective Practice. Educational Horizons. (pp143-147) Clapp, K. (1990). Position paper on the reflective practitioner. Unpublished manuscript, Truman State

University (formerly Northeast Missouri State University. Cohen, P. (1995, August). Designing performance assessment tasks. Education Update, Association for

supervision and curriculum development, 37 (6), 1-8. 36 References include sources used for initial development of the conceptual framework as well as

sources used in revisions. Conant, J. B. (1963). The Education of American Teachers. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Book Company,

Inc. Crittendon, B. (1973). Some prior questions in the reform of teacher education. Interchange, 4(2-3), 1-11. Cruickshank, D. (1987). Reflective teaching. Reston, VA: Association of Teacher Educators. Daniels, D. (2002). Becoming a Reflective Practitioner. Middle School Journal, 33(5), 52-56. Darling-Hammond, L. & Cobb, V. L. (1996) The changing context of teacher education. In F. B. Murray

(Ed.), The teacher educator’s handbook: Building a knowledge base for the preparation of teachers (pp. 14-62). San Francisco, CA: Josey-Bass.

Dewey, J. (1904). The relationship of theory to practice in education. In C.A. McMurray (ed.), The third

yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education (Part One). Chicago, IL: University of

40

Chicago Press. Dewey, J. (1993). How we think. Chicago, IL: Henry Regnery. Elliot, J. (1998). Teachers as researchers: Implications for supervision and teacher education. Paper

presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA. (ERIC Reproduction Service No. ED 293 831)

Fenstermacher, G. (1986). Philosophy of research on teaching: Three aspects. Handbook of Research on

Teaching (3rd ed.). New York, NY: MacMillan Publishing Company. Glasersfeld, E. Von (1984). An introduction to radical constructivism. In Watzlawick, P. The invented

reality: How do we know what we believe we know? Glasersfeld, E. Von (1988). Learning as a constructive activity. In E. von Glasersfeld . The construction of

knowledge: Contributions to conceptual semantics. (pp. 310-338). Salinas, CA : Intersystems Publications. (Reprinted from Proceedings of the 5th Annual Meeting of the International Group for Psychology in Mathematics Education, Montreal, 1983).

Glasersfeld, E. Von (1995). Radical constructivism: A way of knowing and learning. London: The Falmer

Press. New York, NY: W. W. Norton. Grow-Maienza, J. & Howard, P. (1995). Evidence of developmental stages of teaching efficacy in the

case studies of 20 internships in a fifth-year M.A.E. program. Paper presented at annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, March, 1995.

Grow-Maienza, J., Olsen, S. & Miller, P. (1998). Truman data from the Benchmark Project: A collaborative

outcome assessment of graduates of eleven four-year, five-year, and fifth-year teacher education programs. Paper presented at annual meeting of AACTE, February 1998, New Orleans.

Hansen, W. L. (1990). What knowledge is most worth knowing? Liberal Education, 76(4). Harri-Augstein, S. & Thomas, L. (1991). Learning conversations. London: Routledge. Holmes Group Executive Board. (1986). Tomorrow’s teachers: A report of the Holmes Group. East

Lansing, MI: The Holmes Group. Hutchins, R. (1969). The Learning Society. New York, NY: The New American Library. Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T. & Holubec, R. T. (1993). Circles of learning. (3rd ed.) Edina, MN:

Interaction Book Company. Kagan, S. (2009). Cooperative learning. San Juan Capistrano, CA: Kagan Cooperative Learning. Kinsella, E. A. (2001). Reflections on reflective practice. Canadian Journal of Occupational Therapy,

68(3), 195-198. LaBoskey, V.K. (1993). A conceptual framework for reflection in pre-service teacher education. In

Calderhead, J. and Gates, P. (1993). Conceptualizing Reflection in teacher development. Washington, D.C.: The Falmer Press.

Leinhardt, G. (1992, April). What research on learning tells us about teaching. Educational Leadership,

49, 20 –25. Levine, A. (2006, September). Educating School Teachers. Washington, D.C.: Education Schools Project,

1-12.

41

Loughran, J.J. (2002). Effective reflective practice: In search of meaning in learning about teaching.

Journal of Teacher Education, 53, 1, 33-43. Loughran J. & Northfield J. (1996). Opening the classroom door: Teacher researcher learner. London:

Falmer Press Maturana, H. R. & Varela, F. J. (1992). The Tree of Knowledge: The biological roots of human

understanding. (Revised Edition). Boston, MA: Shambala. Miner, W. (2002). The reflective practitioner. Unpublished Manuscript, Truman State University. Piaget, J., Tomlinson, J., & Tomlinson, A. (2007). The Child's Conception of the World. Lanham:

Rowman & Littlefield. Piaget, J. (1973). To understand is to invent: The future of education. New York, NY: Viking Press. a Presidential Task Force on Psychology in Education American Psychological Association (1993).

Learner-centered psychological principles: Guidelines for school redesign and reform. APA & McREL.

Reiman, A.J. (1999). What is reflective practice in teaching? From Guided reflective practice. Raleigh:

N.C. State University (http://www.ncsu.edu/mctp/reflection/reflective_practice.html ) Richardson, G. (1990). Position paper on Lee Shulman. Unpublished Manuscript, Truman State

University (formerly Northeast Missouri State University). Richardson, V. (1996). The case for formal research and practical inquiry in teacher education. In F. B.

Murray (Ed.), The teacher educator’s handbook: Building a knowledge base for the preparation of teachers. San Francisco, CA: Josey-Bass, 715-737.

Rosenshine, B. and Stevens, R. (1986). Teaching functions. Handbook of Research on Teaching (3rd

ed.). New York, NY: MacMillan Publishing Company. Schon, D. (1990). Educating the reflective practitioner. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers. Schwab, J. (1983). The practical four: Something for curriculum professors to do. Curriculum Inquiry, 13,

239-65. Serafini, F. (April, 2002). Reflective practice and learning. Primary Voices K-6, 10(4), 2-6. Shepard, L.A. (1995, February). Using assessment to improve learning. Educational Leadership 52, 38-

43. Shulman, L. (1986a). Paradigms and research programs in the study of teaching: A contemporary

perspective. Handbook of Research on Teaching (3rd ed.). New York, NY: MacMillan Publishing Company.

Shulman, L. (1986b). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher,

15(2), 4-14. Shulman, L. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational

Review, 57(1), 1-22. Shulman, L. (2004). The Wisdom of Practice: Essays on Teaching, Learning, and Learning to Teach. San

Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. 384-397.

42

Slavin, R. E. (1994). A practical guide to cooperative learning. Needham, MA: Allyn and Bacon. Smith, P. (April, 2002). A reflection on reflection. Primary Voices K-6, 10(4), 31-34. Spence, L.D. (Nov/Dec. 2001). The case against teaching. Change. Pp. 11-19 Tom, A. (1980). Teaching as a moral craft: A metaphor for teaching and teacher education. Curriculum

Inquiry, 10, 317-23. Truman State University. General/Graduate Catalog 2008-2009. Online: http://catalog.truman.edu/ Wiggins, G. (2005, Expanded 2

nd edition). Understanding by Design. Alexandria, VA: Association for

Supervision and Curriculum Development., 370 Pp. Wiggins, G. (1996, December/1997, January). Practicing what we preach in designing authentic

assessments. Educational Leadership, 53, 18-25 Wiggins, G. (1996). Honesty and Fairness: Toward Better Grading and Reporting. T. Guskey

Communicating Student Learning. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, 141-177.

Wiggins, G. (1995). Designing performance assessment tasks. Education Update (37, 6). Published by

Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, 1-8. Yost, D.S., Sentner, S.M., Forlenza-Bailey, A. (2000). An examination of the construct of critical reflection:

Implications for teacher education programming in the 21st Century. Journal of Teacher Education, 51(1), 39-49.

Zeichner, K. (1983). Alternative paradigms of teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education, 34(3), 3-

9. Zeichner, K. & Liston, D. (1996). Reflective teaching: An introduction. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum

Associates, Publishers. Zeichner, K. and Liston, D. (1987). Teaching student teachers to reflect. Harvard Educational Review,

57(1), 23-48. Zoubeida, D. & D’Ambrosio, B. (1996) History, philosophy, and sociology of science and mathematics. In

F. B. Murray (Ed.), The teacher educator’s handbook: Building a knowledge base for the preparation of teachers (pp. 245-260). San Francisco, CA: Josey-Bass

43