Teaching at Work


Volume 1

Series Editor:

Yeping Li, Texas A&M University, College Station, USA

International Advisory Board:

Miriam Ben-Peretz, University of Haifa, Israel
Cheryl J. Craig, University of Houston, USA
Jennifer Gore, University of Newcastle, Australia
Stephanie L. Knight, Pennsylvania State University, USA
Allen Yuk Lun Leung, Hong Kong Baptist University, Hong Kong
Ian Menter, University of Oxford, UK
Yolanda N. Padrón, Texas A&M University, USA
Hersh C. Waxman, Texas A&M University, USA


Advances in Teaching and Teacher Education is an international book series
that aims to provide an important outlet for sharing the state-of-the-art research,
knowledge, and practices of teaching and teacher education. The series helps
promote the discussion, improvement, and assessment of teachers’ quality, teaching,
and instructional innovations including technology integration at all school levels as
well as through teacher education around the world. With no specific restriction to
disciplines, the series strives to address and synthesize different aspects and stages
in teaching and teacher professional development both within and across disciplines,
various interactions throughout the process of instructional activities and teacher
education from various theoretical, policy, psychological, socio-cultural, or cross-
cultural perspectives. The series features books that are contributed by researchers,
teacher educators, instructional specialists, and practitioners from different education

For further information:

Teaching at Work

Edited by
Yeping Li and Janet Hammer
Texas A&M University, USA

A C.I.P. record for this book is available from the Library of Congress.

ISBN: 978-94-6300-080-2 (paperback)
ISBN: 978-94-6300-081-9 (hardback)
ISBN: 978-94-6300-082-6 (e-book)

Published by: Sense Publishers,
P.O. Box 21858,
3001 AW Rotterdam,
The Netherlands

Printed on acid-free paper

All Rights Reserved © 2015 Sense Publishers

No part of this work may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted
in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, microfilming,
recording or otherwise, without written permission from the Publisher, with the
exception of any material supplied specifically for the purpose of being entered and
executed on a computer system, for exclusive use by the purchaser of the work.

Preservice Teachers’ Problem-Solving Lesson Engagement and Knowledge and Beliefs about Teaching for Equity 51 Trina J. Waxman. New Directions. and Those Who Do Not Travel Read Only One Page (St. Goldsby and Tingting Ma 5. Edie Cassell and Burcu Ates 6. Nancy Dubinski Weber. Ayse Tugba Oner. TABLE OF CONTENTS Acknowledgementsvii Part 1: Introduction and Perspectives 1. Malatesha Joshi Part 2: Selected Approaches and Practices in Teaching and Teacher Preparation 4. Preparing Preservice Teachers for Diverse Urban Classrooms 123 Kamala Williams and Norvella Carter v . Dianne S. Franco-Fuenmayor and Kayla B. Rollins 3. Subtracting Stereotypes through Studying Abroad: The World Is a Book. Indiogine. Enrico P. Changing Preservice Teachers’ Attitudes Toward Linguistic Diversity by Introducing a World Englishes Perspective 81 Zohreh R. Gerald Kulm. Teaching at Work: Innovating and Sharing Teaching Approaches and Practices to Advance Teacher Preparation 3 Yeping Li and Janet Hammer 2. S. and Policy Implications 9 Hersh C. Susana E. Davis. Research-Based Approaches for Identifying and Assessing Effective Teaching Practices: Challenges. Janet Hammer and Sunni Sonnenburg 7. Eslami. Connecting Research and Practice through Teacher Knowledge 29 Emily Binks-Cantrell and R. Augustine) 105 Cynthia Boettcher.

Green. Mentoring Viewed through an Open Classroom Experience 235 Dianne S. Modeling the “Write” Teaching Practices: Instructor Influences on Preservice Teachers 145 Tracey S. Hodges. Minding the Gap: Mentoring Undergraduate Preservice Teachers in Educational Research 171 Katherine Landau Wright. Commitment. Amanda D. Douglass 10. April G. and Innovation 253 Douglas J. Erin McTigue and April G. Timothy N. Martha R. Franks. Douglass. Katherine Landau Wright and  Anna de La Garza 9. Walters and Liangyan Wang 12. Goldsby and Mary Figuero-Charles Part 3: Commentary 13. Palmer Index261 vi .TABLE OF CONTENTS 8. The Examined Life: Using Digital Stories to Develop the Reflective Capabilities of Preservice Teachers about Culture and Diversity 211 Lynne Masel Walters. Erin McTigue. Tracey S. Quality Teaching and Teacher Preparation: Challenges. Hodges. Technology Integration and Preservice Teachers: Theory and Practice 193 Robin Rackley and Radhika Viruru 11. Nancy Dubinski Weber.

Their collective efforts helped ensure this book’s quality. This book would not have been possible without the dedicated group of more than 30 contributors who have been our colleagues and friends over the years and we thank them for their contributions. With the launch of a new book series. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This book is a themed collection of chapters on the important topic of teaching and teacher education. they are dedicated to the improvement of teaching and teacher preparation. the book differs from many other volumes. The volume is not typical. as it contains several unique features that we would like to highlight as follows. The volume presents collaborations stemmed from an open classroom program that started about three years ago. this volume presents a starting point for expanded and increased collaborations within and across institutions to advance teaching and teacher education. This group of contributors also worked together as a team to review chapters. The book series aims to provide a platform that can help facilitate important on-going discussion about teaching and teacher education nationally and internationally. Their collaborations demonstrate joint efforts of many faculty members across tracks and ranks and together with graduate students. it is an edited volume on a specific theme. 2. 1. reflection. Similar to many other books. 3. The faculty of this department take pride in their work of preparing quality educators. We want to take this opportunity to thank and acknowledge all of those who have been involved in the process of preparing this book. especially in times of change. as it embodies close collaborations of 35 scholars who work in the same large department at a Research Tier I University. The open classroom program has fostered the spirit of pursuing excellence in teaching and teacher education through sharing. We hope the inaugural volume will reach a broad global readership. and collaboration. vii . At the same time. This volume goes beyond regular open classroom visits and organized discussions on Fridays to develop scholarship on teaching and teacher education.

Their reviews and comments helped improve the quality of many chapters. They include: Lynn Burlbaw. this book’s timely publication would not have been possible without Michel and his team. Mónica Vásquez Neshyba. we want to thank Carol Gonzalez for her assistance in formatting many chapters of this book and Michel Lokhorst (a publisher at Sense Publishers) and Jolanda Karada for their professional assistance in making this publication a smooth and pleasant experience. Finally. Valerie Hill-Jackson. Quentin Dixon. Patricia Larke. and Julie Singleton. L. Mary Margaret Capraro. As the first volume of the new book series on “Advances in Teaching and Teacher Education”.ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Thanks also go to a group of peers who took the time to help review many chapters of the book. viii .


Teaching at work. teaching. . Li & J. YEPING LI AND JANET HAMMER 1. sharing and pursuing excellence in teaching and teacher preparation by a group of teacher educators and researchers who have been involved in teaching and teacher preparation for many years. still needs more systematic studies to identify what helps determine good teaching practices and what helps make a good teacher. as a professional practice. 3–8. Teaching at Work. Everyone is a teacher in some form. TEACHING AT WORK Innovating and Sharing Teaching Approaches and Practices to Advance Teacher Preparation INTRODUCTION Teaching plays an important role in all of our lives and provides us opportunities to learn from others including parents. Rather. It can occur in formal as well as informal settings and is a form of practice that is so common in our society that it often goes unnoticed. refers to three related. (3) teaching helps to prepare preservice teachers through teacher preparation programs for their future roles as classroom teachers. This book is sparked by the on-going efforts in innovating. nor a book that provides a bag of ‘tricks’ for others’ daily usage. Hammer (Eds. this is a book by teacher educators to share their instructional approaches and practices in teacher preparation with reflection. and of course. however. often supported with collected evidence of preservice teachers’ learning. This is not a book of rhetoric debates about the nature of high-quality teaching. our classroom teachers. The same is the case when parents use Band-Aids to take care of their child’s minor scratches but are not trained in the professional practice as medical doctors to take care of their child’s broken arm. friends. © 2015 Sense Publishers. yet different meanings: (1) good teaching makes a difference in students’ learning.). Y. not everyone engages in teaching as a professional practice. The title. In contrast to medical doctors’ practices. The title of the book highlights the nature of the book as follows. (2) teaching can be taken as a platform to promote scholarly discussion and to study what defines and demonstrates good teaching. All rights reserved.

which is the focus of this book. In addressing this shortage. Li. there are a very limited number of books available on teaching in a teacher preparation program. and assessing classroom instruction. this book is designed to present and share many teaching approaches and practices that have been used and valued by a group of teacher educators who also uphold teaching improvement as a scholarly pursuit. The general scope of teaching at work recognizes the importance of good teaching in students’ learning at all levels. teaching can be taken as a platform to promote scholarly discussion and to study what defines and demonstrates good teaching. 2010. 2009) as well as in different subject areas (e. The readers can find many books available on teaching in K-12 education within and across education systems (e. where teaching is expected to help students learn knowledge and skills but not necessarily help students become qualified educators. good teaching makes a difference in students’ learning. it also includes good teaching practices developed and used in teacher preparation. pre-kindergarten through grade twelve as well as in a university setting. 2004.. This book is designed to put together such a set of chapters contributed by those teacher educators who are taking teaching not only as a professional practice. at the time when studies on teaching in teacher education programs are long overdue. Indeed. which is scholarship development on teaching and its quality improvement. implementing.Y. Richardson. 1999). In these settings. planning. this book presents a new and important scholarship on teaching. What makes this set of chapters unique is that they are the result of collaborative efforts focusing on teaching in a large teacher preparation program in a research tier I institution in the U. 2010). As part of these collaborative efforts.S. Gay. teaching differs from the case in K-12 education. This meaning highlights the focus of the book. 2013.. However. Saha & Dworkin. refers to all types of classroom and online instruction.. Osborne & Dillon. Silver & Li. 2014. 2001. Li & J. This meaning helps make the book different from many others that aim to provide practical suggestions for designing. Li & Huang. but also modeling good teaching practices for preservice teachers in an effort to prepare them for their future classrooms.g. teaching is being taken as the ‘subject’ of scholarly inquiry with and through an ‘open classroom’ 4 . Certainly. Stigler & Hiebert. Hammer The first meaning.g. The second meaning. refers to such special settings where teaching becomes the subject of scholarly discussion and study. and about teaching in general (e.g. The third meaning of this book’s title refers to such settings where the students are preservice teachers and the preparation of excellent teachers becomes the mission. Bain.

Hammer. as we not only work closely together in leading and managing the department’s teacher preparation programs. This book also presents a unique collaboration between two scholars: Yeping Li and Janet Hammer. this book also represents the first of its kind in connecting scholarly collaboration and administrations. In the following sub-sections. Teaching at Work approach. We are convinced that upholding teaching as a professional practice and its study as a scholarly pursuit. has been living in the United States for over 20 years and studying mathematics instruction in K-12 classrooms and teacher education programs between the East and the West (e. Part I: Introduction and Perspectives The first part provides an overview of the book and select perspectives on identifying and assessing effective teaching practices and on the importance 5 . as this book presents. Li. and Part III: Commentary (1 chapter). we will provide brief summaries for Parts I-III. is an award-winning educator and has insight into the traits of high-quality teaching and what it takes to develop excellent teachers in the United States. but also encourage close collaborations among different tracks of faculty and graduate students within the department. It is in the spirit of pursuing excellence in teaching and discussing various instructional approaches and practices in teacher preparation through classroom observation and open discussion that we would like to share with you what we have learned.g. OVERVIEW OF THE BOOK This book is structured in three parts that include a total of 13 chapters: Part I: Introduction and Perspectives (3 chapters). mathematics teacher and teacher educator in China have provided great sources for reflection on issues related to teaching and teacher education. we appreciate the valuable opportunities of learning from our contributors and colleagues. Through editing this volume. Moreover. Teaching is not only what we do normally as faculty members. His previous experiences as a student. 2014). provides a unique lens for educators in different teacher education programs to work closely together to reflect upon and improve teaching. Li. with over 25 years teaching experience in K-12 classrooms and teacher preparation programs. but also our shared interest from different perspectives. Part II: Selected Approaches and Practices in Teaching and Teacher Preparation (9 chapters).. Silver & Li. as an educator and researcher originally from China.

Preparing teachers with the knowledge necessary for research-based reading instruction thus holds the promise of developing and delivering effective teaching. effective teaching practices and approaches. skill sets and dispositions.). Nevertheless. including: preservice teachers’ awareness of teaching for diversity and knowledge and the ability to employ problem-solving heuristics in Chapter 4 (Davis et al. the authors argue that teachers are key to the development and delivery of research- based instruction that will lead to student’s success. efforts to improve teaching have led to the development of different perspectives and approaches in identifying and assessing effective teaching practices. Waxman and his colleagues (this book) provide a review of four approaches that have been developed and used to identify and assess the effectiveness of teaching practices. preservice teachers’ attitudes toward linguistic diversity in Chapter 5 (Eslami et al. The chapter by Cantrell and Joshi (this book) highlights the importance of teachers’ knowledge for making effective teaching possible.Y. readers can learn from reading the chapters included in this section several important aspects of teaching in a teacher preparation program. No universal agreement is in existence to define and assess effective teaching practices. By examining teaching beyond daily practices. Because the quality of teaching is elusive. Specifically. Li & J. Designing and delivering teaching to preservice teachers needs careful consideration recognizing that the students must be prepared for tomorrow’s classrooms. In particular. preservice teachers can and shall obtain from their program studies. and preservice teachers’ learning of technology integration in teaching in Chapter 6 . Hammer of teachers’ knowledge in teaching.).). preservice teachers’ preparation for teaching in diverse urban schools in Chapter 7 (Willams and Carter). With the implicit assumption about the effectiveness of research-based instruction. Part II: Selected Approaches and Practices in Teaching and Teacher Preparation Making teaching effective within a teacher preparation program is more complicated than the act of delivering knowledge itself. its effectiveness can be defined and affected by many different factors. Also important when working with preservice teachers is the consistent modeling of effective teaching practices in order to help guide their learning. By providing knowledge. many chapters in Part II highlight important aspects that preservice teachers can and shall learn for tomorrow’s classrooms through program studies. preservice teachers’ world views in Chapter 6 (Boettcher et al.

including modeling.) and Chapter 12 (Goldsby and Figuero-Charles). these chapters provide valuable suggestions to help prepare preservice teachers for teaching in tomorrow’s schools. where Palmer highlights challenges that teacher education programs face. mentoring and digital storytelling. Teaching at Work 10 (Rackley and Viruru). preservice teachers’ learning. as presented in Chapter 11 (Walters et al. Part III: Commentary The book concludes with a chapter in Part III. even more so in our current rapidly changing society. we want to inform readers that this book is not put together to ‘ignore’ learning. shows another promising method that can be used to develop preservice teachers’ global competence and consciousness perception about culture and diversity through reflection and writing. With the ever-increasing diverse student population and classroom environment. (this book) presents a quasi-experimental study that shows possible effects of modeling the “write” teaching practices for preservice teachers. In 7 . The use of digital storytelling approach. We do hope that the book. This book makes timely knowledge contribution and is positioned to stimulate further discussion and exploration. specific teaching practices and approaches are also shared in these chapters demonstrating the work of teacher educators within different content. Moreover. respectively. these chapters provide rich ideas and useful information about teaching and teacher education.). In Chapter 9 (Wright et al. At the same time. the contributors present their use of a mentoring approach in educating undergraduate preservice teachers and graduate students. in this case. Various research methods are employed by these contributors to document their teaching effectiveness. The chapter by Hodges et al. As a collection. Several other chapters in Part II also highlight some other teaching practices and approaches that are developed and used in preservice teacher preparation or graduate courses. as outlined above. Also explained in the beginning are the several meanings that this title is designed to contain. FINAL THOUGHTS The book’s title indicates the content of this book. provides much useful information about different teaching practices and approaches developed and used in teacher preparation. Addressing these challenges calls for more collaborations and knowledge development in teacher preparation.

(Eds. (2009). readers should know that preservice teachers and their learning are actually at the center of different teaching practices and approaches that are discussed in this book. The teaching gap: Best ideas from the world’s teachers for improving education in the classroom. & Dworkin. A. and practice. Gay. Boston. Learning and Culture College of Education and Human Development Texas A&M University. NY: Springer. E.. research. DC: American Education Research Association. & Dillon. NY: Routledge. (2010).. J. International handbook of research on teachers and teaching.. (2010). (2014). Switzerland: Springer Publishing.). Li. Just as we can learn from our own teaching through practice and reflection. USA 8 . needs systematic studies. R. & Li. but rather learning is the focus. New York.   Yeping Li Department of Teaching.. What the best college teachers do. NY: The Free Press. G. NY: Teachers College Press. New York.Y. (1999). Osborne. (2013). Li & J. especially in teacher preparation where much still remains to be explored. Washington. W. Culturally responsive teaching: Theory. How Chinese teach mathematics and improve teaching. Teaching. Silver.). Saha.). Stigler. Transforming mathematics instruction: Multiple approaches and practices.). New York. (2001). J. Handbook of research on teaching (4th ed. Cham. Good practice in science teaching: What research has to say. (Ed. S. Y. Richardson.. as a professional practice. Teaching is never meant to be a purpose in itself for what readers can learn from this book. Li.). & Hiebert. Hammer fact. V. K. London: Open University Press. & Huang. (2004). USA Janet Hammer Department of Teaching.. (Eds. L. REFERENCES Bain. MA: Harvard University Press. Y. G. Learning and Culture College of Education and Human Development Texas A&M University. we also learn about teaching through sharing and collaboration. A. J. New York. (Eds. J.

& Rivera. . Haycock. 2010. SUSANA E. New Directions. 2011. the federal government has recently developed a 2014 initiative “Excellent Educators for All” that requires states to develop plans for providing “effective educators” for all students. 2009). NANCY DUBINSKI WEBER. and Policy Implications INTRODUCTION Research has found that having an effective teacher is one of the most influential factors that improve students’ academic achievement (Darling- Hammond. Rothman. Hammer (Eds. 2011). One of the challenges in addressing this problem of closing the gap of access to effective teachers is that there is considerable debate in the field regarding the identification and assessment of effective teaching practices Y. 2010. HERSH C. Unfortunately. 2011). Padrón. Students from high- poverty schools have also been found to have diminished opportunities to learn and receive a lower quality of classroom instruction than their more affluent peers from low-poverty schools (Boykin & Noguera. 2011. Camburn & Han. ROLLINS 2. 2010. the quality of teachers’ classroom instruction has also been found to vary dramatically within the same school thus creating an additional equity concern for students who do not have opportunities to learn from effective teachers (Day & Gu. Teaching at Work. 2008). Jerald. 2009. Waxman. the inequitable distribution of high- quality teachers within and across schools is one of our most serious educational problems (Darling-Hammond. In addition. 2014). Li & J. 2014). High-poverty schools that serve predominantly minority and poor students have been found to typically have less-experienced and less-qualified teachers than low-poverty schools (Almy & Theokas.). WAXMAN. 9–27. Duncan & Murnane. Shin. © 2015 Sense Publishers. To address these concerns of providing equal access to good teachers to students of all ethnic and socioeconomic backgrounds. RESEARCH-BASED APPROACHES FOR IDENTIFYING AND ASSESSING EFFECTIVE TEACHING PRACTICES Challenges. This lack of consistency across classrooms and grade levels also has been found to interfere with student learning (Duncan & Murnane. & Wilkins. All rights reserved. FRANCO-FUENMAYOR AND KAYLA B.

For example. et. 3). The failure to systematically identify effective teaching practices has resulted in policymakers trying to evaluate teachers and teachings based solely on student test scores (Cuban. Elmore. al. and Teitel (2009) describe this problem. 2013). Fiarman.5 was a medium effect. 10 . 2013). & Little. Consequently.8 was a large effect. and d = 0. and (d) value-added measures of teacher evaluation. Although there is no uniform standard for interpreting effect sizes. The present chapter describes four of the most prevalent approaches that are currently used to identify and assess effective teaching. A description of each approach follows in the sections below. and then summarize some of the strengths and weaknesses of the approach. 2012).0 indicates that a particular teaching practice increases student’ academic achievement by standard deviation. They are (a) meta-analyses or research syntheses of quantitative studies in the field. d = 0. These conflicting perspectives and approaches about identifying effective teachers have also impacted federal. Cohen (1988) suggested that d = 0. state.H. As City. Goe. (c) systematic classroom observation. (Darling-Hammond. “one of the greatest barriers to school improvement is the lack of an agreed-upon definition of what quality instruction looks like” (p. Bell. For each of these four approaches. Researchers’ different perspectives and approaches to defining and measuring the construct of teacher effectiveness has resulted in contradictory findings related to the critical question of identifying and evaluating effective teachers (Camburn & Han. META-ANALYTIC APPROACHES For the past three decades. and local educational policy regarding teacher evaluation and how to determine teacher effectiveness. 2008. an effect size of d = 1. The effect size or scale that is used in meta-analysis is “d” or the standard deviation unit that is typically created by subtracting the mean of the control group from the mean of the treatment group and dividing the difference by the pooled sample standard deviation. meta-analyses or quantitative research syntheses of studies have helped education become a more evidence-based field. Roehrig. (b) checklists of teaching skills and strategies. this identification and measurement issue is one of the most important educational issues today. WAXMAN et al. 2011. the qualities they generally use to define effective teaching. Meta- analysis is a method that summarizes prior research on specific instructional programs or teaching behaviors and quantifies how much of an impact that particular teaching practice has on students’ academic achievement. C.2 was a small effect. we will explain the rationale of the approach.

(c) classroom discussion (d = 0. S. it included many meta-analytic studies that focused on teaching approaches and instructional strategies. 2012) findings revealed that the top teaching strategies based on overall effect sizes are (a) teacher credibility (d = 0. & Pollock. (f) reciprocal teaching (d = 0. RESEARCH-BASED APPROACHES There have been over a thousand meta-analyses conducted in education during this period (Hattie.75).g.e. products. Hattie’s (2009. Department of Education (USDOE). 2001). John Hattie’s Visible Learning: A Synthesis of Over 800 Meta-Analyses Related to Achievement (2009) is one of the most comprehensive meta-syntheses in education. randomized controlled trials and quasi-experimental designs that established equivalence in matched control designs) have often resulted in the WWC being called the “what doesn’t work clearinghouse’ due to the large number of studies that have not met the criteria for selection.90). 2009. and policies in education. 2007. and (g) teacher student-relationships (d = 0.74). (d) teacher clarity (d = 0.72). (e) feedback (d = 0. teaching behaviors and practices) that lead to improved student outcomes. this evidence-based approach has been strongly promoted by the U. 2012) and researchers have begun summarizing these meta-analyses to specifically focus on those salient education processes (e. Hattie’s research has also been rewritten for preservice and in-service teachers so that they could apply the principles to any classroom in the world (Hattie. By focusing on the results from high-quality research. Pickering.75).82). Marzano. In the past decade. practices. Other educators like Robert Marzano have similarly summarized the findings of meta-analyses and developed professional development programs for teachers based on those findings (Marzano.90). Hattie (2009) found that teachers’ active involvement in teaching has greater effects on student learning as compared to teaching practices where the teacher is less involved or not involved at all. One of the major concerns with meta-analyses and evidence-based education approaches is that they typically only focus on what is scientifically “proven” to be effective for improving students’ academic 11 . 2012). Overall. His major perspective for effective teaching is that student learning needs to be visible to teachers and that teachers need to make teaching visible to students so that they can become their own teachers.. The What Works Clearinghouse (WWC) was established by the USDOE to review the research on different programs. the WWC tries to answer the question “What works in education?” Unfortunately. the rigorous criteria for selecting studies to be reviewed by the WWC (i. (b) providing formative evaluation (d = 0..

g. Deborah Ball and her University of Michigan colleagues have also initiated a 12 . size of school. feedback. A third concern is that meta-analyses and meta-syntheses generally aggregate the findings from individual studies and often ignore emphasizing important individual student or school contextual variables that may mediate the overall effects.g. sex. 2008). 1990). research on effective teaching typically consisted of subjective data based on personal and anecdotal accounts of effective teaching (Nuthall & Alton-Lee. however.H. A second concern is that most meta-analyses only include experimental or quasi-experimental studies that report appropriate quantitative statistics.).. Teach Like a Champion: 49 Techniques that Put Students on the Path to College. CHECKLIST APPROACHES Historically. Recently. Payne. In other words. These accounts have often developed into specific checklists of teacher behaviors or teaching practices that educators argue leads to improved student outcomes. A final concern with the meta-analytic and “what works” approach is that it assumes that evidence only comes from research and it ignores the value of teacher expertise and experience (Hargreaves & Fullan. ethnicity. 2012). and Bryan Goodwin’s (2013). This is an important selection bias that should always be considered when making assertions from meta- analytic research. The 12 Touchstones of Good Teaching: A Checklist for Staying Focused Everyday are good examples of the recent checklist approach. In typical classroom situations. achievement and they often ignore examining the impact of instructional practices and programs on other important student outcomes such as engagement in learning or motivation to learn (Hargreaves & Fullan. In other words. socio-economic status.. and location of school) and student characteristics (e. these variables occur simultaneously and are considered related components of quality instruction. educators and researchers have re-emphasized this approach and begun developing checklists to identify and assess teaching practices. A fourth major concern is that individual meta-analyses often focus on individual variables like teacher clarity. etc. and classroom discussion. meta-analyses often ignore key school demographics (e. C. meta-analyses often simplify the instructional process to focus on individual variables rather than clusters of variables that typically comprise classroom instruction. Several popular education books such as Doug Lemov’s (2010). Meta-analyses ignore all qualitative research that has made important contributions to the field of teaching. WAXMAN et al. 2012.

and peer-evaluation. and to help differentiate between the quality levels of teacher instruction as well as provide a means for gauging instructional practices and diagnosing the overall quality of an individual teacher. Checklists provide a common language for teachers and researchers to analyze. Often. procedures.). and evaluators. 2012). and examples to communicating with parents and other professionals. performance assessments are developed from these checklists and professional development programs are designed based on these assessments that measure these specific practices. Checklists can be used: (a) as a means for self. outline several benefits of checklists. These practices are very diverse and range from making content explicit through explanation. representations. Teachers are often overwhelmed by their day-to-day responsibilities and value meaningful feedback that helps them develop their 13 . administrators. This common language facilitates clear communication between teachers. RESEARCH-BASED APPROACHES project called TeachingWorks that focuses on 19 high-leverage practices that are hypothesized to improve student outcomes. These high-leverage practices are intended to be a comprehensive framework that can be used for the professional preparation of teachers. (c) to allow administrators and decision-makers to compare and contrast the teaching practices of more. Many of these checklist approaches are used for teacher evaluation and preparation purposes that advocate a more practice-oriented perspective for teachers’ professional development (Ball & Forzani. Evaluations based on a checklist of strategies can be particularly accessible for teachers as they are less inclined to refer to published research. Some additional high-level practices include designing a sequence of lessons toward a specific learning goal and implementing organizational routines..and less-effective teachers. discuss. and reflect on quality teaching practices (Chen et al.). allowing for specific feedback on strengths and weaknesses as well as areas for improvement and informs professional development needs assessments (Chen et al. Chen and colleagues. 2012). (b) as a diagnostic tool for evaluators to assess teaching practices and overall teaching quality. modeling. and strategies to support a learning environment. which typically addresses achievement gains on standardized exams. 2009). Published research generally does not easily translate to strategies that can be immediately implemented in classrooms to address “today’s problems” (Goldstein. The evaluation of teaching practices fosters improved quality of teaching for individual teachers by analyzing the extent to which specific strategies are successfully implemented (Chen et al.

(d) a specific observational focus. 2009). 2012). and (i) a method to process and analyze data (Stallings & Mohlman. (h) a method to record the data. Third. 2003). (f) a unit of time. improve students’ retention of previously learned material. 2003). 2004). 1988). practice to increase positive student academic outcomes. researchers have begun to use more objective and reliable measures of systematic classroom observations in order to develop a scientific basis to teaching (Hilberg Waxman. checklists are often laundry lists of simple techniques that over-simplify the complexity of teaching and distract educators from focusing on aspects of teaching that are not easily measured (Hargreaves & Fullan. Systematic classroom observation is a quantitative method of measuring classroom behaviors from direct observations that specify both the events and behaviors that are to be observed and how they are to be recorded (Waxman. motivate students and promote academic effort. (c) the training procedures for observers. Descriptive observational studies 14 . & Tharp. (b) the operational definitions of all the observed behaviors.H. so providing teachers with feedback that helps them improve efficiency and efficacy for their practice will help them manage their classrooms. Improving student education and learning is highly dependent upon teacher preparation and support (Ball & Forzani. the behaviors included on the checklists are often derived from personal experiences or individual’s perceptions regarding the importance of individual practices. (e) a setting. data collected from this procedure focus on the frequency with which specific behaviors or types of behavior occurred in the classroom and the amount of time they occurred. these checklists are often used to identify deficiencies in classroom practice rather than focus on teachers’ strengths and assets. WAXMAN et al. (g) an observation schedule. 2012). and deliver effective and engaging instruction (Goldstein. CLASSROOM OBSERVATION APPROACHES Classroom observation approaches to examine effective teaching have been prevalent for decades and they generally consist of systematic classroom observation or walkthrough instruments. Systematic classroom observation has often been used to provide a description of current classroom instructional practices and to identify instructional concerns (Waxman. Generally. C. First. Second. For the past several decades. There are a number of concerns with the use of checklists to assess effective teaching. There are several elements that are common to most observational systems: (a) a purpose for the observation.

small-group instruction. 2011). 2008).g. and Edwards (2010) describe the common elements of a classroom walkthrough as: (a) informal and brief. many of the traditional evaluation systems fail to identify instructional areas in need of development or teachers that are most effective. & Brown. City. & Deci.” Instructional rounds are based on the medical rounds model and they integrate improvement strategies in their approach. Braziel. teacher explanations and feedback) are implemented in the classroom as well as to evaluate programs and the fidelity of program implementation. and teachers. Smith. Mulhern. Waxman. research has found that many of these evaluation systems rate most teachers as proficient or highly proficient even when schools are failing to meet state standards (Weisberg. and (g) having the improvement of student achievement as its ultimate goal. These typically are short observations (e. A more recent observational approach that is also being used both for research and evaluative feedback purposes is the walkthrough or walkabout instrument that is designed to obtain multiple snapshots of classroom practices in order to provide a rich data picture (Early. RESEARCH-BASED APPROACHES allow researchers to examine the extent to which specific instructional practices (e. Stout. Good & Brophy. Stout. (d) teacher expectations. Results from the 15 . (b) effective use of time. Additionally. however. 2008).. In an effort to improve classroom instruction in Chicago Public Schools. 2009). instructional leaders. 2010. Classroom observation approaches have long served as the foundation of traditional teacher evaluation systems. Most importantly. (e) focused on specific elements to improve teaching and learning.g. the Excellence for Teaching Pilot using the Charlotte Danielson Framework for Teaching was launched in 44 elementary schools in the first year and expanded to 101 elementary schools in the second year (Sartain. Kachur. (d) not intended for formal teacher evaluation purposes. 2014. Cude. 2011. & Keeling. and (e) good classroom management predict students’ academic achievement (Good. (b) involving administrators. & Edwards. Sexton. & Smith. Stoelinga. (c) quick snapshots of classroom activities—instructional and curricular.. classroom observation research has yielded scientific evidence that the teaching practices like (a) opportunity to learn. Rogge. Elmore. and Teitel (2009) have a specific type of the walkthrough that they call “instructional rounds. (c) focus on meaning and practice. Kachur. 5 – 20 minutes) that focus on specific teacher behaviors and general classroom environment measures in the classroom. Fiarman. Systematic classroom observation has also been used to provide individualized feedback to teachers regarding their classroom instruction. (f) an opportunity to give feedback to teachers for reflection on their instruction.

Stoelinga. (b) classroom organization. which suggests that much of the effect that teachers and the classroom have on student learning is found in the teacher- student interactions. (b) conduct more observations for struggling 16 . Principals and administrators. Additional concerns regarding whether this observational approach will lead to improved teaching and student outcomes involve the expertise of the observer. 2009).000 classroom observations indicated that teacher-student interactions across grade levels fit into three domains: (a) emotional support. 2013. critics of current practices argue that classroom observations have failed to provide teachers with the necessary feedback to improve their instructional practices (Sartain. Hamre and colleagues (2013) developed the Teaching through Interactions framework. 2013). While classroom observation instruments have a primary role in examining effective teaching. 2013). and (c) instructional support. feedback from classroom observations is still viewed as a crucial aspect to making changes in instructional practices in order to ultimately impact student learning. 2011. however. it has been noted that the observation instruments used are often “generic” in regard to content area and grade level observed indicating the feedback from the observation lacks the specificity needed for instructional changes. Furthermore. WAXMAN et al. Hill & Grossman. While there are many critics regarding current observational practices. & Brown. teachers are typically only observed two to four times per year making it unlikely that such infrequent feedback can have a meaningful impact on classroom instruction. School principals or other administrators often conduct classroom observations that are used for the purpose of teacher evaluation and instructional feedback (Hill & Grossman. pilot study were promising and indicated that the classroom observation ratings were valid measures of teaching practice—students showed the most academic growth in classrooms where teachers received a high rating and the least academic growth in classrooms where teachers received a low rating. Additionally. Results from over 4.H. Hill and Grossman (2013) argue specific changes that should be made to current practices of using classroom observation to examine effective teaching including (a) develop content area specific observation protocols with appropriate instructional practices for the grade level being observed. The New Teacher Project. Classroom observation research along with studies using more indirect measures have revealed that instructional practices and levels of cognitive demand vary greatly from classroom to classroom within the same school (Rothman. C. often lack the instructional expertise for specific content areas making it nearly impossible to provide effective feedback.

Value-added is a measure of teachers’ contributions to the achievement growth of their students and the purpose of this approach is to determine how much a teacher contributes to student growth during the time students are in that teacher’s classroom.g. low SES students who have fewer opportunities for summer learning).S. have concluded that ratings of teacher effectiveness based on student test scores are too unreliable—and measure too many things (i. 2013).. This approach is strongly advocated by the U. VALUE-ADDED APPROACHES The most controversial approach for assessing and evaluating effective teaching is the use of value-added measures. and (c) consider the possibility of using content area observers (e. & Sudweeks. (b) simplify the observation instrument by condensing items that measure the same instructional aspects. The National Research Council and the Educational Testing Service. (b) based on state tests that do not measure growth and higher-order skills. and (c) provide meaningful formative feedback on lesson content and support adaptation efforts. Advocates of this approach argue that a teacher’s record of promoting achievement remains the strongest single predictor of the achievement gains of their future students (Kane & Staiger. Currently. S. Other critics of value-added measures are concerned that they are (a) based on one test given on one day. 2012).. department chairs) to provide more specific feedback than administrators. school demographics and student characteristics) other than the teacher—to be used to make high-stakes decisions.. It is believed that publicly reporting teachers’ effectiveness will be 17 . Additionally. RESEARCH-BASED APPROACHES teachers rather than fewer observations across all teachers. Department of Education and a key component of the U. many states have passed legislation to enforce that 30-50% of the teacher’s evaluation is linked to the student’s test scores on standardized tests (Everson. over 40 states in the United States have adopted “value-added” measures to evaluate teachers.g. Feinauer. The New Teacher Project (TNTP) (2013) recommended additional specific changes to be made to existing classroom observations practices including (a) removal of any items on the observation instrument that cannot be directly observed. among other research organizations. and (c) penalize teachers who serve the neediest students (e. Department of Education’s “Race to the Top” program. Other critics of value-added teacher evaluation argue that the majority of teachers do not teach in tested subjects or grades and as a consequence standardized student achievement data is not available to be used in their ratings. however.e.

and the school. average. below average. This difference in classification confuses users of value-added scores when comparing percentage changes in teacher designations if these are based on different numbers of performance groups.H. Scherrer (2012) points out that the “underlying assumptions of value-added modeling are dubious. and above average). Additionally. For example some have divided teachers in three groups according to how effective they are according to the student data (i. (2012) argue that it is crucial to understand how much teacher value-added estimates depend on the type of data and statistical models used. (b) using single or multiple cohorts of students. He considers that value-added models improve current accountability systems using status models to measure student performance on a one-time assessment and then compares it to a target level. Kersting and colleagues concluded that almost two-thirds of teachers remained in the same performance group across all conditions. WAXMAN et al. Additionally. 58).e. while others have divided teachers into quartiles when they report the percentage of teachers that either remained in the same group or changed categories.. 18 . they highlight that studies have divided the value-added distribution into different types of performance groups. at best” (p. Different methods for controlling for student prior learning accounted for about one-sixth of teacher reclassifications. 2012). It is important to understand the underlying assumptions of the value-added approach since there are different models that are commonly used. 2013). Consequently. They explored the effects of (a) differences among students in their prior learning. C. they found that differences in number of students used in the statistical model accounted for up to one-third of teacher reclassifications into different performance groups while single versus multiple cohort models accounted for about one-fifth. and (c) the number of students contributing to the value-added estimates for each teacher on the stability of value-added estimates. & Stigler. classroom. another reason among many why talented young people will avoid entering the teaching profession or leave just as they are becoming effective teachers (Darling-Hammond. Kersting et al. He also believes that this approach seems to “reward teachers for whom they teach and not how they teach” (p. Chen. Some value-added models rely exclusively on student test scores from previous grades and prior teacher effects to estimate the teacher’s contribution to current learning as opposed to other models that adjust for differences in regards to the student. 58). the latter not only include students’ test scores from the previous year. but also account for other background characteristics that could be related to student learning such as school level aggregates and other measures of classroom and school-level inputs (Kersting.

researchers question the methodological. Polasky. They advocate other ways of evaluating aspects of effective teaching and incorporating these into professional standards for teaching. Chetty. and Rockoff (2012) analyzed school-district data from grades 3–8 for 2. They argue that although policymakers are increasing the use of value-added models within educational evaluation and accountability systems. 2012). They concluded that value-added measures accurately predicted teachers’ impacts on test scores when they controlled for student characteristics. They also found that students who are assigned to high value-added teachers are more likely to attend college. multiple sources of data. technical. for example. Darling-Hammond. Amrein-Beardsley. and Rothstein (2012). summer learning loss.5 million children and linked it to information on their outcomes as young adults and the characteristics of their parents. They also emphasized that replacing a teacher whose value added is in the bottom five percent with an average teacher would increase students’ total lifetime incomes by a significant amount of money. and live in higher socioeconomic status neighborhoods. In contrast to Darling-Hammond et al. teachers’ value-added performance is affected by the students assigned to them. In fact. and Sloat (2013). et al.. and that value-added ratings cannot disentangle the many influences on student progress. Darling-Hammond and colleagues (2012) emphasize that value-added models of teacher effectiveness are inconsistent. as well as timely and meaningful feedback to teachers (Darling- Hammond. expert evaluators. prior teachers.e. Furthermore. who are critics of value-added models. class size. Collins. resources. but also by other factors such as school factors (i. curriculum). argue gains in student achievement are not only influenced by an individual teacher. describe the debate between policymakers and researchers in regards to value-added models and the evaluation of teacher effectiveness and educational quality. they recommend using other approaches to evaluate teachers’ performance. Advocates and critics of the value-added approach have led to much controversy in the field regarding whether this approach will lead to improved teaching and student outcomes. (2012). Friedman. earn a higher salary. Chetty and colleagues (2012) showed that standard value-added measures are not biased by the students assigned to each teacher when they statistically control for student 19 . they argued that teachers in grades 4-8 have large impacts on their students’ adult lives. RESEARCH-BASED APPROACHES In another study. and inferential attributes of these models. home environment. Haertel. Amrein-Beardsley. individual student needs. such as multiple classroom observations. as well as the kinds of tests used..

2011). the evaluation system should include (a) multiple systematic classroom observations of teachers. For example. In addition. may be detrimental to improving other important non-cognitive or socio-emotional outcomes such as motivation. 2011. Dymnicki. there needs to be more systematic programs of research that incorporate several of the distinct approaches described in this chapter. (b) student feedback or perceptions of teaching. 2012). & Schellinger. WAXMAN et al. value-added metrics successfully disentangle teachers’ impacts from the many other influences on student progress. but also through improved outcomes later in life such as students’ future earnings. for example. A second critical issue relates to the exclusive emphasis of some approaches on improving student test scores such as done with the value- added approaches. Furthermore. DISCUSSION In spite of the recent attention. yet there are very few studies focusing on teaching strategies or practices that promote these affective dimensions. In addition. Hence. and grit. One of the most serious problems related to the increased use of approaches for examining effective teaching is that there has been a proliferation of approaches prior to the completion of adequate research and evaluation examining their effectiveness. they should undergo systematic programs of research. These non-cognitive outcomes have been found to be critical in predicting students’ life success (Durlak. Taylor. effective teaching practices remains a construct with few agreed-up characteristics or descriptions (Tellez & Waxman. and (c) student achievement gains. feedback. Before certain approaches become widely implemented. Focusing on improving test scores. Tough. and professional development on effective teaching. Better ways of measuring and recognizing effective teaching practices need to be developed (Darling-Hammond. 2012). interpersonal skills. The MET project focuses on improving teaching and learning through better evaluation. 20 . They maintain that in order to make reliable and valid assessments of effective teachers. C.H. Weissberg. one of the more promising programs of research for examining and assessing effective teachers is being conducted by the Measures of Effective Teaching (MET) project from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation (Kaine & Staiger. 2006). They concluded that students who have high value-added teachers not only benefit from scoring higher on math and reading tests at the end of the school year. characteristics. this research needs to be widely disseminated so that their findings can be used to guide and improve practice. self-control.

Research on effective instructional practices often fails to take into account important individual student characteristics or school contextual differences that may differentially impact their relative effectiveness. & Garcia. Classroom contexts are diverse and educators need to focus on what works best. Similarly. the former director for the Institute of Education Sciences. assessment-driven instruction. Roehrig and her colleagues (2012). Waxman & Chen. Comprehensive theories of instruction are needed to provide us with explanations of which instructional practices are most important and how they should be combined in order to provide greater effects on student outcomes. (b) enhancing students’ motivation to learn. for example. and for whom. 2006). effective classroom instruction for English language learners (ELLs) may be different than instruction for non-ELLs (Waxman. A third major concern with most of these approaches for evaluating and assessing effective teaching is the lack of conceptual and theoretical models. 2007). argue that there are four dimensions of effective teaching that make up a dynamic. Classrooms are highly complex and generally consist of different domains or dimensions of teaching. (c) planning and delivering engaging. under what conditions. 2011. A final concern and policy implication is the need for researchers to collaborate with practitioners to design better research on assessing effective teaching. John Easton. highly-complex inter-rated system: (a) developing caring classroom communities. Padrón. we do not have an explicit specification of the model that provides us with an understanding of how these constructs impact each other during ongoing classroom instruction. RESEARCH-BASED APPROACHES there have been few studies examining teacher practices which specifically foster students’ resilience or internal protective factors that contribute to students’ academic and social success (Rivera & Waxman. and (d) supporting students’ deep processing and self-regulation. For example. Another important issue to address is whether the teaching practices described in this chapter are generic and effective for all students or are some instructional practices differentially effective for some students. has recently argued “our greatest challenge is in working better with practitioners and policy makers to use the research to make schools 21 . Although the dimensions or constructs of teaching have been identified in this model. Cuban (2013) describes this issue as the “black box of classrooms” because we have a lack of understanding of what actually happens in the classroom during instruction. effective classroom instruction for students in urban schools or high-poverty schools may be different than schools serving suburban or rural classrooms.

H. 14)”. The serious equity-related teacher quality issues that plague many students from high-poverty schools highlight the need for schools and teachers to begin using scientific evidence to determine effective teaching practices and then ensure that all students have access to high-quality teachers. The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching. Fishman. There is a critical need to develop a solid knowledge base on effective teaching 22 . 54). 2002. Berliner (2009) succinctly describes this issue. 1). “it is the tinkering by teachers and researchers and the study of their craft by the teachers themselves. that seems to me the most likely to pay off in improved education” (p. Furthermore. 2013- 14). and Sabelli (2011) similarly describe the emerging model of design-based implementation research that focuses on the persistent problems of practice from multiple stakeholders’ perspectives and calls for reconfiguring the roles of researchers and practitioners. (b) focus on the “ignorance” or biases in their own research. Andy Hargreaves and Michael Fullan (2012) argue that the “professional expertise is not just having and being aware of evidence. We strongly agree with their perspective and also maintain that educational researchers similarly need to be able to (a) be more mindful and reflective of the quality of their own work. Hargreaves and Fullan (2012) support this position by arguing that. Stokes. Professional Capital: Transforming Teaching in Every School. practitioners. & Grunow. WAXMAN et al. Such collaboration can lead to improved approaches for identifying and assessing effective teaching practices. it’s also about knowing how to judge the evidence and knowing what to do with it” (p. we will clearly fail in our endeavors. Others have similarly advocated for “use-inspired basic research” (National Research Council. C. “good teaching is perfected through continuous improvement (p. 2011). Gomez. and policy makers to address important research questions (Waxman. When these three activities are done on a more consistent basis. p. for example. Penuel. 1997) or engineering approaches to educational research that focus on how to make things actually work in the settings we want to improve. better places where students learn more” (Easton. 2010. critical out-of-school factors that affect the outcomes of schooling for students must also be addressed. If we only focus on school or teacher factors and ignore the importance of family and community influences on the education of students. In their recent book on improving teaching. 311). Cheng. describes this collaborative process as building networked improvement communities in education (Bryk. and (c) try to work collaboratively with researchers from other disciplines. it will promote more mindful research that will make a difference in education.

and practice: The great disconnect. (2009). Staniszewski. Teachers College Record. Elmore. REFERENCES Almy. R. Evaluation. S. 127–162). In S.. (2012). (2011). Fiarman. M. S. 24. S. D.. instruction from national surveys. and Accountability. The Netherlands: Verlag... E. 1–14. CA: Jossey-Bass. and (c) developing. Lapan & M. R. T.S. With greater understanding and support of the needs of all students and their teachers. NJ: Erlbaum. Cohen. Frontiers in the sociology of education (pp.. Quartaroli (Eds. & Rockoff J. 497–511. S. A. & Valley. Chen. RESEARCH-BASED APPROACHES practices and policy for all students that focuses on practices that improve students’ academic achievement and affective outcomes. L. and adapting best practices. C. Educational Assessment. Bryk. Friedman. F. C. Two decades of generalizable evidence on U. 295–213). M. (2013). teacher. W. M. In M. Collins. (2009). & Grunow.. A. innovative practices. Research essentials: An introduction to designs and practices (pp. E. Boykin.. Great teaching: Measuring its effects on students’ future earnings. communities of teachers need to simultaneously use best practices while developing new. Hallinan (Ed... Cambridge. 58–64. VA: ASCD. Camburn. or school— is left behind. In other words. 113(3). J. & Theokas. Assessing the quality of teachers’ teaching practices. circulating. Alexandria. MA: Harvard Education Press.). F. DC: Education Trust. Strengthening links between evidence-based research and educational practices can benefit the growing population of students at risk of failure in schools and those who share responsibility for educating them. Hillsdale.). 12(3). (2011). Berliner. Amrein-Beardsley. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed. The work of teaching and the challenge for teacher education. D. (1988). N. A. City. Chetty. (2010. Education Next.. policy.. L. & Forzani.. Upton. & Han. Washington.). C. (2009). San Francisco. S. Dordrecht. Hargreaves and Fullan (2012) argue that the teaching profession continuously creates new practices while (a) building on the knowledge base. Polasky. 25–41. A. (2011). 21(4). Creating the opportunity to learn: Moving from research to practice to close the achievement gap. J.. Education Policy Analysis Archives. W. D. (2012). A. (b) testing the impact of classroom practices. & Sloat.. F. L. E. Research. P.. & Teitel. M. Value-added model (VAM) research for educational policy: Framing the issue. Mason. S. & Noguera. November). Getting ideas into action: Building networked improvement communities in education. 23 . A. A. W. 561–610.. Ball. Journal of Teacher Education. Gomez. E. schools can improve the quality of teaching practices and ensure that no child. E. 60(5). Not prepared for class: High-poverty schools continue to have fewer in-field teachers... C. Instructional round in education: A network approach to improving teaching and learning.

Darling-Hammond. J. … Hamagami. C. M. B. C. L. Cambridge. NY: Teachers College Press. Looking in classrooms (10th ed. J. What do we know about how teachers influence student performance on standardized tests: And why do we know so little about other student outcomes? Teachers College Record. K. L. The impact of enhancing students’ social and emotional learning: A meta-analysis of school-based universal interventions. Darling-Hammond. R. The High School Journal. UK: Routledge. Goe.. Good. Day.. L. Abingdon. L. & Brophy. C. New York. & Fullan. A.. The new lives of teachers: Teacher quality and school development.. & Little. Paper presented at the annual IES Research Conference. (2009). (2013). (2013). New York. J. (2013). R. M. E. The Elementary School Journal. WAXMAN et al. & Schellinger... 83(2). (2014). Darling-Hammond. A. (2010). New York. R. L. Visible learning for teachers: Maximizing impact on learning. New York. Harvard Educational Review. Durlak. Haertel. Getting teacher evaluation right: What really matters for effectiveness and improvement. C.. NY: Oxford. 8–15. (2012). Mashburn. (2012). Goldstein.. Amrein-Beardsley. R. M. J. Taylor. but the field has identified better approaches. 461–487. & Hubbell. Rogge.ed. New research initiatives for IES. R. J.. B. 31. E.. G. T. J. Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. B. Hamre.. (2014)... Restoring opportunity: The crisis of inequality and the challenge for American education. K. 349–402. L. (2010). (2008). Child Development. 113(4). E. Inside the black box of classroom practice: Change without reform in American education. A. DC: National Comprehensive Center for Teaching Quality.). Weissberg. New York. DC.gov/director/ speeches2010/2010_06_29.. (2012)... Bell.. Effective teaching as a civil right. Pianta. NY: Routledge. O. Teaching through interactions: Testing a developmental framework of teacher effectiveness in over 4. Engagement. M. Hargreaves. Hattie. Early. K. 82(1). Evaluating teacher evaluation: Popular modes of evaluating teachers are fraught with inaccuracies and inconsistencies. DeCoster. NY: Teachers College Press. C. R.H. P. (2013). and rigor as vital signs of high-quality instruction: A classroom visit protocol for instructional improvement and research. Darling-Hammond. 405–432. 116(1). B. 1–46. L. 97(4). T. L. The flat world and education: How America’s commitment to equity will determine our future. E. Voices in Urban Education.. Retrieved from http://ies. Studying teacher moves. Downer. A. 93(6). alignment. (2010. Rethinking teacher evaluation: A conversation about statistical inferences and value-added. 44–58. D.. R. The 12 touchstones of good teaching: A checklist for staying focused every day. Approaches to evaluating teaching effectiveness: A research synthesis. Good. & Murnane. (2011). A. 219–239. MA: Harvard Education Press. & Gu. L. 12(1). 24 . Cambridge.. (2008). J. (2012). J. VA: ASCD.. Q. & Sudweeks. Hattie. Phi Delta Kappan. Feinauer. D. Dymnicki.. NY: Teachers College Press. Goodwin. A. S. J. (2014). New York. (2011). Duncan. (2013). Jones. MA: Harvard Education Press. D. Professional capital: Transforming teaching in every school. Alexandria. NY: Pearson. & Deci. T. Easton.. L. J.000 classrooms. C. Washington. J. 22–28.. Cuban. Washington. & Rothstein. R. Education Next.asp Everson. June).

In K. Organizing research and development at the intersection of learning. S.. A. Seattle. New York. & Waxman. Learning from teacher observations: Challenges and opportunities posed by new teacher evaluation systems. Gathering feedback for teaching: Combining high-quality observations with student surveys and achievement gains. & Pollack. C. Alexandria. Chen. (2011). Observational research in the U.). M. Haycock. H. Individual differences and cultural and contextual factors (pp. & Alton-Lee.. R. (2012). Washington. C. Alexandria. Airastia. Classroom walkthroughs to improve teaching and learning. R. K. & Wilkins. (2004). & S. B. W. So much reform. & Stigler. C. (2013). H. Larchmont. 1–4. 185–200.. (2001). Urdan (Eds. The Elementary School Journal.. (2007). Introduction: Purposes and perspectives on classroom observation research. classrooms: New approaches for understanding cultural and linguistic diversity (pp. Education Policy Analysis Archives. G. 546–570. A.. MA: Harvard Education Press. J. H. McElhaney. DC: Education Trust. Waxman. C. Payne. National Research Council. 21–47). C. D.. (2011). C. H. 25(6). Teach like a champion: 49 techniques that put students on the path to college. and design. J. Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk. In H. H. & Tharp. R. 1–39. D. Roehrig.. DC: National Academy Press. & Jakiel. A. Jerald. M. The art and science of teaching: A comprehensive framework for effective instruction. (2009). 25 . D. Research on teaching and learning thirty years of change. Waxman. 16(3). J. G. M. NY: Cambridge. implementation. Rothman. N. In R. (2010). P.. R. Behind the classroom: A rare glimpse indicates the extent—and persistence—of variation in teacher practice. (2010). M. Washington.. Harvard Education Letter. 21(7).. (2012). Graham. Kersting. Value-added teacher estimates as part of teacher evaluations: Exploring the effects of data and model specifications on the stability of teacher value-added scores. VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. & Staiger. Resilient and non-resilient Hispanic English language learners’ attitudes towards their classroom learning environment in mathematics. VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Scientific research in education. B. Turner. (2008). & Edwards. Kachur. Classroom instruction that works: Research-based strategies for increasing student achievement. Kaine. Christen. Marzano. J. Stout. E. Harris. S. 90. 40. 501–527). R. & Sabelli.). 371–401. Rivera. 83(2). Committee on Scientific Principles for Education Research. & T. Fishman.. R. J. too: How state policymakers can ensure the drive to improve teacher quality doesn’t just trickle down to poor and minority children. Educational Research. Cambridge. Washington. Hillberg (Eds.. 331–337. Fighting for quality and equality. Shavelson & L. NY: Eye on Education. H.S. R. R. D.. E. A. J. Pickering. APA educational psychology handbook: Vol 2. Marzano. D. Hill... WA: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation... E. so little change: The persistence of failure in urban schools. Nuthall. (2009).... W. & Grossman.. San Francisco. (2002).. J. Effective teachers and teaching: Characteristics and practices related to positive student outcomes. L. B. T. Towne (Eds. Tharp. (2012). Cheng. S. CA: Jossey-Bass. RESEARCH-BASED APPROACHES Hilberg.). D. DC: American Psychological Association. C. N. Harvard Educational Review. S. Penuel. J. (1990). L. Lemov.

A. In K. principal-teacher conferences. In S... C. International Journal of Social Sciences.. Avoiding ignorance and mindlessness in educational research: Moving from “good enough” studies to more mindful approaches. 24–34. & Rivera. H. Transformational teaching: Theoretical underpinnings.. N. Journal of Contemporary Research in Education. Encyclopedia of education (2nd ed. C. 303–310). and district implementation. 93(8). Waxman. (1997). R. J. N. C.H. G. P. Weisberg. K. C. What’s the value of VAM (value added modeling)? Phi Delta Kappan. C.). (2003). Educational Psychology Review. H. 131–151). (2012). Improving educator quality for English language learners: Research. J. Brooklyn. Keeves (Ed.-L. & Keeling. Contemporary approaches to research on learning environments: Worldviews (pp. (2006). and practices (pp. C. 469–474).. How children succeed: Grit. Waxman (Eds.. D. G. P. methodology. Walberg (Eds. Shin. A. (2006). Mulhern. NY: Macmillan.. 58–60. & Mohlman. In J. C. D. (2008). IL: Consortium on Chicago School Research. Stoelinga. C. Waxman. (2011). & Smith. (2012). Téllez. K. H. 33(2). Cude. D. (2013). pp. H. (1988). S. A WalkAbout observation of pre-service student behaviors during field placement: Do they practice what we preach? Texas Association of Teacher Educators’ Forum. Scherrer. S. L. and core methods. In D. NJ: World Scientific Publishers.). New York. 3(1). (2008). H. Waxman. New York. Stallings. G.. & Brown. H. J. Closing the achievement gap within reading and mathematics by fostering Hispanic students’ educational resilience. NY: Houghton Mifflin. G.   26 ... & Garcia. Narrowing the achievement gap: Strategies for educating Latino. J. H. E. Waxman. L. J. curiosity. Systematic classroom observation. Stokes. 24. Padrón.. J. The widget effect: Our national failure to acknowledge and act on differences in teacher effectiveness. Paik & H. New York. H. Black and Asian students (pp. Classroom observation techniques. Oxford. W. Pasteur’s quadrant: Basic science and technological innovation. WAXMAN et al. (2009). Padrón. Waxman. Téllez & H. Fixing classroom observations: How common core will change the way we look at teaching. Smith. 1–11. Brooklyn. C. and measurement: An international handbook (pp. Slavich. Waxman. (2012). C.. NY: The New Teacher Project.. Washington. Hackensack.). Educational issues and effective practices for Hispanic students. 1–22). (2007). & Chen. In J. Y. P. Preparing quality teachers for English language learners: An overview of the critical issues. C. Sartain.. DC: Brookings Institution.). Tough. Braziel. Rethinking teacher evaluation in Chicago: Lessons learned from classroom observations. L. and hidden power of character. Fisher & M.. NY: Springer. L. Guthrie (Ed. & Waxman.. D. K. Mixed method approaches for examining classroom learning environments for resilient and nonresilient students in urban elementary schools. S. Educational research.. & Zimbardo. Khine (Eds. Chicago. Y. 195–220). NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. M. J. 1(3). 98–103.). basic principles. Sexton. England: Pergamon. policies. 569–608). H... E. (2013–14). The New Teacher Project [TNTP]. Y. H. NY: Author. Mahwah.

RESEARCH-BASED APPROACHES Hersh C. Learning and Culture College of Education and Human Development Texas A&M University 27 . Learning and Culture College of Education and Human Development Texas A&M University Nancy D. Waxman Education Research Center Department of Teaching. Learning and Culture College of Education and Human Development Texas A&M University Susana E. Learning and Culture College of Education and Human Development Texas A&M University Kayla B. Rollins Education Research Center Department of Teaching. Franco-Fuenmayor Education Research Center Department of Teaching. Weber Education Research Center Department of Teaching.

in school in the United States: “The teacher’s influence on student achievement is 20 times greater than any other variable” (EdTrust Good Teaching Matters. So what does it take to be a good teacher? A growing body of research indicates there is a science to good teaching that requires knowledgeable teachers who are prepared with an understanding of evidence-based. Fishman. Potter et al. With time. a gap persisted between research and practice. Teaching at Work. 29–48. or lack thereof. Most recently. the field of education was not initially a highly researched field. 1998). Hammer (Eds. educational researchers increased in number and we began to learn more about instructional practices that produced the best results through scientifically-based research. 2003. MALATESHA JOSHI 3.). instructional practices.. All rights reserved. & Morrison. Piasta. or research-based. 2011). Li & J. Cox. good teacher knowledge is correlated with good classroom instruction. EMILY BINKS-CANTRELL AND R. The findings and implications of educational research often went no further than the publications of scholarly journals. . systematic. with the increased funding due to No Child Left Behind. Moats & Foorman. and good classroom instruction is correlated with higher levels of student achievement (McCutchen. 2002a. Historically speaking. This chapter will discuss a few examples of such efforts. Simply put. © 2015 Sense Publishers. Y. efforts have been made to build a bridge between educational research and teaching practice by improving teacher knowledge. Abbott. Yet. Spear-Swerling & Brucker. For example. 2004). McDonald. 2009. MET Project. with a focus on the field of reading and literacy education. CONNECTING RESEARCH AND PRACTICE THROUGH TEACHER KNOWLEDGE INTRODUCTION There is evidence that a teacher is the most influential factor upon a student’s success. well- controlled studies were conducted. Green. Beretvas. “Evidence shows clearly what most people know intuitively: Teachers matter more to learning than anything else inside a school” (Learning About Teaching.

unable to read a newspaper or bus schedule) • 3 million students are placed in learning disabled classrooms because they cannot read • Of the ~15% of students who drop out of school. & Fletcher. 1908). the United States ranks 25th among 29 nations in student reading achievement (UNESCO. fluency.g. 1979.. In response to this situation. Vellutino. Huey. the Congressional Hearing on Measuring Success: Using Assessments and Accountability (Lyon. & Jaccard. vocabulary. 1997a. 1995. models. 1999. Joshi THE IMPORTANCE OF RESEARCH-BASED INSTRUCTIONAL PRACTICE A great deal of research has rather recently been devoted to reading instruction at the elementary level. more than 75% report difficulties in learning to read • 2% of students receiving special or compensatory education for difficulties learning to read will go on to complete a four-year college program • >50% of the adolescents with criminal problems and history of substance abuse have reading problems (NCES. and poor classroom instruction. have reading difficulties (e. Yet despite such a large body of research. the National Research 30 .E. declared illiteracy a public health issue. 1990. 2005). especially at the early primary grades (Foorman. M. the National Reading Panel identified that systematic phonics instruction. number of books available at home (Chiu & McBride-Chang. 2005). 2013) Further. Goodman & Goodman. Shaywitz. and materials have been offered (Adams. Torgesen. Chall. 2000). which means that these students cannot perform at the minimum academic expectations • Approximately 25% (or 70 million) individuals in the U. Various reasons have been proposed for the reading problems: poor oral language development (Hart & Risley.S. Shaywitz. 2006). many children still struggle to acquire basic reading skills: • 33% of fourth grade students (60% of minorities) are unable to read simple books with clarity and fluency • 38% of the fourth graders are reading below the Basic level and 29% of the eighth graders are reading below the Basic level. Moats. Scanlon. Francis. and strategies for comprehension are all necessary components of quality reading instruction (NICHD). 2003). but in 2000. training in phonemic awareness. Furthermore. 1967. Because of the concerns with reading achievement and performance. 2005. 2001). genetics (Pennington & Olson. many theories. Binks-Cantrell & R. 2005. NAEP.

Torgesen. 1998) concluded that “quality classroom instruction in kindergarten and the primary grades is the single best weapon against reading failure” (p. Moats & Lyon. 2014). Because the acquisition of reading skills does not come naturally or easily for many children. One main factor is suggested as the major cause: poor instruction due to poor teacher knowledge due to poor teacher preparation – or in other words. Burns. systematic. 2003. & Mathes.. research is not being put into practice. and Griffin. some of 31 . many children do not receive the kind of instruction necessary for them to succeed in reading. 2011. and synthetic can enable students to overcome other factors that may be stacked against them (Blachman et al. 2000).. 2006. & Chard. which refer to application of rigorous. Dickson. Connecting Research and Practice Through Teacher Knowledge Council (Snow. Spear-Swerling & Brucker. as well as student reading achievement. 1996. these children become dependent upon the skills and knowledge of the primary grade classroom teacher as their main source for learning to read. While research has suggested certain and specific components and student skills necessary for learning to read (NICHD. McCutchen et al. Mather. 2004). there is hope that when teachers receive high-quality training in research-based reading instruction. While a student’s language awareness and incoming reading skills are the best predictors of reading achievement (Olson. 2004). According to the Reading Excellence Act (1998). Moats (1994) and others (Bos. However. Keenan. systematic. Denton.. 2003) have attributed poor classroom instruction to a lack of teacher knowledge needed to teach reading skills. As a result. RESEARCH-BASED READING INSTRUCTION Evidence-based reading practices are synonymous with scientifically-based reading research (SBRR). both teacher knowledge and classroom practice. a national literacy problem exists. Foorman. 2004. Podhajski. will be positively affected. effective instruction in basic language constructs such as phonology. Burns. and morphology that is explicit. Brady. Byrne. and Griffin. teachers have demonstrated limited knowledge of such concepts over the past ten years. The National Research Council (Snow. 2001. reading instruction. Foorman et al. & Samuelsson. the alphabetic principle. and objective procedures to obtain valid knowledge relevant to reading development. 1998) cited poor classroom instruction as a statistically significant cause of reading difficulties in young children. and reading difficulties (Fletcher & Francis. and hence. 2002b. 343).

2009. 2012. Binks. Dean. & Smith. 2009. the five essential components of reading instruction based on scientifically-based reading research include explicit. scientific review. in 2000.. Graham. 2000) recommends that teachers have an explicit knowledge of such concepts for the effective teaching of decoding skills in a direct. Glaser. Moats (1999) states this clearly. empirical methods that draw on observation or experiment. Smith. Seidenberg. 2013. how children develop reading skill. & Hougan. According to National Reading Panel (NICHD. 13) Through scientifically-based reading research. 2013). 2001). Washburn. Walsh. and Wilcox. colleges of education may not be providing pre-service teachers with this information (Binks-Cantrell. The federal government created the National Reading Panel to perform a meta-analysis that reviewed all scientifically-based reading research studies and. & Smith. Dean. Adams (1990) 32 . Ironically. as one cannot teach what one does not know. 1994. 2006) leaving teachers unprepared to effectively teach reading to all students. (p. Joshi. Joshi. 2000). phonics. to select validated instructional methods and materials. The National Reading Panel (NICHD. Specifically. 2009. Research performed with struggling readers has repeatedly found direct. and the validated principles of effective reading instruction. how the English language is structured in spoken and written form. Graham. vocabulary. Dean. systematic manner to enable the successful acquisition of early reading skills for all beginning readers. Binks-Cantrell & R. & Boulware-Gooden. and text comprehension. Joshi the criteria included in SBRR are research studies that employ systematic. Binks. and use assessments to tailor instruction are all central to effective teaching. explicit. Dahlgren. teachers must understand the basic psychological processes in reading. fluency. Binks. The ability to design and deliver lessons to academically diverse learners. it has been repeatedly shown that the direct teaching of linguistic structure concepts is of great importance to both beginning and struggling readers (Moats. and have been accepted by a peer-reviewed journal or have undergone rigorous. Hougen. Greenberg. and systematic instruction in phonemic awareness and phonics improves reading and spelling development and reduces the number of students who experience reading difficulties (Bos et al. Hougen. McKee. M. Joshi. involve rigorous data analyses. & Walsh. how good readers differ from poor readers. systematic instruction in phonemic awareness. outlined the findings that had been repeatedly replicated.E. Joshi.

& Chen. sentences. 2007). 2014. Fishman. 2001). & Morrison. structure of the English language at the sound. the teacher must be familiar with the complex. Connecting Research and Practice Through Teacher Knowledge clearly demonstrated in her synthesis of research on beginning reading the importance of teaching children explicit instruction in English orthography. Informed teaching varies in instructional time.g. yet mostly predictable. 2009). 2011. The key to student success lies in the quality of implementation. including explicit phonics instruction. Moats. and meaning combine together to form words. and text (Perfetti & Harris. 2013).. teachers must therefore understand the relationship between print and speech in the English language. depth. & McMillan. Additionally. Dhar. 2014). 2003). 2005). which is needed for fluent reading. exposure to rich vocabulary. Furthermore. Moulton. Tunmer. Heimbichner. Jaccard. Adlof & Perfetti. and morphemic (meaning) levels (Moats & Foorman. Teachers’ knowledge of morphology and historical changes in English helps inform vocabulary instruction. and sequencing in the essential components of reading instruction 33 . and practice in reading varied and interesting texts. This knowledge is necessary for developing accurate. as most reading difficulties are based in these basic language constructs (Fielding-Barnsley & Purdie. her research demonstrated that different types of literacy experiences are required for the development of sound reading ability. Perfetti. Most language-based reading disabilities are mixed in nature. Connor McDonald. which is an essential prerequisite to successful decoding (Bos et al. However. 2011. which requires a systematic understanding of how structural analysis. automatic word recognition. 2008. In order to then connect the sounds from phonemic awareness to the letters and letter combinations through phonics. rather than the program itself (Carlisle & Berebitsky. In order to deliver effective instruction based upon students’ needs. syllable. knowledge of phonemic segmentation is critical to developing phonemic awareness in children.. syntax. Vellutino. Adams emphasized the key role of phonemic awareness in fostering an understanding of how print works. Haager. THE IMPORTANCE OF TEACHER KNOWLEDGE IN RESEARCH-BASED READING INSTRUCTION Common sense and research alike tell us that well-designed instructional programs cannot compensate for a teacher who lacks the content and pedagogical knowledge of research-based instruction (Piasta. and research findings indicate the fallacy of single-solution approaches (e.

teachers must rely on background knowledge of their own to tailor lessons for individual students” (p. The present chapter. and over-rely on reading aloud and rereading: “Even if they use one of the many well-designed and scripted intervention programs. rather than reading curriculums or programs. O’Connor. research-based reading instruction. (p. Binks-Cantrell & R. M. 2000) and may seriously impact implementation of recommendations such as those offered by the National Reading Panel (NICHD. therefore. Mather. vocabulary. 2000) for the use of systematic phonics instruction. Friedman. 2003). the authors suggest important implications for teacher training: Teacher preparation does not apparently include sufficient or in-depth content training (Hill.E. comprehension. informed teaching requires an informed teacher who has an explicit understanding of the complex structure of the English language (Moats. The critical features of effective teacher training programs in reading must align with research by presenting a balance of oral language. Accordingly. Otherwise. memorize words by sight. focuses on the teacher knowledge necessary to deliver effective. McCutchen & Berninger. & Hunter. 2010). 1999) and given the great amount of research that emphasizes the importance of teaching phonological awareness and phonics. 34 . 8) As research suggests that training can increase teachers’ knowledge and use of systematic instruction that will assist at-risk children with reading development (Bos. 3). Narr. utilize formulaic comprehension strategies. & Babur. teacher training programs must instill teachers with the foundational knowledge necessary for providing early systematic research-based reading instruction. Calhoon. Sandow. We concur with Lyon (1999) that teacher preparation and professional development programs…must “develop preparation programs to foster the necessary content and pedagogical expertise at both pre-service and in-service levels”. 2013. 2014). word identification. As the findings of Bos and colleagues suggest that teachers generally lack the knowledge or preparation to adequately instruct students with dyslexia and related reading problems. the assessment of all aspects of literacy leaning and managing literacy instruction across grade levels (International Reading Association. fluency. 1999. 1999. a teacher without such knowledge may encourage students to “guess” or skip unknown words. phonics. phonemic awareness. Joshi depending upon the nature of the student’s difficulties and the student’s progress (Calhoon & Petscher.

(b) Language as the foundation for reading instruction (including the knowledge of language structure and application to teaching for phonetics. (c) Align teacher education curricula. the characteristics of poor and novice readers. and uninformative classroom instructional programs. Moats prepared a paper entitled Teaching Reading Is Rocket Science: What Expert Teachers of Reading Should Know and Be Able To Do. as well as in-service professional development. & Wilcox. and supported practice that will enable them to successfully teach reading. writing. Moats took the stance that preventing reading failure was a top priority for education and took stock of teacher preparation in reading. (b) Establish core standards. (c) Practical skills of instruction in a comprehensive reading program (including opportunities for supervised experience and use of validated instructional practices). phonology. Moats attributed teachers’ under-preparation to teach reading to the “reading wars” that had been fought in the previous decades. were outlined: (a) Knowledge of the psychology of reading and reading development (including basic facts about reading. the lack or absence of meaningful professional standards. (e) Press the developers of textbooks and instructional materials to improve their products. Connecting Research and Practice Through Teacher Knowledge In 1999. skills. curriculum. (d) Create professional development institutes for professors and master teachers. (f) Promote high quality professional development for teachers. and (g) Invest in teaching. Just as children deserve to be taught to read by their teachers. Suggestions for the future of teacher preparation and professional development in reading outlined by Moats (1999) include: (a) Research should guide the profession. NCTQ (Walsh. morphology. and (d) Assessment of classroom reading and writing skills. Yet. 2006) analyzed the syllabi and textbooks of 72 elementary education programs and found that 15% taught all of the components of the science of reading and 4 of the 226 texts used were found acceptable for teaching the science of reading. poor quality textbooks used in reading education courses. and entry level assessments for new teachers. semantics. in 2006. She found that the difficulty of teaching reading and complexity of the knowledge base required for effective reading instruction had been strongly underestimated. Components of an improved curriculum for teacher preparation. and spelling is done to prompt action rather than criticism. and how reading and spelling develop). Glaser. Highlighting the need for improved teacher preparation to teach reading. orthography. standards for students and licensing requirements for teachers. teachers deserve to be prepared with the knowledge. 35 . and syntax and text structure).

teacher practice. with an effect size of. Joshi Other researchers sought to determine links among teacher knowledge. literacy activity. The kindergarten teachers’ use of phonological awareness strategies was statistically significantly related to students’ growth in phonological awareness and end-of-year word reading measures. Further. 44 teachers with varying degrees of teaching experience completed surveys to assess both their linguistic knowledge as well as general knowledge. Preliminary data on teacher knowledge replicated the same findings of Moats (1994) eight years later: Although some teachers are familiar with some terms. (spelling. and student learning. reading comprehension. Binks-Cantrell & R. and group context. Additionally. In a study by McCutchen. Students of the kindergarten teachers (n=492) were administered assessments of phonological awareness. and orthographic fluency in September. with an effect size of . Green. and analyses of growth in alphabet production showed that the effect of experimental condition on growth was statistically significant.E. January. and May. And this change in classroom practice carried over to student growth. This experimental group of teachers significantly deepened their phonological knowledge after receiving instruction (McCutchen et al. Word reading was also assessed at the end of the year. the teachers’ literacy instruction was observed throughout the school year and coded based on four broad categories: knowledge affordance. 1999 for a detailed description of such instruction). listening comprehension. 2002). November. Abbott. and composition in September. This increase in knowledge carried over to classroom practice: experimental group kindergarten teachers spent statistically significant more time on activities directed toward phonological awareness across the year. Beretvas. first grade experimental group teachers spent statistically significant more time on explicit comprehension instruction (M = 1. and May. textual context. et al. Potter. orthographic fluency.. However. emphasis on phonological and orthographic activities did not compromise the students’ 36 . and thus.89 minutes). 23 of the 43 teachers participated in an intensive two- week instructional institute devoted to deepening the experimental group teachers’ understanding of research about learning disabilities and effective instruction. (2002a). February. Cox. 82.72. stressing the importance of explicit instruction in phonological and orthographic awareness (see McCutchen & Berninger. Further. teachers still do not possess an explicit understanding of English phonology. Students of the first-grade teachers (n=287) completed assessments of phonological awareness. M. there was no statistically significant difference in listening comprehension scores.

Mehta. 1997. this study also yielded three important findings: (a) We can deepen teachers’ own knowledge of the role of phonological and orthographic information in literacy instruction. 1991. For the first grade students. By focusing on teacher knowledge. Conclusions were drawn that word-structure knowledge is indeed important to effective teaching of word decoding. 1985. Several measures of basic reading and spelling skills were used to assess the tutored children’s progress. 2004). Schatschneider. In this study. Foorman. and (c) changes in teacher knowledge and classroom practice can improve student learning. Vellutino et al. and more advanced reading and writing skills. 1999. Bradley & Bryant. Lundberg et al. Results indicated that the new teachers who received the word-structure instruction outperformed a control group of teachers who did not receive such instruction in knowledge of word structure at post-testing time. Error analyses also indicated links between teachers’ patterns of word-structure knowledge and children’s patterns of decoding progress. and composition fluency. Foorman. there is a strong need include information about English word structure in both pre-service teacher preparation and in-service teacher training. 1996). Cunningham. & Mehta.. 1997b. Schatschneider. Connecting Research and Practice Through Teacher Knowledge listening comprehension growth. To assess teachers’ word-structure knowledge. and therefore. (b) teachers can use that knowledge to change classroom practice. O'Connor. graphophonemic segmentation. teacher-generated instructional activities. 1988. Statistically significant correlations were found between teachers' post-test knowledge on the graphophonemic segmentation / irregular words tasks and tutored children's progress in decoding phonetically regular words. the effect of experimental condition was statistically significantly related to growth in phonological awareness. Furthermore. course instruction was consistently a more important influence on post-test performance than was prior background (on all three 37 . The findings of this study add to the mounting number of research studies that have documented a causal relationship between explicit alphabetic instruction and student learning (Ball & Blachman. 1998. & Fletcher. reading vocabulary. Torgesen. reading comprehension. and classification of real words as phonetically regular or irregular tasks were administered. 1990. Winikates. classification of pseudowords by syllable type.. Francis. Francis. spelling. children who received tutoring improved statistically significantly from pre-test to post-test on all assessments. Other researchers examined the word-structure knowledge of new teachers and evaluated the progress of children tutored by a subgroup of the teachers (Spear-Swerling & Brucker. Fletcher.

Brady & Moats.g. Furthermore. the results yielded from this study support the belief (e. 1994. 1999. participants in Group 1 (who supervised tutoring) scored higher on post- tests in comparison to the scores of Group 2 (who did not supervise tutoring. which suggests a need for more instruction. Notable characteristics of the tutoring program which appeared particularly helpful in balancing the needs of the novice teachers and tutored children include: • the use of a structured lesson plan emphasizing one or two basic techniques for developing specific skills. many new teachers still performed below ceiling on the post- test (particularly in irregular word tasks). although they had statistically significant higher backgrounds). Joshi measures for Group 1 and on two out of three for Group 2). 2000. Moats. Results suggest that the teacher knowledge gained as a result of the course instruction influenced the teachers’ abilities to effectively teach decoding skills. tutored children consistently showed statistically significant progress in all specific areas of tutoring and the teachers’ post-test performance patterns on the word-structure knowledge measures (including knowledge of letter sounds. as well as various instructional techniques. and reading and spelling of irregular words)..E. it cannot be concluded that supervised tutoring experiences enhances teachers’ word-structure knowledge beyond the benefits provided by course instruction. The novice teachers in this study were beginning to acquire some competence in teaching word-level reading skills. 356) 38 . but results suggest that further preparation in this area was needed for better results. Binks-Cantrell & R. M. McCutchen & Berninger. (p. in university classroom sessions. But because these differences were not statistically significant. decoding and spelling of phonetically regular words. • focused assessments providing clear information about skills to work on in tutoring. Better pre-service preparation in English word structure could allow in-service professional development to focus on topics such as meeting individual differences and grouping children. Another interesting note is that even after six hours of course instruction in word structure. 1997. and • opportunities for novice teachers to practice administering assessments. Although it was not possible for the authors to obtain a control group of untutored children for comparison. 2004) that an understanding of word structure is important for effective decoding instruction. Overall.

In 2012. pp. & Papagno. to reading education. and Hougan expanded the study of teacher knowledge of research-based reading instruction to a new population of teachers – university instructors. 2008). Perhaps most importantly: “Results suggest that when effective practice is in the hands (and heads) of teachers. • Learning vocabulary is facilitated by phonological processing (Baddeley. who work on the educational front lines. We cannot expect our teachers to leave our universities adequately prepared to teach beginning and/or struggling readers when our university instructors do not possess an understanding of research- based instruction themselves. Connecting Research and Practice Through Teacher Knowledge The literature seems to consistently concur that the linguistic components of the English language need to be explicitly taught to teachers of reading. we may begin to hope for progress in the only reading war that really matters – the one against reading and writing disability” (McCutchen et al. and semantics). there were no statistically significant differences between the performance of university instructors and their pre-service teachers – both demonstrated a lack of understanding of these important concepts. written language (spelling. In fact. Gathercole. which states that one cannot give what one does not possess. as informed teachers must understand the interdependence of these components in effective reading instruction. the university instructors). They expanded the “Peter Effect” (Applegate and Applegate. They found that pre-service teachers (n=173) performed very similar to their university instructors (n=114) on the basic language constructs survey. 81–82). 1998) • Proficiency in writing and spelling is related to proficiency in decoding strategies (Berninger & Richards. and reading comprehension. syntax. 2002) Such understanding of the structure of the English language will enable teachers to analyze students errors in oral reading. The hypothesis was that one of the reasons many of our pre-service and in-service teachers lack the knowledge of reading research is because they are not receiving adequate preparation at the university level – and this might be due to a lack of knowledge and understanding among those who prepare the teachers themselves (that is. While much recent research has shown a general lack of teacher knowledge in language constructs and reading components. 39 . 2002. Binks-Cantrell.. The importance of the teacher – at any level – cannot be understated. Washburn. little research has analyzed the current knowledge level of those preparing teachers to teach early reading. Joshi.

More recently. that this knowledge will carry over to their students (the pre-service teachers). practicum requirements. teacher preparation programs have been able to volunteer for accreditation based upon alignment of the program’s syllabi. Those with accreditation are experiencing increases of quality applicants. most importantly.E. 2014). but the concept of scholastic. public universities. This demonstrates that university instructors’ knowledge and understanding of how to most effectively teach reading can be heightened to a proficient level when relatively simple efforts are made to stay abreast of current research and practices in the field – and. IDA has begun to look at the alignment of the standards with teacher preparation programs. teacher knowledge (and the role teacher preparation programs play in improving teacher knowledge) is starting to receive the recognition of importance it deserves. and scientific grouping that the former sets of standards lacked (Moats. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION In some ways. but their students’ (the pre-service teachers) knowledge was statistically significantly higher as well. and any other evidence with IDA’s Knowledge and Practice Standards. These findings have strong implications for the future of teacher preparation. the International Dyslexia Association (IDA) set forth its own list of standards in 2009 to fill in gaps of specificity. several professional organizations have adopted knowledge and practice standards for teachers of reading. Binks-Cantrell & R. most universities do not require their instructors to attend professional development seminars or make other efforts to stay up-to-date with the most current research. At the current time. For instance. Teacher accountability is an issue for the university level just as much as the K-12 level. To date. evaluations. ranging from small. Joshi The good news is that they also assessed a group of university instructors who had participated in a bi-yearly professional development program for at least two years – and not only was their performance on the knowledge survey statistically significantly higher than their counterparts. assignments. 18 teacher preparation programs have been accredited. With recognition that these standards are only truly meaningful if they are put into practice. During the past five years. freedom poses a few barriers to holding university instructors accountable for understanding and preparing their pre-service teaching students with an understanding of the basic language constructs from current research. but there are a few challenges that remain. M. private programs to large. and programs that did not 40 . or academic. clarity. such as the International Reading Association and the Council for Exception Children.

2012). to model lessons. or what they intuitively think is effective in teaching struggling students. & Purdie (2005) found that in-service teachers often lacked the knowledge of basic language constructs and often favored a more “whole language” approach to teaching reading. Further documentation of HEC’s success can be found in the Texas Reading First Higher Education Collaborative Report (HEC. which included paid travel (gas. Participants could request an HEC staff member. faculty members of the HEC were provided with knowledge and practices validated by SBRR. as well as other HEC members.S. a professional development program for university instructors was established through a combination of state and university funds that resulted in significant outcomes for university instructors and pre-service teachers alike. Additionally. where HEC staff and participants shared research reports. Despite its success. (b) Provide materials based on SBRR to teacher educators for use in preparing EC-4 teachers. and other information online. Rather than relying on how they were initially taught. Connecting Research and Practice Through Teacher Knowledge receive accreditation are offered the opportunity to work toward accreditation with a mentor from IDA. Any instructor of reading education within the state was invited to participate in HEC. and make presentations for students and faculty at their respective institutions. In 2013.. and meals) to attend collaborative seminars in which research-based practices were discussed with leaders in the field of reading and followed by collaboration regarding how best to incorporate these practices into their courses. HEC also ended. sample syllabi. and (c) Establish a community of members who collaborate in the ongoing process of adjusting their instruction and materials to ensure the preparation of highly qualified teachers. review syllabi.S. Texas’s Higher Education Collaborative (HEC) had three specific objectives: (a) Assure that teacher educators and educational administration educators are knowledgeable about components of SBRR and incorporate these critical components into teacher preparation courses. “Ask the Expert” Q&A. In one of the first teacher knowledge studies outside of the U. unfortunately. collaboration among members was enhanced through the implementation of an online community. Fielding-Barnsley. with the conclusion of Reading First. As mentioned in the Peter Effect study (Binks-Cantrel et al. car rental/airfare. HEC Online. Participants also received materials designed to assist with the integration of SBRR into their courses. Washburn. 2006). assist with course content alignment. hotel. 41 .. The study of teacher knowledge and preparation in SBRR is also expanding beyond the U.

Dysteachia is a term used to refer to the phenomenon of students who exhibit dyslexic-like tendencies. Israel. Finland. Joshi. and Zambia.E. 2014) have been held on teacher knowledge from an international perspective at the Society for the Scientific Study of Reading’s annual conference highlighting patterns in knowledge among teacher educators. Graham et al. Louisa Moats conducted one of the first major studies of teacher knowledge and preparation to teach reading (1994). Portugal. and Wilcox (2006) found that the vast majority of the most popularly used reading education textbooks neglected to provide information on all five essential components of effective reading instruction as identified by the National Reading Panel. M. Binks-Cantrell & R. teacher knowledge. In addition to lacking the quantity of information. and high stakes testing results rather than the teacher. and related terms and concepts. not because of a neurologically-based reading disability but because of inadequate instruction. many of the current educational policies and funding priorities still target curriculum materials. 2014). And most recently. Joshi Binks-Cantrell. Despite the strong correlations that have been demonstrated between 42 . two special forums (2013. Since that time. and pre-service teachers in New Zealand. and teacher professional development that maximizes teacher quality (Moats. Twenty years ago. Glasser. school organization. Walsh. While the above initiatives demonstrate some positive directions. teacher preparation. as well as the textbooks used in teacher preparation courses) begin to receive more attention. numerous other researchers have assessed both in-service and pre-service teachers with various instruments and have found similar results. especially to those at-risk for reading difficulties. in-service teachers. phonics. the quality will increase and the rate of dysteachia will decrease. China. The textbooks used to prepare teachers to teach reading are also starting to receive attention through a more critical lens. She administered a survey to regular and special education teachers and found that very few possessed an understanding of the basic language constructs that research has deemed fundamental to successful reading acquisition. Canada. Binks. both populations are largely leaving their teacher preparation programs lacking the knowledge they need to effectively teach reading. (2009) found the same textbooks often lacked in the quality of information provided. and Joshi found that while there are some differences in the misconceptions of teaching reading and dyslexia between American and British pre-service teachers. such as incorrect definitions of phonemic awareness. The hope is that as teacher knowledge and teacher preparation (including the knowledge and professional development of teacher educators.

as well as spelling and morphology (Joshi.. 2013). teachers themselves must possess an explicit knowledge and understanding of research-based reading instruction (Moats.. REFERENCES Adams. (2014). Because we know quality classroom instruction is the best weapon against reading failure (Snow. (1990). phonics. Carreker. J. Connecting Research and Practice Through Teacher Knowledge teacher knowledge. 2000). New York. is the quality of their reading education coursework. & Griffin. pre-service teachers take anywhere from one to five courses in reading education prior to entering the field. there has been little to no improvement over the past twenty years in teacher knowledge of and preparation to deliver research-based reading instruction (Moats. C. Ehren. Adlof. In order to provide explicit instruction in these concepts. 2014. Producing and maintaining a more knowledgeable and better prepared teaching force is the most important challenge for education to undertake. Burns. and comprehension (National Reading Panel. 43 . Seidenberg. the teacher can really make all the difference. we must do a better job of preparing and maintaining teachers who have the knowledge and ability to deliver just that. MA: MIT Press. 1998).. Cambridge. & G. But what really matters more than the quantity of their reading education coursework. explicit. P. M. & Perfetti. NY: Guilford. A. both during their initial teacher preparation (e. 1998). professional development opportunities). which can vary greatly – often depending upon the professor or instructor of the course. and just like what we know to be true at the K-12 level (Snow. 246–264). E. classroom instruction. & Moats. and systematic instruction in phonemic awareness.). Beginning to read: Thinking and learning about print. Individual differences in word learning and reading ability. Teacher education programs must ensure that its teachers are provided with up-to-date information about research-based reading instruction. vocabulary. 1999). Typically. Stone. Silliman. As almost anyone who has attended college can tell you. our students deserve no less. Burns. S. B. R. Treiman. and spending millions of dollars on curriculum programs that are thrown out every few years is not the answer. & Griffin. Research tells us that about 40% of children will struggle with learning how to read and continue to struggle with reading throughout their lives if they never receive direct. In C. Wallach (Eds. in the Colleges of Education and Alternative Certification Programs) as well as ongoing throughout their career (e. depending upon their teacher training program.g. J.g. fluency. and student achievement. 2008/2009). Handbook of language and literacy: Development and disorders (pp. Moats likened the teaching of reading to rocket science (1999).

& McBride-Chang. Individual and group sensitivity to remedial reading program design: Examining reading gains across three middle school reading projects. Braze.. D.. 49–66. J. (A position paper of the International Dyslexia Association). Dickson. R. 565–592. Brady. Binks-Cantrell. C. & Babur. 526–536. S. Francis. Mather.. Bos. 10. A. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal. MD: International Dyslexia Association. New York. 97–120. B. & C. J. & Moats. 96. S. S. A. Journal of Educational Psychology. Binks-Cantrell & R. Fletcher. Schatschneider.. (2006). Gathercole. Bos. M. Joshi Baddeley. & Mathes. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal. (1998). (1999). S. Teachers’ attitude to and knowledge of metalinguistics in the process of learning to read. (2010). Reorganizing the instructional reading components: Could there be a better way to design remedial reading programs to maximize middle school students with reading disabilities’ response to treatment? Annals of Dyslexia. A. Fowler (Eds. 65–75.. (1997). Cunningham. & Richards. (2011). Clonan. M.. (2001). 429–444. 33. J. M... Schools that “beat the odds”: Implications for reading instruction. Informed instruction for reading success­—Foundations for teacher preparation. D. Interactive. & Shaywitz. B. R. Efficacy of phonics teaching for reading outcomes: Implications from post-NRP research. (2013). Brady. 37–55. & Bryant. N. Francis. L. S. Explaining individual differences in reading (pp. Sandow. (1991). Learning Disabilities Research & Practice... Psychological Review.. & Chard. Carlisle.. 24. A. & Papagno. 57–85. M.. C.. & Hougan. CA: Academic Press (Elsevier Imprint). 60. Foorman. Brain literacy for educators and psychologists. The role of instruction in learning to read: Preventing reading failure in at-risk children.. Berninger. (2004). M. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education. Friedman Narr. & Berebitsky. 158–173. D... (1985). 51. J.. Y. Rhyme and reason in reading and spelling. 44 . R. B. (2002). NY: McGraw-Hill.. S.. Annals of Dyslexia... M. London: Psychology Press.E... 258–261. context. B.. Baltimore. P. 16. & Mehta. Peter effect in the preparation of reading teachers.. N. Bradley. D. 26. Washburn. Learning to read: The great debate. T. G. Journal of Educational Psychology. B. D. M. (2012). W. N. E. C. V. Ball. V. Brady. S.. N. Podhajski. Foorman. 444–461. Explicit vs. L. 50.. 24. C. Remedial and Special Education. and reading: A comparison of students in 43 countries. & Hunter.. M.. 227–238. 105. S. E. B. Perceptions and knowledge of pre-service and in-service educators about early reading instruction. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology. J. B. 773–800. 26.). C. J. Denton. A. 14. E. implicit instruction in phonological awareness. E. Gender. G. (1990). Chiu.. The phonological loop as a language learning device. R. Fletcher. Ann Arbor. (1967).. 69–96). C. & Purdie. & Petscher. C. M. Schatschneider. Scientific Studies of Reading. Calhoon. A. D. & Blachman. collaborative professional development in early literacy instruction: Supporting the balancing act. (2003). Mather. Literacy coaching as a component of professional development. R. M. Shaywitz. Does phoneme awareness training in kindergarten make a difference in early word recognition and developmental spelling? Reading Research Quarterly. (1998). Calhoon. L. 90. E. C. (2011). B. Scientific Studies of Reading. P. Joshi. 331–362. Blachman.. In S. Fielding-Barnsley. MI: University of Michigan Press. Effects of intensive reading remediation for second and third graders and a 1-year follow-up. San Diego. Chall.. C. (2005).

(2008/2009). Francis. 1. In B. M. R. Carreker. D. DC: National Council for Teacher Quality.. In S. D. R. M. Higher Education Collaborative (HEC)... M.. (2006). E. & McMillan. (1995). 45 . M. NCTQ teacher prep review: A review of the nation’s teacher preparation programs. Dahlgren. Teachers College. D. Rosenfield & V.. F. Blachman (Ed. I. NY: Macmillan. C. 42–43. H.... Binks. M. E.. Retrieved from www. B. Joshi.. J. K. S. 201–212. & Smith. M. Dean. & Walsh. Do textbooks used in university reading education courses conform to the instructional recommendations of the national reading panel? Journal of Learning Disabilities. Goodman. Baltimore. 18. E. Francis.. M. Shankweiler. (1997a). R. R. Schatschneider. Washington. Early intervention for children with reading disabilities. 6–16. Dean. & Boulware-Gooden.. Moulton. Learning to read is natural. (2003).. The psychology and pedagogy of reading. B. New Zealand. E. 32(4). TX: Vaughn Gross Center for Reading and Language Arts. R.. Binks. Schatschneider. L. 458–463. O. DE: International Reading Association. Y. R. B. The case for early reading interventions. MD: P. B. R. Binks. Weaver (Eds. (2009). & Moats. Berninger (Eds. N.eddata. Theory and practice of early reading. 243–264). E. & Francis. D.. M. Morgan Hill. B.... D. Hill. L. International Reading Association. C. Dhar.. NJ: Erlbaum. Treiman. New York. NY: Oxford University Press. K. New York.. A. C... Foorman. The role of teacher education programs in preparing teachers for implementing evidence- based reading practices. In L.com/resourcespublications/RF_Evaluation_2007-2008 Hart. C. Graham. M. Smith. Shaywitz. Haager. 42. Prepared to make a difference: An executive summary of the National Commission on Excellence in elementary teacher preparation for reading instruction. Journal of Learning Disabilities. M.. Foundations of reading acquisition and dyslexia: Implications for early intervention (pp. P. J. E.. The California reading first year 6 evaluation report.. Fischer. CA: Educational Data Systems. R. Hougen. A. D. Joshi. T. J. Meaningful differences in the everyday experience of young American children. A. S. J. (2009). B. NJ: Erlbaum.. (2008). Heimbichner. Hougen. Scientific Studies of Reading. B. Columbia University. Contemporary Educational Psychology.. M. Winikates. (2006). & Fletcher. Fletcher. & Goodman. (2013). 42. H. Mehta. (2000).. & Carter.. S. Why elementary teachers might be inadequately prepared to teach reading. J. American Educator. and the United States of America (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Moats. S. New York. McKee. Explicit syllable and phoneme segmentation in the young child.. How words cast their spell: Spelling instruction focused on language. (1979). Hillsdale. Graham.. R. R. not memory.. M. C. 255–276. Greenberg. Y.). J. J.. Implementing evidence- based academic interventions in school settings (pp. D. 392–402. Joshi.). B.. Dean. improves reading and writing. Liberman.. E. The impact of instructional practices in grades 1 and 2 on reading and spelling achievement in high poverty schools. L. NY. E. B. Mahwah. Eakin. (1997b).. W.. Joshi. Texas reading first Higher Education Collaborative: 2005–2006 Annual Report.. D. Shaywitz. R. L. Connecting Research and Practice Through Teacher Knowledge Foorman.). 605–625). D. (1908). Huey. 31.. 1–29. Literacy instruction in teacher education: A comparison of teacher education in Australia. (1974).. Austin.. & Smith. & Fletcher. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology.. Foorman.. Resnik & P. (2009). Newark. Brookes. & Risley.

G. G. (1994). In M. Snowling & C. Brookes.. C. McCutchen. Lyon.S. DC: National Center for Educational Statistics. R. A. In P. D. MD: Paul H. 2001. Moats. Washington. K. V. . 44. 73–86. National Center for Educational Statistics (NCES). R. Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction: Reports of the subgroups (NIH Publication No. Cunningham. Topics in Language Disorders. (1999). 14. E. R. 16. 269–288). Beretvas. Journal of Learning Disabilities. Measuring success: Using assessments and accountability to raise student achievement. March 8. NY: Thomas B. A. R. National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP). N. M. Annals of Dyslexia. Byrne. D. 52. 00-4754). Condition of education. New York. Abbott. McCutchen. Wanted: Teachers with knowledge of language. Beginning literacy: Links among teacher knowledge. What teachers don’t know and why they aren’t learning it: Addressing the need for content and pedagogy in teacher education. (2004). . Gray.. A.S. 14.. D. L. O’Connor.. M. S. The voice of evidence in reading research (pp. The nation’s report card: Reading. C. Binks-Cantrell & R. B. Washington. (1989). L. Keenan. 23–45. Gates MacGinitie reading tests. IL: Riverside. Why do children differ in their development of reading and related skills? Scientific Studies of Reading. R. Measuring teachers’ content knowledge of language and reading. F.. C.E.. 18. DC: National Center for Learning Disabilities.2014.. & Berninger. B. 69–86. K. Joshi Lyon. 453–472. (1999). Teachers learning ladders to literacy. Genetics of dyslexia. L. teach well: Helping teachers master literacy-related subject-matter knowledge.. House of Representatives. Department of Education. (2003). Olson. Reading teachers’ knowledge of children’s literature and English phonology. and reading instruction. L. Hearing before the Subcommittee on Education Reform.. MacGinitie. Office of Educational Research and Reform. DC: U. E.). (2001). 53. U.). Potter. 81–102. J. Pennington. Green. Moats.. (2000). (2014).S. H. 215–226. Fordham Foundation. McCardle & V. language. (2002). 46 . Teaching reading is rocket science. 203–214. L. B.1080/19404158. .. Whole language lives on: The illusion of ‘balanced’ reading instruction. (1996). Australian Journal of Learning Difficulties 19(2). Hulme (Eds. Report of the national reading panel. B. C. Harry. S. Annals of Dyslexia. Science. D. doi: 10. Washington. S. (2000). The NICHD research program in reading development. L. 35. Chhabra (Eds. Washington. Moats. National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD). (2002b). L. (1999). R.. & Olson. L. R. DC: American Federation of Teachers.. Chicago. Moats. and imagination in the professional development of reading teachers.. (2014). Learning Disabilities Research & Practice. The science of reading: A handbook (pp. Baltimore. Committee on Education and the Workforce. Cox. (1999). reading disorders. DC: U.. 38–54. C. Annals of Dyslexia. 2013). R. Cox. R. & Covill. S.. (2005). & Samuelsson. C. (1999). Moats. K. C.. 75–91. N. 207–225. (2005. McCutchen. G. Moats.. Government Printing Office. Sidman. & Lyon. & Foorman. and student learning. R. The missing foundation in teacher education: Knowledge of the structure of spoken and written language. S.. Those who know. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice.). D. Washington. teacher practice. S. & MacGinitie.941093 Moats. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing. W.

(2011).. Vellutino. F. R. 355–382). Torgesen. J. Spear-Swerling. Where does knowledge come from? Specific associations between print exposure and information acquisition. Hulme (Eds. Oxford. & Jaccard. Components of reading ability: Multivariate evidence for a convergent skills model of reading development. 112 Stat. P. Journal of Educational Psychology. Preventing and remediating reading difficulties: Bringing science to scale (pp. 332–364. J.. 85. (1993). classroom practices.. Austin. Journal of Academic Language Therapy. J. seq. A. Perfetti. TX: Pro-Ed.. A. Brady. 3–32. Reading Excellence Act of 1998. 101(f) (title VIII). McCardle & V. M. 331–360. Teachers’ knowledge of literacy concepts. MD: York Press. Jaccard. The science of reading: A handbook (pp. L. Annals of Dyslexia. B.. 317–330. (2013).. R. 72–103. & Brucker. K. B. Stanovich. and student reading growth. A. Snow. 521–537). & Denckla. C. 9. Sipay. E. E. W. In M. F. 211–229. J. C. United States Department of Education. Snowling & C. B.. B. 53. Test of phonological awareness. K. C. 224–248. Scanlon. Vellutino. (Eds. & C. Foorman (Ed. Connecting Research and Practice Through Teacher Knowledge Perfetti. L. Baltimore. Tunmer. K. R. Baltimore. (1994). Language Learning and Development.).. S. 47 . M. The prevention and remediation of reading disabilities: Evaluating what we know from research. J. 2681-391 et. Preventing reading difficulties in young children. (2004). & Brucker. The science of reading and its educational implications. (1996). Pratt. 153–171). 1.. Fowler (Eds. P. No. R. (2013). R. 13. MD: Brookes.. Piasta. S. Lessons learned from research on interventions for students who have difficulty learning to read. J. 2681-337. J. Explaining individual differences in reading: Theory and evidence (pp.. Chhabra (Eds.). (2004). 73–120). J. S. In P. Cognitive profiles of difficult-to-remediate and readily remediated poor readers: Early intervention as a vehicle for distinguishing between cognitive and experiential deficits as basic causes of specific reading disability. New York. D. 9. Braze.. 88. Language Learning and Development. Scanlon. Spear-Swerling. D. Torgesen.. 296–316. Seidenberg. & Bryant. & Cunningham. (2003). Scientific Studies of Reading. S. J. div. Torgesen. E. R. McDonald. F. M. E.. In B. UK: Blackwell. P.. D. M. Vellutino. (2013). Small. Recent discoveries on remedial intervention for children with dyslexia. Journal of Educational Psychology. L. O. K. Fishman. & Kessler. (1997).. In S. Torgesen. (2003).. Universal reading processes are modulated by language and writing system. R. Washington.. Sec. (2005). & Chen. Teachers’ acquisition of knowledge about English word structure. 11. Annals of Dyslexia.). & Griffin. Burns. DC: National Academy Press. L. 105-277. A.. Treiman. 601–638. Phonology is critical in reading: But a phonological deficit is not the only source of low reading skill. (2009).. The voice of evidence in reading research (pp. 9. & Harris. R. Pub. Learning to use an alphabetic writing system. C...). (2007). N. Scientific Studies of Reading. 2003. (1998). E. K. J. NY: Psychology Press. 54. The reading excellence act. Preparing novice teachers to develop basic reading and spelling skills in children. Chen. O.). F. Language Learning and Development. 11–47. Toward distinguishing between cognitive and experiential deficits as primary sources of difficulty in learning to read: A two-year follow-up of difficult to remediate and readily remediated poor readers. & Morrison. M.

Wechsler intelligence scale for children (3rd ed. Washburn. Joshi Walsh. (2013). D. (2006). Learning and Culture College of Education and Human Development Texas A&M University R. 1–18. R. San Antonio. Wechsler. Malatesha Joshi Department of Teaching.. 20. D. DC: National Council on Teacher Quality (NCTQ).. E. Learning and Culture College of Education and Human Development Texas A&M University 48 . Binks-Cantrell & R.).. & Wilcox. E. M. TX: The Psychological Corporation. M. Emily Binks-Cantrell Department of Teaching.. What do pre-service teachers from the US and UK know about dyslexia? Dyslexia. Binks-Cantrell. (1991). What education schools aren’t teaching about reading and what elementary teachers aren’t learning. D. K. Glaser. D. & Joshi.E. Washington.


was the use of Second Life® (SL) to simulate a diverse middle grade math classroom. The first component. Watson. 2005). Teaching at Work. The interdisciplinary team of instructors. All rights reserved. and the most challenging from a design and implementation perspective. Hill. INDIOGINE. ENRICO P. These studies are part of a long-term research project to develop a problem-solving course aimed at enhancing the beliefs about and abilities of preservice mathematics teachers to address the needs of diverse students. 51–80. Li & J. Charner-Laird. The two studies present research findings from two major components of the problem-solving course that the team designed and revised over several semesters. TRINA J. In this chapter we present findings from two studies that highlight our work during recent semesters of a 5-year National Science Foundation (NSF) funded project. Teachers need strong mathematics knowledge for teaching (Kulm. S. AYSE TUGBA ONER. Kirkpatrick. PRESERVICE TEACHERS’ PROBLEM-SOLVING LESSON ENGAGEMENT AND KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEFS ABOUT TEACHING FOR EQUITY Preparation for teaching for equity requires both mathematics knowledge for teaching (Ball. and Gordon (2006) stated that “very few teacher education programs have successfully tackled the challenging task of preparing teachers to meet the needs of diverse populations’’ (p. Szczesiul.). 2005. DIANNE S. . GOLDSBY AND TINGTING MA 4. © 2015 Sense Publishers. 2011) to be effective in culturally and ethnically diverse middle grade classrooms. 2008) and equity consciousness (McKenzie & Skrla. researchers and students engaged in the Knowledge for Algebra Teaching for Equity (KATE) Project employed several strategies to enhance middle grades preservice teachers’ (PSTs) knowledge for teaching algebra problem- solving for equity. & Bass. Hammer (Eds. GERALD KULM. 2008) and knowledge of how to address the complexities of teaching all students with wide-ranging needs (Achinstein & Athanases. DAVIS. The second study examined the use of readings on equity consciousness and equity-based problem-solving activities designed to develop and integrate PSTs’ awareness of teaching for diversity and knowledge and ability to Y. 396). Kulm.

T. J. DAVIS et al.

employ problem-solving heuristics. The second study compared this
approach with a section of the course that focused only on problem solving.
Together, these two studies provide insights to the specific challenges and
gains in PST preparation that are possible with the integration of teaching
for equity and learning about problem solving.


The nature of and need for improving teachers’ mathematics knowledge
is well established (Conference Board of Mathematical Sciences [CBMS],
2001; Huang & Kulm, 2012). A Hypothetical Learning Trajectory (HLT)
(Simon & Tsur, 2004) constructed by the project team served as the
theoretical framework to guide the design, development and instruction
for the problem-solving course. We began with the model of Lamberg and
Middleton (2009) in constructing a HLT that consisted of three conceptual
schemes for teaching for diversity. These schemes characterize effective
research-based strategies to engage and motivate diverse students in learning
algebra: (1) situated learning, (2) culturally relevant teaching, and (3) critical
pedagogy. Each scheme has the following components: (a) description
of the conceptual scheme, (b) cause and effect mechanisms that describe
the teachers’ knowledge, (c) cognitive interpretations of knowledge, and
(d) intermediary understandings necessary for bridging to the next level
(Lamberg & Middleton, 2009, p. 237). The following brief summaries
provide the characteristics and research bases for the HLT schemes. A more
complete description is given by Brown, Davis, and Kulm (2011).

Situated Learning Scheme
The Situated Learning scheme requires that the teacher allow students to
have concrete and hands-on experiences designed to build math learning on
realistic problems that students solve using a variety of skills, concepts, and
tools. Traditional lessons provide only limited development of conceptual
understanding (Hollar & Norwood, 1999; Karsenty, 2002; O'Callaghan,
1998). In a situated learning context, students develop math understanding
by constructing their own culturally relevant knowledge (Ladson-Billings,
2011), building from more concrete to abstract ideas (Pellegrino, Chudowsky,
& Glaser, 2001). Students move from using materials such as algebra tiles
and everyday objects, gradually transitioning to problems that are more
open-ended, allowing students to devise solution strategies.



Culturally Relevant Teaching Scheme
The Culturally Relevant Teaching scheme relies on the teacher to identify
contexts for activities that are based in and relevant to her own students’
cultures and lives. Many students do not see the relevance of math and have
low self-expectations for learning math (Ladson-Billings, 1997). Since
learning is unlikely unless students are engaged in the lesson (Thier, 2001), a
context that enhances motivation for learning math is necessary. The teacher
must adapt math activities and problems to include contexts that are relevant
and individualized to the interests of a particular class, group, or student
(Malloy & Jones, 1998).

Critical Pedagogy Scheme
The Critical Pedagogy scheme provides learning activities in which students
investigate the sources of mathematical knowledge, identify social problems
and plausible solutions, and react to social injustices. Problem-based learning
engages students in using math to address and solve problems that are drawn
directly from possible social or community issues that are likely to motivate
and engage students (Boaler, 2000; Lewis, 2009). The teacher adapts math
activities and problems to include social contexts relevant to the interests of
a particular ethnic or interest group, or individual student (Stinson, 2004).
As students become more engaged and interested in these activities, they are
more likely to build skills necessary to succeed in mathematics.
The HLTs were presented and discussed with the PSTs, along with
problem-solving activities to help the preservice teachers develop activities
and lessons that address the bridging steps necessary for their own progress
in the trajectories.


The context for the research was a mathematics problem solving course
that is required for middle grades math teachers at Texas A&M University.
The course was revised by the KATE research team over a period of five
semesters to include activities and assignments to address issues of diversity
and culture in teaching algebra. The design of the course includes four
primary, interrelated components: (1) math problem solving and problem
posing, (2) math problem equity challenges, (3) readings and discussions on
diversity, and (4) Second Life® tutoring and teaching.


T. J. DAVIS et al.

The participants were middle grades mathematics preservice teachers
enrolled in either the spring or fall semester. Most of the participants were
juniors who had previously completed four of eight mathematics courses
required for certification. The participants were nearly all White females,
which reflects the overall demographics of preservice teachers at the
university. The spring and fall courses used the same activities but were
taught by different instructors who were members of the research team and
had served as course assistants in a previous semester.


KATE team members designed a three-dimensional virtual classroom in
Second Life® to plan practice teaching sessions for preservice teachers
enrolled in the mathematics problem solving course. We believe that there
are specific approaches and areas of awareness about teaching for equity
that preservice teachers must develop and practice early in their preparation
(Darling-Hammond, 2000). We assert that providing early teaching
opportunities in a simulated classroom environment offer a promising model
for practice teaching experiences. We also suggest that the use and application
of technology tools to support engagement and simulate classroom teaching
can perhaps provide a dimension that will advance preservice mathematics
teacher development.
Earlier models of laboratory classroom experiences (Berliner, 1985) can
be recast as virtual experiences through the design of well-planned and well-
executed classroom simulations. For a number of years teacher educators
have sought alternative methods for clinical or practical experiences for
preservice teachers (Berliner, 1985; Metcalf et al., 1996). The notion of
classroom laboratory settings as an alternative or complement to field-based
experiences is not a new one. In the search for alternative clinical experiences,
on-campus laboratory activities such as microteaching, simulation, or
reflective teaching were often overlooked (Cruickshank, 1984; Metcalf et
al., 1996). In recent years, emerging approaches in teacher education have
evolved to include the use of virtual technologies to design and simulate
authentic classroom teaching environments. Virtual classroom simulations
make it possible to provide preservice teachers orchestrated practice with
diverse learners (represented by avatars or agents). During simulations,
avatars can exhibit a greater variety of mathematics misconceptions and a
myriad of interests and needs, than would the more sporadic opportunities



that might arise during face-to-face classroom observations or other field-
based settings (Brown et al., 2011).
In this first exploratory study, preservice teachers’ problem-solving
lessons were examined. We examined recordings of classroom lessons
from preservice teachers enrolled in one of two consecutive problem-
solving courses to answer the research questions: What are the differences
between two groups of PSTs’ lesson engagement in a simulated classroom
environment related to a) student-teacher actions, and b) mathematics
instruction indicators? How do PSTs’ self-evaluations of their lessons differ
from evaluations by their peers and those of external evaluators?

Participants.  The spring semester class consisted of 21 females and 1
male. There were 16 White females, 1 African-American female, 4 Hispanic
females, and 1 White male. The fall semester class included 28 females
and 2 males. There were 24 White females, 4 Hispanic females, and 2 White

Procedures.  The first author co-designed a virtual middle school classroom
and additional learning spaces in Second Life®. The KATE virtual classroom
and learning spaces were designed specifically for preservice teachers to
engage in tutoring and teaching exercises with middle grade student (MGS)
avatars throughout the course. The KATE virtual classroom includes tools
such as media display screens and an interactive white board. Gesture menus
were also integrated into the KATE classroom design to support active
engagement between the PSTs and MGSs (see Figure 1):
• MGSs were able to select the following gesture options:
• Student response gestures were also used by MGS avatars during lessons
to indicate their level of understanding. After a MGS avatar selected the
gesture options from the menu, question marks of different colors display
above the MGS avatar’s head.
• Hand-raising gestures were used by the middle grade student avatars to
get the preservice teacher’s attention during lessons.
1. Red Question Mark – indicates “I don’t get it; I am lost.”
2. Yellow Question Mark – indicates “I think I see what you mean; I’m
almost with you.”


T. J. DAVIS et al.

3. Green Light Bulb – indicates “I get it.”

Figure 1. Middle school classroom gesture menu

Problem-solving lesson teaching experience.  Preservice teachers enrolled
in the problem-solving course developed personal teacher avatars early in the
course. Each PST prepared a 15–20 minute algebra lesson to teach to the full
class of MGS avatars. PSTs spent 2 weeks to plan their lesson with the help
of feedback from the instructor. All PTSs’ teaching occurred during the final
3 or 4 weeks of the course. There were 4 to 5 “live” MGS avatars played by
math education graduate students and 15 “bot” MGS avatars that were pre-
programmed with specific response options. A trained research team member
controlled the actions of the 15 bot avatars during each lesson. Lesson plans
were submitted early by the PSTs. The instructor and the full team of MGS
avatars reviewed the plans and conducted detailed lesson practice sessions
where they performed “dry runs” with lesson slides, and discussed and
planned the kinds of actions they would each perform during the lessons.
Actions included introducing math misconceptions in the lessons, as well
as various questions that MGS avatars might ask during particular lessons.


Within the three-dimensional virtual space PST avatars walked into the classroom. PSTs and research team members were able to access the video recordings from this secure site. 2011). concepts. PRESERVICE TEACHERS’ PROBLEM-SOLVING LESSON ENGAGEMENT Some actions challenged the PSTs to adjust their approaches. Build math learning on realistic. These detailed planning sessions occurred a week prior to the delivery of each lesson. During the algebra problem-solving lesson. and react to social injustices. 6 items. All of the problem-solving lessons were recorded by research team members who were serving in avatar roles. 6 items) (b) mathematics instruction (21 items).. The working out of problems was then displayed on a media screen in the virtual classroom in real-time (with a few seconds delay). identify social problems and plausible solutions. The PSTs chose one of three schemes from the HLT to guide the design of their problem-solving lessons in SL: • Situated learning scheme – Provide an instructional context that allows students to have concrete and hands-on experiences with math knowledge and skills. Camtasia® allows a user to record any on-screen activity. and (c) virtual environment and technology use (8 items). and tools. • Culturally relevant teaching scheme – Use contexts for activities that are based in and relevant to students’ cultures and lives. The instructor provided feedback to the PSTs if there were issues with their lesson plans. asked questions and engaged with MGS avatars in the classroom.. open-ended. plus two 57 . • Instruction for diversity was guided by a Hypothetical Learning Trajectory (HLT) (Simon & Tsur. Video recordings were made using the Camtasia® software.  The Mathematics-Virtual Classroom Observation Instrument (M-VCOI) includes three sections: (a) student-teacher engagement (student actions. advanced their lesson slides that were projected on a display screen. the preservice teacher went to a remote room where sh/h-e logged into Second Life® as a teacher-avatar and delivered the lesson in the virtual classroom. 2004) for teaching for equity developed by the research team (Brown et al. culturally relevant problems that students solve using a variety of skills. Data sources. teacher actions. The site includes a specialized database application designed to provide access to Internet media streaming content. PSTs used an interactive pen display (i. The recordings were then uploaded to the university’s MediaMatrix website. SmartPodium tablet) to illustrate their problem-solving work and respond to questions posed by the MGS avatars. • Critical pedagogy scheme – Provide learning activities in which students investigate the sources of mathematical knowledge.e.

M-VCOI student-teacher engagement segment Section 2 was comprised of 21 items focused on Mathematics Instruction indicators. evaluators were instructed to review the lesson recordings and use tally marks to indicate each time a MGS student avatar engaged in a particular action (e.T. Section 3 focused on Virtual Environment and Technology Use items and was completed last. observed to some extent (2). Similarly. open-ended questions. addressed a student misconception. Sample items are provided in Table 1. 58 . For each of the 21 mathematics instruction items. displayed a math misconception). the student-teacher engagement portion of the instrument. gave incorrect or inaccurate information). responded to a student question. evaluators were instructed to mark if the indicator was observed at all (1). DAVIS et al. To complete section 1. J. or observed to great extent (3).. Figure 2. However data from this section were not analyzed in this study.. asked a question.g.g. used a gesture. Figure 2 depicts the student-teacher engagement component of the evaluation instrument. evaluators were instructed to record each time the teacher (PST) avatar engaged in a particular action (e.

Both external evaluators were advanced doctoral students in the same curriculum and instruction department. Sample items from the M-VCOI Component Number of Items Sample Items Student-Teacher 12 Student: Responded to a question or made Engagement a comment (number of times observed) Teacher: Addressed a student misconception (number of times observed) Mathematics 21 The teacher used purposeful questioning Instruction to clarify students’ understanding (not only “Do you understand?” or “Do you have questions?”) The context of the lesson was culturally relevant and meaningful to students’ lives and interests. Evaluators were instructed to record the total number of student and teacher actions for the first section of the instrument.e. They marked indicators (i. they engaged in an instrument orientation session. PRESERVICE TEACHERS’ PROBLEM-SOLVING LESSON ENGAGEMENT Table 1. 59 .. They entered the respective evaluations online as they were completed. They were not affiliated with the grant project prior to completing the evaluations. the evaluators met with the first author to discuss their responses and make clarifications. Reviewing the lessons was their only role with the project. Data collection. During that time they also submitted weekly updates to the observation team leader. Virtual Environment 8 The teacher used the SmartPodium tablet and Tech Use to work out problem(s) effectively.  Two trained external evaluators viewed each lesson recording and completed the full version of the M-VCOI. 1 to 3) for each item in the second and third sections of the instrument. They participated in follow- up sessions online as they completed M-VCOI evaluations for all lessons given by preservice teachers during the fall and spring semester courses. The evaluators participated in an initial project orientation meeting. The SPSS statistical analysis software program was used to analyze data. Descriptive and inferential statistics were computed to fully answer the research questions. Additionally. After completing the first evaluation.

Cohen’s d calculated for the student “used gestures” item (d =.” and “using the gestures” had higher means during the fall semester course as compared to the spring semester. A comparison of the teacher actions for the spring and fall groups was done using t-tests. 94) indicated a large effect size. a very small number of teachers ignored student avatar questions or misconceptions during their lessons.T. and effect sizes of student and teacher actions from PSTs’ lessons in each of the courses. and (8) extension or generalization of the problem. 49). A comparison of the student actions for the spring and fall groups was done using t-tests to determine if there were significant differences in the means.93). The Cohen’s d statistic was used as a measure of difference in means. (4) statement of the problem. (2) key mathematical concepts and/or procedures. Table 2 displays means. There were statistically significant (p<. The lesson plans included eight components: name of the scheme. Lesson plans.05) differences between the spring and fall group means were the teacher “asked a question” (d =. 55) and the teacher “responded to a student question” (d =. Teachers asking questions. (5) solution. (3) rationale for the context selected. The results of the analyses of the measures are provided in Table 2. 1992) statistic was used as a measure of effect size or standardized difference in means. had a much larger than typical effect size.  Archival data were collected from all lesson plans that were submitted by PSTs enrolled in either the spring or fall course. Working on problem posing was a key component of the course. The Cohen’s d (Cohen. J.52) and fall (31. standard deviations. There were statistically significant (p<. questioning seems to be a prominent teacher action observed in the lessons during both the spring (26. Results Student-teacher engagement. Both “students asking questions. 60 . both in favor of the fall group. We examined student-teacher lesson engagement data from PSTs enrolled in the spring course and for a second group of PSTs enrolled in the fall course.01) differences between the spring and fall group means for this item. as well as.88) courses. responding to student questions. (7) questions to probe students’ understanding. The third author reviewed the lesson plans and concatenated the schemes that were used in the spring and fall courses. DAVIS et al.01) differences between the spring and fall group means for this item as well. The items with statistically significant (p<. The Cohen d values computed were medium or typical effect sizes. Cohen’s d indicated that the student “asked a question” item (d = 1. were moderately higher during the fall course. Additionally. (6) description of alternative approaches students might have.

12) 26.38 (0.74) 0.26 (9. or made 26. standard deviations.61) 1.75) 0.57 (0.88 (10.87) 0. and effect sizes for each of the items are presented in Table 3.14 (4. 1992) statistic was used as a measure of effect size or standardized difference in means.42 Teacher Actions Asked a question 26.03 a comment Used gesture 17.87) -0.59 (0.93) 17.50 (9.05) difference between the spring and fall group means was on–the teacher “provided a summary of the lesson to remind students what they should have learned”.10) 25.18) 0.49 Was unclear during the lesson 0.16) 20.66) 0. A comparison of the mathematics instruction indicators for the spring and fall groups was done using t-tests to determine if there were significant differences in the means. standard deviations. The Cohen’s d =. The means.09 (1.39 Ignored a question or misconception 1. in favor of the fall group.48 (0.56) 0.20 (0.89) 0.25 Mathematics instruction indicators.25 Displayed a mathematics 0.25 (6.94 Gave an incorrect answer 0.93 Responded to question.13) 1. and effect sizes for student and teacher actions Item Spring Course Fall Course Cohen’s d Mean (SD) Mean (SD) Student Actions Asked a question 12. The majority of responses for the mathematics 61 .66 (0. 88 indicated that there was a large effect size.37) 0. Preservice teachers’ patterns of lesson delivery were similar across both the spring and fall courses. PRESERVICE TEACHERS’ PROBLEM-SOLVING LESSON ENGAGEMENT Table 2.90) 0.52 (1. The Cohen’s d (Cohen.38 (11.28) 0.55 Responded to a student question 13.58) 0.10 (1.  Responses from the two evaluators were averaged for each of the respective indicators.66) 0.59) 0.12 misconception Was divergent or off-task 0.80) -0.00 Gave incorrect or inaccurate 0.38 (0. Means.96) 31.38 information Addressed a student misconception 1.97 (1. The most notable statistically significant (p<.88) 0.31 (8.13 (4.74) 0.10 (0. The results of the analyses of the measures are provided in Table 3.38 (0.52 (8.28 (0.24 (5.

34) 2.79) 1.41 (0.13 (0. Table 3.51) -0.70) 1.24 problem-solving Answered students’ questions and 2.56) 0.53) 1.83 0.55 (0.74) 1.30 learning the mathematics or solving the problem Presented the lesson clearly. standard deviations.29 (0.22 (0.59) 2.68) 2.39 Demonstrated expectation for all 1.24 (0. using 2.65) 2.47 lesson or activities Used purposeful questioning to clarify 2.07 (0.56 (0.36 (0.62 (0.49 Used multiple representations in the 1.49) 0.46 students’ understanding Provided students opportunities for 2. J.49) 0.63) 2.58) 2.39 learning to other situations problems etc.00 (0.52 (0.76) 0.53 (0.01 ability (evident in teacher’s language) Assisted students in generalizing 1.63) 0.28 lesson to the students Clearly outlined how the lesson would 1.36 misconceptions.63) 0.69 (0.00 (0.84 (0.48 accurately and thoroughly Connected ideas and concepts 1.68) 1. (Reverse order) Demonstrated confidence of students’ 1.47 (0.73) 1.50) 0.67) -0.69 (0.11 proceed Gave a rationale or justification for 1. DAVIS et al.64 (0.28 (0.54) 0.83) 1.26 (0.62 (0.63 (0.36 Redirected student thinking 1.83 (0.60) 2.72) -0.40 addressed students’ difficulties or misconceptions appropriately Ignored students’ questions or 1.62) 2.71) 0.67) 0.01 students to participate (Continued) 62 . and effect sizes for mathematics instruction Item Spring Course Fall Course Cohen’s d Mean (SD) Mean (SD) Clearly articulated the objectives of the 1.72) 0.67 (0.40 (0.68 appropriate math language and materials Worked out the mathematical content 2. Means.47 (0.56 (0.62) 2.06 (0.T. Distributed feedback evenly 2.51) 0.75) 0.79 (0.59 (0.

55 and 2. A possible explanation is that the lessons generally ran 15-20 minutes and some PSTs reported that they felt rushed towards the end of their lessons. pace.40 relevant and meaningful to students’ lives and interests The lesson was based on one of the 1.39 scheme 1=not observed at all. PSTs in the spring and fall classes also didn’t help middle grade 63 .26) 1.” and “answering students’ questions and addressing students’ difficulties or misconceptions appropriately. preservice teachers in both classes were also stronger in three additional areas: “presenting the lesson clearly. Consistently.37) 0.24 (0.55 (0.54) 1.” Although the “providing a summary of the lesson to remind students what they should have learned” item had the highest effect size among other items and yielded statistically significant differences between the two groups.” “working out the mathematical content accurately and thoroughly.35) 2. (Continued) Item Spring Course Fall Course Cohen’s d Mean (SD) Mean (SD) Provided a summary of the lesson to 1. PRESERVICE TEACHERS’ PROBLEM-SOLVING LESSON ENGAGEMENT Table 3.62 (0. This item yielded predominantly “not observed at all” responses during the spring and fall semesters.74) 0. 2=observed to some extent.16 (0.38 of the lesson effectively and efficiently Context of the lesson was culturally 1. using appropriate math language and materials.50) 0. 3=critical pedagogy scheme) The lesson clearly followed the above 2.02 (0.84 (0.43 following schemes (1=situated learning scheme.57) 0. which were 2.81 (0.88 remind students what they should have learned Managed the time. and sequence 1. Fewer mathematics instruction indicators were “observed to a great extent. 3=observed to great extent instruction indicators ranged from 2 (observed to some extent) to 1 (not observed at all) for preservice teachers in both classes.69 respectively.51) 0.07 (0.63) 1. 2=culturally relevant context scheme.” “Providing students opportunities for problem-solving” had the highest mean in both the spring and fall classes.47 (0.44 (0. it had the lowest mean for both academic semesters.43) 1.

  Table 4 displays the percentage of schemes that were addressed in preservice teachers’ lesson plans that were submitted. J. and fewer lessons followed the culturally relevant context scheme (63%). According to the respective preservice teachers. The full class was instructed to review the recordings of two of their peers’ lessons and complete a M-VCOI- Lite evaluation of the lessons. Lesson 1 spanned 19. and lesson 2 spanned 24. Schemes. student avatars to generalize learning to other situations or problems in their lessons. It is identical to the M-VCOI protocol in all other ways. Table 4. to some extent or to a great extent. DAVIS et al. During both semester courses most PSTs followed a culturally relevant scheme for their lessons. There was a modest increase in the percentage of lessons that followed a critical pedagogy scheme during the fall semester course (27%). Percentage of schemes reported by preservice teachers Scheme Spring Course Fall Course Situated learning scheme 2 (9%) 3 (10%) Culturally relevant context scheme 15 (68%) 19 (63%) Critical pedagogy scheme 5 (23%) 8 (27%) In addition to examining the full class aggregate results for all lessons completed by the two external evaluators that have been presented thus far. we also examined mathematics instruction results specifically for two sample lessons. Spring course lessons given by PSTs predominantly followed either a culturally relevant context scheme (68%) or a critical pedagogy scheme (23%). The M-VCOI-Lite protocol does not include the section 1 student-teacher-engagement component.T. 64 .38 minutes. full class peer evaluations of the two sample lessons. and external reviewer evaluations of the same two sample lessons. The evaluation results include preservice teachers’ respective self-evaluation responses (S1 and S2). We examined the mathematics instruction component from three perspectives: preservice teachers’ self-evaluations of the two sample lessons.01 minutes. and two external reviewer evaluation responses (E1 and E2). peer evaluation means (L1 Mean. and L2 Mean). The two sample lessons were designed and taught by preservice teachers enrolled in the fall semester course. Table 5 displays mathematics instruction results for both lesson 1 (L1) and lesson 2 (L2). The situated learning scheme was followed the least (see Table 4). lesson 1 was designed to follow a culturally relevant scheme and lesson 2 was based on a critical pedagogy scheme.

48) 3 2 2 2.36) 3 2 3 1=not observed at all.78) 1 2 2 1. the self-evaluations from the two preservice teachers were typically not as high as the peer evaluation means across multiple 65 .63 (0.07 (0. 2=observed to some extent. Sample lessons 1 and 2 self.71) 1 2 2 2.74 (0.33 (0. Similarly.78 (0.76) 2 1 2 2.53) 3 2 3 9 2.37 (0.70) 2 1 2 2.85 (0.40) 3 3 3 5 2.64) 2 2 3 2.62) 2 1 1 2.44 (0.81 (0. and external) were consistent in evaluating lesson 2 higher than lesson 1 across several mathematics indicators.64) 2 2 2 14 2.40) 3 3 3 6 2.67 (0.30 (0.63 (0.44 (0.54) 2 2 1 2. Despite this limitation.67 (0.81 (0.45) 2 1 2 17 2.76) 1 1 1 2.85 (0.63) 3 2 3 20 2.73) 1 2 3 2. all three evaluator groups (self.48 (0.81 (0.76) 1 2 2 2.26 (0.56) 2 2 3 15 2.78) 1 1 2 2.26 (0.91) 1 1 2 12 2.70 (0.57) 3 1 3 19 2.70) 2 2 3 2 2.70) 2 2 3 2.30 (0.64) 2 2 3 3 2.69) 2 2 3 8 2. than the evaluations made by the external evaluators.78) 1 2 1 2.82) 1 1 2 2.37 (0.70) 1 1 3 2.69) 2 1 2 2. peer and external evaluations Item # L1 Peer S1 E1 E2 L2 Peer S2 E1 E2 Mean (SD) Mean (SD) 1 2.51) 3 3 2 7 2. their evaluations were typically higher across most mathematics instruction indicators.51) 3 2 2 13 2.56 (0.78 (0.30 (0.51) 3 2 3 10 2.68) 1 2 2 2.64) 2 2 2 2.78 (0.04 (0. When PSTs in the class were asked to complete evaluations for two of their classmates’ lessons.19 (0.44 (0.33 (0.74 (0.74) 2 1 1 2.45) 2 2 3 4 2.78) 1 1 2 2.67 (0.52 (0. 3=observed to great extent Examining the data from the three perspectives revealed several findings.36) 3 2 2 11 1.74 (0.89 (0. PRESERVICE TEACHERS’ PROBLEM-SOLVING LESSON ENGAGEMENT Table 5.26 (0.70) 3 1 2 18 2.37 (0.56 (0. peer.56 (0.32) 3 2 2 21 2.52 (0.40) 3 2 3 16 2.33 (0.

T. This may be due in part to questioning and problem posing exercises being emphasized throughout the math problem solving courses. the preservice teacher’s mathematics instruction responses predominately ranged from. DAVIS et al. while the percent agreement for lesson 1 was 62%. For sample lesson 1. The teacher asking questions was the action observed the most in lessons during both the spring and fall courses.” the means for both items were higher for the fall course as well. the two items with statistically significant differences between the spring and fall groups were the teacher “asked a question” and the teacher “responded to a student question. “addressed to some extent” to “not addressed at all. the student action that occurred the most during the problem-solving lessons was MGS avatars “responding to questions or making comments. Our research and design teams went to great lengths to design a highly engaging and immersive virtual classroom. The experiences provided ongoing practice for preservice teachers in presenting and assessing problem- solving activities in a virtual classroom setting with diverse middle grade student avatars. 66 . a majority of PSTs followed a culturally relevant scheme for the lessons. During the spring course. During both the spring and fall semester courses.” In terms of teacher actions. the student actions with statistically significant differences between the spring and fall groups were “students asking questions. mathematics instruction indicators. and the situated learning scheme was followed the least. J. In summary. During both semester courses. with perhaps greater success during the fall semester.” the means for both items were higher for the fall course. lessons predominantly followed either a culturally relevant context scheme or a critical pedagogy scheme. and small-group learning spaces that were used to structure carefully planned mathematics teaching experiences for preservice teachers. Discussion One of the overarching objectives of our broader work was to provide preservice middle school mathematics teachers early experiences in teaching algebra for equity.” and “using the gestures. It appears that the self-evaluations were more discriminating than the peer evaluations were as well. with a higher mean for the fall course.” We computed percent agreement reliability measures for lesson 2 across the 21 mathematics instruction items. the self-evaluation responses matched at least one of the external evaluators responses 81%.

all three evaluator groups (self. A key purpose of the experimental course was to develop equity consciousness. Perhaps some attention can be directed at ways to better empower preservice teachers to design lessons around the situated learning and critical pedagogy schemes in future courses. peer. Seeing this very modest increase in the variety of schemes employed during the fall semester course was promising. they think of the evaluations as grading their classmates’ work and they tend to evaluate their peers more favorably. PSTs’ peer evaluations were typically higher across most mathematics instruction indicators. STUDY 2 In the second study. Despite this limitation. This also helps to build a case for not restricting the lesson evaluations to just peer review. we were able to conduct a preliminary examination of student and teacher actions during the problem solving lessons. the self-evaluations were typically not as high as the peer evaluation means across multiple mathematics instruction indicators. PRESERVICE TEACHERS’ PROBLEM-SOLVING LESSON ENGAGEMENT During the fall course. which embodies four beliefs: 1) all children (with a few 67 . One possible explanation is that even when PSTs are instructed to the contrary. This was a limitation of the current study. and external) were consistent in evaluating sample lesson 2 higher than lesson 1 across several indicators. a similar inflation of peer lesson evaluations was observed during the first semester of the project. and take a closer look at PSTs mathematics instruction performance across 21 indicators. Through the use of the M-VCOI. and external) revealed notable findings. than the evaluations made by the external evaluators. our examination of the lesson evaluation data from three perspectives (self. Efforts are also underway to validate the M-VCOI protocol. fewer lessons followed a culturally relevant context scheme and there was a modest increase in lessons that followed a critical pedagogy scheme. Anecdotally. It appears that the self-evaluations were more discriminating than the peer evaluations were as well. In addition. Similarly. peer. This exploratory investigation will help to guide further examination of the Second Life® problem-solving lessons described in the current study. This perhaps offers some insight on their inflated evaluation responses. the objective was to compare the beliefs about teaching for equity and the problem solving knowledge of participants in the course developed and taught by the KATE research team (Experimental) with the “standard” version of the course offered by the department (Comparison).

Ball & Bass. Delpit (2006) proposed ten precepts regarding teachers’ attitudes and actions regarding teaching students in urban environments. 2008. socioeconomic and cultural characteristics. Silver. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics [NCTM]. teachers who adopt culturally relevant pedagogy should enable students to 1) develop academic achievement. The main purpose of both the experimental and comparison courses was to develop preservice teachers’ knowledge of problem solving methods. the complex nature and significant role of problem solving in mathematics teaching and learning has been widely acknowledged among researchers and practitioners (Cobb. 2008). Yackel. McKenzie. Researchers have made numerous efforts to promote equity consciousness and adopt Critical Race Theory (CRT) in education to achieve culturally relevant teaching (e. 68 . Ladson-Billings. 2) improve cultural competence. & Scheurich. 1998. p. skills and professional dispositions concerning diversity. 1995. DAVIS et al. 2005). and 4) practices in school should be changed to meet all children’s needs (Skrla. researchers have begun to show interest in preservice teachers’ problem solving.. prospective teachers are required to “operationalize the belief that all students can learn. To better prepare prospective teachers for diversity in teaching. field experiences and clinical practice should be provided for teacher candidates to improve their knowledge. 1992. Teacher education standards include diversity as one of the essential factors for teacher candidates to acknowledge and promote (National Council for the Accreditation of Teacher Education [NCATE]. 2) all children refers to all with diverse innate. 2001. cognitive. 1985). NCTM. The shift in focus from PreK-12 students’ problem solving to preservice teachers’ problem solving is mainly due to an increasingly accepted notion that teachers’ mathematical knowledge for teaching has a significant impact on student achievement (e. NCATE (2008) specified that curricula. 3) adults in school should take accountability for student learning. National Mathematics Advisory Panel [NMAP].T. Recognizing the importance for mathematics learners (especially PreK-12 students) to learn to think mathematically and become mathematical problem solvers. Throughout the past two decades.. 2009). 2000. non- discriminatory. & Wood. Schoenfeld. Particularly. and 3) develop a sociopolitical consciousness. [and] demonstrate fairness in educational settings by meeting the educational needs of all students in a caring.g.7). J. linguistic. According to Ladson-Billings (1995). and equitable manner” (NCATE.g. 1989. exceptions who are extremely disabled) have the capability to excel academically. 1994. 2008). 2003. Furthermore. 1993. socio-demographic.

we compared an experimental and standard problem-solving course to answer the research question: What are the differences in preservice teachers’ beliefs and knowledge about (a) teaching for diversity. This line of research identifies problem solving as one of the key mathematical topics that teacher education courses should focus on to achieve effective teacher education as well as good teaching (Watson & Mason. In this study. PRESERVICE TEACHERS’ PROBLEM-SOLVING LESSON ENGAGEMENT Along with other important knowledge such as mathematical facts and representations. 2007). (Dooren. Concerns regarding preservice teachers’ problem solving skills and strategies have also been raised. reasoning. 2007). through having particularized a general strategy for themselves. 2007). concepts. impact prospective teachers’ future pedagogy or their rejection of the topics as irrelevant to their own teaching (Watson & Mason. an essential issue is to allow preservice teachers to experience doing mathematics “in their own situation. a shared understanding should be achieved about why. in a study of preservice teachers’ arithmetic and algebra word problem-solving skills and strategies. 2007). Prior research has documented evidence that preservice teachers are inadequately prepared in mathematical knowledge for teaching in their teacher education programs (Conference Board of Mathematical Sciences [CBMS]. pp. and making connections. 2003. Keret & Ilany. 2007. p. researchers conclude that pre-service teachers who had arrived at the end of their teacher education still continued to demonstrate problem-solving behaviour characterized by (some of) the problematic features of the student teachers who had just started their teacher education. how and when teaching and learning the key mathematical topics in teacher education. For example. so that preservice teachers can become more aware of what their future learners may experience. but some awareness and experience in how to teach it. Working with preservice teachers on mathematical tasks can help them develop their mathematical knowledge for teaching arithmetic operations (Chapman. and (c) teaching algebra problem-solving? 69 . Verschaffel. More importantly. and improve their content and pedagogical knowledge of and attitudes towards proportional reasoning (Ben-Chaim. such as problem solving. 45) The experimental course attempted to develop not only knowledge of problem solving. In designing the tasks. the ability to solve problems is an important dimension of teachers’ mathematical knowledge for teaching (Ponte. & Onghena. (b) algebra problem-solving. 2001. 208). 2000). Ball & Bass. rather than relying on being given particular ‘things to do’” (Watson & Mason. proving. 2009).

met and tutored a middle grades student avatar. The fifth author. 4 Hispanic females. and 3 White males. a graduate teaching assistant.  The experimental group of 30 participants included 28 females and 2 males. and planned and presented a 15-20 minute problem-solving lesson that used one of the Teaching for Diversity schemes to a group of avatars in SL (See Study 1. Each of three assigned Equity Problem Challenges illustrated one of the Teaching for Diversity schemes and consisted of four components: a culturally relevant problem to solve and adapt for middle grade students. was the lead instructor for the experimental class. and answering mathematics and equity questions that middle grades students might ask. 2008) and other essays on teaching for diversity. As homework. 5 Hispanic females. Two guest lecturers presented and discussed cultural diversity and cognitive engagement. • Readings and Discussions on Diversity. for a 14-week semester.T. planning a problem-solving lesson. • Math Equity Problem Challenges. Instruction and practice with problem-solving heuristics. and 2 White males. The comparison group of 28 participants included 25 females and 3 males. participants completed several problem sets that applied heuristic methods. There were 23 White females. • Second Life®. writing out complete solutions. Participants completed an orientation to SL. • Math Problem-solving and Problem Posing. was the instructor for the comparison class. The following summary provides a 70 . DAVIS et al. Responding to Diversity (Ellis.. Davis et al. J. Procedures. The following summaries provide brief descriptions of the activities of the experimental class. an award-winning clinical professor.  The third author. using How to Solve It (Polya. Participants. Methods The comparison group for the study was a second section of the course. which met once a week for 3 hours. 2012). responding to student misconceptions. Assigned readings were given from the textbook. 2004) as the primary textbook. The university online registration for the two sections provided information that one of the sections was a research project. with guest presentations by members of the research team. There were 24 White females.

Data sources. interrelated components: (1) Math Problem-solving. As part of the required presentation of the assigned weekly problem. problem-solving. Presentations by groups of 3–5 students included the NCTM standards addressed. and teaching. Agree. • Math Problem-solving. 71 . The experimental group took the tests the first day of class. Strongly disagree) adapted from the Cultural Awareness and Beliefs Inventory (CABI) (Roberts-Walter. an activity for class participation. and 3) Integration of Technology. • Problem Posing. 2014) revealed four factors: (a) teacher efficacy. This activity was used to distinguish between different types of problem posing.and posttests of the Knowledge for Algebra Teaching for Equity (KATE) test developed by the authors. (b) teaching beliefs. 2004) as the primary textbook. for a 14-week semester. • The design of the comparison course included three primary. The KATE test contained 20 Likert-type items (Strongly agree. the comparison group members were given gift certificates to compensate their participation and completed the test individually during the first and last two weeks outside of class. The following summary provides brief descriptions of the course activities. which used a combination lecture and online format. and a similar problem created by the group posed to the class. Students completed weekly problems that applied heuristic methods. and (d) racial beliefs. PRESERVICE TEACHERS’ PROBLEM-SOLVING LESSON ENGAGEMENT brief description of the activities of the comparison class. students created a similar problem and had the class explore it. using How to Solve It (Polya. • Integration of Technology. Table 6 provides example items for each of these factors.25 hours and completing online assignments outside of class for the remaining hours. Oner & Kulm. Instruction and practice with problem-solving heuristics. (c) cultural beliefs. The presentations of the problem solutions using Polya’s four steps required the integration of technology. Disagree. 2007). Students created a video to use with a problem they created for a problem-solving lesson plan.  Participants completed pre. 2) Math Problem Posing. and 19 mathematics problems to assess algebra knowledge. Polya’s four steps. writing out complete solutions and presenting these solutions in class. meeting once a week for 1. A previous factor analysis of the CABI (Indiogine.

Table 7.T. Factors and sample items from the CABI Instrument Factor Number of items Sample items Teacher efficacy 11 I am comfortable with people who exhibit values or beliefs different from my own. Using W for the total weight of the loaded truck and x for the number of boxes. write a symbolic rule (or equation) that expresses W as a function of the number of boxes. Cultural beliefs 3 I believe students in poverty are more difficult to teach. Table 6. was made up of 12 questions that addressed understanding and problem-solving skills in algebra. The empty truck weighs Problem-solving 4500 pounds. DAVIS et al. how would you assist this student? 72 . Table 7 shows examples of these items. Racial beliefs 2 I believe many middle school teachers engage in biased behavior toward students of color in the classroom. One student‘s response was as follows: 2x + 7 + 3x – 9 = 0 5x – 2 = 0 5x = 2 x = 2/5 Is the answer correct? If you think the student has misconceptions with respect to the problem. was comprised of 7 questions on how to assist students’ who had errors or misconceptions. Sample items from the KATE Algebra Test Component Number of items Sample items Algebra 12 A truck is loaded with boxes. assume each box Knowledge and weighs 20 pounds. Teaching beliefs 4 I believe that poor teaching is the main factor that causes the gap in math achievement between White students and students of color. and a classroom scenario in which a student used a unique strategy to correctly solve a real world algebra problem. Algebra 7 A math class was given this problem: Simplify Teaching 2x + 7 + 3x – 9. J. The open-ended problems had two components: Algebra Knowledge and Problem-solving. and Algebra Teaching.

For the CABI.43 Algebra Experimental 8.32 Comparison 58. PRESERVICE TEACHERS’ PROBLEM-SOLVING LESSON ENGAGEMENT Results The pretest and posttest scores on CABI.46 0. A comparison of the pretests for the experimental and comparison groups was done using t-tests to determine if there were significant differences in beliefs or algebra knowledge prior to instruction.77 –0. the only significant (p<. Means. using mean and standard deviation estimates of experimental and comparison groups. and effect sizes for experiment and comparison groups Measure Group Pretest Posttest Cohen’s d Mean SD Mean SD CABI Experimental 56.38 Knowledge and Problem-solving Comparison 8. On Algebra Knowledge and Problem-solving.91 3.24 On the pretests.07 4.72 1.69 Teaching Comparison 11.10 58.98 Algebra Experimental 12.78 4.05) difference between the experimental and comparison groups was on the CABI. The Cohen’s d (Cohen. and Algebra Teaching measures were the dependent variables.87 12.00 1. the experimental group had a slight decrease in mean scores from pretest to posttest.24 3. indicating a higher mean score for the comparison group.73 4. while the comparison group showed no change.01) increase.33 1. the experimental group had a small increased mean score from pretest to posttest. standard deviations.33 56. Table 8.25 3.49 9. Algebra Knowledge and Problem- solving. 73 . The Cohen’s d indicated that the experimental treatment had moderately positive effects on beliefs and attitudes toward diversity.93 14. the experimental group means increased while the comparison group means decreased over the course of the semester.03 0.33 1. The comparison group had a significant (p<.56 4.33 8.38 2. 1992) statistic was used as a measure of effect size to determine the effectiveness of the treatment. The results of the analyses of the measures are provided in Table 8. On the Algebra Teaching measure.

it is worth noting that the comparison group experienced a decrease in attitudes and beliefs about diversity over the semester. Few scholars have designed and employed virtual classroom simulations as an experimental setting for preservice mathematics 74 . given the extent of the work done on problem sets and Equity Challenge Problems in which they did well in applying Polya’s heuristics in solving a variety of challenging problems. they recognize their limitations.. While the effect size was modest. it should be noted that these attitudes and beliefs are often well-established and resistant to change. it appears that the experimental group responses to misconceptions made attempts to engage students by asking questions. responding to student misconceptions. armed with the knowledge and practice they gained. The activities designed to develop experiences with teaching diverse students may have helped the experimental group to become more confident. leaving little room for improvement. We plan to do follow-up research after the PSTs have had student or full-time teaching experience to determine if the course has more lasting effects. There may have been a “ceiling effect” since their performance on the pretest was equivalent to the posttest for some previous semesters (Brown et al. Concluding Thoughts The work highlighted in this chapter is another step in pursuing an emerging research agenda. DAVIS et al. The performance on the algebra teaching items was especially puzzling since the participants had extensive experience in the course planning lessons. The number and demand of assignments and the challenge of connecting problem-solving and teaching for equity may have interfered with the experimental participants’ ability to integrate their knowledge. Perhaps the test items did not capture the extent of the participants’ knowledge.T. and teaching a simulated lesson in Second Life®. Our informal observations have been that participants often enter the course with reasonably positive beliefs and confidence about teaching diverse students. As they encounter the activities and assignments. whereas the comparison group only told the student the correct procedure. Also. Discussion The activities developed and implemented in the problem-solving course appeared to provide a reasonably effective combination of approaches that help improve preservice middle grade math teachers’ knowledge and beliefs about teaching for equity. 2011). This finding is important and requires further research. The experimental groups’ performance on the algebra test was disappointing. In some informal follow-up analyses. J.

Journal of Teacher Education... Multiple perspectives on the teaching and learning of mathematics (pp. 83–104). Hill. REFERENCES Achinstein. & Bass. D.g. C. L. Westport. C. D. Chien. (2007). Keret. grant # 1020132. & Kulm. Proceedings of the 2002 Annual meeting of the Canadian mathematics education study group (pp. 2–8. CT: Ablex. B.. 10. and conclusions or recommendations expressed in these materials are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation. 843–862. (2000). H. Davis & E. Ben-Chaim. findings.. Laboratory settings and the study of teacher education. and the affordances of using innovative technological resources like 3-D virtual classroom environments. the effects of engagement. 21. Edmonton.). 2010. Simmt (Eds. 43–46. Cheong. and how can we decide? American Educator. S. In B. Any opinions. Davis. Finally. Focusing new teachers on diversity and equity: Toward a knowledge base for mentors. D. 29(1). H. Boaler (Ed. 20–22. L. & Athanases. PRESERVICE TEACHERS’ PROBLEM-SOLVING LESSON ENGAGEMENT teachers to apply and practice their emerging knowledge and skills in teaching. D. (1985). can perhaps inform the design of select mathematics teacher preparation courses. Future investigations of virtual teaching and learning simulation experiences.. L. Empirical and anecdotal evidence suggests that simulations in virtual worlds can provide effective instructional settings for preservice teachers (e. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT This project is funded by the National Science Foundation.). Designing and implementing authentic investigative proportional reasoning tasks: The impact on pre-service mathematics teachers’ content and pedagogical knowledge and attitudes. learner and course characteristics. Berliner. (2005).. In J. Brown. Ball. & Ilany. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education. 36(2). exploring new ways to prepare teachers to engage all students in rich and effective learning experiences is critical. (2005). L.. Ball.. H. Further research needs to be done in finding the appropriate balance between the focus on equity and problem solving and on helping preservice teachers connect and integrate these ideas and skills. Y. 75 . & Bass. Interweaving content and pedagogy in teaching and learning to teach: Knowing and using mathematics. Knowing mathematics for teaching: Who knows mathematics well enough to teach third grade. B. Z. Our work has been reasonably successful in developing preservice teachers’ beliefs and attitudes about teaching math for equity. & Bass. Ball. 2012). Teaching and Teacher Education. D. (2003). Toward a practice-based theory of mathematical knowledge for teaching. 14–17. 3–14). 333–340. AB: CMESG/ GCEDM.

). Mathematics for every student: Responding to diversity. Proceedings of the 41st annual meeting of the research council on mathematics learning (pp. 41–48). P. T. CA: Jossey Bass. San Antonio. J. Dooren. S. (2011). 155–159. (2008). G. Cruickshank. 21–32). 6. D. How teacher education matters. 55. I. K. Pre-service teachers’ preferred strategies for solving arithmetic and algebra word problems. Cheong. Knowledge for algebra teaching for equity (KATE) project: An examination of virtual classroom simulation approaches. 112(1). Davis. (2012). Kulm (Ed. (2012). Brown. Chien. & Kulm. D. 10. Journal of Mathematical Behavior. (2002). The effects of a graphing-approach intermediate algebra curriculum on students’ understanding of function. C. 220–231. Brown. E. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education. Kulm. Yackel. (2006). Boaler. The effects of practice teaching sessions in second life on the change in pre-service teachers’ teaching efficacy. T.). 266–283.). Reston.. Journal of Teacher Education. Cobb. & Kulm.. American Mathematical Society and Mathematical Association of America. & D. Wood. (2000). TX. I. (2014). In T. Indiogine. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education. the Netherlands: Sense. Journal of Negro Education. Washington. (2000). J.. Developing preservice math teachers’ diversity awareness and knowledge.. 51(3). 3–18). (2008). J. Psychological Bulletin. O. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education. P. C. The dreamkeepers: Successful teachers for African American children. Davis. T. 6–8). Cobb. 4). A. Prospective middle grade mathematics teachers’ knowledge of algebra for teaching. W. Computers & Education. G.. G. Preservice teachers’ knowledge for teaching algebra for equity in the middle grades: A preliminary report. 67–87. Yackel. E. San Francisco. Facilitating preservice teachers’ development of mathematics knowledge for teaching arithmetic operations. G. 9(2). & Kulm. M. V. 166–173. W. D. National Forum of Multicultural Issues Journal. DC.T. Hollar. IN: Phi Delta Kappa. (Ed. Darling-Hammond. (2010). T. Cohen. 27–52. 18(4). Journal of Mathematical Behavior. Educational Studies in Mathematics. (1994).. & Onghena. A theoretical framework for mathematics knowledge in teaching middle grades.. In G. 31(4). 117–144. Models for the preparation of America’s teachers. Delpit. Reston. Theoretical orientation. 51(1/2).. Bloomington. Rotterdam. (1999). Ball (Eds. Ladson-Billings. Huang. R. Karsenty. M. J. Chapman. L. P. (1984). L. grades (pp. The mathematical education of teachers (Vol. Conference Board of the Mathematical Sciences [CMBS] (2001). G.. L. R. Verschaffel.. (2007).. 417–430. Journal of Teacher Education. Mathematics from another world: Traditional communities and the alienation of learners. & Norwood. Che (Eds. Lessons from teachers. (2003). E. Ellis. Teacher knowledge and practice in middle grades mathematics (pp. Oner. J. 341–349. Rethinking elementary school mathematics: Insights and issues (pp. & Kulm. In G. 868–880. 80.). 220–226. 76 ... T. Matney & S. A power primer. & Wood. VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. What do adults remember from their high school mathematics? The case of linear functions. 57(3). 30(2). A. VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. 379–397. (1993). G. (1992). DAVIS et al.

Educational Researcher. 271–283. (1998). P. Lamberg. P.ed. (2009). & Middleton. Toward a theory of culturally relevant teaching. NY: MacMillan. Princeton. Ladson-Billings. Malloy. 143–163. 77 . American Educational Research Journal. 21–40. Reston. VA: Author. Computer-intensive algebra and students’ conceptual knowledge of functions. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education. San Francisco. Ladson-Billings.pdf O’Callaghan. Using equity audits in the classroom to reach and teach all students. Washington. R. Polya. Is meeting the diverse needs of all students possible? Kappa Delta Pi Record.. DC: Author. Schoenfeld. 29(1).. G. McKenzie.. N.. G. K. J. TX. K. Chudowsky. CA: Corwin Press. metacognition. (1992). 38(4). 229–234. West Conshohockem. Lewis. Curriculum and evaluation standards for school mathematics. 56(2). 233–245. (1997). Foundations for success: The final report of the National Mathematics Advisory Panel. (2007). Retrieved on December 12. & Jones. (2001). (2009). Knowing what students know: The science and design of educational assessment. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. 11(1). New York. (2008). G. 28(6). Design research perspectives on transitioning from individual microgenetic interviews to a whole-class teaching experiment... DC: Author. Texas A&M University. B. L. F. Ladson-Billings. K. PRESERVICE TEACHERS’ PROBLEM-SOLVING LESSON ENGAGEMENT Ladson-Billings. (Eds. Washington. Grouws (Ed. A. A. M.. 334–370). Journal for Research in Mathematics Education. NCATE Standards for the accreditation of teacher preparation Institutions.). Teaching and Teacher Education. (2004). Alternatives to field-based experiences: The comparative effects of on-campus laboratories. & Glaser. W. (1998). & Skrla. H. DC: National Academies Press. 12(3). 465–491. and sense-making in mathematics. Learning to think mathematically: Problem solving. (2001). M. B. In D. Ladson-Billings. Thousand Oaks. & Kahlich. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. VA: Author. An investigation of African American students’ mathematical problem solving. (2011). 29. Principles and standards for school mathematics. (1989). Determining the validity and reliability of the cultural awareness and beliefs inventory (Unpublished doctoral dissertation).). G. A. Metcalf. W. 2012 from http://www. G. G. How to solve it. 33. (2008). T. E. Crossing over to Canaan: The journey of new teachers in diverse classrooms. (1998). College Station. (1996). NJ: Princeton University Press. Pellegrino. CA: Jossey-Bass. A. Ladson-Billings. G. An educator’s guide to working with African American students. (1995). It doesn’t add up: African American students’ mathematics achievement. 7–24. G. Journal of Teacher Education. (2005). Washington.gov/about/bdscomm/list/mathpanel/report/final-report. Is the team all right? Diversity and teacher education. C. J. C. Reston. 697–708. National Council for the Accreditation of Teacher Education. 13–15. PA: Infinity. Just what is critical race theory and what’s it doing in a nice field like education? International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education. R. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education. Roberts-Walter. National Mathematics Advisory Panel. (2000). 48(1). (2011). Handbook for research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. Hammer.

CA: Corwin. K. McKenzie. Hillsdale. W. & Scheurich.. Charner-Laird. 6. 395–409. L. 8–18. & Tzur. 205–215. D. C. Teaching and learning mathematical problem solving: Multiple research perspectives. (2004). NY: Teachers College Press.. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education. Watson. P.. (2009).. Stinson. J. Effective teaching/effective urban teaching: Grappling with definitions. (1985).). Kirkpatrick. 91–104. M. New York. Watson. 57.. Mathematical Thinking and Learning. Thier. J. Journal of Teacher Education. Mathematics as “gate-keeper” (?): Three theoretical perspectives that aim toward empowering all children with a key to the gate. Indiogine Department of Teaching. Learning and Culture College of Education and Human Development Texas A&M University 78 . Thousand Oaks. Using equity audits to create equitable and excellent schools. Szczesiul. & Mason. J. (2006). (2001). NJ: Erlbaum. Learning and Culture College of Education and Human Development Texas A&M University Gerald Kulm Department of Teaching. The Mathematics Educator. grappling with difference. 14(1). S. D. 10. Learning and Culture College of Education and Human Development Texas A&M University S. Trina J.T. R. Simon. Davis Department of Teaching. & Gordon. DAVIS et al.. Taken-as-shared: A review of common assumptions about mathematical tasks in teacher education. R. Explicating the role of mathematical tasks in conceptual learning: An elaboration of the hypothetical learning trajectory. Skrla. M. Silver. A. E. A. Learning and Culture College of Education and Human Development Texas A&M University Ayse Tugba Oner Department of Teaching... Enrico P. (Ed. (2004). Developing inquiry-based science materials: A guide for educators. (2007).

PRESERVICE TEACHERS’ PROBLEM-SOLVING LESSON ENGAGEMENT Dianne Goldsby Department of Teaching. Learning and Culture College of Education and Human Development Texas A&M University Tingting Ma Department of Teaching. Learning and Culture College of Education and Human Development Texas A&M University 79 .

 J. Mathematics instruction items in the M-VCOI survey Number of Item Item 1 Clearly articulated the objectives of the lesson to the students 2 Clearly outlined how the lesson would proceed 3 Gave a rationale or justification for learning the mathematics or solving the problem 4 Presented the lesson clearly. and sequence of the lesson effectively and efficiently 19 Context of the lesson was culturally relevant and meaningful to students’ lives and interests 20 The lesson was based on one of the following schemes (1=situated learning scheme. 3=critical pedagogy scheme) 21 The lesson clearly followed the above scheme 80 . DAVIS et al. (Reverse order) 12 Demonstrated confidence of students’ ability (evident in teacher’s language) 13 Assisted students in generalizing learning to other situations problems 14 Distributed feedback evenly 15 Redirected student thinking 16 Demonstrated expectation for all students to participate 17 Provided a summary of the lesson to remind students what they should have learned 18 Managed the time. 2=culturally relevant context scheme. pace. APPENDIX Table 9. using appropriate math language and materials 5 Worked out the mathematical content accurately and thoroughly 6 Connected ideas and concepts 7 Used multiple representations in the lesson or activities 8 Used purposeful questioning to clarify students’ understanding 9 Provided students opportunities for problem-solving 10 Answered students’ questions and addressed students’ difficulties or misconceptions appropriately 11 Ignored students’ questions or misconceptions.T.

As a paradigm shift in English language teaching. According to Bolton (2006). With the spread of the English language and the increasing number of English language users who have acquired English as an additional language (Graddol. educators need to adapt to multilingualism and at the same time prepare for this transformation of English. . rather WEs embraces emerging varieties of English used in diverse sociolinguistic contexts and includes local and international varieties. Teaching at Work. should a number of varieties of English (Englishes) be considered legitimate for use globally? As stated by Kubota (2001). WEs is an umbrella label referring to a wide range of differing approaches to the description and analysis of English(es) worldwide. ESLAMI. Li & J. and if so. Should there be only one Standard English. while teaching the dominant codes and conventions. in spite of this growing diversity within the English Y. 2010). All rights reserved. Hammer (Eds. Eslami. 1997). World Englishes challenges the acceptance of one Standard English variety. ZOHREH R. 2011). However. As Matsuda and Matsuda (2010) suggest. 81–103. teachers can also help students understand that language users may deviate from the perceived norms to convey important social meaning. which variety (from the United Kingdom.). a WEs perspective rejects the superiority and authority of speakers of ‘standard English’ and accepts the language authority and norms of diverse users of English (Shin. North America. The pedagogical implications apply to both spoken and written English. or another standard)? Or. EDIE CASSELL AND BURCU ATES 5. but there is a widening debate over the variety of English that is most acceptable. defined inclusively to encompass not only the linguistic varieties but also the functional varieties of English today (Matsuda & Matsuda. the World Englishes (WEs) paradigm challenges the homogenous viewpoint of English and offers a heterogeneous perspective. © 2015 Sense Publishers. CHANGING PRESERVICE TEACHERS’ ATTITUDES TOWARD LINGUISTIC DIVERSITY BY INTRODUCING A WORLD ENGLISHES PERSPECTIVE INTRODUCTION There is little argument that English has become the international language. there has been an increasing interest in considering the pedagogical implications of WEs. & Chen. As a nation that is becoming more diverse.

R. Six activities were implemented in undergraduate pre-service teacher education courses at a 82 . When educators reflect on the impact of English varieties on English instruction overall. there is a need to design teacher education courses that focus on instilling a sense of openness to diversity in teachers as well as self-awareness of their own attitudes and beliefs (Garmon. researchers and teacher educators recognize the need to consider how varieties of English are regarded in classrooms.S. borders due to a high rate of immigration. then they may not validate varieties of English in their teaching dispositions and teaching practice. to improve U. This is a pressing concern for pre-service teachers in the U. both inside the U. ranked most influential among the participants in this study. 2005).S. and found that none of them had classes specifically dedicated to the teaching of WEs. language. as Matsuda (2009) notes. Kamhi-Stein. Among these courses there must be curricula that specifically deal with varieties of English as the main content.S. pre-service teachers’ preparation. & Brinton. ESLAMI et al. preservice teachers are not exposed to linguistic diversity both globally and locally. Because English language teaching has become a major commodity worldwide (Anchimbe. (The study by Vavrus was conducted 24 years ago. The project exposed pre-service teachers to activities designed to prepare them to address the varieties of English that exist globally as well as locally (Snow. 2006). The World Englishes paradigm challenges the deficit perspective that monolingual English speakers may subscribe to “heterogeneity of English” users. This paper focuses on one of the activities.Z. they cannot forsake the sociocultural contexts of its use and its speakers. researchers need to investigate how World Englishes can be incorporated in teacher education programs in the U. However. and internationally. because of the plethora of cultures.S. especially regarding the English language. used in a WEs project aimed at promoting awareness about local and international varieties of English in a teacher education course in the U. 2006). If U.S.S.S. and linguistic varieties that reside within U. so a new survey is certainly needed. both within the United States and beyond. researchers need to find models of successful curricula or specific activities that can serve to linguistically enlighten future teachers. languages.) So. varieties of English are not being addressed in teacher education programs. Vavrus (1991) surveyed the teacher training coursework of 12 universities in the U.S. Therefore. The WEs perspective offers a heterogeneous viewpoint that recognizes the varieties of English. The current study is a sub-part of a larger study that aimed to promote awareness and instil positive attitudes toward linguistic diversity among preservice teachers. and beyond its borders.

The activity pre- service teachers found the most influential focused on a documentary film entitled American Tongues. draw conclusions. Timmis. some researchers describe native speakers of English as being deficient in using English in international settings. which explores American dialectical differences and their relation to race and ethnicity.S. 2002.g. to convey specific social meaning. U. Therefore. present the methodology used in the present study. Southwestern university in the U. and to assert their identities.S. Tsurutani. in its function as a global language. This lack of knowledge about World Englishes may lead to negative attitudes toward the varieties of English that their students will use. they may very well be at a disadvantage in ELF (English as lingua franca) settings (Jenkins. In what follows. English use is recognized as being context-dependent. hybrid. land grant. but also the methodologies associated with them and the curriculum materials that follow. in order to incorporate a WEs perspective into the teacher education program. As argued by Seidlhofer (2011). and then will present the findings. and standards. several studies have identified a tendency among teachers in general and English language teachers in particular to want to observe the traditional standards (e. However. In fact. Preservice teachers were instructed to watch the film and write a guided reflection about the issues presented in the documentary. Since monolingual speakers of English have not had the opportunities that international users of English have had in adapting to other cultural and linguistic ways of operating. teachers have a lack of awareness that English has become the default language of global communication and English users around the world are adapting English to meet their needs. dynamic.a far cry from more traditional approaches toward language that are concerned with grammar. and fluid. especially from Great Britain and North America. LITERATURE REVIEW The first challenge in promoting awareness of WEs in teacher preparation programs is countering the attitudes that teachers have regarding ‘non- standard’ varieties of English.. Jenkins (2009) points out that the most respected versions of English are those of native speakers. 2011). we will discuss the relevant literature. This includes not only the speakers of these high-status varieties. rules. Changing Preservice Teachers’ Attitudes large. 2012). A content analysis was conducted of all of the reflections of the preservice teachers. native English speakers will not 83 .

In this study.” (Dröschel. and Australia) and beyond (Samimy & Kurihara.The Inner Circle represents the traditional bases of English: the United Kingdom. 2006). Australia.g. 2006).’ ‘Global English.it no longer has a single center (such as the U. Canada. spoken by millions. are now merely two of many varieties of World Englishes. New Zealand.K. 34).’ etc.S.Z.S. “‘International English. we regard World Englishes beyond its general description of post-colonial and institutionalized varieties of English and define it as the linguistic diversity of English users both within ‘Inner Circle’ countries and internationally as well. Kubota and Ward (2000) define the term. 2008). and some of the Caribbean territories. English is a language that is used both in local and international contexts by both native and non-native speakers regardless of the name given to it (Snow. it is predicted that by 2050 approximately half the world will be proficient in English due to its globalization. with a billion more learning it. The other two circles are the Outer Circle and the Expanding Circle.) which 84 . Inner Circle countries. Shifting teachers’ perspectives to accept varieties of English as legitimate varieties does require a shift in thinking and predispositions. 2012). p. both within Inner Circle countries and internationally. According to Qiong (2004). as the linguistic diversity of English users around the world. varieties emerge as the language is molded by the new communities which adopt it. only need training to develop sensitivity to other varieties of English but also to become interculturally competent speakers of English. or U. more varieties of the language are emerging. thus this global language (English) becomes polycentric.’ ‘English as an International Language. ESLAMI et al. R. Ireland. Through globalization and spread of English. U. He conceived of the idea of three concentric circles or geographic spheres of influence where the English language is used. British and American English. The two traditionally known varieties. The aim is to help teachers recognize and accept linguistic diversity by introducing them to a variety of Englishes in the Inner Circle countries (e. This change should have an effect on what teachers understand to be good practice in their profession (Dewey. When teaching English as an international language.’ ‘English as a World Language. 2011.’ ‘World English. teachers are required to have a mindset and approach that is different from those traditionally used in English language teaching (Matsuda. It is the language of globalization. was coined by Braj Kachru (1992). There are a number of considerations that must be taken into account when educators reflect on how WEs have an impact on English instruction. The term. Kamhi-Stein & Brinton. Because of the large number of people speaking English. United Kingdom. World Englishes... the United States.

Many pre-service teachers are unaware of the degree of linguistic diversity among English language users. Kamhi-Stein. 2000).S. Thus. Teacher education programs need to adequately prepare teachers for a society that is experiencing a high rate of immigration and producing more and larger groupings of cultures. As a result.. Changing Preservice Teachers’ Attitudes influences its norm of usage. Lippi-Green (1997) identifies a pervasive idea of a hierarchical order of English varieties that exists in the U. Lippi-Green. So. 2003. the literature emphasizes that ethnic and racial prejudice still heavily linger in the U. 2001). 1997). 1997) and linguistic variation is generally seen as something that must be fixed in an individual (Lippi-Green. 2000. to avoid enforcing monolithic native speaker norms or stigmatizing ELLs’ language in the classroom. Kubota. It is imperative for pre-service teachers who are from Inner Circle countries (Kachru. Kubota & Ward. and linguistic varieties in U. languages. classrooms. which negatively color the attitudes of native speakers toward varieties of English (Kubota. & Brinton. How can teacher educators design coursework and activities that prepare teachers to effectively and sympathetically deal with linguistic diversity 85 . 1995). future teachers must develop knowledge and competency in WEs. 2006). 2012). It is our belief that incorporating a WEs perspective into teacher education programs supports these goals.S. Additionally. Individuals who do not speak “standard English” are deemed second class English speakers (Lippi-Green. 1997) rather than a marker of uniqueness (Schnizter.S. these changes require teacher preparation programs to prepare all teachers to affirm linguistic and cultural diversity in their professional practice. many school programs have not been sensitive to students who speak varieties other than Standard American English. they regard their own cultural frame of reference as the norm and are completely oblivious to the privilege they enjoy through being a speaker of an Inner Circle variety of English (Kubota & Ward. 1992) to be aware of the WEs paradigm so they can better understand and be prepared to meet the needs of English language learners (ELLs) in their future classrooms. but instead has multiple centers around the globe which individually shape its character (Seargeant. The numerous varieties of English that have developed require teachers to be prepared to teach students about the varieties of English spoken around the world as well as be able to positively impact their students’ attitudes toward these varieties (Matsuda. there is a need for researchers to further examine how pre-service teachers can be better prepared to address the varieties of English they will encounter in their instructional practices (Snow. 2001. Since migration has led to dramatic changes in the demographic of students.

S. Kubota’s study was exploratory and conducted on a small scale. The Kubota 86 . pre-service teachers’ preparation. reflection on their teaching experience will be key. it is imperative to address this issue in mainstream teacher education programs in the U. Finally. and interviewed students after the intervention. 2001. Several activities.Z. Snow. including classroom and small group discussions on various topics related to WEs. there is a relative lack of research on how to develop a WEs perspective in teacher education programs in the U. 2006).S. and promote validation of cultural and linguistic differences (Kubota. Kubota developed a study including an eight-week unit on WEs carried out in a U.S. ESLAMI et al. Eslami. researchers and teacher educators need to find models of a successful curriculum or specific activities that can serve this purpose. Matsuda. Brown (2005) discussed incorporating a World Englishes course into an MA TESOL degree plan in the U. high school. 2009. Dewey (2012) notes that for teachers to go beyond the knowledge they gain in their training programs. students still held fast to their notions of the superiority of their own variety of English and bias against WEs.S. She administered a pre-test and post- test. Sharifian and Marlina (2012) discussed the incorporation of a WEs paradigm in their university undergraduate and graduate courses in Australia. Matsuda (2009) explored how teacher education programs in Japan have addressed the international nature of English in their curriculum. Despite the need to address the linguistic and sociocultural diversity of English in today’s globalized world. & Brinton. 2008). The results of this study indicate that changing students’ beliefs and prejudice about linguistic diversity can be challenging and that beliefs do not necessarily change after being exposed to a new outlook. and films related to English varieties. were used. Understanding the global spread of English and creation of new varieties is particularly important for teachers because the attitudes and perspectives of teachers influence their students’ attitudes (Tan & Tan. conducted classroom observations. guest speakers representing WEs varieties. 2006)? To improve U. In 2001.S. Therefore. The results indicated that even after the series of lessons. Kamhi-Stein. R. & Wright under review). Although the studies cited above are all important in enhancing awareness about WEs in teaching and teacher education programs. teacher education programs need to motivate teachers to make reflection a process that continues throughout their careers (Snow. Having teachers reflect on their own perceptions and knowledge related to English varieties can be instrumental in developing acceptance of linguistic diversity. and other Inner Circle countries (Ates.

Among the six activities used in this intervention. According to fall 2011 demographics published in the university’s ‘statistical fact book’ 65. In this paper. The teacher credential program requires all preservice teachers to take multicultural education and English as a second language (ESL) methodology courses as part of the teacher education curriculum.S. Through carefully planned coursework and classroom activities. A fifteen- week semester-long ESL methodology course was selected to conduct the large study on WEs. we examined the effects of our intervention on pre-service teachers’ perceptions and attitudes toward WEs and diverse English users (Ates. 15.4% were Black. Activity Six activities were used to introduce WEs to preservice teachers. a longer treatment length. Eslami.8% of students enrolled were White. The activities consisted of four in-class sessions and two online sessions.S. Participants This study’s participants were preservice teachers seeking a Bachelor of Science (B. was selected as the site for this study. 3. under review). METHODOLOGY Context A large land grant university located in southwestern region of the U. Changing Preservice Teachers’ Attitudes (2001) study provided the impetus for this study: we examined the effect of incorporating a WEs perspective into a mainstream pre-service teacher education program in the U. The first in-class activity was Introduction to World Englishes. and 8. The study involved a total of 215 preservice teachers from five ESL methodology course sections in spring 2011.2% were Hispanic.S.6% were international. & Wright. and a variety of activities. Preservice 87 . pre-service teachers ranked watching American Tongues as the most effective activity. we examine the reflections of the pre-service teachers to explore their views and opinions in relation to linguistic diversity and also to reveal possible reasons why this activity was considered the most effective activity by the pre-service teachers.) degree in Interdisciplinary Studies enrolled in the College of Education. using a much larger subject sample.

accents. the pre-service teachers were asked to complete a questionnaire about the speakers they had heard. and perceptions. The fourth activity was called Miscommunications. Animated Characters.Chinese/Vietnamese). After listening to the audio. Outer. and (3) reflect on their own experiences interacting with speakers of American English (Kubota. The guiding questions were: 88 . the following topics were introduced in a lecture format: the dichotomy between native and nonnative English speakers. The objectives of this activity were to help pre-service teachers (1) become aware of the existence of varieties of American English. between interlocutors using varieties of English. The third activity. and the other of East Asian descent. Following the videos. pre-service teachers were asked to choose a character who speaks with an accent from a Disney movie or any animated film. and Expanding) of English language users (Kachru. (2) examine their own perceptions about American English.Z. Twelve international graduate students who were enrolled in the M. 2001). The sixth and final activity was to view American Tongues online. a one-hour. R. In the second in-class activity. This activity used various YouTube video clips to show miscommunications. In this activity samples of animated films were provided to guide the activity. Indian English. followed by a short discussion. the ownership of English. ESLAMI et al. teachers were presented audio from two YouTube videos by speakers of World Englishes (one of European descent. their accents.French/German. A series of guiding questions were used for pre-service teachers’ online reflections and discussions. Participants were asked to identify the character. sociolinguistic documentary film that examines American English regional dialects. and their resolutions. a PowerPoint about the history of Indian English was presented. pre-service teachers were shown samples of Indian English from YouTube. 1985). TESOL (Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages) Education master’s program were invited to give short introductions about themselves and the status and varieties of English used in their countries. award- winning. and attitudes. Preservice teachers watched American Tongues (1988). Lastly. Next.A. clips from the TV series Outsourced were shown. the movie. and the three concentric circles (Inner. involved having guest speakers use varieties of English in class. Guest Speakers. In activity five (one of two online activities). and discuss in one paragraph why they believed the particular accent was chosen for the character. the accent.

FINDINGS This section represents the findings of the qualitative data analysis. There were seven major themes identified in the analysis of the reflection papers. More specifically. DATA ANALYSIS A thematic analysis (Boyatzis. The study revealed that activities such as watching the American Tongues 89 . reflect in about one page (300 to 500 words) on the different varieties that exist in American English. sentences. Changing Preservice Teachers’ Attitudes After watching the documentary.” even though you know they are speaking American English (a variety different than yours)? Were you able to understand what was said in different varieties of American English? Did you prefer one accent over others? Why? Were some accents more intelligible to you than others? Why? DATA COLLECTION Five sections of students enrolled in the ESL methodology course provided the data for this study. To add trustworthiness to the analysis. The data was collected through the pre-service teachers’ reflections to the given prompt on the film American Tongues. Themes were formed by grouping common responses of participants that implied the same meaning or underlying idea. 1998) was used to find common themes that emerged from the reflection papers. one of the researchers read through all of the reflection papers and extrapolated common themes that emerged from the responses. fifteen percent of the reflection papers were coded by another researcher and similar themes were identified. Each text segment was classified into a topical category labeled with a code. The same researcher revisited the reflections and assigned noteworthy quotations that corresponded to the themes. Did you know all these varieties existed in the United States of America? Did they sound different? Would you judge someone based on their “accent. All five ESL methodology section instructors agreed to be part of the study and included the six WE activities in their syllabi. These common responses were grouped under the relevant category to which they belonged. or parts of sentences related to a distinct concept. The analyzed texts were divided into segments which were paragraphs.

As a result of watching American Tongues. Identification of American English dialects and accents One of the most common themes that emerged from the reflections was a new awareness among the pre-service teachers of varieties in American English. After watching the video.S.” Listed below are some of the reflections made by pre-service teachers about their new awareness (italics added by the authors): I had no idea that many varieties existed in American English. but overall the different regional dialects all sound very different from each other. New perspectives gained through watching American Tongues # Themes revealed through analysis of pre-service teachers’ reflections 1 Identification of American English dialects and accents 2 Criticism of stereotyping/being judgmental of others’ dialects and accents 3 Recommendation to apply the Golden Rule: “Do unto others as you would have others do unto you” 4 Reaction to negative perceptions of Southern accents 5 Validation of dialects and accents as an expression of cultural identity 6 Appreciation of linguistic diversity as essential to American identity 7 Pledge to embrace American English dialects as future teachers 1. pre-service teachers commonly stated that they learned about the many varieties that exist in the U. American Tongues. R. ESLAMI et al.Z.” or accents such as “a Mexican accent” or “a British accent. and how people can stereotype others based on the way they speak or sound. it opened my eyes to the magnitude of the different varieties of American English. Many of the varieties sound similar. When I usually think about different varieties of English I think of Indian English or British English. ‘That person speaks a different variety of English 90 . not different American accents. documentary film can help pre-service teachers become aware of linguistic diversity which exists not only around the world but also within the U. Table 1. Participants stated that they previously thought of varieties in the English language as “Indian English or British English. These new perspectives also helped the students reflect on their future teaching experiences with English language learners. I have never thought to myself. Seven themes emerged from the analyzed data.S.

dialects. 2. they would always say that people living in other parts of the country are the ones that are hard to understand. Criticism of stereotyping/being judgmental of others’ dialects and accents The next most common theme that emerged was criticism of judging people based on the accent and dialect they use. or a Mexican accent. some speculated that this behavior stemmed from ignorance.” I was far from right. it just sounds different. I was not aware of even a slither [sic] of the plethora of accents here in our melting pot of a country. the list seems endless. Changing Preservice Teachers’ Attitudes than me. such as maybe a Southern American accent. 91 . I assumed that every other region just spoke “normally.’ I usually think we all speak English.” “I was very surprised at the numerous varieties the English language consumed. Now I can be more observant of other English speakers and how they express the language. Pre-service teachers specifically emphasized how some people in the film were quick to make a character judgment based on a person’s accent or dialect. Common phrases that were echoed by the pre-service teachers were that this documentary “opened my eyes to different varieties. Instead of saying that their own accent was hard to understand and follow. I had heard of universally known accents. Prior to watching this video I was unaware of the many different dialects spoken in America. a British accent. The participants found this surprising and at the same time offensive. This documentary really opened my eyes to the different forms of American accents all around our country.S. but I had little knowledge of the hundreds of varieties which are derived from the different countries from which immigrants travel. In their reflections. I have always noticed the difference in people’s voice. but I did not realize that there were so many different varieties. accents that can be associated with them. I always assumed there was a Southern dialect and then in my eyes a Jersey or New York dialect.” and “I learned so much that I had never heard of before.” “I was unaware of the varieties. Relevant examples from the reflections are listed below: Most of the people that were interviewed stated their stereotypes when it came to different accents across the United States. every region has specific words.” These reflections of pre-service teachers reveal that the majority were not familiar with the breadth of American English varieties existing within the U.

I have family members who speak all different dialects but I don’t think some are better or worse than others. In the video many different American accents are presented. I think this is absurd because you cannot judge a person just from their accent. Many pre-service teachers responded to the negative stereotyping by suggesting that people should treat others as they wish to be treated. That was something I strongly disagreed with. 3. I don’t think people should have to feel inferior to others based on their accents. Examples of comments related to this theme are listed below: This video makes me question if I have the right to say that. After watching this video. Recommendation to apply the Golden Rule: “Do unto others as you would have others do unto you” Another theme that emerged is an extension of the observation about stereotyping and being judgmental. stereotyped. People classify others as being dumb or smart depending on their accent which they locate to a certain state. As shown in the reflections cited above. and I was surprised how willing people were to admit their somewhat offensive opinions on just the way people talk. this documentary was effective in making students aware of how language users are judged. It was sad to hear some of the comments in the video that discriminated against people purely based on the sound of their voice. I was surprised to see how strongly some people feel against certain accents. ESLAMI et al. as an educator especially I would not judge a person’s character through their accent. Dialects bring a sense of sentiment and identity with them. We both have our own opinions and our own 92 . I was surprised to learn about how one can be judged about what kind of person they are just by their accent. and even marginalized based on the accent and variety of English they use. I think that people may be too stereotypical when it comes to dialects and accents. Hearing these people make character judgments about others was wrong and seemed to stem from ignorance as people acted surprised by other’s accents. Some participants even identified the practice of valuing or placing a higher status on one dialect over another by saying that no one has the right to say one accent is right or the other is wrong.Z. They might think that my English has a strong accent. There is no one who can say who is right or wrong. R.

People come from all over the world. Changing Preservice Teachers’ Attitudes way of speaking. I actually love sitting and listening to the many different ways people talk. lazy. and upsetting. I think it is important to remember that everyone is unique and that everyone. surprising. The way we speak and the specific words we use are what make us unique and individual. it is easy to judge someone quickly based solely on their accent. I would never judge them. Participants portrayed their reactions to hearing the negative stereotypes about Southern accents as: saddening. Below are some of the reflections on this theme: 93 . I have an “accent” and who’s to say that how I talk is not correct? This is why I don’t judge others. I personally enjoy the different accents. We all have some sort of an “accent” and I believe we should embrace the diverse “accents” that are presented in the world. a woman says she broke up with her fiancé when she discovered his Southern accent because she feared she would have “hillbilly babies. Because I have been the butt of jokes and discriminated against slightly in certain situations because of my Texan accent. stupid. I always try not to do the same to others. 4. and dumb. offensive.” Pre-service teachers could not believe the degree to which the Texan accent was perceived by some people in the film as slow. and me [sic] nor the person that lives next door to me are going to talk exactly the same.” These excerpts reveal that pre-service teachers questioned the judgmental attitudes portrayed in the film which were based on accent and dialectal differences. shocking. We all come from different backgrounds and who am I to judge someone based on the way they talk. Speaking to someone with an accent is interesting when it is a new experience. Reaction to negative perceptions of Southern accents Watching American Tongues led to the participants’ realization that their own “Southern” accents were judged negatively and some even recalled personal experiences with linguistic discrimination. From the soft and slow Southern accent to the fast paced speech of the north. In one scene in the documentary. speaks with an accent. It really goes back to the golden rule. While someone might speak in a way that is different than the way I speak. “treat others as you wish to be treated. Due to stereotypes. everyone speaks in a unique way and I find that very intriguing. including you.

I don’t judge people based on their accents so it was eye opening to see all of the animosity that exists throughout different regions of the country. People should not judge people by the accents or words they use in their speaking because they mostly likely learned that way of speaking from the place they grew up. In addition to being taken aback at the blatant prejudice. I’ve lived in Texas my whole life so actually hearing that we so obviously do speak a lot slower than people from the North came as a shock.Z. R. I always thought of the Southern accent as being friendly but maybe that is just because I am around it all of the time. they strongly disagreed that people’s intelligence can be related to their accents. Obviously. This just is not true and I feel offended when someone says that. I was really surprised to learn that there is a lot of prejudice towards the Southern accent. ESLAMI et al. I wish that people across the country (and world for that matter) could learn to appreciate each other for their differences. People think of the Southern accent as ignorance and racism and I never knew that before. 94 . I disagree and think accent has nothing to do with intelligence and it depends on the person and their education… It is possible that the pre-service teachers in this study were better able to identify with the negative stereotyping about Southern accents because many of them are from the South. I was saddened by the many negative opinions people have of Southerners. Many people think we are slow and stupid because of our Southern drawl. I feel like people judge me sometimes without knowing me just because of my accent. I also would not judge people that speak a different form of English than I do like all the people in the video it was crazy that people would talk bad about the way people from Texas/South speak. I also think that people from around the nation see people from the south as “dumb” or “more stupid” than the rest. I feel like that [sic] movies and TV have really pushed the stereotype that Southern people are stupid and inbred. They made fun of the way people from the South speak and I found that to be kind of offensive because their form of English is no better than ours.

specific dialects. come from different parts of the world and bring with them different cultures. 6. I personally love the fact that we all have accents because to me it is like taking a piece of home with me wherever I may be. and along with that their languages. Validation of dialects and accents as an expression of cultural identity A majority of the pre-service teachers expressed their belief that dialects and accents represent who we are. Some relevant reflections are listed below: The different accents and dialects are one of the great things that make up America. and different culture makes things interesting. Many participants recognized that the way people speak is a reflection of who they are. I think the different accents and dialects just highlight the idea of the melting pot that is America. Appreciation of linguistic diversity as essential to American identity Pre-service teachers commonly commented that every person’s cultural background is unique and that the cultural and linguistic diversity existing in the United States is part of what makes the country rich and unique. 95 . which I am very proud of. I think we should all be proud of where we came from because it made us who we are today. and let it be known that they are unique and different in their own way. It’s culture. Our accents and dialects are a part of who we are and another thing we have to learn about each other! Pre-service teachers identified the fact that people in the U. Several people in the video explained the identity and comfort that comes with their personal. My accent is a part of my roots and where I grew up. Changing Preservice Teachers’ Attitudes 5. customs. Many identified their accents as part of their culture and indicative of the region in which they were raised: The accent is the culture expressing itself.S. I love accents and in my opinion I think it’s awesome because in a way it kind of shows who you are and where you come from. I am proud to be a Texan and to have the accent. One thing I took away from this video was that dialects are “culture expressing itself in sound. Accents can even be conversation starters and windows into a stranger’s life. People with different accents around the country have the opportunity to express their culture. With that I am even more proud to be an American.” I found this true of myself and others.

All regions have developed a specific slang depending on their way of life. We all must understand that we have different varieties. As future educators. Rather we need to embrace these differences and realize that English is a mixture of languages and varieties of accents. It is also important to educate students about proper English within the classroom versus in a social context. and in an ELL classroom this is extremely important for making our students feel comfortable and welcomed. and we all must value and respect those differences. I love America and the fact that we are different. and America wouldn’t be the same without this diversity. The varieties that exist in American English [sic] is exactly what makes the language so rich and everlasting.” Every person deserves to shown respect. This is what makes our country so strong and diverse. and backgrounds. There is no right way to speak English. 7.Z. Pre-service teachers’ reflections indicated that they believe Americans take pride in regional variations in language and culture as part of the fabric of the overall diversity in the United States. It would not be fair to our students to deem them as less than or greater than other based off the accent or dialect that they speak with. accents. We all add to what America is. As a country. ESLAMI et al. we should accept and appreciate all of the diversity that forms America and be free to speak in any form of English that we want to. They stated that linguistic diversity should be celebrated and appreciated for its variety and uniqueness because part of being American is being free to express one’s own culture. R. we need to be aware of our predispositions. One of the best things about America is that it is a country where people are free individuals and speak in diverse and unique ways according to who they are. The documentary American Tongues opened up my eyes and made me realize that everyone is unique and although in society we sometimes think of that difference as a negative thing that is not always the case. while letting students know that the English that they use in social 96 . Pledge to embrace American English dialects as future teachers The last of the themes that emerged from the teachers’ reflections was about the impact of this activity on their future classroom teaching and on working with English language learners: It is important as a future teacher to not discriminate or judge any child based on their “accent.

Changing Preservice Teachers’ Attitudes contexts is perfectly acceptable. “I always assumed there was a Southern dialect and then. The findings reveal that pre-service teachers who participated in this activity gained a new outlook on the variety of American English accents and dialects. Being exposed to the documentary allowed pre-service teachers to realize how much diversity exists even within one variety of English (American English). the foreign and regional accent. Davé (2013) identifies two types of accents. As a future teacher I feel that I need to be open to all forms of English and willing to accept and learn each person’s background that goes along with their accent.S. 97 . pre-service teachers discussed their need to appreciate and embrace the language diversity English language learners bring into the classroom. such as the Southern accent or the nasal Midwestern accent. became aware of the stereotypes that exist toward English varieties. DISCUSSION The purpose of incorporating the American Tongues documentary film as one of the World Englishes activities was to inform pre-service teachers about the diversity of Englishes in the United States. and eventually were able to make connections between what they learned and their future classrooms and students. with an accent or dialect that I have never heard before. As Davé (2013) explains “Although regional dialects in the United States are distinct. and will be able to embrace others with different accents than mine more easily.’ I was far from right. they are embraced as an integral component of American culture with specific regional mannerisms” (p. I also think that this will help me when I encounter a student in my classroom who may be from an entirely different place than me. Additionally. or accent. As one pre-service teacher stated. This awareness provided the opportunity for pre-service teachers to reflect critically and appreciate the linguistic diversity that exists within the U. The pre-service teachers were not cognizant of the breadth of American regional accents. I assumed that every other region just spoke ‘normally. 5). We should not give the impression that their use of the English language is less than any other use. In general. The key point for them was to make ELLs feel welcome and not feel discrimination because of their language. dialect. a Jersey or New York dialect. prior assumptions were transformed into new awareness. in my eyes.” Through this activity. I believe after watching this video that I can appreciate the variety of English’s that America holds.

a possession all human collectives have in common. They indicated disdain for being judgmental toward speakers of non-standard varieties of English.” (p.Z. It is the most salient way we have of establishing and advertising our social identities. is more than a tool for communication of facts between two or more persons. Therefore. The fact that American Tongues highlighted negative stereotypes about Southern dialects may be one reason this activity had a powerful effect on these teachers. or dialect. Ironically. pre-service teachers were able to reflect on accents and dialects at a deeper level and critically associate these characteristics in speech and language with identity and cultural background. the pre-service teachers’ reflections on this documentary may 98 . Davé (2013) also provided this insight on the concept: “Accent not only includes tonal qualities but also involves word choice. made these teachers aware of the negative impact and even resentment that may result from being subjected to negative biases and stereotypes. through a legacy of immigration. These pre-service teachers do not appear to embrace an English- deficit perspective (Ates & Eslami. (as well as the varieties among the participants themselves). This notion was discussed by Lippi-Green (2012): “Language. Our participants indicated that the documentary promoted awareness of the existence and validity of varieties of English within the U. ESLAMI et al. Through the World Englishes activity. 3). acknowledgment of stereotypes associated with regional accents. R. Their reflections show that they acknowledge a transformation of English in the U. especially with their own Southern accents.S. One of the themes reflected on by the pre-service teachers was that one’s language represents one’s culture and identity. These pre-service teachers indicated that they should make their future ELL students feel welcome and not feel discrimination because of their language. It should be noted that watching and reflecting on American Tongues was the last of the six activities in the WEs project implemented in this study. arrangement of words. And finally. Many of their reflections showed that this sentiment was transferred to an appreciation of the language diversity English language learners bring into the classroom. the pre-service teachers reflected on how people easily stereotyped others based on their accents.S. 2). but instead assert a heterogeneous viewpoint in their discussion of the American regional varieties shown in the documentary. and cultural expressions that are rooted in national (and regional) expressions of identity (p. one of the main stereotyped accents in the film was the Southern accent. which is the dialect of most of the pre-service teachers in this study. 2012).

The responsibility lies with the U. By doing so. a separate study is needed. educational system to recognize and embrace the increasing diversity. under review). these teachers can be more effective because their students gain confidence when they are introduced to a broader world view in a classroom focused on what each student has to contribute.S. a teacher 99 . Eslami. As the English language is adopted by people from all over the world. both within Inner Circle countries and internationally among countries. It is evident in this study that the introduction of the World Englishes paradigm through the intervention of this instructional activity in a teacher education course did affect the teachers’ perceptions and attitudes and appeared to have helped prepare them to affirm linguistic and cultural diversity in their professional practice (Ates. Instead. IMPLICATIONS OF THE STUDY The United States has become a highly diverse country inhabited by people from all over the world speaking dialects of English. especially in the classroom.S. In order to investigate the impact of only this one activity. Kubota and Ward (2000) define the term. both within and beyond the U.. which is occurring at a rapid pace. should be considered just as valid as any Inner Circle variety. and Wright. We believe it is imperative to incorporate a WEs perspective into teacher education programs so that teachers will be adequately prepared for diverse learners. of English language learners (ELLs) in their future classrooms. 1992) develop knowledge and competency in the WEs paradigm. Changing Preservice Teachers’ Attitudes also reveal the cumulative effect of all six activities on their transformed attitudes. and throughout the world are not focused on remedying perceived deficits in their students’ linguistic heritages. although sometimes vastly different. It is imperative that the teaching force is able to understand and accommodate WEs. we cannot separate the influence of this activity from the cumulative effect of all the activities. as well as transmit that same acceptance and knowledge to all the students in their classrooms. World Englishes. This means that teachers who accept the validity of a variety of Englishes within the U. they can better understand and have the perspective to support. Even though students indicated that this was the most influential of the six activities.S. and thereby meet the needs. it no longer remains as it once was but is molded and enhanced into different forms. Teachers’ reflections indicate that when pre-service teachers from Inner Circle countries (Kachru. as the linguistic diversity of English users around the world. New varieties of English.

So.Z. and administrators. As argued by Lewis (1981).. pre-service. or even outrageous (Matsuda. may find a WEs perspective new. Although the WEs paradigm and its implications to teaching the English language may be familiar to TESOL professionals. administrators. Kubota 2001). but at the same time we must consider the history and politics of English and validate heterogeneity in the use of the English language as well as its users. for curriculum changes to be implemented successfully. rather. tackling diversity at the individual level may not be enough to cultivate appreciation of other varieties of English (cf. 2009). Standard American English) in order to function in native English speaking countries such as the U. and in-service teachers. radical. A concerted effort is needed in teacher education programs to introduce cultural and linguistic diversity in all the teacher education courses and to equip teachers to successfully prepare their students for future intercultural communication. which is invaluable to every student in the classroom. Educators should validate and embrace WEs varieties and respect new users of English as these users provide English with different colors and flavors. professionals in other fields (e. R. all stake holders should be aware of different attitudes toward English varieties and possible resistance and take appropriate and effective actions to bring about the necessary changes. It is our belief that English language learners who acknowledge the preponderance of Englishes throughout the world as ng " which makes their teaching more effective if you ac need to be taught the accepted high-status variety of English (i.e. it is also important for teachers and students to consider the differences in the ways in which English users today use English among themselves and in their communications with other native or non-native speakers of English. However. standardized varieties from English classes or replacing them with lower-status ones. ESLAMI et al. we should not neglect the needs of our learners. 2008). all varieties add to the students’ repertoire and thus enrich the curriculum (Matsuda. Non-TESOL educators.S.g. Considering how deeply belief in the validity of high-status varieties like American and British English are ingrained in our students. Parents are more likely to be supportive if they are better informed about the implications of the worldwide spread of English and are convinced that a global perspective is good for their children. can bring a sense of acceptance and boost self-esteem. students and their parents. Researchers 100 . content area teachers and teacher educators). and parents should be informed that accepting WEs and varieties of English does not mean removing native or high-status.

World Englishes. 25. (2011). Graddol. issues and resources. The handbook of applied linguistics (pp. Incorporating World Englishes into undergraduate ESL education courses. 38(3). Linguistik Online. 11−30). Quirk & H. K. Dewey. Teaching experiences of native and nonnative English speaking graduate teaching assistants and their perceptions of preservice teachers. G. Brown. Oxford. 275−286. Kubota. World Englishes: Pedagogical practices in the TESOL preparatory sequence. (2011). B. & Dewey. (2006). (1998). In A. Educational Studies. REFERENCES Anchimbe.pdf Jenkins. (1997). (2012). B. M. Ates. E. B. Standards. Kachru. Z. In A. (2005). (2006). (2001). Cogo. (2004). CA: Sage Publications. Jenkins. IL: University of Illinois Press. 281−315. K. Kachru. & Wright. (1992). English in the world: Teaching and learning the language and literature (pp. Transforming qualitative information thematic analysis and code development. (1985). B. 367−396). Ates. 3−14. 1−14. R. Lingua Franca English: The role of simplification and transfer. Thousand Oaks. 47−64. (2013). World Englishes. Journal on Excellence in College Teaching. 101 . Elder (Eds. The handbook of world Englishes (pp. Language Teaching. D. Kachru.britishcouncil. Varieties of world Englishes. VA: TESOL. Z. 926−936. Bern: Peter Lang.). & Eslami. (2005). In R. 44(3). Y. R.. Accommodating (to) ELF in the international university.. Teaching English from a global perspective (pp. & C. 289−312). Burns (Ed. 141−170. J. Teaching world Englishes to native speakers of English in the USA. 20(1). Davé. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. The future of English? A guide to forecasting the popularity of the English language in the 21st century. Retrieved from http://www.). Nelson (Eds. In B. Indian accents: Brown voice and racial performance in American television and film. Boyatzis. 26(1). Urban. Six key factors for changing preservice teachers attitudes/beliefs about diversity. Alexandria. S. Davies & C.. M. B. Garmon.). A. (under review). 23(3). Bolton. World Englishes: Approaches. Y. Changing Preservice Teachers’ Attitudes need to continue to examine different instructional activities and program models in different contexts to find out how the WEs perspective can be integrated into teacher education programs so that awareness and acceptance of language varieties can be promoted. K. (2012). Journal of Pragmatics. The native-speaker fever in English language teaching (ELT): Pitting pedagogical competence against historical origin. Malden. B. 1(1). K..). UK: Blackwell Publishing. Eslami. 19−33). (2011). A. E. Language Teaching. Kachru.org/learning-elt-future. L. M. World English. Dröschel. London: The British Council. J. Bolton. codification and sociolinguistic realm: The English language in the outer circle. A. 101−129. MA: Blackwell..Widows (Eds. Review of developments in research into English as a lingua franca. Towards a postnormative approach: Learning the pedagogy of ELF. Journal of English as a Lingua Franca. B. 43(4).

(2011). P. K. L. World Englishes. R. R.). L. K.). Hardman (Eds. Exploring linguistic diversity through world Englishes. (2003). 169−189). 465−479. TESOL Quarterly. (2009). 4(2). (2002). ideology. Evaluation of speakers with foreign-accented speech in Japan: The effect of accent produced by English native speakers. and discrimination in the United States (2nd ed. 253−268. Incorporating world Englishes in teaching English as an international language. 24(3). Matsuda (Ed.2011. 56(3). ideology. UK: Oxford University Press. Global English language teaching and teacher education (Vol. (2006). R. Desirable but not necessary? The place of world Englishes and English as an international language in English teacher preparation program in Japan. In F. In K.. English Journal. Native-speaker norms and international English: A classroom view. H. (2004). ESLAMI et al. World Englishes and teaching of writing. Bristol. UK: Multilingual Matters. Lippi-Green. ELT Journal. J. F. E. Oxford. 37. World Englishes.. W. 140−153). Exploring world Englishes: language in a global context. Kamhi-Stein.). American and other “World Englishes. F. (2008). 240−249. (2012). A. English with an accent: Language. (1997). Bristol.1080/07908318. Vavrus. 261−281. English with an accent: Language. 227−236. Samimy.. Foreword. Tsurutani. (2012). v–vii). 369−374. 78. Abingdon: Routledge. S. Sharifian (Ed. Timmis. X. Language.). and discrimination in the United States (1st ed. & Tan. Boston.. & Kurihari.Z. 181−195. Culture and Curriculum. TESOL Quarterly. 1−15. 26. Seargeant. Encyclopedia of language and linguistics (pp. Kubota. Matsuda. K. Y. Z.614694 Snow. (2011). R.” English Today.. Matsuda. R. Shin. CO: Multilingual Matters. (2012). London: Routledge. Tan. (2000). D. MA: Elsevier. D. When paradigms clash: The role of institutionalized varieties in language teacher education. 27(3/4). Eslami. 26−33. 19(2). & Marlina. (2012). C. H.). Principles and practices of teaching English as an international language (pp. P. doi:10. English as an international language (EIL): An innovative academic program. 719−729. English as an international language: Implications for interculturalists and language educators. (2006). Brown (Ed. Attitudes towards non-standard English in Singapore. Dogancay-Aktuna & J. 679−686). VA: TESOL Matsuda. Matsuda. M. A. Alexandria. Why China English should stand alongside British. In S. International Journal of Intercultural Relations. Schintzer. Teacher training for English as a lingua franca. A.). A. 89(6). I. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics.. (2010). Presentation of local and international culture in current international English language teaching textbooks.   102 . A. K. Understanding English as a lingua franca. P.. London: Routledge. B. Nonnative speaker teachers. Seidlhofer.. Lippi-Green. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development. In A. W. English as an international language: Perspectives and pedagogical issues (pp. 80−86. D. (1991). Sharifian. Qiong. & Ward. 10(2). & Chen. R.. M. & Brinton. K. (1995). (2008). & Matsuda.

Eslami Department of Teaching. Changing Preservice Teachers’ Attitudes Zohreh R. and Special Populations Sam Houston State University 103 . Learning and Culture College of Education and Human Development Texas A&M University Edie Cassell Department of Teaching. Literacy. Learning and Culture College of Education and Human Development Texas A&M University Burcu Ates Department of Language.

CYNTHIA BOETTCHER. . among other things: To position our students to live and compete in a global society. Augustine) INTRODUCTION Texas A&M University’s Vision 2020 states. developing and developing and performing a dual language play with the children and touring and visiting sites of historical significance. art. Luckily. SUBTRACTING STEREOTYPES THROUGH STUDYING ABROAD The World Is a Book. and culture of a particular country and. JANET HAMMER AND SUNNI SONNENBURG 6. prior to their travels. Teaching at Work. undergraduate education students from Texas A&M University have traveled to many countries in Europe. tutoring students in English. Since 2006. Li & J. and Central America following intensive preparation courses in which they. history. but who have the capacity to understand other cultures and to live and work outside their own cultural framework. Asia. in some cases. Students are required to answer three questions in preparation for the course and write a reflection on these three questions following their trips regarding how these experiences have changed their stereotypes of other cultures and helped them to be prepared to teach in diverse settings. we found over the past years that we had enthusiastic support from the College of Education and Human Development and the Department of Teaching. These varied in length and experiences have involved working in schools with students. Y. Learning and Culture as well as from the Texas A&M University Study Abroad Office. and Those Who Do Not Travel Read Only One Page (St. © 2015 Sense Publishers. Hammer (Eds. All rights reserved. 105–121.). study and research the literature. Texas A&M University must produce graduates who are not only academically prepared. develop lessons to teach students who are English as a Foreign Language Learners (EFL).

2011. Willard-Holt. 2003. and in study abroad opportunities. it is particularly important that teachers understand and accept cultures (Bruce. Taylor and Sobel (2001) note that “a significant discontinuity exists regarding the language. Quinn. Faulconer. & Anderson. Brindley. & Morton. acknowledge. Research suggests that a global perspective is essential in today’s world and that in American classrooms. and methods that effectively require pre-service teachers to confront their own biases and truly see into another culture is paramount to preparing teachers who will honestly and effectively create equitable learning environments for all children” (p. and guide the design of culturally responsive curriculum. students come to recognize their preconceived stereotypes. consciously or subconsciously. McKercher (2008) states. Faulconer (2003) insists that teacher perceptions of various cultures can negatively impact their interactions with students and a “change in these perceptions should be the goal of every teacher education institution. and Morton (2009) recommend that teacher educators expose pre-service teachers (PSTs) to “field experiences that remove PSTs from their presumptions about teaching and take them out of their comfort zone” (p. and the interconnectedness with their own students’ lives and school opportunities. 3). Quinn. (p. In particular. immersion experiences. 345). Boettcher et al. “stereotypes in tourism are both remarkably common and enduring” (p. As Dantas (2007) notes.C. create rich spaces for dialogue. which are growing increasingly diverse. 488). Podernski. 2009). and ethnicity of the teaching force and the school-age children they are teaching” (p. promote students’ inert knowledge into action. which are eventually transformed through travel and cultural exchanges. Designing curricula. regarding students who are different from themselves (Smolcic. Brindley. it is vital that pre-service teachers recognize. the importance of understanding stereotypes is imperative for a generation of teachers who will teach in a community of students whose demographic dynamics will be extremely different from their own experiences. 2001). and address any stereotypes that they may hold. 531). WHY DEVELOP STUDY ABROAD EXPERIENCES In today’s global society. Similarly. guided international experiences can challenge teacher education students to use inert knowledge to read and interpret their experiences with diversity and understanding of self. culture. 76) 106 . Education programs with an international component are in a unique position to engage teacher education students in firsthand exploration of cultural and diversity understandings. 1991. Pence & Macgillivray. Thus. 2008.

505–506) American educators report that when their students return from studying in another culture. though most of these studies have focused largely on second language acquisition during cultural immersion (Bateman. 33). interpersonal relationships. 3). Pederson. 107 . Wilkinson. however. 2008. have questioned the true impact of study abroad experiences on cultural understanding. The qualities that pre-service teachers meeting the goals would hopefully possess include cross-cultural knowledge (including knowledge about cultures other than their own). and the perspective of seeing themselves as part of a professional community with peers around the world. SUBTRACTING STEREOTYPES THROUGH STUDYING Abroad Willard-Holt (2001) suggests a list of goals for educating pre-service teachers based on her extensive research related to global education. the ability to view peoples of other cultures without the distortions of stereotype. Robinson. “deep cultural understanding cannot be guaranteed either. 1989). a sense of ease in other cultural groups. motivation to teach from a global perspective. grow intellectually. 33). and develop personally” (p. “The research literature that evaluates the impact of study abroad on US college students coincides with these impressionistic perceptions and find that participants in study abroad programs acquire global-mindedness. He goes on to suggest that students who study abroad are often more cognizant of broadening their horizons concerning international issues. allowing a safe space in which participants can discuss their experiences of cultural difference in order to learn and grow from them. Various other studies confirm the impact of study abroad and international experiences on identity development. particularly if participants have only their own cultural perspective with which to make sense of actions motivated by an alternative and invisible set of rules” (p. Thibadoux & Helms. and reflection are key components. Hadis (2005) writes. (pp. 1988. This indicates the need for a well- structured study abroad experience that is potentially accompanied by classroom learning in which culture. Wilkinson (1998) notes. cultural interactions. Some scholars. the ability to perceive and value cultural diversity. they usually have more appreciation for different cultures and are more mature. and independent than prior to traveling. self-aware. and one’s sense of global participation and citizenship (Braskamp. 2002. metacognition. Wilkinson goes on to state that such cultural interactions involving cultural differences may promote “stereotyping and denigration” as opposed to understanding and empathy (p. 2010. 1998). confidence and skill in communicating.

between two nations. The rewards of a successful international program for educators or future educators are significant. it is noted that an intense immersion experience. between university professors and students. can change and motivate pre-service teachers. and it clearly suggests that study abroad experiences. can foster the development of critically inquiring leaders who may not only have more questions than answers. 329). In fact. and again after their travels. The questions were asked at the beginning of the courses before the students studied the cultures of the country they were to visit. and between self and others. 131). Robertson and Webber (2000). the authors state that this tendency was “the greatest shortcoming of the programme. and travel documents” (p. in their case “leaving little in-depth engagement with ‘real’ New Zealanders” (p. As faculty members and study abroad leaders. “Cross-Cultural Experiential Learning for Teachers. medications. state “… the breaking of boundaries between theory and practice. Barkhuizen & Feryok (2006). the authors of this chapter believe it is imperative to prepare pre-service teachers for their international programs before they arrive at their destinations. in which the student moves from the level of “dabbler” to “participant. 2006. The authors further suggest that innovative ways of providing more intercultural and interlingual contact should be found for a successful international experience. The students wrote in-depth reflections on these three questions so the 108 . 191). Boettcher et al. 132). and one that has continued to be the most difficult to address in subsequent programmes” (Barkhuizen & Feryok. in reporting the results of their cross-cultural travel study exchange between Canadian and New Zealand students in educational leadership. including social activities with members of the community and professional meetings with host-country educators.” is the most exciting and rewarding and ends her article. point out that just being in another country does not create an international experience and caution against the tendency for student teachers to limit many of their activities to their own group members.C. p. 132). the authors of this article developed three questions to investigate with their various types of study abroad programs. Based on the research of Willard-Holt’s (2001) goals for educating pre- service teachers. and Barkhuizen and Feryok (2006) view and stress that the preparation goes “well beyond the usual advice about clothing. but.” with the words. know that there are still more questions to ask” (p. more importantly. however. In the classic Wilson study (1982). 2001). The nature of study abroad programs and their impact on pre-service teachers vary from program to program. even as short as one week (Willard-Holt. “No one should make the claim of being educated until he or she has learned to live in harmony with people who are different” (p.

it is important for the faculty to help students examine their preconceptions and stereotypes about the country without forcing them into a position of rejecting their own preconceived views or the new broader ideas that the research literature can support. Concerning stereotypes. A Study Abroad Field Trip The study abroad field trip commonly extends seven to ten days and includes in the preparation the reading of several pieces of literature from authors of the country being visited as well as research projects about the country’s history and places that will be toured during the field trip so that each student is an “expert. A common theme that we saw with all of our study abroad programs was that students in each program had preconceived stereotypes of the cultures they were to visit and most held tightly to their American ideology prior to going abroad. authors asked the following three questions: 1. educational courses. Janes (2011). research-focused. Since students always bring a part of themselves into the reading of each text. implies that he encourages students “to see how their viewpoints lead to a distinctive set of views”. working with American students studying in Great Britain. this variety of formats allows pre-service teachers to participate who would otherwise not be able to commit to a two-month program. but at the same time “begin to appreciate that 109 . SUBTRACTING STEREOTYPES THROUGH STUDYING Abroad authors could determine if stereotypes were changed after traveling abroad. What do you know about the international issues of the culture and country you are going to visit? 3. The format varies from one week to a two-month experience. TWO TYPES OF STUDY ABROAD PROGRAMS Students in the College of Education and Human Development are offered the option to participate in various study abroad experiences which are associated with writing-intensive.” who presents his/her research and can answer questions about the place being visited during the study abroad. Do you have any preconceived notions or stereotypes of the culture you are visiting? 2. What do you know about the various subcultures in the country and their contributions? Student comments about their understanding prior to leaving for their study abroad programs demonstrate that these questions helped them to frame their understanding of what they thought they knew.

I expected Americans to be hated upon. and learn about Russia. 2011). & Boettcher. During the field trip. One of the greatest educations that every student needs is that of other cultures and people. rather than the people who were subject to them. with these beliefs came a prejudiced outlook on socialism and other non-capitalistic viewpoints. to be cold-shouldered at every interaction with the Russians. As students begin to break down their stereotypes they must learn to interact in harmony with other people in settings outside of their own American culture (Hammer. and students are encouraged to interact with local residents as much as limited time allows. I have always been taught certain things about communism and Russia and I wonder if it is really this way. because I really like the freedom and capitalism in America. as I prepare for this trip to Russia. I had no idea that my experience was to be extremely different from what I had anticipated. As the authors analyze their students’ reflections from study abroad field trips over the past eight years. A classroom of students can sit. Boettcher et al. If this same group of students were 110 . As an American growing up in a conservative household. 66). That class will learn only so much about the people and the way they live. 16). Upon returning from Russia Ben wrote. words can mean very different things to different people at different times” (p. His goal of helping students to think and reflect beyond a single answer and American cultural definition is the model by which the authors of this chapter mentor students in their literature reflections. The old cliché “never judge a book by its cover” is a strong parallel to my experience in Russia. From what I know I really don’t like the communist lifestyle of this country. I really don’t like what I have learned about socialism and wouldn’t want to live like this. students submit a culminating reflection paper sharing what they have learned and experienced. My parents have always led me to believe that America is the greatest country in the world. Wiese. I bleed capitalism. It was merely a biased opinion on the different forms of government. Ben wrote. students maintain a journal and upon return from the study abroad experience. Pence and Macgillivray (2008) suggest that “stepping outside of one’s comfort zone and reflecting on one’s reactions can help pre-service teachers become more flexible and reflective practitioners” (p.C. the findings uncovered several strands of demystifying stereotypes: Students demonstrated shifts in their perspectives of a visited culture and their preconceived notions were changed following their travels (All names are pseudonyms). I hope to learn about the different lifestyles of others. However. talk. The field trip includes visits to multiple historical and cultural sites. read.

Visiting Auschwitz and Terizan made me so sad about the treatment of innocent people. and learn what it is like to experience in Russia for ten days. What I found interesting is that the real problem is between English rule over Ireland. Dave wrote about his change of perspective of stereotypes he had about Ireland. Dave wrote. as mine did. This caused the civil war to be so 111 . This seems silly to me that people can’t get along over such a simple thing as religion. I now know why the people couldn’t help the Jews. I enjoyed learning about the history of Ireland in general. then all those bits of information would actually mean something. It was so inspiring to me to read about how many citizens risked their lives and did rescue many Jewish people. we would be willing to risk our own lives to rescue our own neighbors? We are no different and shouldn’t think we are better. I know in America we wouldn’t stand for mistreating people like the Germans did. In America I feel that Christianity in general is a joint effort and other religions get pushed to the back. especially the children. There are very few differences and there shouldn’t be a spiritual war over this. I never knew this before. There were so many different facets of this but I felt that the religious factor fascinated me the most. In Ireland. I realized that Americans also discriminate terribly. the religions are technically different. This was interesting because the religions are not all that different. I am interested to learn more about why the citizens didn’t act and defend their Jewish neighbors. This trip has changed my perspective and stereotypes forever. They could see the sights. I know I will be a better classroom teacher because of my real life experiences. In his journal. Protestants and Catholics are constantly in battle. I also want to know why the Jewish people didn’t stand up for their rights against Hitler. they would also have be killed. the only thing I really know about is the Potato Famine. I have a greater respect for the citizens of these two countries. interact with the people. Catholics and Protestants don’t fight in our country. How did this happen. I wonder why they can’t get along like we do in America. Reading the literature and visiting the sites. After her trip Gloria reflected. and why didn’t the government help the people? I also know about the war between the religions. On the plane ride back to Houston. the problem derived from the religion of England and the people wanting to get away from English rule. Although. Gloria wrote about Poland and Czech Republic. I can’t understand why the Polish and Czech citizens didn’t do something about the persecution of the Jewish people. In time of war. SUBTRACTING STEREOTYPES THROUGH STUDYING Abroad to subsequently travel to Russia. Their biases and stereotypes would change dramatically. as I look forward to Ireland. after visiting Poland and the Czech Republic.

and C about a certain group or culture does not mean that they actually do or act the way you were told. political structure. economy. which is something I have always done. I learned a lot about the Spanish culture. I know very little about Russia and this country’s international issues. You can never judge a book by its cover. and how this unique history has shaped the people of Spain. It makes me feel that I can’t take Ireland’s past and history for granted. to be honest. Learning about these differences made me more culturally diverse and aware. Ella wrote prior to going on the trip. throughout this experience I learned that the world is so much bigger than you will ever be able to fully comprehend. much more brutal. and the arts of the country they were to visit. it was very interesting because it made me feel more passionate about my own history and culture and helped me break down the stereotypes of different religions. and they have different modes of transportation. Their culture is completely different than my own. Lauren writes about her study abroad field trip to Ireland. I never realized how horrific some of the 112 . history. my stereotypes were shattered. their literature. and have a different living style. They were very passionate and have had to fight all their lives. just because you have heard A. I learned that Russian people are very simple. They speak a different language. I have a better understanding of their history. students knew very little about the geography. but I don’t much about the people. but I loved seeing and being a part of these differences. Learning about these differences impacted my perceptions of Spain greatly. Hearing about the day-to-day lives of everyone we met who would talk to us was so interesting. and so many different customs you have to have an open mind when meeting new people. After traveling to Russia Ella wrote. I know the name of their president. My eyes were opened to a whole new culture both different and similar to my own. but also tough. I definitely have an altered perspective on different cultures since I took cultural plunge for10 days in Ireland. Together these and many more aspects make the people of Spain beautifully unique to me as a native Texan. These people have been through so much from the czar rule through communism. or their history or what they do for a living. B. literature. Overall. Alice wrote. But at the same time.C. The second question we investigated: What do you know about the international issues of the culture and country you are going to visit? We discovered that prior to the trips abroad. With so many people. they eat different foods. Boettcher et al.

our tour guide from Moscow. Their attitudes about language acquisition. I liked not knowing where I was and having to figure how to get to where I needed to be.” Andrew wrote. store. Yes. Being stuck in the cookie cutter society that I 113 . Today the people consider themselves a democracy. the more I learned about myself. including Russia. the main thing that I learned from the study abroad was how important it is to get out and interact with diverse types of people. he knew five languages which he learned himself by reading. The Russian people were so friendly. and they really wanted their country to be democratic. He taught us some basic Hungarian that ended up really helping us out in the following days. English is the language of business. I loved having the opportunity to speak to the various tour guides and townspeople to learn more about them and their cultures. was the perfect example of language acquisition. Petersburg when we needed help in the coat room. SUBTRACTING STEREOTYPES THROUGH STUDYING Abroad treatments were of Lenin and Stalin. Most importantly I enjoyed visiting those countries and having the opportunity to observe their normal daily life routines. I realized that many countries. but how many children that are required to learn it actually practice it every day and are perfectly fluent in it? Sergei. It was so interesting to hear the different perspectives of the older and younger generations. I really knew what it felt to be a foreign student not knowing what the teacher was trying to tell me or help me understand. or market. We had been having a difficult time finding our way around and when we would ask people on the streets for directions. To think that I could be speaking three other languages fluently blows my mind and the fact that there are people in the world that do that made me want to better myself and maybe even take on that challenge pertaining to this aspect of my life. Of those conversations. In talking to the Russian citizens some of them prefer communism because they felt that everyone had a job and their families’ daily needs were provided. but there are evidences of communism everywhere we traveled. they could not understand what we were saying. We Americans expect for others to know our language and because of what I had learned in this multicultural literature class. People like Sergei came to the rescue in Moscow and St. I believe was definitely part of their culture. I was able to take in that reality. Heath wrote. my favorite was a night in Budapest when a small group of us went to a coffee shop and we ended up having a great conversation with our waiter who was a native Hungarian. I figured out the more that I interacted with the people from the different cultures. have children learn English in addition to their native language. Others I visited with didn’t want a communist government.

I see faces that have given up hope. The third question we asked students prior to and after their trips was: What do you know about the various subcultures in the country and their contributions? Prior to the course. After studying the history and visiting the various palaces of past czars. eyes full of terror. There deeds were still wrong. the roll call area. have always been a part of. but their convictions cannot be overlooked. Nothing can prepare you for the rush of emotions as you walk through the gas chamber.C. Learning about the Holocaust in school. Something you can never forget. I have a total appreciation for the Jewish people and the struggles they experienced. Sarah wrote about her experience in Austria. while in Russia I also learned that the people today do not like to consider themselves as Communists. Before visiting the country I was actually unsure whether they are a communist country. the execution chamber. see the crematorium or picture the atrocities that happened on the dissection table. there is a negative communist connotation still associated with the country. I am at least able to understand that some of these soldiers had different convictions than Hitler. and turned to substance abuse to carry out their horrific duties. While I still struggle with the Nazi treatment. I learned firsthand from the people we met in the coffee shop about the various things that the Hungarians people have been through and their struggles since World War II. When you hear Russia referred to in the American media. I easily thought that what I do and how I live is the same for everyone. the students really did not even consider that the country was multicultural. and reading the firsthand accounts of Holocaust victims still never prepares you for the harsh reality of experiencing something like this firsthand. Mauthausen. I imagine how many of those people were ready to claim death and try to think of those who were fighting until the end. watching the watered down movies about the horror. but from this experience I quickly saw that I am only a little spec in a huge world of diversity and change. hearts full of anger of people that did nothing to deserve this tragic fate. As I walked through each building. There is nothing that can prepare you for what you will experience as you walk through this concentration camp. I am still amazed that the people in Buda and Pest were separated from each other for years because Hungary didn’t have money to reconstruct their connecting bridges which were bombed during WWII. Boettcher et al. I realized why the starving masses 114 . I cannot help but think of who has walked there before me. I also came to understand why so many of the German soldiers used drugs and alcohol because not all of them agreed with the commands that they were given. Kylie wrote.

tutor after-school sessions with Italian students preparing to take their Trinity English Examinations. I am still in awe of Gaudi’s La Sagrada Familia in Barcelona. There is nothing like this in America. Because this experience is more intense than a two week study abroad. Although I recognize the atrocities of Lenin and Stalin. in the schools they teach lessons they have already prepared. Then. at local middle and elementary schools. assist with lessons their peers have prepared. observe Italian classes in other subjects (where they learn what it feels like to be a language learner in math. student interviews are part of the selection process. A Two-Month Study Abroad Based on the authors’ realization that an extended immersion supports a meaningful cultural exchange and that our students still need to have time for travel and engagement with their peers at the Santa Chiara Study Center. SUBTRACTING STEREOTYPES THROUGH STUDYING Abroad embraced communism as a means of improving their families’ lives. etc. where all of our students spend the entire school day. we travel to Italy. they put their theoretical preparatory coursework to practical use when they get to Italy. I began to understand why their charisma attracted so many people to follow their ideology since it appeared to be working on behalf of the everyday people. beginning in mid-March and continuing until mid-May. classes). 115 . physical education. Jessica wrote. after going to Spain I realized that there are two different languages and really two different groups of people in Spain. the way the different groups view their very different cultures. Monday through Thursday. art. I was finally able to view Russian history from the perspective of the czar and from the perspective of the poor masses and develop empathy toward both classes of people. I realize that the Spanish are creative persistent people who are still working to finish a beautiful architectural masterpiece that was started in 1882 and won’t be finished until 2026. the authors designed a program to incorporate extensive pre-departure preparatory work on campus for two months in order to allow for total dedication to cultural immersion through fieldwork in Italian schools after the arrival in Italy. In effect. Going to Spain opened my eyes to the different cultures in Spain. and the hard working ethic of the Spanish people. I had always thought that everyone in Spain did bullfighting and flamingo dancing. Preparation for the experience begins before the semester abroad with seminars over orientation topics. I always thought that the Spain people were just happy go lucky people.

my opinion has drastically changed from this experience. and importance of Italy. Arezzo. I was always angry that people in America did not know the English language and I thought they should learn it. 116 . and how these behaviors would be different from Americans. Boettcher et al. How embarrassing and uncomfortable it is for natives to become frustrated with you because you don't know their language. songs. culture. I finally understand how hard it is to be in a foreign country and to try to learn the language. before we leave for our international learning experience we are learning about the history. our students are able to expand their cultural knowledge through weekend trips to Rome. I have always heard that the Italian students are loud and can be overbearing. I hope that the Italian people can all speak English so I will feel more comfortable when I tour the sites. I feel almost ignorant looking back at how I acted before this trip. and Cortona. As with our ten-day study abroad field trips. High School Musical and Peter Pan. In addition. Florence. I actually feel very prepared to work with the students in Italy. Past productions include Pinocchio. However. Tom Sawyer. I have always heard that Italy is a land of wine and pasta! Addie wrote about her experience after traveling to Italy. with the exception of revising lessons and writing journal reflections reporting on their experiences in the Italian classrooms and the implications of these experiences on their teaching philosophies and practices for the future. I will be more tolerant of people whose first language is not English.C. Wizard of Oz. Their Texas A&M coursework in Italy is limited to their extensive fieldwork at the elementary and middle school. we examined the question: Do you have any preconceived notions or stereotypes of the culture you are visiting? Addie wrote. and dances with our pre- service teachers speaking Italian and the Italian children speaking English. We are preparing lesson plans to help the Italian children learn English. Meredith wrote before going to Italy. Coming back to the United States. students organize rehearsals for a highly successful bilingual production of a classic musical. I've obtained a new appreciation for people in America who don't know the English language. In addition to the academic program. so we can better understand how the various stake holders in Italy view life. Again. I have been in the field for many semesters and have taught some English as a Second Language Students. All productions are presented to the community in the historic and beautiful town theatre and include script. However. We are reading books to educate us over their past. we discovered the same themes emerged in the two-month program in Italy.

On our first day. and Italy are innately curious and passionate about learning. reflecting on teaching in Italy seems like a daunting task because I feel like a different person transformed by all that I have experienced and learned. I think I can be successful in this new endeavor. Meredith shared. Italy was an ally of England. I feel more confident in myself as a teacher. I remember walking up to Dante Middle School and all of a sudden.S. teaching in Italy has taught me that language barriers are not impenetrable. I have learned that there are other ways of life. People can connect in spite of not always understanding each other. my parents’ favorite wine. I learned very quickly that the Italian schools have different policies for classroom management and they were very effective. Educators in Italy valued the opportunity to enrich their students’ language acquisition. It has always been a democratic country and has exported Prosecco. From this experience I learned that students in the U. Seeing how other people teach and live has opened up my mind to different alternatives of teaching students a second language. This experience has allowed me to see what teaching English Language Learners is like and has made me want to pursue teaching English abroad. Castiglion Fiorentino feels like a second home to me now. These middle school students are just like the middle school students in Texas schools and I have really come to admire their hard work acceptance of evaluation in front of their peers without being embarrassed or demeaned by their peers. The middle schools students were not loud and overbearing but very eager to learn and most respectful. and I wish that everyone could have the same opportunity to be a part of a program like this one. didn’t realize that Italy had once been an Axis member during World War II. The Pope is from Rome and the Christians were persecuted by the Roman soldiers in The 117 . SUBTRACTING STEREOTYPES THROUGH STUDYING Abroad because of my classroom management class and studying of different strategies to maintain and establish classroom rules and routines. To not only travel abroad. I felt welcome and appreciated in this town. and knew nothing about what a Constitutional Republic meant. The second question the authors explored prior to the two month trip to Italy: What do you know about the international issues of the culture and country you are going to visit? We discovered from their initial writings that they didn’t know about the political structure of Italy. but to be embedded in a community like we had with Castiglion Fiorentino. This experience has helped me tremendously. Kelly noted. I didn’t have the same confidence I did before leaving for the trip. France and the United States during World War II. Lucy wrote prior to the trip.

which means they elect their officials. the Italians are friendly with all people and are very wealthy. I know that many Italians settled in New York. When studying America history. In addition to these two groups of people. I was shocked to discover that the Communist Party was a viable part of both elections. After Don spent two months in the Italian schools he learned. The Italian schools have immigrant children who do not speak Italian and lessons must be modified to accommodate the various the Italian language learners. and the fashion industry. art. I would assume that all people living in Italy are of Italian and Catholic descent. As far as I know. our American students didn’t realize there were so many subcultures in Italy. during my time in Italy there was a local and national election. The other things that I know about Italy are from movies I have watched where I have observed that they are very family oriented and like to get together and eat and celebrate. which I have now discovered England and the United State were members of during World War II. I am embarrassed that I didn’t know about the political structure of Italy as a college student. Boettcher et al. I had my eyes open to the fact that Italy has influenced more than food and they are known throughout the world for their cultural innovations such as irrigation. From the past two months I have recognized the influence of the Italian culture on the United States. I learned that the city of Castiglion Fiorentino was actually bombed by the Allies. Lucy wrote about her experience. Don shared in his journal prior to departure. I have always read that Italy has many artists and architects and they are famous for their buildings and their ancient culture. architecture. I also know that there are many fashion designers in the popular magazines and Italy is known for its sense of fashion. I knew that Italy was known for their numerous cathedrals. My American history classes never impacted my view of the international issues of Italy. Roman Coliseum. After my experience. 118 . It appears to me that the mother is the most influential member of the family. While the mother is revered. It seems the primary influence of the Italian culture in the United States in food. I feel confident that they all speak Italian and I will not experience many other cultures. The final question that we posed with our two-month Italy group was: What do you know about the various subcultures in the country and their contributions? As with the ten-day study abroad trips. While in Italy. I now know that Italy was a socialist country and is today a Constitutional Republic. Patricia wrote prior to the experience.C. the father is still considered the head of the family.

Patricia reflected on her learning. The Italians were warm and welcoming and they certainly do have a sense of fashion. When I think of all the magnificent cathedrals that I had the opportunity to visit. and I am a changed person having seen these things first hand. their religions. As an American I finally realized just what a young country we truly are. I was so impressed with the knowledge that Italian children had about architectural masterpieces on a global scale. They have corresponded with us about the influence of these trips and how it is impacting their own classrooms. I wasn’t expecting to see such diversity in a small country such as Italy. and their regional prejudices and dialects. Italy is a very old country. after visiting Venice. Siena. students will be forever changed. and Florence I learned that Italy was really a group of city states. I discovered people who embrace communism are often located in the central regions. The authors agree that if the trip is a ten day field trip or a two month immersion program. their politics. Many of these students have graduated from Texas A&M University and are teaching. SUBTRACTING STEREOTYPES THROUGH STUDYING Abroad After returning from abroad. and ancient Roman Etruscans. CONCLUSION This study of pre-service teachers’ intercultural developments through study abroad and their awareness of their American stereotypes highlights how teacher education can transform the global awareness of young people through travel. I don’t know about the subcultures of Italy. Judy wrote on her first day of class prior to studying about Italy. I found that each path I traveled in Italy. These yearly trips are powerful vehicles for preparing Texas teachers to work with diverse students while learning to subtract from the pre- conceived stereotypes they possessed prior to travel. I took away a different lesson. I loved learning about the contributions of the artists. Judy wrote after her trip. I have never really studied about this country but only know about the fashion industry and the artists and architecture. and I realized that we as Americans don’t have the artistic knowledge that Italians schools emphasize. Rome. Each one has its own history and unique subculture including their foods. whereas the democratic Catholics reside in the north-eastern regions which border other countries. Our research is continuing with future study abroad trips and a follow-up 119 . architects. I am amazed at the beauty and extraordinary ancient structures that are in the midst of the cities. Art is embedded in their daily life and school curriculum.

Gauging the impact of study abroad: How to overcome the limitations of a single-cell design. S. (1988). 34(1). McKercher. A. ED482507. (2011).. Assessment. P.. 1−5. Dantas. 75−94. Panel Presentation and Paper. REFERENCES Barkhuizen. 25. 42(1). B.. Cross-cultural leadership development. 70−80. Language Teaching. Assessing intercultural effectiveness outcomes in a year-long study abroad program. 21−27. Innovations in Education and Teaching International. 3(4). (2010). & Boettcher. International Journal of Intercultural Relations. Paper presented at the 2003 Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association.C. A. S. C. J. 34(1). & Webber. A.. Podernski. Pederson. 318−331. observations. & Morton. Braskamp. Wiese. Hawaii International Conference. M. (2008). Promoting openness toward culture learning: Ethno-graphic interviews for students of Spanish. F. J. G. 86. Hammer. 115−134.. The roots of stereotypes about tourists. 120 . & Macgillivray. B.) Hadis. The management of language training. (2003). 45. 61−68. IL. Robertson. 315−330. and conclusions of a cross-cultural partnership between pre-service English as a second language (ESL) teachers and an Italian middle school. 1.. (2005). Consonance and dissonance in a study abroad program as a catalyst for professional development of pre-service teachers. Honolulu. F. the authors agree with Dantas (2007). T. L. P. (2008). Pre-service teachers’ perceptions of a short-term international experience programme. (ERIC document reproduction service no. Boettcher et al. 34. Beyond ignorance: Using the cultural stereotypes of Americans studying in the UK as a resource for learning and teaching about British culture. (2011). that educational programs with an international component and cultural immersion provide students opportunities to create a better understanding of self and to subtract stereotypes of other cultures. R. 525−532. C. M. (2002). Pence. 48(1). (1991). Chicago. G.. These kids are so bright! Pre-service teachers’ insights and discoveries during a three-week student teaching practicum in Mexico. M. M. Faulconer. Journal of Teacher Education. Exploring implications. C. J. Journal of College & Character. 21. Developing a global perspective: Strategies for teacher education programs. L. The impact of an international field experience on pre-service teachers. & Feryok. Quinn.. (2006). 146−157. Robinson. Brindley. Teaching and Teacher Education. M. Teaching and Teacher Education. HI. P. Building teacher competency to work with diverse learners in the context of international education. Society. 10(1). K. (2008). (2000). I. C. D.. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education. 24. 3−19. investigation of our former students in the field and how they are using the knowledge from their study abroad experiences. R. In conclusion. (2009). Teacher Education Quarterly. Bateman. 14−25. (2007). The Modern Language Journal. Bruce. Janes. Leadership in Education. H. B. L. & Anderson. Developing global citizens. 345−347. M.

Teaching and Teacher Education. Becoming a culturally responsive teacher.   Cynthia Boettcher Department of Teaching. Wilson. Learning and Culture College of Education and Human Development Texas A&M University Janet Hammer Department of Teaching. E. M. Addressing the discontinuity of students’ and teachers’ diversity: A preliminary study of pre-service teachers’ beliefs and perceived skills. (2001). G. (1998). H. Study abroad from the participants' perspective: A challenge to common beliefs. M. & Helms. (1989). S. 505−517. (1982). 15−30).html Smolcic. 17(4). Research notes: An analysis of a successful international study abroad program. doi:10. 31(1).). S. M. 184−192. (2001). 564−592. 17. (2011). 16. New York. 487−503. 21. Foreign Language Annals. R. The impact of a short-term international experience for pre-service teachers. & Sobel. Teaching and Teacher Education.1016/S0742-051X(01)00008-7 Thibadoux. V. In K. SUBTRACTING STEREOTYPES THROUGH STUDYING Abroad Saint Augustine. D. M. Theory into Practice.brainyquote. Learning and Culture College of Education and Human Development Texas A&M University 121 .. E. Johnson & P.com/quotes/s/saintaugus108132. NY: Routledge. Annals of Tourism Research. A. Taylor. Learning and Culture College of Education and Human Development Texas A&M University Sunni Sonnenburg Department of Teaching. Retrieved from www. Willard-Holt. Wilkinson. 23−39. Cross-cultural experiential learning for teachers. C. Research on second language teacher education: A sociocultural perspective on professional development (pp. Golombek (Eds..

Li & J. 123–143.). we offer an overview of the historical context of urban education and preservice teachers. thus teacher education institutions are responsible for preparing teachers for urban schools. some researchers have exasperated these views by explaining urban conditions through deficit theories and unchallenged stereotypes that promote racism and discrimination. according to the National Center for Education Statistics (2012). Hammer (Eds. urban districts account for more than 50% of the total school districts and teaching population in the nation. © 2015 Sense Publishers. 2007. Ng. The terms preservice and student teacher are used interchangeable in this chapter. PREPARING PRESERVICE TEACHERS FOR DIVERSE URBAN CLASSROOMS1 INTRODUCTION In recent years. there has been a demographic shift of those seeking careers in teaching. Many education institutions are beginning to rethink how to attract and prepare urban teachers. Yet. Getting certified teachers to seek positions in urban settings is a systemic problem. KAMALA WILLIAMS AND NORVELLA CARTER 7. There is a diminishing resource pool of teachers entering the profession with a desire to teach in an urban setting. further exasperating the receivement gap for diverse students in urban settings. This school district refers to preservice teachers as student teachers. Based on current teacher education needs. which is multiplied by negative views of cities and city schools. additional studies are warranted on the study of preservice teachers for urban environments. All rights reserved. because of the shortage of teachers being produced by traditional college programs (National Center for Alternative Education. a description of a revised field experience course and the preliminary findings of the dispositions of preservice teachers that are headed for diverse classrooms. a revised model of a preparation program. . As more of the teaching force is filled with middle class White women. vacancies for positions in diverse urban schools increase. Teaching at Work. While the media has sensationalized these views. In this chapter. 2003). Y. Alternative education programs have increased over the past decade. 2008.

Board of Education. Williams & N. No Child Left Behind and now. 3) have the ability to apply generalizations about learning. 2001). 4) be willing to teach all children. based on these variables. ghetto. (b) demographic composition of the school age population. 2001). when they have a climate of high expectations for students. such as large bureaucracies. He reported that urban teachers need to 1) be persistent when seeking solutions to never-ending problems. Legal cases and federal acts such as Brown v. Edmonds (1979) reported that urban schools can be effective when they have strong administrative leadership. However. identified seven characteristics of urban teachers that outweigh ability and instructional skills in classroom teaching. Canniff. 2005. such as at-risk. There are primarily three demographic variables that challenged teacher preparation programs to prepare teachers for diverse environments: (a) location of the school within the city. For example. As studies and reports became more focused on the critical needs and issues of urban schools. In the 1990’s. researchers began to identify characteristics that were unique to urban environments. and (c) the socioeconomic status of the community (Garcia. disadvantaged and poverty-stricken (Howard. when there is an orderly environment without being oppressive and basic skills are required over all other school activities. Race to the Top have brought attention to the need for educating all students. and diversity of population (Weiner. These actions were all critical in increasing the concern about urban education. Most traditional teacher education programs have focused on the preparation of teachers for mono-cultural classroom settings with students from middle and upper socioeconomic backgrounds (Banks & Banks. in a classic study. marginalized. Historically. 2008). the Elementary and Secondary Act of 1965. 5) have a professional orientation.K. 2006). 2) exhibit a response to authority that supports student learning regardless of school policy. specific issues about urban education have historically emerged solely connected to legal mandates. studies have indicated that teaching environments are different in urban schools when compared to suburban and rural schools. Carter URBAN EDUCATION AND PRESERVICE TEACHERS: AN OVERVIEW The historical context of urban education and preservice teachers reveals that urban schools have existed since the development of teacher preparation programs. 124 . Many of these studies began to highlight negative issues about teaching and learning in urban schools with the use of negative labels. Haberman (1995). the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VI and Title VII). It was not until the 1970’s and early 1980’s that researchers began to describe urban education and urban students in a more equitable and positive way.

attitudes. However. 1996). This concept is often called the cultural mismatch (Irvine. Davis. This is among one of the crises that set the context of urban schools. linguistically. resulting in a mismatch between the students’ school and home cultures (Sable. 2003). the enrollment for students of color in our nation’s schools has been steadily increasing. 2008).5% percent of the nation’s student population. and performance styles of ethnically diverse students to make learning encounters more relevant. p. In the past few decades. a majority of teachers have been representative of cultural backgrounds different from those of the students they teach. 2001a. 29) listed the following characteristics of this culturally relevant pedagogy: 1. Sleeter. It acknowledges the legitimacy of the cultural heritages of different ethnic groups. including a number of large-scale syntheses (Cochran-Smith. particularly for students of color. 1990. Weiner. Noel. By 2000. prior experience. Grant and Secada (1990) concluded that the paucity of research on preparing teachers for diverse students was unacceptable. most teachers will instruct students from culturally. 2003. Even though the school age population has become more diverse. & Fries. Ladson-Billings. only eight percent of public school teachers are African American and six percent represent Hispanic Americans (National Center for Education Statistics. both as legacies that affect student’s dispositions. Preparing Preservice Teachers for Diverse Urban Classrooms 6) have a resistance to burn-out. 125 . Also in the 1990’s. Grant & Secada. a volume of research has been conducted in this area. students of color made up approximately 43. frames of reference. Zeichner & Hoeft. 2005). 1999. Since that time. Haberman. 25 years later. Gay (2012. Culturally responsive teaching was described as using the cultural knowledge. Therefore. 2001). middle class European-Americans (Lansman & Lewis. the teachers of these students are predominately female. ethnically. It stressed the ability of teachers to respond to their students by incorporating elements of students’ culture in their teaching (Irvine. 2001b. Although the numbers of students of color are increasing. 1996. & Hoffman. economically diverse backgrounds (Banks. and 7) recognize their own humanness and weaknesses. and approaches to learning as worthy content to be taught in the formal curriculum. 2011). culturally responsive pedagogy was a major concept in multicultural education. The National Center for Education Statistics (2011) reported that in 2011-12 school year. 2005). 2006). little on the design and structure of teacher preparation programs that support preservice teachers’ learning has changed (Hollins & Guzman. 2000. Within their careers.

resources and materials in all the subjects and skills routinely taught in schools. experiences and communities. 1998. 3. Nieto (2000). on marginalized students (Canniff. 2012). 2001). 2013). even if White educators have good intentions. Hollins and Guzman (2005) note that White teachers often carry negative and stereotypical beliefs about students of various sociocultural backgrounds into the classroom setting. unwittingly. negated and reversed have a positive impact on the academic achievement of students. 2007). 2008. as Robinson and Lewis (2011) indicated. It teaches students to know and praise their own and each other’s cultural heritages. Teacher beliefs. Delpit. 110). 4. about their students’ capabilities can also be particularly damaging for urban students (Williams. Urban teachers were found to need high levels of cultural sensitivity. 5. Research promotes culturally responsive teaching as a vehicle for success in diverse classrooms (Carter. 2003. behaviors and instructional practices in the classroom. Other issues that complicate the dynamic between White teachers and students of color or lower socio-economic backgrounds are mismatched cultural 126 .K. “one possible source of transformation for urban students of color is the implementation of a process that insists on instructional design that results in culturally relevant and responsive pedagogy” (p. With the rising concern about how to enhance the quality of education in urban schools. 2008). which would need to be demonstrated through their attitudes. Further. Additionally. reported that deficit models and thinking that are refuted. It builds bridges of meaningfulness between home and school experiences as well as between academic abstractions and lived socio-cultural realities. Most often. According to Saffold and Longwell-Grice (2008). A widely established theme in the scholarship of culturally responsive teaching is the importance and the necessity for White educators to adopt culturally responsive pedagogy due to the negative impact that teachers have. Williams & N. It uses a wide variety of instructional strategies that are connected to different learning styles. literature surrounding culturally responsive pedagogy highlighted the hidden destructive methods used by Whites that can hinder the learning process for learners of color (Carter & Jenkins. Vaught & Castagno. studies have begun to support the significance of teachers’ behaviors and attitudes in the educational process (Webb-Hasan & Carter. It incorporates multicultural information. Carter 2. they can encounter difficulties in the classroom if they are not familiar with their students’ cultures. and their lack thereof. Irvine.

Given that both Whites teachers and teachers of color have gaps of understanding concerning education inequities and interracial discourse. 15) 1. Jenkins & Carter. Preservice teachers need to be prepared to become culturally responsive and engage in anti-racist behavior. justice and equality. Teachers of both races are apprehensive of the educational system and simultaneously distrust it. It is important to state here that White educators are not the only educators that face challenges in teaching learners of diverse backgrounds. 2005. Preparing Preservice Teachers for Diverse Urban Classrooms mores. justice and equality at the same time most Blacks may understand racism at instinctual level. Researchers have argued about “gaps in the research based on how candidates’ predispositions are related to the admission and selection process used to identify applicants most responsive to learning to teach diverse students (Hollins & Guzman. and low motivations of both students and teachers (Bennett. p. p. Whitfield. it is vital to examine how these factors may influence oppressive practices in the classroom. 2013). the current inequities in education and the affirmative action policies that impact it. 510). we examine predispositions of candidates to learn more about the benefits of recruitment and what to look for in a candidate. Nieto. Most White teachers believe the system was founded in fairness. teachers’ negative racial attitudes. Stewart (2012) found that African American teachers held negative beliefs about Latino students that impacted their ability to teach them. 1994. According to Jost. 3. an inability to teach students efficiently. 4. 2013. lower teacher expectations. 2000). Black and White teachers lack a basic understanding of educational history of people of color. Black and White teachers harbor many stereotypes about their students and offer one-dimensional rationales concerning the achievement gap. race issues and institutionalized racism and other social issues. However. may be reserved in articulating it and may have adopted the same beliefs as Whites concerning fairness. 2. Hollins 1995. Many may assume that anti-oppressive teaching comes to people of color naturally because they have experienced oppression themselves. and Jost (2005. For instance. 127 . 1999. teachers’ beliefs about racially and socio-economically diverse students. In our program. misunderstandings in communication. people of color can also marginalize the very students they are trying to empower (Jenkins & Carter. Ladson-Billings.

Catapano. While the faculty members are sympathetic to issues of cultural diversity and social justice.K. studies began to support the significance of teachers’ behaviors and attitudes in the educational process (Gollnick & Chinn 1986. behaviors. THE NEW MODEL: URBAN STUDENT TEACHER EDUCATION PREPARATION (USTEP) With the rising concern about how to enhance the quality of education in urban schools. meaning they are comprised of primarily White. The hours were spent in predominantly White middleclass settings where the socioeconomic status was similar to the university student’s own experience. Williams & N. 1992). It is becoming more widely understood that preservice teachers who aspire to become urban teachers should be provided with the necessary experiences to enable them to be effective in diverse classrooms. Zeichner. Additionally. middle-class females. teacher beliefs operate as filters through which their interpretations and decisions are made in practice and instruction. 2010). they simply have had little experience working in urban schools themselves (Singer. 1994). Unfortunately. The initiative redesign focused on a student teaching model with equally 128 . an urban specialist was assigned as the field experience supervisor and student teaching course instructor to provide the instruction needed to be effective. The traditional core experience required the students to spend a set number of hours in the classroom before student teaching. The students were not prepared for diverse classrooms. In addition. The teacher education program at a Type I university in the Southwestern part of the United States was reflective of a growing number of large teacher education programs needing to redesign coursework and experiences to prepare preservice teachers for diverse classrooms. The preservice teachers were introduced to an initiative designed to provide additional support for placement in urban settings. Sleeter & Grant. and instructional practices in the classroom (Larke. 1992. Urban teachers were found to need high levels of cultural sensitivity often demonstrated through their attitudes. the authors revisited a model previously used at a university in the Midwest part of the country to provide educational experiences to assist preservice teachers in learning to teach in urban environments. faculty members at many teacher education institutions are not unlike the profile of the preservice teachers they teach. 2000). & Huisman. Carter Researchers have argued extensively that urban teachers need specific skills and preservice teachers need specific experiences to develop their expertise (Bennett. Therefore.

additional readings. 2010). 2010. TEA. The presentation was designed with hopes of moving students to action by applying for the initiative and preparing themselves for teaching in diverse urban schools. The presentation included data on national and state hiring trends as well as teacher and student demographics. Students were notified of their acceptance by the Urban Education Center team. This informational meeting held during the spring semester of their junior year was designed to inform students of all necessary requirements and planning for the upcoming Fall student teaching experience. The urban specialist as field supervisor and student teaching course instructor was a vital part of this newly revised program. guest speakers and mentoring. and (c) an urban specialist as field supervisor and course instructor provided support through revised assignments. During the meeting. students were given a brief presentation regarding the current need for teachers in urban schools. those who selected USTEP the “urban initiative” were directed to a specific application developed by the urban team from the college’s Urban Education Center. • Urban school districts account for more than 50% of the total school districts and teaching population in the nation (USDE. The students were reminded that as a state funded institution. When students completed their student teaching applications. UNIVERSITY ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPORT THROUGH RECRUITMENT AND PLACEMENT Students were introduced to the initiative in a general meeting for preservice teachers organized by the university’s student teaching team. 2012). the university was obligated to prepare its future teachers for all classrooms. The students were required to submit three letters of recommendations and have a 2. The university student teaching office in cooperation with the university urban education center team reviewed all applications and requirements. Close attention was paid to the dispositions of student teachers about city and urban schools during the selection process. For example. The university contacted a district. and 129 . Preparing Preservice Teachers for Diverse Urban Classrooms important components supporting the student teaching experience for diverse urban classrooms (a) university administrative support through recruitment and placement (b) district support through collaborative development. The selection team noted specific interest and previous experiences in urban settings.5 grade point average in their education courses. • Over 80% of all teacher education graduates do not select large cities for employment opportunities (USDE.

along with required weekly development sessions. where the preservice teachers were introduced to the urban specialist assigned as the university supervisor. the district placed each of the students with cooperating teachers who would mentor and support them during their student teaching experience. Students were enrolled in a student teaching course designed specifically for urban teacher preparation. classroom management classroom environment. and district policies. Williams & N. apartment locator services. The student teachers were provided with a Student Teaching handbook detailing expectations. An orientation session was held during the first week of school. In collaboration with the university’s Urban Education Center team. discipline. student teachers were provided with information about the district. The district administrators agreed that preservice teachers who were strong in content knowledge would benefit from an urban student teaching experience. The district supported the student teacher initiative from its inception. Carter made student teaching arrangements for the accepted applicants. Prior to the student teaching experience. Sessions were scheduled for students to network with principals. placement. The university offered administrative help with recruitment. a week long new teacher induction program prior to school starting.K. administrators and board members. The university’s Urban Education Center had a long-standing relationship with the district and had previously conducted district wide professional development on culturally responsive classroom teaching. The students were invited to attend Reach2Teach. and other important information needed for transition to urban life. District Support through Collaborative Development The district selected was located about 100 miles from the university and was a recent recipient of the Broad Prize. Included in the handbook was a schedule of required weekly professional development sessions for all student teachers. Some students from the university travelled to the district to visit classrooms and observe teachers. The university sponsored a meeting prior to the semester ending. course offering and financial support for the initiative. special populations and cultural diversity. The district demonstrated support for student teachers through a collaborative development program. The district supported student teachers by scheduling speakers on topics such as: interviewing skills and resume writing. which is an award for the best urban school district in the nation. The district remained supportive and immediately hired all students who 130 .

The urban specialist was responsible for redesigning the student teaching course to include additional reading. This preservice experience is set apart from others by the expertise of an urban specialist as instructor and field supervisor. District development schedule District Collaborative Development Reach2Teach New Teacher Induction Academy First Day of Instruction/Student Teacher Orientation Seminar (Danielson Framework) Seminar (Resume and job planning) Seminar (Rigor and Relevance) Seminar (Classroom Management) Seminar (Diversity in the Classroom) Seminar (Special Populations) Seminar (Data Driven Decision Making) Seminar (Principal Panel and Interviews) University’s Supervisors Meeting applied for positions after completion of their student teaching. a grounded knowledge of culturally responsive pedagogy and familiarity with the chosen district. Preparing Preservice Teachers for Diverse Urban Classrooms Table 1. The district continues to support new teachers with a new teacher induction program. The student teachers were required to journal daily. scheduling guest speakers. The urban specialist was selected by the university urban center team as someone with experience in urban schools. providing relevant course work. As part of the course. a guest speaker 131 . It required that educators critically reflect on the way in which they taught and consider the underlying messages and assumptions in their curriculum. providing an account of their classroom experiences in relations to their teaching and personal reflections. Sessions were designed for the preservice teachers to reflect on their experiences and deconstruct the assigned readings as well as their classroom experiences. writing and reflective assignments relevant to teaching in urban schools. deconstructing experiences and serving as a mentor to preservice teachers. Urban Specialist Support The urban specialist was key to the USTEP Model. Culturally responsive teaching pedagogy was the foundation for the urban initiative student teaching course.

K. Williams & N. Carter

was invited to speak to the student teachers. The discussion was organized
to address how to avoid the pitfalls of anti-racist teaching. This presenter
described ways in which educators who try to promote anti-racism in the
classroom can promote the dominant ideology that is prominent in mainstream
education by emphasizing individuality, placing too much focus on the
“Other” and by using teaching strategies based on deficit theory. The author
explained different ways all educators can support the dominant discourse
on race relations and offered suggestions to keep equity at the forefront of
teaching. The student teachers were encouraged to ask questions and discuss
scenarios openly in a safe environment.
The urban specialist, in the role of field supervisor completed all required
observations of the student teachers in the classroom. Shortly following the
observations, the urban specialist conferenced with the student teachers to
address their teaching practices. As part of the follow-up conference, the
student teachers were provided a chance to reflect on experiences requiring
guidance about their lessons. This gave the urban specialist an opportunity
to offer input regarding teaching practices based on culturally responsive
pedagogy. A critical part of the urban specialist responsibility was to mentor
the student teachers. As a supportive mentor, the urban specialist addressed the
immediate needs of preservice teachers by providing psychological support,
assessments, feedback on teaching and identified areas of improvement.
An essential component for creating positive preservice teaching
experiences was the scheduled share and support sessions. Psychological
support built the preservice teacher’s self-esteem and ability to handle stress.
The journals student teachers kept afforded the urban specialist with ideal
discussion topics. The student teachers used journaling to express their many
concerns and challenges. The process allowed the urban specialist to guide
and direct student teachers appropriately. During these scheduled sessions,
the student teachers were also able to share common experiences with one
The USTEP Model illustrates the importance of collaboration and support
between the university, district and urban specialist in preparing preservice
teachers for diverse urban classroom. The relationship model displayed in
Figure I depicts an equal importance on each component with interaction
among all entities. In keeping with a tenet of culturally responsiveness, the
student teacher is at the center of the process. While each component is
equally important, this model places light on the significance of the urban
specialist. The role of the urban specialist as course instructor and field
supervisor provided the students with valuable expertise as mentor. The


Preparing Preservice Teachers for Diverse Urban Classrooms

Figure 1. The USTEP model illustrates the collaboration needed
between all involved

responsibility of course instructor for other student teachers is assigned in
the student teaching office and is not the same person as the field supervisor
who is responsible for field observations.


This model illustrates how the university collaboratively worked with an,
urban district and an urban specialist to preservice teachers. The goals of
implementing the initiative undergirded by the fulfil the needs of USTEP
Model included:
1. promoting the confidence of the preservice teacher in diverse urban
2. improving effective teaching behaviors for all student teachers;
3. increasing knowledge and application of culturally responsive teaching;
4. increasing the numbers of prepared urban teachers for diverse urban


K. Williams & N. Carter


The six preservice teachers participating in the program were African
American, Latino and White middle-class students who expressed a goal of
teaching in urban schools. They elected to become a part of this experience
because of job availability in the school districts; therefore, immediate
employment was their incentive. Although students self-identified themselves
as middle or upper class, all received financial aid. The teachers ranged in
age from ? to 24, single with no children.
In the redesigned field experience course described as part to the teacher
education program, students were asked to write in their journals daily and
complete written assignments. They were provided feedback from the urban
specialist instructor. The urban specialist as field supervisor made class
observations and conference calls. In addition, follow-up conferences were
held with students who sought employment in urban schools.
The preliminary findings included four emergent themes from students
who sought urban teaching positions after their preservice experience in
urban schools. The four themes were (a) the urban school experience (b)
view of the city, (c) the urban specialist mentor, and (d) cohort support.

The Urban Experience
The preservice teachers had differing prior urban school experiences.
Preliminary findings revealed that 3 of the 6 preservice teachers did not have
prior experiences or exposure to urban schools. Although they did not have
experience in urban settings, they expressed a desire to learn more and gain
greater experience in the urban setting. This is reflected in their applications.
For example:
To be perfectly honest, I have no experience with urban schools.
I grew up in a mostly white community, going to mostly white
public elementary and junior high schools. I transferred and attended
a private high school, also mostly white. Despite my person schooling,
I am most certainly interested in teaching in an urban school and have
taken steps in that direction. As a senior in high school I applied to the
TEACH grant, which requires recipients to teach four of their first 8
years in a low socioeconomic school…
My first experience in an urban school environment was a … middle
school. Many of the children from low income households had


Preparing Preservice Teachers for Diverse Urban Classrooms

patterns of behavior that seemed odd to me at the time. I saw
everything from disciplinary problems, to trying to be invisible. My
parents did their best to explain to me why these children would be
acting the way they were. I was able to understand most of what they
said, but I was still confused.
Three of the six preservice teachers had previous experience in urban
schools. They had attended urban schools throughout their K-12 educational
experience. They were able to reflect on their own experience in urban
schools. The students with urban experience responded differently in the
sense that they were able to reflect on their personal experiences in urban
schools. Their application responses were illustrative:
I grew up in city and I attended city school so I know where
these kids are coming from. I witnessed students fall through
the cracks because they would not listen to a teacher who had
no idea what life outside the class was like for them.
I have always seen myself teaching in urban districts, especially
since I experienced on first hand my entire life. I grew up in (city)
and attended public schools on free or reduced lunch from
kindergarten all the way to senior year of high school.
Growing up in an area where graduating from high school
was a huge accomplishment and going to college was unheard
of, I knew at an early age that I wanted to be the change my
community needed.
These responses showed a contrast between those students with previous
experience in urban settings and those without experience and exposure.
This was important because studies indicate that perceptions and attitudes
about schools are influenced and shaped by personal knowledge (Swetnam,
1992). The annual Gallup poll taken by Phi Delta Kappa on perceptions of
public schools indicated the greater one’s personal knowledge was about
the public school, the better one likes and respects the schools. According to
Swetnam (1992), people who do not have personal knowledge or experience
have a tendency to form their attitudes and perceptions based on media
representation that could be fictional. Although, there is a definite dearth
of positive information about city schools and urban areas in general, when
perservice teachers enter urban schools with limited exposure, it could leave
them vulnerable to stereotyping without additional professional and support
to help them understand what they are experiencing.


K. Williams & N. Carter

Urban Choice
A theme emerged that is worthy of discussion, specifically, an urban school
as a place of employment. In a classic study by Carter and Larke (1995), a
group of 45 White, middle-class preservice teachers were asked to explain
in detail why they would not accept a teaching position in an urban school.
Some of their responses were the following:
I realize I am being selfish and idealistic, but I don’t want to settle for
I couldn’t handle being in a school …where …teachers spend most of
the day dealing with depressing problems.
It was a great [urban field] experience, but I would be embarrassed to
tell my friends and family that I work here
These comments were made almost 2 decades ago, but according to more
recent studies, the predispositions of these students still exist and are attached
to real feelings about their jobs as a social status symbol (Hollins & Guzman,
2005; Jenkins & Carter, 2013;Singer & Hoffman, 2008). For these preservice
teachers, the wealth and social status of the school district determined their
personal value and worth as a teacher. Larke and Carter (1995) reported
these students were steeped in their philosophical orientation toward how to
establish their own sense of worth and it was tied into their desire to teach in
affluent school districts. Some of these same students pursued an urban field
placement because it would “look good on their resume” or “show they were
well-rounded to an employer.”
In direct contrast, preservice students who applied for the USTEP initiative
were excited and eager to seek employment in an urban environment. They
actively sought opportunities to serve children in city schools and articulated
passion toward being in the city. Prepositions of preservice teachers may
have implications for recruitment and the selection process of potential
teachers for diverse classrooms.

The Urban Specialist Mentor
It is important to note that over last two decades, research on preparing
teachers for diverse populations has been conducted. These preliminary
findings add to the research by addressing the importance of the field
supervisor as urban specialist. This mentoring role was significant in the


while instruction-related support includes learning to teach. They expressed that weekly opportunities to share personal experiences helped them through some of their challenging times. 2008). While a mentor was needed to assist the preservice teacher confront problems and concerns. This is reflected in their journals. Cohort Support An essential component for creating positive preservice teaching experiences was the weekly share and support sessions. you have no credibility. For example: Having the opportunity to discuss experiences and assignments with someone who knows what you are talking about. Being a part of a group where you could discuss your experiences and share ideas every week was so important. This was an important part of their student teaching experience. Psychological support built the preservice teacher’s self-esteem and ability to handle stress. Nothing is more powerful than having someone with that experience in urban school. what worked. Preservice teachers need support and guidance from experienced mentors. what did not and how you would change it for the next class. The preservice teachers overwhelmingly expressed the importance of the cohort support. the goals of mentoring advanced beyond supporting new teachers emotionally and assisting them in developing professionally. 1996). Sometimes you were going through some of the same things and you were able to share that with others in the program. district and cooperating teacher. Psychological support addresses the preservice teacher’s needs and concerns. It was so important having a support system of supervisor. The preservice teachers expressed their need for support to analyze and deconstruct their experiences in the urban classroom. Preparing Preservice Teachers for Diverse Urban Classrooms experience of the preservice teachers. You can’t speak on things unless you have experienced them. 137 . The latter can be achieved through formative observations and evaluations conducted by mentors (Moon-Merchant & Carter. Mentors provide psychological and instruction-related support (Gold. Having urban supervisor to help you to reflect on each assignment. Urban supervisor made us think of things we had not thought of before.

Scheduled weekly meeting sessions allowed opportunities for them to voice their concerns. respect and confidentiality. peer meetings also allow preservice teachers to feel part of a group. Through sharing personal experiences. These meetings assisted preservice teachers cope with problems and gave them opportunities to reflect. journaling and reflecting on assignments and experiences with your group in our weekly meeting. there was no inclination to cast judgment. The opportunity to work in a cohort with other student teachers so closely. Support was sustained throughout the program by dialoguing with the preservice teacher and his or her peers. discussions and activities oriented around self-assessed needs and concerns are essential. Reflection was a means for improving classroom process and outcomes. learn and grow professionally. Teacher efficacy is the extent to which a teacher believes he/she can actually teach the children. Williams & N. To build self-confidence and a high sense of teacher efficacy. When preservice 138 . vent. peer support sessions reduce isolation and provide candid and sincere dialogue from peers experiencing similar challenges. Carter Discussions with the group and support from supervisor. and help one another solve problems.K. thus retarding feelings of isolation. preservice teachers gained a deeper understanding of themselves as emerging teachers. Peer share and support sessions were built on the founding codes of trust. These requirements were critical to the success of the group meetings. share their successes and challenges. Just to know the members of the cohort were experiencing some of the same highs and lows and to have someone to help you work through those situations was most helpful. According to Rogers and Babinski (1999). Since the urban specialist was university-based. Consequently. Supporting emerging teachers was incorporated as a form of therapeutic guidance. Danielson and McGreal (2000) reported that structured journal reflections on practice effectively promoted professional learning. I knew others were having some of the same experiences we were able to discuss and share. Teacher efficacy was an important element. Feedback received during this process enabled them to see that others were experiencing the same challenges. One of the most important aspects of these confidential group sessions was that the activity permitted teachers to share their accomplishments and frustrations without fear of consequences.

The model proposed by Hill- Jackson (2007). 2002/2003). Preservice teachers with indicating high cognitive complexity. Niday. multifocal perspectives. 139 . The selection of these preservice teacher applicants can be determined by analyzing their application responses with the Five Dispositions of Advocates and Resisters in the Multicultural Classroom Model. Journal entries assisted the preservice to perceive the progress of personal growth during the student teaching experience. & Potts. 2000). and ethics. includes cognitive complexity. the urban specialist becomes critical for examining and deconstructing educational systems that perpetuates inequality and maintains the status quo for many students in urban schools. empathy and high moral standards would be determined to be good candidates for the USTEP program.1997. Preparing Preservice Teachers for Diverse Urban Classrooms teachers closely examined their practices. intercultural sensitivity. The preliminary analysis of this program initiative indicates that preservice teachers would be willing to complete student teaching in urban schools districts in preparation for teaching in urban schools. CONCLUSION Researchers have repeatedly confirmed that teachers need to know more about the world of the children with whom they work in order to better offer opportunities for learning success (Graybill. Improving the instructional practices and the methods used to prepare teachers are important in improving urban education (Milner. acquired new ideas from peers and gained self-confidence. These preservice teachers would require support. The urban specialist in the USTEP model would also serve as a mentor aiding the preservice teachers as they navigate through their urban experience. Through conversations and sharing ideas during the support sessions. Of the 6 students who participated in the initiative. 5 pursued jobs in an urban district. As instructor for the course. the school district and an urban specialist as demonstrated in the USTEP Model. from the university. This model of student teaching emphasizes the need for an urban specialist equipped to help the students develop their competency in areas of cultural responsiveness. advanced discourse with mentors and peers and recognized that teaching is an ongoing professional growth process (Boreen. Pransky & Bailey. Johnson. worldviews. they perceived patterns of classroom events. entry-level teachers reflected on their own practice. 2012).

2005. Additionally. NOTE The present uban education model discussed in this chapter is based on the foundational 1 model introduced by Carter and Larke (1995). Conway.K. Browning. Universities should recruit and identify students that are willing to teach in urban schools. Implications for Future Research Over the last decade. The district should identify cooperating teachers who want to guide. & Mercier. & Roberts. The use of various components of this evolving model may be useful in identifying existing programs that allow preservice teachers to be supported by the university. Future researchers can further the implications for the model in suburban and rural schools. Further study needs to be done to determine if preservice teachers hired as teachers continued to be supported and remain in the school district. 140 . Carter Recommendations Finally. Rohr. Williams & N. new models with specialized criteria should be embraced. Cavalo. thus negating the perpetuation of stereotyping and discrimination. a change in the preparation of preservice teachers should be considered. Preparing teachers for urban schools should be viewed as a distinctive component of teacher education programs. In addition. 2007. 2005. researchers have studied university school partnerships in preparing new teacher for urban schools (Burbank & Dynak. Duffy. Ferreira. & Burdum-Cassidy. 2005). Miller. This model has been in used for nearly 20 years at various institutions thus a revisitation of the model is needed. The university should provide preservice teachers interested in teaching in an urban setting with an urban specialist as supervisor and instructor. these students should be supported by a district that provides continuous professional development during the preservice field experience. rather than adhering to the traditional standards involving general guidelines. Gasparello. It is our desire that gaps in the research will be filled by researchers that are interested in pursuing the development of various models for preservice teachers. district and an urban specialist to help in deconstructing new experiences faced in diverse urban schools. it is recommended that colleges and universities should answer the call to provide the nation’s schools with adequate numbers of teacher prepared to teach in diverse urban classrooms. mentor and share best practices that are grounded in culturally responsive pedagogy.

J. J. coaching.).. Preparing teachers of color at a predominantly White university: A case study of project TEAM. Davis. M. Banks (Eds. C. NY: Macmillan. (2007).. C. In J. M. 141 . Gay. 16(4). Boston. York. S. M. J. Culturally responsive teaching: Theory. M. G.. & Secada. 445–464. Haberman. Boreen. In J. M. Mentoring beginning teachers: Guiding. (1996). Haberman. Thousand Oaks. New York. San Francisco.). & Larke. & Dynak... J. School Science and Mathematics. Selecting and preparing culturally competent teachers for urban schools. M. (2003). Preventing disproportionate representation: Culturally and linguistically responsive referral intervention. Cavallo. N. Sikula (Ed. University–district partnerships and the recruitment of tomorrow’s teachers: A grassroots effort for preparing quality educators through a teaching academy. 41(1).. research & practice (2nd ed. & Thompson. A. Project of association of teacher education (2nd ed.. A.). (2005).. assessment and issues of diversity. NY: Macmillan. T. NJ: John Wiley & Sons. MA: Allyn. R. Star teachers of children in poverty. M. NewYork. B. (2003). New York. L. Teacher education yearbook II (pp. Carter. M. 105(7). Beginning teacher support: Attrition. & J. 747–760). Grant. (Ed. (2004). (2005). & E. Increasing student access to qualified science and mathematics teachers through an urban school–university partnership.. A. Preparing teachers for diversity. (2008). CO: National Center for Culturally Responsive Educational Systems (Practitioner Brief Series). Handbook of research on multicultural education. Teaching and Teacher Education.. & Banks. Banks & C. In W. reflecting. (2005). The Teacher Educator. IN: Kappa Delta Pi. Teaching Education. J. Hoboken. Good. Cochran-Smith. L.. (1999). D. P. Multicultural education: Issues and perspectives (6th ed. M. 54–69. Conaway. J. (2000). Buttery. (2003). (1990). Sikula (Eds. (1995). 77–95). P. Niday.. (2000). New York. NewYork.). 20–31. (2012). Ferreira. NY: Longman. J. Multicultural teacher education: Research practice and policy. Preparing the urban teacher: Reconceptualizing the experience. N. O’Hair & S. Handbook of research on teacher education (pp. N. Carter. Y. & Fries. 19(4).). K. Odell (Eds. & Burdum-Cassidy.).). Cole. 403–422).. Washington. Looking in classrooms (9th ed. Sikula. A. P.. Bennett. Handbook of research on teacher education (2nd ed. & Potts. D. G. 363–372. D.. & Brophy. Bennett. Browning. T. & Oritz. Action in Teacher Education. In M. K. 29(1). Teacher candidates’ changing perceptions of urban schools: Results of a 4-year study. J. D. I.. C. 325–335. (1995). pp. CA: Jossey-Bass. Garcia. Guyton (Eds.). Haberman. & Roberts. NY: Macmillan.). Multicultural education: Theory and practice (4th ed.). C. Houston. ME: Stenhouse Publishers. Burbank. W. In J. West Lafayette. A cultural memoir of schooling: Connecting history and critical reflection to the development of culturally responsive educators. S. (1996). Gold. M. Canniff. NY: Teachers College Press. DC: AACTE & Eric Clearing House & Bacon.). Denver.. mentoring and induction. B. CA: Corwin Press. B. Johnson. M. J. Convergence or divergence: Alignment of standards. J.. A. Preparing Preservice Teachers for Diverse Urban Classrooms REFERENCES Banks.

(2001). 79–90). 186–209. & Lewis.).S. New York. The Urban Review.. Government Printing Office. M. Noel. A. pp. Educational Leadership. Iran-Nejad & D.). J. R.. Saffold. San Francisco. Williams & N. P. (2005). Zeichner (Eds. 36. (2008).. Ng. H..teach-now.. W. & Hoffman. Miller. NY: Macmillan. (1985). In M. Hollins. Retrieved from www. Carter Haberman. (2007). R.. But good intentions are not enough: Theoretical and philosophical relevance in teaching students of color. & Guba. Nieto. & Guzman. Sable. 40(2). National Center for Education Statistics. Cochran-Smith & K. Naturalistic inquiry. 211–248). CA: Sage. J. 109–112. (2000). 62(8). S.. The troubling context of urban education: Instructional design as a source of transformation for students of color. Person (Eds. CA: Jossey Bass. S. DC: U.. W. A. & Sikula. Landsman & C.. Hollins. T. & Lewis. White teachers. W. (2003). (2008). M. M. 700–705.K. C. Handbook of research on teacher education (2nd ed. In J. Preparing teachers for high poverty schools. Challenges in teacher education for urban education.. DC: American Educational Research Association. Powerful pedagogy for African American students: A case of four teachers. NY: Longman.org National Center for Education Statistics. Urban Education. 17(1). Rohr. Washington. Preparing teachers for diverse student populations: A critical race theory perspective. R. G. F. Washington. Overview of alternative teacher certification. & Longwell-Grice. G. J. G. Milner. In A. 380–398. Review of research in education (Vol. Revealing the deep meaning of culture in school learning: Framing a new paradigm for teacher preparation. Sterling. (2012). New York. 24. Studying teacher education: The report of the AERA panel on research and teacher education (pp. (2003).S. (2006). Jenkins. H. Irvine. S. Government Printing Office. & Mercier. 70–79. (2011). The dreamkeepers: Successful teachers of African American children.). C. Gasparello. Washington. R. and eliminating racism (pp. (1994). Avoiding the pitfalls of anti-racist teaching: Lessons for White and Black educators.  pp. New York. (1999). T. Lincoln. (2011).). Ladson-Billings. Teacher shortages in urban schools: The role of traditional and alternative certification routes in filling the voids. Howard. E. Urban Education. 179–202. Journal of Curriculum and Pedagogy. U. Washington. J. (1995). Mahwah. Landsman. J. Action in Teacher Education. C.S.. VA: Stylus Pub.. S. National Center for Alternative Certification. Duffy. 142 . The National Journal of Urban Education and Practice. 47(4). Education and Urban Society. (2005). J. Ladson-Billings. 477–548). Newbury Park. (2013). G. diverse classrooms: A guide to building inclusive schools. N. 262–274. Public elementary and secondary school student enrollment and staff from the common core of data: School year 2006–07 (NCES 2009- 305).. Y. 403–422). & Carter. (Eds. promoting high expectations. Lewis (Eds. NJ: Erlbaum. L. White women preparing to teach in urban schools: Looking for similarity and finding difference. Robinson. Educating teachers for a diverse society: Seeing with the cultural eye. 62–65. Research on preparing teachers for diverse populations. Department of Education. G. 6(4). J. 35. Affirming diversity: The sociopolitical context of multicultural education. DC: Author. E. DC: U. E.. 8(2). NY: Teachers College Press. Institute of education sciences (NCES2011).

(2006).. principals. G. Handbook of research on teacher education (2nd ed. K. M. Government Printing Office. (1996). (2001b). 11 (2).S. G.S. 66(1).S. J. D. (2012).S. Lyter. (2001a).S.   Kamala Williams Department of Teaching. Review of Educational Research. Teaching Education. 25. (2011). In J. 70(3). S. & Carter. Pittsonberger. 95–113. C.. Washington. L. Washington. Journal of Teacher Education. Learning and Culture College of Education and Human Development. Urban teaching: The essentials. teacher attitudes. Clearing House.. and structural racism. Department of Education [USDOE]. G. Race Ethnicity and Education. S. E. Department of Education [USDOE]. 30–32. U. New York. Power of a teacher: Implications for African American middle school students. National Center for Education Statistics. Washington. K. Texas A&M University Norvella Carter Department of Teaching. E. DC: American Educational Research Association. Sleeter. U. A. E. Williams.). Secada (Ed. 1(1). Department of Education.. Learning and Culture College of Education and Human Development. 5(1) 5–26. Review of research in education (Vol. teachers. 209–250). Texas A&M University 143 .. T. In W. F. L. N. (2010). A. (2006). Government Printing Office. Riordan. Preparing Preservice Teachers for Diverse Urban Classrooms Singer. districts. & E. Buttery. Swetnam. Vaught S. U. K. 369–406. (2007). New York. Media distortion of the teacher image.). Webb-Johnson. N. DC: U. Catapano. Guyton (Eds. (1992). NY: Macmillan. Research in the 90’s: Implications for urban teacher preparation. K. Sikula. Sleeter. Culturally responsive urban school leadership: Partnering to improve outcomes for African American learners. R. & Orlofsky. Washington.. Epistemological diversity in research on preservice teacher preparation for historically underserved children.M. “I don’t think I’m a racist”: Critical race theory. Teacher socialization for cultural diversity. The National Journal of Urban Education and Practice. Digest of education statistics 2011 (NCES2011). 119–130. 77–98.. Zeichern. L.S.. Government Printing Office. The Journal of the Texas Alliance of Black School Educators. Strizek. Preparing teachers for culturally diverse schools: The overwhelming presence of Whiteness.. DC: U. (2012). 525–547). (2000). pp.. (2008). 52(2). 21(2). L. Weiner.  pp. and school libraries in the United States: 2003-04 schools and staffing survey (NCES 2006-313 Revised). & Castagno. DC: U. & Hoeft. C. Characteristics of schools. The condition of education 2012 (NCES2012). & Huisman. 94–106. Weiner. The university’s role in preparing teachers for urban schools. NY: Teachers College Press.

2008). The local level has frequently mirrored national policy.e. 145–169. as writing has consistently been an overshadowed part of many state and school district curricula. instead. Li & J. Hammer (Eds. TRACEY S. Teaching at Work. NANCY DUBINSKI WEBER. © 2015 Sense Publishers. However. 2004). Moreover. An increase in the emphasis on writing in daily life would logically be reflected by a commensurate increased emphasis in the amount of writing that occurs within schools. current research (Cutler & Graham. 2008) indicates otherwise. the majority of teachers create their own model as well as supplementary materials for teaching writing concepts. however. people are relying on the written word for communication (Yancey. Rather than using oral language to communicate (via phone calls or face-to-face interactions). KATHERINE LANDAU WRIGHT AND ANNA DE LA GARZA 8. Reading First). HODGES. 2010). the essay will become optional. very few school districts adopt a premade writing curriculum. writing has been overlooked in K-12 classrooms and is not even included as one of the five essential components of literacy education in the No Child Left Behind legislation (i. A curiously unintended.. Morgan. yet significant. All rights reserved. MODELING THE “WRITE” TEACHING PRACTICES Instructor Influences on Preservice Teachers INTRODUCTION Writing is infiltrating society at a higher rate than ever before. which recently dominated educational policy (Cutler & Graham. Historically. DOUGLASS. . This national ambivalence about the importance of writing can also be seen on high-stakes tests: only in 2005 did the SAT exam introduce a written essay component. APRIL G. or at least an increase in the writing instruction that occurs within schools. but may also be due to ground-level characteristics. relative neglect may not only be stemming from top-down forces. ERIN MCTIGUE.). Y. However. starting in 2016. consequence of the increased focus on technology has resulted in more words written each day. often they do not personally enjoy writing or feel confident in their ability to teach writing concepts (Dempsey. PytlikZillig & Bruning 2009. While most K-12 teachers have students engage in some degree of writing.

from where do these emotions originate.g. 2002. 2009). S. Because teachers directly control the type and amount of writing in schools. 2006. Following these sections are the methods. Comparisons among instructors’ teaching practices and student behaviors also are analyzed. the constructs supporting effective writing instruction are also multi-dimensional and complex. MacArther. Additionally. we provide a brief review of prior and current research on writing instruction. The combination of teachers’ feeling unprepared to teach writing and having few curricular resources to draw upon. their writing instruction at the preservice level. the more complex writing appears. Morgan. Preservice teachers’ self-efficacy for writing tasks and their perceived ability to teach writing is compared from the beginning to the end of the course. Previous research indicates that teachers’ attitudes toward writing are frequently apathetic or. & Fink. No single model 146 . and what can be done to change them? Research indicates that preservice teacher preparation programs and former teachers are the leading sources of preservice teachers’ beliefs about writing (Graham. In the following sections. 2010). Colby & Stapleton. Dempsey et al. and discussion for our study. preservice teacher self-efficacy for writing instruction. State of Writing Instruction Research Writing is a complex and multi-dimensional cognitive and social process. But. methods to inform teacher education programs are discussed. and effective teacher modeling. at best. mediocre (e. PURPOSE The present chapter discusses the results of a program evaluation and self-study of writing-intensive education courses at a university in the southwestern part of the United States. This finding indicates the quality of writing instruction at the preservice level can have profound and lasting effects on teachers’ attitudes.T. and we define the major constructs – preservice teacher self-efficacy for writing. can result in scenarios of limited classroom writing instruction. Harris. it is imperative to take a step back and look at the foundations of teachers’ beliefs about writing – specifically. Multiple sources of data are used. and the more researchers understand about the underlying processes.. we describe writing-intensive courses and observations of these courses using classroom observation instruments. HODGES et al. To that effect. Together. results..

writing instruction at the K-12 level does not parallel the influence of writing in daily life. 2011).g. Berninger. & Abbott.. For the purposes of the present study. Looking beyond the public schools. and engage students in various grouping methods to improve student achievement (Tschannen-Moran & Johnson. utilize multiple genres of text. 2012). 2011). 2006). Hall & Grisham-Brown. 2007). 2008. 2007). research is needed to more clearly connect teacher self-efficacy with writing instruction. Cutler & Graham. Despite the fact that writing was included in No Child Left Behind. Pajares & Valiante. Despite this lack of research. that currently exists. preservice teachers self-efficacy for writing instruction is defined as preservice teachers’ belief in their abilities to effectively instruct students on writing tasks and writing strategies to improve writing achievement. Modeling The “Write” Teaching practices of writing instruction. yet there is a dearth of current research focusing on improving writing instruction for students. 2012). Current research on self-efficacy shows that teachers who demonstrate a high sense of efficacy are more likely to diversify their instructional strategies. Therefore. there is a strong call for studies that focus on improving the self-efficacy of preservice literacy teachers. Graham et al. Preservice Teachers’ Self-Efficacy for Writing Instruction Teacher educators should develop activities that allow preservice teachers to engage in creative writing tasks that model teaching strategies they could integrate into their own literacy lessons (Colby & Stapleton. 2010a. Graham & Perin. Preservice Teachers’ Self-Efficacy for Writing Students’ beliefs about their own writing processes and competence for writing are instrumental in their ultimate success as writers (Pajares. there is even less research that focuses directly on teacher education programs as vehicles for improving the self-efficacy beliefs of preservice teachers. and the Common Core State Standards emphasize both learning to write and writing to learn as important constructs in literacy development (National Governors Association. 2003.. The majority of current research on writing instruction is focused on inservice teachers (e. teachers need to be writers in order to 147 . fully captures these complexities (Graham. 2006. Writing instruction is foundational to students’ success in the classroom and beyond (Graham & Perin. It is the teacher’s belief in his or her abilities to engage students in the process of writing to produce high-quality writing samples. However.

. In the present study. 2012). many teachers report that they are inadequately prepared to teach writing (Kiuhara. Graham. The task of making these connections is on the teacher educators. However. 2006). Effective Teacher Modeling Preservice teachers learn the skill of teaching from effective teacher models. “a teacher’s efficacy belief is a judgment of his or her capabilities to bring about desired outcomes of student engagement and learning. teachers who feel that they will improve student achievement are more likely to change their beliefs regarding self-efficacy (Skaalvik & Skaalvik. parents. Moreover. preservice self-efficacy for writing is the preservice teachers’ belief that they can effectively write for multiple purposes (e. 2009). to preservice teachers. students) with confidence. HODGES et al. note-taking) and multiple audiences (e. 2010). According to Tschannen-Moran and Hoy (2001). teachers. 2009). 1986). Graham and Perin (2007) found that when teachers did not provide effective modeling of strategies in writing instruction. who can enhance the effectiveness of preservice teachers by modeling the practices suggested by theory. 783). effectively teach writing (Colby & Stapleton.g.. Moreover. It is significantly more difficult for a teacher to instruct on a skill with which he or she is not familiar or adept. student achievement decreased (d = -. persuasion. lesson planning. in their seminal work. self. Through social cognitive theory and self-efficacy for writing (Bandura. This suggests that teacher educators are staying up-to-date on best practices which research shows improve student outcomes and achievement in writing and are demonstrating these practices. Preservice teachers can visualize how these practices would translate into their own classrooms. but also provides the preservice teachers with the opportunity to test and use the strategies and 148 . even among those students who may be difficult or unmotivated” (p. & Hawken. including strategies and instructional approaches. In fact. these demonstrations are occurring in authentic classroom settings. communication.g. research-based practices related to writing instruction in authentic classroom settings. 1977. S.61).T. Research suggests that preservice teachers often revert to teaching in the same ways they were taught because they do not fully grasp the connections between theory and practice from their teacher preparation courses (Ritter. Effective teacher modeling is also present in higher education when teacher educators are instructing preservice teachers (Kaufman. effective teacher modeling is operationally defined as the demonstration of best.

. Modeling The “Write” Teaching practices instructional approaches themselves. Likewise. The task of preparing future teachers for the classroom presents a unique situation for those who teach writing-intensive courses to not only 149 . examine their own thinking (metacognition) about writing. 1992). • Instructors must provide explicit instruction in writing. low stakes in- class writing. and 75% for a one-credit course) • Instructors must require a minimum of 2000 written words. writing-intensive courses are predominately junior-level courses designed to prepare preservice teachers for classroom instruction. To improve the writing skills of undergraduates. 33% for a 3-credit course. The writing process is complex and intimidating for many students and this presents a real concern when it comes to preservice teacher preparation in writing. timed writings. • A large percentage of the final course grade must be based on writing quality (about 25% for a 4-credit course. and language acquisition and development of English Language Learners (ELLs). Effective teacher modeling will be measured through systematic classroom observations. • Instructors must provide feedback that allows for the improvement of writing on major assignments. the writing assignments differ by course to include a wide range of writing assignments including research papers. help develop positive beliefs about writing. multicultural children’s literature. Writing-Intensive Education Courses Courses that allow preservice teachers opportunities to engage in writing. and practice giving feedback on others’ writing. Although the basic requirements for writing-intensive courses can vary by university. reading and writing instruction for middle grades. The content of the courses varies and includes topics such as children’s literature. 2002). journals. These courses incorporate regular writing tasks in ways that allow students to learn both the subject matter and ways of thinking and writing specific to their discipline. many universities have opted to restructure content area courses and designate them as writing- intensive (Farris & Smith. essays. which have been a call for research in past and current published studies (see Graham et al. the conditions for a writing-intensive course in the university studied here are as follows: • The course must require writing related to the students’ major. In the participating education department. and assessment of others’ writing.

2013) for the purpose of describing teachers’ instructional practices (Hilberg.” referring to the common assumption that teacher effectiveness is consistent across classrooms within a particular school while neglecting to appreciate the impact of each individual educator (Weisberg. & Keeling. and improving educational program quality. Teacher practice.. Systematic classroom observation measures have been employed for a number of purposes. S. should these courses be informative. Classroom observation research can go beyond simple value-added protocols to evaluate teacher effectiveness with valid and reliable measures of specific 150 . which involve simply taking in what is going on in the immediate environment. 2013) based on what is determined to be effective (O’Leary. Sexton.T. but they should also fully prepare future teachers for the task of teaching writing themselves. TNTP. Waxman. Precise and explicit procedures are established for the observations themselves as well as for the act of recording those observations for later analysis and logic-based interpretation (Reiss. some of which include: examining teaching practices. 2004. systematic classroom observations establish a protocol for gathering information from the environment in a reliable. they should be designed to provide students with specific. The specific goals of these courses can differ. 2013. Taylor & Tyler.  Systematic classroom observation protocols are unique in that they focus on the aspects of teaching that can be reliably observed and assessed (Hamre et al.. Unlike casual observations. 2012. authentic practice in writing that both inform their knowledge of the content and allow them to practice effective writing methods. The data collected from such measures directly inform the improvement of teaching practices (Hilberg et al. Simply focusing on grades and test scores does not provide a complete picture of a specific instructor’s effect on student learning. replicable way to reduce bias. & Tharp. however. Hill & Grossman. exploring classroom environments. HODGES et al. 2005). 2012). This focus on individual teachers combats the “Widget Effect. Mulhern. Measuring Effective Teacher Modeling through Systematic Classroom Observations The drive to link what teachers actually do in their classrooms to how their students perform academically has created a need for classroom observation research to examine the nuances and intricacies of the diverse and dynamic teaching field. assessing and evaluating teachers. 2004). Methods like value-added modeling have emerged in an effort to estimate teacher quality based on student improvement (Doran & Fleishman. 2009). 1971).

. 2013. Waxman et al.. 2004) and achievement (Kane et al. Alberg. The classroom environment variables. METHODS The program evaluation described in this chapter analyzed writing-intensive education courses through two surveys and three classroom observation instruments to determine the effectiveness of the writing-intensive courses in improving self-efficacy beliefs about writing of the preservice teachers and best practices for teacher education programs when teaching writing pedagogy. can be correlated with other variables to determine what relationships exist (Pianta et al. & Wooten. Tyler. Pianta et al. la Paro. but also they can capture and illuminate details about the classroom environment. 2008) like engagement (Raphael et al. Taylor. 2011). 2009). & Huang. Payne.. enabling educational improvement. 1998). Padrón.  Classroom observations allow researchers to collect evidence about what goes on in classrooms (O’Leary. including the practices and interactions that take place (Hamre et al. 151 . 2002). Classroom environments... researchers can go beyond simply finding out what strategies instructors are using in the classroom to revealing how they facilitate learning through the environments they create and the interactions they have with students. allowing for identification of classrooms of quality and those in need of support (Stuhlman & Pianta. 2012) in order to study teaching and learning in a naturalistic setting (Hilberg et al. The observations can be triangulated with other data such as student achievement scores and survey responses to identify specific teaching practices that lead to positive student outcomes (Raphael. Smith. behaviors. 2002. 2009). Cox. climate. they provide reliable and comprehensive information (Hilberg et al. 2002). 2008. 2004. researchers better understand the nature of those individual classrooms and the variations between them. Franco-Fuenmayor. and organization. 2011).. By examining first-hand what is really going on in classrooms. Furthermore. Roberson. Pressley. & Mohan. 2009). like teacher/student and student/student interactions. 2004) that sheds light on what teachers do that engenders positive student outcomes. Ross.. Not only do they allow for the description of the classroom and the organization of learning activities (Pianta.. Modeling The “Write” Teaching practices teacher behaviors and strategies (Kane. This method increases our overall understanding of effective teaching (Waxman. & Bradley. & Lowther. When observations are conducted systematically and by well-trained observers.

3% EC-6 89 38% 4-8 16 6.8% 8-12 Frequency of Writing daily 70 29. As can be seen in Table 1. The second group of participants consists of the eight instructors of the writing- intensive courses. and the majority (n=113) indicated that they are interested in pursuing an early childhood (EC-6) certification.9% Asian 26 11.3% MyCompLab Grammar Module Yes 97 41. The first set of participants consists of 233 preservice teachers enrolled in 12 sections of face-to-face writing-intensive education courses in the spring of 2014. HODGES et al.5% No 136 58.1% Hispanic 198 84.9%) are either sophomore or junior classification.8% Junior 29 12.9% Freshman 61 26.3% Other Certification Area 113 48.7% indicated they write more than three times Table 1. The majority (83.T. S.1% 152 .4% less than 1 per week 10 4.6% of the preservice teachers are White. Participants Two sets of participants are the focus of this evaluation.3% Never 3 1.4% Graduate Ethnicity 2 .1% Sophomore 140 59.6% White 3 1. Demographic information for preservice teachers (n = 233) n percentage Classification 2 .8% 1-2 per week 64 27.4% Senior 1 . 84.9% 3-5 per week 86 36.9% African American 2 . and 66.

they collectively tell the story of what happens in writing-intensive education courses and what impact these courses have on preservice teachers who will be tasked with teaching writing. certification area. Section 1 asks preservice teachers to indicate the course for which they are currently enrolled. 87.3%) of preservice teachers indicated that they do not write at all during the week. A small percentage (1. Modeling The “Write” Teaching practices per week. MyCompLab is an online grammar module students are required to complete during their first writing-intensive education course. Letters are used to designate different sections of the same course and to protect the identities of the participating instructors.5% (n = 7) are female. Writing-intensive education course instructors Instructor ID Course Taught 1 A 2 A 3 A 4 B 5 B 6 C 7 C 8 D 153 . (3) self-efficacy for writing instruction. These demographics are comparable to the student sample demographics.5%) indicated that they have not completed the MyCompLab grammar module. Less than half (41. Pre-Version is divided into four major sections: (1) demographic information.5% of the instructors (n = 7) are White and 87. their classification. Together. gender. Table 2 shows courses taught by the eight instructors. Instruments Two surveys and three classroom observation instruments are the focus of this analysis. The Preservice Teachers Self-Efficacy for Writing Inventory. (2) self- efficacy for writing. the number of writing-intensive courses they have Table 2. and (4) self-efficacy for writing instruction. based on the effectiveness of the teacher preparation program. ethnicity. This confirms that the majority of students were enrolled in their first writing-intensive education course. According to our data.

Overall reliability scores for this sample were high (α=0. we wanted to understand what behaviors or tasks influence this self-efficacy. instructional practices. while section three is rated on a 3-point scale from not at all (1) to a great extent (3).915) and reflected current trends in current research. S. using current research. This section served as an additional comparison to the two surveys by focusing specifically on how the preservice teachers feel their self-efficacy for writing and writing instruction has changed throughout the semester. and (5) self-efficacy for writing instruction.  The instrument was adapted by the authors from the Teacher Roles Observation Schedule (TROS) (Waxman & Padrón.T. Questions for sections two. types of writing activities. and the status of their completion of the MyCompLab grammar module. The Preservice Teachers Self-Efficacy for Writing Inventory. (4) self-efficacy for writing instruction. Instructor observation instrument. including activities. Post- Version consists of five major sections: (1) demographic information.892) and fell within an acceptable range. how often the write. as well as preservice teachers’ beliefs about the effectiveness of their teacher education program in preparing them for writing and writing instruction. and class time devoted to writing. we used three formal classroom observation instruments to describe students’ and instructors’ behaviors. (3) self-efficacy for writing. The primary difference between the two surveys is the addition of section two on the post-course survey. HODGES et al. Questions for sections two and four are rated on a 5-point Likert scale from strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree (5). Sections two through four ask questions to establish the self-efficacy for writing and writing instruction.  Because self-efficacy alone is not a comprehensive measure of assessing whether or not preservice teachers feel prepared to teach writing. based on the effectiveness of the teacher preparation program. while section four is rated on a 3-point scale from not at all (1) to a great extent (3). To determine what is actually happening in college writing-intensive education courses. Classroom observation instruments. completed. This information was used to establish similarities and differences among samples. (2) an evaluation of the effectiveness of the course for which the preservice teacher is currently enrolled. 2004) for the purpose of this study and consisted of behaviors and 154 . The reliability scores for the current sample were moderately high (α = 0. which asks the participants to directly compare their experiences from beginning to end of the semester. three and five are rated on a 5-point Likert scale from strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree (5).

The mean inter-rater agreement across all observers was moderately high (83. the effectiveness of their teacher preparation program. We 155 . The reliability was high (α = 0. the observer rated the degree to which each behavior and characteristic was observed. The second observation occurred after Spring Break and was specifically chosen as a more general education day in the course. type of activity. One observation occurred before Spring Break and focused on a day devoted to writing instruction.5%) and the reliability was also moderately high (α = 0. Modeling The “Write” Teaching practices characteristics in the following categories: instructional setting.  The instrument was adapted by the authors from the Student Behavior Observation Schedule (COS) (Waxman & Padrón. At the end of each classroom observation. and instructional practices. focus of instruction. interactions. which was a follow-up measure. The mean inter-rater agreement across all observers was high (91%) and the reliability was moderate (α = 0. on-/off-task manner. Pre-Version during the third week of classes to assess their initial views on writing. Overall classroom reflective instrument. and the context of writing implementation within the overall classroom environment. The Preservice Teacher Self-Efficacy for Writing Inventory.  The instrument was adapted by the authors from Part 4 of the Classroom Observation Measure (COM) (Ross & Smith. purpose of interactions. 1996) for the purpose of this study and addressed instructor use of writing instruction. was administered during the second-to- last week of courses. 2004) for the purpose of this study and included characteristics and activities in the following areas: instructional setting. the observer checked off each detected characteristic or activity. type of engagement. we calculated effect sizes to determine the impact of each instructor on the self-efficacy beliefs of students in that course. writing strategies addressed. interactions. and writing skills addressed. Procedures The 233 participating preservice teachers were administered the Preservice Teacher Self-Efficacy for Writing Inventory. the observer checked off each witnessed characteristic or activity. student use of writing strategies. At the end of each 30-second observation cycle. Using both instruments together.98).829). focus. Post-Version.551). At the end of each 30-second observation cycle. and their initial views on writing instruction. Two classroom observations were completed for each instructor. Student observation instrument.

Next. wanted to analyze how the instructors specifically taught writing and observe how much writing was present in a class day not devoted to writing instruction. Effect sizes. writing should have been present even if the focus of the lesson was on general course content. Additionally.  Using Cohen’s d.  Finally. the instructors were divided into 156 . writing activities. ten rounds of observations were completed. and The Classroom Reflective Instrument. As each course is designated as writing-intensive. Analysis of variance. differences among the eight instructors were calculated. To analyze these results. S. During the systematic observations. first. the researcher selected three students who represented the demographics of the class. and focus of the instruction. we utilized all three instruments. we wanted to explore the instructional practices emphasizing writing within the writing-intensive courses. For all items on The Instructor Observation Instrument and The Student Observation Instrument. and writing skills which were the focus of the instruction. the researcher observed each student for 30-seconds and documented the classroom setting. taking into consideration age. the researcher completed The Classroom Reflective Instrument. five rounds of observations were completed. For 75. several statistical procedures were used. analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used.or 180-minute courses. The Instructor Observation Instrument. using descriptive statistics (means and standard deviations) as well as frequencies.T. type of instruction. For each observation. ethnicity. Finally. For the purposes of this study. at the end of the observation. the researcher observed the instructor for 30-seconds then documented on The Instructor Observation Instrument which behaviors were observed as well as the setting of the classroom. For 50-minute courses. effect sizes for preservice teachers’ self- efficacy for writing and preservice teachers’ self-efficacy for writing instruction were calculated. Statistical Analyses The goal of the present study was to determine the impact of the writing- intensive courses on the preservice teachers’ self-efficacy beliefs for writing and writing instruction. Descriptive statistics. and gender.  To determine differences among the instructors. HODGES et al. This allowed us to compare instructors and better inform the behaviors we observed within the classrooms. To complete the observation. The Student Observation Instrument. effect sizes were calculated for each instructor.

RESULTS According to social cognitive theory.223 -1.g.237 -1. Taking these three factors in unison. the classroom).965 5 B F W . which is an underlying framework for much of the writing research.578 -1. Clear differences were seen among the instructors simply by analyzing the percentage of time spent on different writing and pedagogical practices. this study focused on the relationships between effective teacher modeling.719 -1.254 3 A M W .024 8 D F W . preservice teacher self-efficacy for writing. self-efficacy). students are influenced by behavior (e. Modeling The “Write” Teaching practices two groups.090 2 A F H . the two groups did not correlate with overall gains in the preservice teachers’ self-efficacy scores...886 7 C F W . This indicates that the two groups may represent different teaching styles rather than effectiveness of instruction.147 -.191 -1. and preservice teacher self- efficacy for writing instruction.g.256 6 C F W .336 Overall       . most of the instructors made modest improvements in overall preservice teachers’ self-efficacy for writing. Effect Sizes According to Table 3. and environment (e.276 -1.286 Scores 157 . As much of the current research indicates that beliefs cannot be altered (Woolfolk Hoy. personal factors (e.g.219 -1. Davis. Interestingly. & Table 3. writing and writing instruction).281 -1.071 4 B F W . Gains in preservice teacher self-efficacy for writing and writing instruction by instructor Instructor Course Gender Ethnicity Overall Average Gain Overall Average Gain ID Taught in Preservice Teacher in Preservice Teacher Self-Efficacy for Self-Efficacy for Writing (g) Writing Instruction (g) 1 A F W ..

286).053 . ANOVA results for instructional practices by instructor Item Focus on the Focus on Course Modeling Self/Peer- Writing Process Content of Writing Evaluation Strategies Writing % of time 90% (7)a 100% (4)a 30% (7)a 60% (6)a observed (Instructor ID)   83. the overall average gains in preservice teacher self-efficacy for writing instruction are negative (d=-1.281) is low but positive. it reveals important information about the writing-intensive courses. In contrast. 2006).65% (1)a   45% (6)a 95% (2)a 10% (6)a 13. The effect sizes represent changes from The Preservice Teacher Self-Efficacy for Writing Inventory.67% (8)a 16.5% (5)a 10% (1)a 10% (7)a   30% (3)b 70% (3)a 2. HODGES et al. Pape.5% (5)b 5% (5)b   20% (2)b 33. Of all the items on The Instructor Observation Instrument. the average of all the instructors was negative and low (d= -1. explained later in the discussion.886 – -.050 . S. for instructional practices by instructor. this is a positive finding. which are significant or approaching significant. Pre-Version and Preservice Teacher Self-Efficacy for Writing Inventory.077 Note: “a” indicates instructors who are significantly different from “b”. only four items showed significant.33% (8)a 100% (1)a 16. This finding is surprising. differences among instructors.35% (1)b 72.147–.33% (8)a   33. Table 4.965).T. the instructors who did not focus on the writing process focused on course content. significant differences between instructors existed on the item focus on the writing process. As seen in Table 4. however. As can be seen from Table 3. Overall gains in preservice teachers self-efficacy for writing are low to moderate and positive (d =.719). Additionally. Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) Table 4 shows the results.075 . or approaching significant. The mean for all the instructors (d=. 158 .3% (8)b 0% (4)b 0% (4)b   0% (5)b 15% (7)b 0% (3)b 0% (3)b   0% (4)b 0% (6)b 0% (2)b 0% (2)b P . Pre-Version for each instructor. indicating that several instructors focused on the writing process while other did not.

333% (4)b 6. The only significant differences in observations for writing skills are for revising. 159 . ANOVA results for student observations by instructor Item Focus on How to Focus on Writing Writing Skills – Self/Peer- Assess Writing to Learn Revising Evaluation of Writing % of time 47.050 . like The Instructor Observation Instrument.833% (1)b 20% (5)b   18.33% (1)b 0% (4)b 14. For the student instrument.714% (3)a 10% (3)b 2. Table 5.167% (7)a 25. an impact still exists. Table 5 shows the results of the ANOVA from The Student Observation Instruments by instructor.433% (1)b   17.3% (7)b 3. Originally.667% (2)b 0% (3)b 0% (4)b   0% (1)b 0% (4)b 0% (2)b 0% (2)b P . Finally. Several instructors included both foci in their courses.052 Note: “a” indicates instructors who are significantly different from “b”. While these results only show a modest impact. we believed modeling of writing strategies would have a large impact on instructors.167% (7)b 0% (6)b 15.062 .667% (8)b 2.059 . self/peer-evaluation of writing is approaching significance. Some instructors modeled writing strategies more frequently than other instructors.778% (8)a 31.714% (3)a   25. this item was present as a writing activity. some instructors used self. approaching significant differences are shown based on the amount of time spent modeling writing strategies for students.667% (5)a 33. according to Table 4. Once again.5% (5)b 19. Modeling The “Write” Teaching practices Secondly. some instructors focused on how to assess writing while some focused on writing to learn.44% (8)b   13.and/or peer-evaluations and some did not. First. Both instruments showed this item as approaching significance indicating that it is a factor separating instructor’s teaching styles.5% (5)b 4.3% (2)b 1.833% (7)b   13.33% (8)a 54% (6)a observed (Instructor ID)   40% (6)a 10% (6)b 24. self/peer-evaluation of writing was approaching significance. Finally. Only the results that are significant or approaching significant are included in this table. Four instructors did not include revision in their courses at all and significant differences existed between these two instructors and all others.

the preservice teachers developed more awareness for the challenges of teaching writing. However. a higher effect size emerges (d=.T. the preservice teachers have the skills to teach writing. in terms of frequency of instructional or student behaviors observed. ANOVA. they rated themselves more highly than at the end of the course. Second. One explanation for this discrepancy is that through effective teacher modeling in a writing- intensive course. The preservice teachers’ self-efficacy for writing instruction represents a perception of how effectively the preservice teachers feel they will be able to teach writing. HODGES et al. the results of the ANOVAs show that differences among instructors do exist. and include further analysis of the differences between instructors based on instructional and pedagogical practices. we noticed that preservice teachers still did the majority of writing tasks outside of class 160 . the results are negative indicating that preservice teachers feel less confident in their abilities to teach writing after taking a writing-intensive course. several themes are exposed. Unlike our expectation. While this could be viewed as negative. Effects on Preservice Teachers’ Self-Efficacy for Writing Instruction The most alarming results are those for preservice teachers’ self-efficacy for writing instruction. looking at the effect size for the effectiveness of the teacher preparation program. because they rated their self-efficacy for writing instruction low. DISCUSSION This section will interpret the results of the effect sizes. While the results of the study. they feel more confident in their preparation program’s effectiveness of teaching them writing skills. through our observations. the positive effect size for preservice teachers’ self-efficacy for writing is impressive. there is a concern. are modest. which focused on how well preservice teachers feel their teacher preparation program prepared them to teach writing skills.289). However. overall. When they entered their preservice teacher education courses. Additionally. This finding indicates that while preservice teachers feel less confident in their abilities to teach writing. but they do show differences in pedagogical and instructional practices. Taking these two scores in unison. because preservice teachers rated their teacher preparation programs highly in their effectiveness of preparing them to teach writing. First. S. we interpret this result in a different way. These results are not correlated with the effects on preservice teacher self-efficacy.

Tables 6 and 7 were created. Overall. wrote a research-based or literary analysis paper of 1500-2500 words. Best Practices for Implementing Writing Instruction in Preservice Teacher Education Programs A secondary goal of this study was to show practices that are effective in increasing the self-efficacy of preservice teachers. These tables reveal the separation in instructional practices and student behaviors we observed within the writing-intensive courses.. preservice teachers gained confidence and perspective on their writing abilities.g. and engaged in low stakes writing activities during class. This finding is promising and expected as the writing-intensive courses were created to teach content alongside writing skills. and paper structure. preservice teachers developed more favorable self-efficacy beliefs toward writing through their writing-intensive courses. However. for instructional practices. the small. Through this level of practice and instruction. interacted with their students in managerial and social contexts. Modeling The “Write” Teaching practices and did not have many opportunities to practice teaching writing. in most cases. but rather by certain items we observed. Additionally. organization. we observed a difference in that some instructors preferred whole-class instruction while others used dyads or individual classroom settings. Effects on Preservice Teachers’ Self-Efficacy for Writing Overall. each course provided instruction on fundamental writing skills like grammar. For example. focused mostly on course content. these findings were clear differences among instructors. positive effects from this study show that with focused instruction and specific purposes (e. Instructors who represent Group 2 used whole-class instruction. 2006) indicates that knowledge and beliefs of preservice teachers cannot be altered. Table 6 shows differences among instructors by instructional practices. These two limitations to the study could be a factor in our results. and taught students about producing graphics and visual aids. In each writing-intensive course.. These differences are not clear-cut by instructor. The overall effect size for preservice teacher self-efficacy for writing (d=.281) is especially impressive as previous research (Woolfolk Hoy et al. Using the effect sizes and results of the ANOVAs. focus on writing). self- efficacy can be increased over the course of 12 weeks. though not significant. the students participated in online discussion boards requiring them to write 200-750 words each week. 161 .

some of these items were significantly different among instructors. This result indicates that the activities in Group 1 are more effective at altering students’ beliefs about writing. In contrast. Both groups interacted equally with students in collaborative contexts or provided feedback. More observations would show more clear differences. instructors who are part of Group 1 taught in dyads or individual class settings. how to teach writing. but most were not. Looking back at the results of the ANOVA. general trends indicate that instructors in Group 1 showed higher effect sizes for preservice teachers’ self-efficacy for writing. and how to assess writing. interacted with students more frequently in instructional contexts. Table 6. direct instruction of writing strategies. Logically. focused on the writing process. S. which has been shown to increase self-efficacy. focused on writing-based products. and used peer feedback during writing. The lack of significant findings most likely results from engaging in only two observations per instructor during the semester.T. HODGES et al. many of the activities in Group 1 ask students to engage in writing. Differences in instructional practices by groups   Group 1 Group 2 Both Groups Classroom Setting – Dyads Whole Class   Items Individual     Type of Interaction – Instructional Managerial Collaborative Items   Social Feedback Focus on – Items Writing-based Product Course Content Writing Process Direct Instruction of     Writing Strategies Modeling of Strategies     How to Teach Writing     How to Assess Writing     Writing Strategies – Sentence Structure Production of   Items Graphics/Visuals Organization     Instructional Low Stakes Writing   Peer Feedback Practices – Item during Writing 162 . and engaged students in low- stakes writing activities. taught students about sentence structures and organization. However. The differences shown in Table 6 relate to differences in instructional and pedagogical styles.

Differences in student behaviors by groups Group 1 Group 2 Classroom Setting . These findings are critical to teacher preparation programs who want to better prepare their preservice teachers to teach writing and who want to more effectively teach writing. No practices were equally seen among the two groups. we feel the most relevant findings for teacher preparation in regard to writing is: 1) one semester writing-intensive courses can have a real and positive impact on improving students’ self-efficacy for writing. and peer feedback may not help students’ feel prepared to implement writing instruction in their own classroom. In contrast. focused on practicing writing. Modeling The “Write” Teaching practices Table 7. they show the types of environments students were taught in as well as which activities showed differences in pedagogical styles. Table 7 shows differences among instructors by student behaviors. instructors in Group 1 used dyads and individual class settings. our findings indicate that instructors who allowed students to practice and engaged in writing more frequently generally had higher effect sizes for preservice teacher self-efficacy for writing. 2) practice in the craft of writing. revision. clear differences between the teaching styles of instructors were observed through the classroom observations. and how to assess writing. In summary. and 4) activities 163 .Items Dyads Whole Class Individual Focus on – Items Practicing Writing Course Content How to Teach Writing How to Assess Writing Writing Skills – Items Grammar Sentence Structure Voice Student behaviors are another critical area to consider when interpreting these findings. While these results are limited. Again. instructors in Group 2 used whole class settings and focused on course content. sentence structure. 3) structuring a writing-intensive class into small groups or dyads may facilitate active engagement in the writing process. These results were mostly consistent with the instructional practices results summarized above. and explicitly taught grammar. Additionally. and voice. Overall. how to teach writing.

due to absences. One course we were observing moved online two weeks after Spring Break. we were not able to conduct more observations of the classrooms. Despite this fact. the surveys administered are researcher-created by the authors of this chapter. CONCLUSION Students at all levels of education are being asked to analyze. we had fewer students (n=209) complete the post- survey than completed the pre-survey (n=233). synthesize. the reliability scores are generally high for the surveys. beliefs are difficult to change and change over longer periods of time. students continue to spend alarmingly little time composing writing in their content-area classes. this limitation is small.T. and d) an emphasis on how to assess writing and give feedback. Third. validity and reliability for the scores is being established. and student attitudes. Limitations Several limitations are present in this study. Every course and section had fewer students engaged in the post-survey. First. teachers can not only intervene with struggling students. the study takes place over one semester. HODGES et al. and evaluate content materials. c) a focus on how to teach writing. which prevented us from conducting a second observation for three sections of that course with the same instructor. Therefore. b) modeling of strategies. but also identify what aspect of the curriculum the student is having difficulty with and specifically assist them with that knowledge and boost retention of the content. Despite these benefits. Second. they must think critically to differentiate between primary and ancillary information. Typically. If students are required to summarize the information in a textbook chapter into just a few sentences. course withdrawals. However. English teachers have neither the curriculum time nor expertise to prepare students to write in all subjects. With this insight. S. which show promise include: a) direct instruction in writing strategies. 164 . 1991). Finally. because of the time constraints. While an English teacher can provide instruction on writing conventions and expose students to different genres. They were pilot-tested with a small sample (n=26) the semester before this study was conducted. Students need to learn the skills to write for different purposes prior to entering professional fields. It is nearly impossible for a teacher to evaluate whether or not students are engaging in this type of thinking without requiring them to produce written work (Gribbin. as we found positive effects for self-efficacy for writing.

Teachers across the content-areas do not feel equipped to assess student writing. 2004). When a specific skill does not receive ample attention. Teacher education programs and leaders in the field will benefit from these results by: (1) using the instruments to evaluate their own writing courses. 191–215. A. and (2) using the findings to build support for required writing courses for preservice teachers. Poor self-efficacy in writing has been noted as one of the key barriers teachers feel unable to overcome. This includes instructors at the college level who are instructing students on how to write for specific disciplines. REFERENCES Bandura. These students must also feel confident in their writing abilities. Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. many university-level teacher-preparation programs are working to address this problem through writing-intensive coursework (Chambless & Bass. (1977). Writing instruction is often overlooked in schools. As literacy demands of the work force increase. and while the reasons are not clear. and strive to improve writing instruction for preservice teachers. the perpetuated idea is that the skill is not important. be aware (metacognitive) of the writing process. Modeling The “Write” Teaching practices Therefore. 84. These facts increase the necessity of teacher preparation programs to evaluate. the beliefs about writing and self-efficacy for writing of preservice teachers cannot be ignored. Most research conducted on beliefs about writing and self-efficacy for writing relate to inservice teachers. assess. how can they evaluate what they feel unable to produce? For the past decade. 1995). 165 . The findings from this study can be used to inform teacher education programs about the necessities for specific courses about writing instruction. Psychological Review. teachers need to be writers themselves (Colby & Stapleton. The present study developed instruments to measure preservice teacher self-efficacy for writing and writing instruction. To be truly effective instructors of writing. While all students will benefit by becoming more competent writers (National Commission on Writing. one major factor is that writing instruction is overlooked in teacher education programs. 2006). students in teacher preparation programs have additional needs. the field of education must prepare more highly qualified writing teachers to support this growth. while demonstrating the connection between self-efficacy beliefs and practice. all content-area teachers must become teachers of writing. and believe they are capable of teaching these skills to their future students. However.

(1991). Primary grade writing instruction: A national survey.. R. 461–487. F. Mashburn. S. Journal of Early Childhood Teacher Education. J. 353–376. 27. G.. & Bruning. R. (1986).. & Bass. B. & Tharp. P. Journal of Educational Psychology. Waxman. O. Writing development over time: Examining preservice teachers’ attitudes and beliefs about writing.. Kane. & Stapleton. DeCoster. & Grisham-Brown. 148–158. 63(3). J. Contemporary Educational Psychology. Englewood Cliffs.. (2004). UK: Cambridge University Press. 38–61. R. Harvard Educational Review. Observational research in U. 28. Harris. & Wooten. (2013). & Grossman. Reading and Writing Quarterly. S. Downer. PytlikZillig. Teaching through interactions: Testing a developmental framework of teacher effectiveness in over 4. A.. & Smith. 100(4). T. 147–166. A. M. 153–159.S. L. K. The Elementary School Journal. (1992). S. Hamagami. HODGES et al.. (2012). 907–919. classrooms: New approaches for understanding cultural and linguistic diversity (pp. J. G. CA: Sage. Writing across the curriculum: Assignments and evaluation. H. & Fink. L. Hill. Evaluating teacher effectiveness: Can classroom observations identify practices that raise achievement? Education Next. 83(2). S. N. B. Assessing Writing. Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation..T. C. S. In H. D. Hilberg (Eds. Dempsey. T. (1995). R. S. (2007).. (2005).. R. C. Purposes and perspectives on classroom observation research. H. Preservice teachers teach writing: Implications for teacher educators. Cambridge. L. Writing-intensive courses: Tools for curricular change... & Perin. (2012). J. The Clearing House. Primary grade teachers’ theoretical orientations concerning writing instruction: Construct validation and a nationwide survey. Berninger. 166 . R. . Pianta. J. Tyler. Writing across the curriculum: A guide to developing programs (pp. Learning from teacher observations: Challenges and opportunities posed by new teacher evaluation systems. 365–368. J. & R. M. Hilberg. Colby. J.. (2002).). 85–87. S. S. Effecting changes in student teachers’ attitudes toward writing. WA: Met Project. & Fleischman. Gathering feedback for teaching: Combining high-quality observations with student surveys and achievement gains. Kane. 371–401. Are attitudes toward writing and reading separable constructs? A study with primary grade children.. C. 99(3). Chambless. (2013). H. H. K. 52–62). Farris. Cutler... R. H. H. (2011). S. . Reading Research and Instruction.. M.). C. Graham. S. E.. 11(3). Bandura.. 32. McLeod & M. A meta-analysis of writing instruction of adolescent students. Tharp.. A. A. C.. A. Graham. (2008). Reading Research and Instruction. Graham. & Staiger. 1–11. Gribbin.. (2009).. J. MacArthur. M.. 113(4). 14.. C. Seattle. (2011). H. & Abbott.. Helping preservice teacher learn to assess writing: Practice and feedback in a web-based environment. 1–20). V. D. Challenges of value-added assessment. S. 51–69. 35(2). Taylor. Doran. T. 445–476. A. . Soven (Eds. Newbury Park.000 classrooms. Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Educational Leadership. Waxman.. Hamre. 45(4). In S. J. Journal of Educational Psychology. (2006). R. Hall. C. S. W. S. Jones. NJ: Prentice-Hall.. & Graham. 64(6).

109(4). D. G. M.. & Bradley. A. The Elementary School Journal. 167 .. 103. la Paro. & Lowther. C. S. A.. Alberg. K. M. & Pianta. Engaging instruction in middle school classrooms: An observational study of nine teachers. 139–158. Skaalvik. R. Reading and Writing Quarterly. 49. R.. D.. C. 1059–1069. M. R. K. (2012). New Orleans. (2001). F. & Hohan. C. T. J. Pajares. Kiuhara. Stuhlman. Using classroom observation as a research and formative evaluation tool in educational reform: The school observation measure.. E. S. L. 61–81. Memphis. Exploring the role of lesson observation in the English education system: A review of methods. NY: College Board. Writing: A ticket to work. Tharp. and achievement in writing: A review of the literature. Teaching and Teacher Education.. 117–124. K. & Hawken. 791–810.. 144–173). Presented at the annual meeting of the Mid-south Educational Research Association. D. New York. Cambridge. 101. 225–238. Literacy Research and Instruction. Cox.). Observational research in U. Graham. or a ticket out. The relation of kindergarten classroom environment to teacher. Ritter. O’Leary. Pressley. 323–342.. New York. M. J. 352–365. & J. R. 26. Washington DC: National Governors Association Center for Best Practices. Common Core State Standards. C. Journal of Educational Psychology. Teacher self-efficacy and teacher burnout: A study of relations. In C. family. (2006).). J. Systematic observation of natural social phenomena. 102(3). (2012). Preservice teachers as writers. National Governors Association. (2002). M. (2009). S.. and meanings. Graham. S. (2009). Teaching writing to high school students: A national survey. S. Pianta. Council of Chief State School Officers. 158–170).. 109(1). Waxman. In H.S. Payne. The Social Studies. The Elementary School Journal. NY: Guilford. (1996). N. MacArthur. Professional Development in Education. Pajares. (2010).. (2008). J. Journal of Teacher Education. Ross. J. The Elementary School Journal. (1971). Self-efficacy beliefs and motivation in writing development. TN: University of Memphis. (2004). L. 338–350. Roberson. E. M. November). (2010). Sociological Methodology. Profiles of educational quality in first grade. M. M. A teacher educator writes and shares student perceptions of a publicly literate life. Fitzgerald (Eds. (2009). & Skaalvik. Modeling The “Write” Teaching practices Kaufman. Hilberg (Eds. Smith.. L. F. Self-efficacy beliefs. NY: Oxford University Press. S. (1998. Reiss. (2004). National Commission on Writing. Modeling powerful social studies: Bridging theory and practice with preservice elementary teachers. (2003). Ross. Raphael. M. UK: Cambridge University Press. G.. 19. Lindemann. 3–33. L. and school characteristics and child outcomes.. Jr. Morgan. New York. Classroom observation: Issues regarding validity and reliability. classrooms: New approaches for understanding cultural and linguistic diversity (pp. & Valiante. & R. R. Handbook of writing research (pp. (2010a). motivation. 136–160. LA. A rhetoric for writing teachers.. models. M. & Smith L. 38(5). S. 60(3). W. Classroom observation measure observer’s manual. Center for Research in Educational Policy. 3.

H. Can teacher evaluation improve teaching?: Evidence of systematic growth in the effectiveness of midcareer teachers. S. Weisberg. 715–737). Learning and Culture College of Education and Human Development Texas A&M University Erin McTigue Department of Teaching. and classroom perspectives. Education Digest. Mulhern. Teaching and Teacher Education. E. (2006). Observational research in U. D. UK: Cambridge University Press. Teaching and Teacher Education. Education Next. Waxman.). S. Y. (2009). October). Hodges Department of Teaching. 27. C. H. (2001). In H. classrooms: New approaches for understanding cultural and linguistic diversity (pp... 751–761. Woolfolk Hoy. Davis. Hilberg (Eds. Waxman. N. K. (2009). C. J. M. Tharp. Using multiple technologies to teach writing. S. 79. (2004). Texas Association for Bilingual Education Journal. N. HODGES et al. S. A. L. Teacher efficacy: Capturing an elusive construct. Learning and Culture College of Education and Human Development Texas A&M University 168 . Padrón. Winne (Eds. R. & Keeling. In P. Exploring literacy teachers’ self-efficacy beliefs: Potential sources at play. Tschannen-Moran. Douglass Department of Teaching. Cambridge. H. S. 75(2). The uses of the classroom observation schedule to improve classroom instruction. G. (2012).. Sexton. Learning and Culture College of Education and Human Development Texas A&M University April G.. 12(4).. Observing classroom instruction for ELLs from student. & Padrón. & Johnson.. & S. Waxman. Yancey. Alexander & P. Taylor. J. W. D. Learning and Culture College of Education and Human Development Texas A&M University Nancy Dubinski Weber Department of Teaching. E. 63–95.   Tracey S. J. & Pape. B. Handbook of educational psychology (pp. H. teacher. Teacher knowledge and beliefs. & R. NJ: Erlbaum.. & Hoy. & Tyler.. 72–96).. Tschannen-Moran.. 38–40. Educational Leadership. M. 11(1). Huang. S. The widget effect: Our national failure to acknowledge and act on differences in teacher effectiveness.T. Mahwah. 31–35.). 17. (2004.. S. C. D. 783–805. Franco-Fuenmayor.. (2011). A. Y.

Modeling The “Write” Teaching practices Katherine Landau Wright Department of Teaching. Learning and Culture College of Education and Human Development Texas A&M University Anna de la Garza Department of Education Psychology College of Education and Human Development Texas A&M University 169 .

Teaching at Work. ERIN MCTIGUE AND APRIL G. Additionally. 2009. Instilling preservice teachers with an interest in and motivation to follow educational research could help insure they remain current with future findings as they enter the classroom as in-service teachers. teachers need to be intrinsically motivated to remain apprised of new ideas and research findings. FRANKS. Furthermore. KATHERINE LANDAU WRIGHT. 2012). However. HODGES. research involving special populations of students. DOUGLASS 9. . preservice teachers can help researchers translate pedagogical ideas into the complex reality of a classroom. Because the realities of K-12 teaching do not often allow time for self-study and reflection. comprised of both educational researcher training and preservice teacher preparation programs working in parallel. teachers often revert back to the models of instruction most familiar to them.). Greenwood & Abbot. In fact. 2001). teachers report frequently feeling ill-prepared and unsupported in this mission as the realities of K-12 classrooms are complex and dynamic situations. Accordingly. could be the perfect setting to address the problem. Preservice teachers are typically more open-minded to new pedagogical ideas than established teachers. Ritter. Studies regarding in-service teachers have verified the need for K-12 teachers to have proven strategies to reach challenging students. Li & J. the benefits of integrating undergraduate preservice teachers and educational researchers extend in both directions. McLesky and Waldron (2004) argue that “the clearest example Y. © 2015 Sense Publishers. has exhibited a particularly notable fracture between researchers and practitioners (e. MINDING THE GAP Mentoring Undergraduate Preservice Teachers in Educational Research INTRODUCTION Teachers are tasked with the overwhelming responsibility of instructing a vast range of learners while continually infusing current. TRACEY S. 171–192.g. AMANDA D. researchers directly benefit from the grounding effect of working with practitioner- oriented individuals. Hammer (Eds. Yet. at times of stress. rather than research new solutions (Kaufman. research-based principles into their daily practice.. particularly those struggling with reading and other learning demands. Research institutions. All rights reserved.

The Research Practice Gap Researchers and undergraduate learners typically remain isolated from each other. research-trained teachers may engage in informal action-research within their classrooms. In total. if preservice teachers are engaged with creating the latest findings in educational research. While Vaughn. 2008) with knowledge of current research findings. Klingner.K. 2001). 3). they will take ownership in their profession. PURPOSE The purpose of the current chapter is to describe the results of a qualitative research study exploring the impact of undergraduate research opportunities on preservice teachers. teacher preparation programs are currently under pressure to reduce this “research-practice gap” by producing highly-qualified and effective teachers (Scheeler. Meanwhile. the current literature offers few solutions. themes from the three case studies are analyzed and applied to the field of education and teacher preparation programs. this separation mirrors the nature of the field (Greenwood & Abbot. Rarely are undergraduate preservice teachers expected to interact with the research in 172 . New ideas can be directly injected into future K-12 classrooms. classically few opportunities are present for preservice teachers to engage in the research driving their teacher certification. WRIGHT ET AL. Finally. we explore the research- practice gap that exists in education from a socio perspective grounded by sociocognitive and social constructivist theories. Although universities are producing both educational research and certified teachers. we often teach best practices for content-area vocabulary instruction. drawing from constructivist models of learning. the underlying research is often only referenced in the course materials. L. especially those related to reading instruction” (p. Research-trained teachers will have a mindset to value research findings as they progress in their careers. In the following sections. For example. of the failure to translate research into practice has been a lack of use of these [research-based] practices. note a frequent blame- game about why this gap between research and practice continues to exist. One salient reason for the research-practice gap is the separation of research and practice communities within universities. Finally. and Hughes (2000). however. Unfortunately. The methods for three case studies of preservice teachers involved in research are described along with the interview protocol for acquiring richer data.

we present our experiences of including undergraduate education students as research interns in educational research projects. If connections between researchers and practitioners are not made during initial teacher and researcher preparation. not as a verb. we tend to not ask the critical literacy questions such as – How did researchers determine that it takes 12-14 exposures to a vocabulary word before learning it? (Flanigan & Greenwood. Teacher-preparation is focused strongly on helping preservice teachers build up their toolbox of best practices However. research is typically presented as a noun. Within this framework. It should be noted that the practice of active undergraduate involvement in research is commonplace in science and engineering laboratories. such as – students typically need 12-14 exposures to a vocabulary word before learning it. In particular. benefiting all involved. Minding the Gap a meaningful way. and faculty in tiered- mentoring research situations. and the sections following provide more extensive descriptions of each tier. In other words. A related. they will likely remain separate. Figure 1 shows this tiered mentoring hierarchy. we simply take the output. but not historically present within social-science research. Often. graduate students. Mentoring Framework As a solution to the research-practice disconnect. For instance. we have found great success in partnering undergraduate students. Figure 1. the cost for only indirectly referencing research is that research becomes extraneous and knowledge is treated statically. multiple levels of mentoring and collaboration are present. 2007). theme is the lack of ongoing opportunities for feedback to be exchanged between researchers and practitioners (Greenwood & Abbot. rather than examine the process for determining the finding. while we present research findings. Hierarchy of Multi-Tiered Mentoring System 173 . yet separate. 2001).

Undergraduate students gain the additional perspectives of graduate students. While these agendas create new knowledge and are valued by the university. the undergraduates may find commonality with them and view them as more approachable than faculty. By the double mentorship. such as conference proposals. manuscripts. which we hope will translate into more reflective teaching and application of educational research during their careers as teachers. undergraduate students learn about research. Faculty members who allow graduate students to engage in the mentorship of undergraduate students pass some responsibility down the hierarchy. To continue to push the field forward. Many faculty members’ research agendas have spanned decades and are carefully built upon previous studies.K. they have opportunities to mentor undergraduates in the research process.  Individual undergraduate students benefit from a deeper understanding and appreciation for educational research.  Faculty members benefit from the new perspectives of a younger generation of learners. as graduate students are students first and researchers second. This mentoring role hones graduate students’ newly acquired research skills. as well as prepares them for a future as teacher-educators and leading research teams in academia. which helps ground research in today’s current environments. WRIGHT ET AL. These unique perspectives allow for meaningful collaborations and new avenues of research. its importance. Undergraduate preservice teachers. Graduate students take on the role of faculty after receiving their doctoral degree and practicing mentorship is critical to their future success. and data analysis. Graduate students. Graduate students may have different theoretical or practical philosophies from the faculty. Undergraduate students can bring fresh ideas and enthusiasm to research. By doing so. Faculty members. L. faculty have more effort to expend on building the graduate students’ skills while working on other aspects of the research collaboration. these ideas are instrumental. Moreover. but have the perspective of a recently K-12 student. Research faculty can discuss ideas with students who have not yet become fully indoctrinated in the teacher world.  When graduate students are included. and the contributions of research to the field of teaching. they sometimes may become disconnected from current classroom practices. The goal is that these students will become teachers who value research-based 174 . so undergraduate students get multiple viewpoints.

can increase comfort level for all involved and foster a mutually empathic environment. faculty. Mentoring undergraduate students comes from a juncture of sociocognitive theory and social constructivism theory. mentors must be knowledgeable in the field in which they are providing support (here. The Role of Mentors Existing research points to several factors that help develop effective relationships between mentors and mentees. an element of comfort is added allowing participants to each have a unique set of contributions while each having a unique responsibility to the task at hand.e. 1997). we outline and explain the two theories guiding this research and specifically discuss how they relate to mentorship in higher education. 153). & Smith. Miller & Stiver. it is necessary to first consider well-founded theoretical frameworks of learning and cognition demonstrating that academic and social interaction provided by a mentoring program may enhance undergraduate students’ success in research. & Salazar. Bandura argued that people actually learn more from others 175 . Cannon. graduate students. and undergraduate students). experience gives mentors “credibility in the eyes of the students they will be mentoring” (Terrion & Leonard. not surprisingly. These interpersonal connections strengthen the relationship between mentors and mentees and contribute to an environment where mentees can feel comfortable taking risks. the field of research) and a mentor’s experience in the field of interest can affect the mentee’s sense of security in asking questions or taking risks (Douglass. Sociocognitive theory developed from the work of Bandura (1977. 2013). Moving beyond the knowledge of the subject matter. such as devoting time for social conversation before meetings. 2008. In the following sections. p.. 1986) who stated that people learn from observing others. Parsons. Informal means. First. By inserting varying degrees of experience (i. or possibly engage directly as researchers in the future. To achieve positive transformation. Theoretical Framework for Mentorship To critically examine how mentoring works. 2007. Minding the Gap practice and remain informed of current research trends. it is essential that mentors understand the importance of the emotional capacity they have when working with mentees. Additionally. Hammer. both the mentor and mentee must establish high quality relational skills that include authenticity and emotional competent (Comstock. Smith.

modeling of effective research practices.K. For example. but was stated by Pajares and Valiant (2006) as “if there is one finding that is incontrovertible in education…it is that children learn from the actions of models” (p. Sociocognitive theory is foundational for understanding the linkages preservice teachers self-efficacy for teaching and research. Secondly. these two theories attribute efficacy. preservice teachers learn from faculty and graduate students. Social constructivism came from the work of Vygotsky (1978) who premised that people learn from a more knowledgeable other (MKO). Social constructivism. the two theories rely on social interactions which are an essential part of research and 176 . Combining the theories. First. The primary idea from these two theories is that people learn from social interactions with each other (Tracey & Morrow.  Vygotsky’s (1978) social learning theory ascribes cognitive development to social interaction between a learner and a More Knowledgeable Other (MKO) (Tracey & Morrow. and the success of the undergraduate students later as in-service teachers. This complex multi-dimensional framework allows for paralleled learning opportunities connected with leadership tasks. Preservice teachers also build self-efficacy for teaching and research by observing quality models. the two theories blend to support mentorship for research in teacher education programs. By experiencing an activity. preservice teachers become more efficacious. passing knowledge down from higher levels to lower levels. Preservice teachers learn how to teach and understand research by participating in research. which helps teachers navigate the demands of the classroom. a graduate student looks to his mentor as a MKO but serves as a MKO to the undergraduate student. As teachers. Bandura (1997) argued that students’ accomplishments could be better predicted by self-efficacy than previous attainment. The same is true when looking at undergraduate preservice teachers in research. According to Vygotsky. 167). WRIGHT ET AL. People learn by doing. 2013). In the three-tiered hierarchy presented in this chapter. Sociocognitive Theory. Taking sociocognitive theory and social constructivism in unison. to learning from modeling and more knowledgeable others. 2012). This idea is supported by the work of Bandura. 2012). than they do independently. the MKO is anyone with a higher level of understanding in a specific domain than the novice (Forman & Cazden. L. this idea is fundamental because it supports teacher influence in altering student perceptions. Both of these theories support social interactions and learning through a hierarchy.

Jana heard about an opportunity for an undergraduate research grant. is described below. Together. Jana. Walker. Jana is a current undergraduate student. represent diverse educational experiences and different research experiences and were mentored through the research process by a graduate student. Mentors. All authors of this chapter (two faculty members and three doctoral students) worked closely with three undergraduate students in two separate research projects and served as the participant observers. A brief description of each student. or both. of Caucasian background. Walsh. Jana and Dr. After research was completed. McTigue decided to pursue how direct instruction of character perspectives could impact third-grade students’ literary reading comprehension. METHODS These case studies were developed using data from participant observations (Creswell. a faculty member. in particular. must be able to think about how students learn and apply information to their interactions with mentees. The primary research focus for the current study is to examine the lived experiences of three undergraduate research assistants and how their experience with education research as preservice teachers helped shape their knowledge and beliefs about teaching. Minding the Gap collaboration. 177 . 2013) and semi-structured interviews. in her fourth year of study as a preservice teacher. Finally. and Gabby (all names are pseudonyms). Manha. the three-tiered system of mentoring is founded upon the principles of both of these theories in that students form perceptions of the world based on interactions with it and become life-long learners from continued support. McTigue (author of this chapter).  The three students. mentoring in the field of research can be especially useful in graduate programs in which students are preparing for a career in educational research while also preparing future teachers for using and conducting educational research in their classrooms (Heirdsfield. In this regard. Participants. 2008). Mentoring programs in research provide an opportunity for both mentors and mentees to reflect more deeply on the learning process. McTigue about sponsoring her application. and approached Dr. She first became interested in educational research after taking an undergraduate course with Dr. & Wilson. along with their path to educational research. all three undergraduate students were interviewed to document their perspectives of the experiences.

Have your ideas about teaching changed because of your experiences with educational research? How? 5. What made you want to become involved in education research? 2. what are they? Do you feel this is good/bad? 7.  When all research experiences had concluded. Interview questions for preservice teachers 1. of South Asian descent. a current third year undergraduate student of Hispanic descent. how do you see the future of education evolving? 178 . Do you feel there is any disconnect between educational research and classroom teaching practices? If so. How do you think this issue could be addressed? 8. but a graduate student directly served as Gabby’s research mentor. WRIGHT ET AL. These questions were developed following a group discussion of what information would be most influential Table 1. Would you suggest to your peers that they seek opportunities to work on educational research projects? Why? 6. McTigue oversaw the administration of Manha’s position. in her Junior year of study as a preservice teacher. and Gabby. Manha had recently matriculated into the College of Education from Biology. After the success of including both Jana and Manha in research. and expressed a strong interest in pursuing research. Dr. Manha is a current undergraduate student. Dr. L. Much like with Manha. is a preservice teacher in the bilingual education program. She was recommended for the research position by faculty members in the department. Based on your experiences in classes and in researching. Procedures. Manha. Gabby. Douglass applied for funding to include an undergraduate student in the beginning phases of a second research project focused on preservice teachers’ writing instruction. Manha was co-supervised and mentored by one of the graduate students. While Dr. Dr. We used a semi- structured interview in order to guide the conversation while allowing students’ opinions and reflections to surface. McTigue received departmental funding to pay an undergraduate student to assist in the analysis process. What role(s) have you played in educational research? 3.K. After data collection from Jana’s study had been completed. Douglass was highly involved in the project. we conducted semi-structured interviews with Jana. What do you feel you bring to the research team? 4.

creating lesson plans. She hoped exposure would give her a better idea about what direction she wanted to take in furthering her education. The previous year. and designing an intervention plan and schedule. At the time. She became involved in the study because her intention after gaining classroom teaching experience is to further her education and obtain a graduate degree. Our goal was to understand the experiences of the participants from their perspective on how involvement in educational research affected their understanding of the role of research in classroom practice. policy. she was involved in reviewing relevant empirical literature. Jana learned about the option of undergraduate research at TAMU. preparing an IRB (institutional review board) application. Jana felt a research experience would help her better understand the process of educational research and to see if it would be of interest to her and directly asked Dr. selecting and reviewing appropriate children’s books. Informal notes were taken during the interviews. Jana had worked. we compared the preservice teachers’ responses with our observations to better understand how mentoring in research has influenced their opinions about research and teaching. she was unsure whether she would like to go into administration. as a nanny. RESULTS Described in the following sections are the results of the semi-structured interviews and researcher reflections for each undergraduate research intern. or educational research. (As noted earlier. McTigue to mentor her. In the second semester. Additional reflections from team members’ interactions with our undergraduate research assistants surfaced during this conversation and were used to support the students’ viewpoints. Furthermore. for an engineering professor.)Through the engineering professor. Jana organized 179 . Jana Jana collaborated in a new reading comprehension intervention study for third grade students. who mentored undergraduate researchers in her laboratory. Minding the Gap for developing strong mentoring relationships. In the first semester. science and engineering departments generally involve more undergraduate students in research than education. The interview questions are shown in Table 1. Further sources of information were obtained by assessing the work produced and tasks completed by each undergraduate research assistant. Jana played an active role throughout the research process. and the team met to discuss the results.

Jana learned. Jana said that she would enthusiastically recommend such an experience for her peers. through modeling. Therefore. Teachers undergo similar processes when choosing appropriate materials for their students. She indicated that through the process she read research articles to inform the team’s decisions and analyzed current children’s literature for quality and applicability to the study. L. Jana noted that this experience helped her learn how to read empirical research. but I have grown from my experiences with educational research. All of the decisions that were made in the intervention were based on empirical research or theory. instructional materials. I learned how to bring out a deeper meaning in reading. “I learned how to bring out a deeper meaning in reading.” While this was not a direct result of our specific study. and assisted with early qualitative analysis. In summary. such as how long the intervention last should. we were making a decision. Jana’s role in initiating the project should not be underestimated. She was more familiar with reading textbooks and other secondary sources in her coursework. McTigue had the original idea for the genesis/design of the study. however. Additionally. McTigue to undertake the study at that time. she brought an eagerness to learn to the group and believed that her ideas “helped get the research moving”. Jana attended weekly meetings of the research group. we would refer back to previous research to understand the minimum amount of instruction needed to measure impact. However. WRIGHT ET AL. as a team. transcribed lessons. was in developing skills for reading more deeply about research. created through the research process. Jana’s enthusiasm and desire to work on a project “right away” convinced Dr. after Jana had approached her and they discussed the study in detail.K. about the importance of consulting empirical. a direct link between preservice teacher research experiences and classroom practices is evident. she was not planning on implementing it during the 2013-14 school year due to other time commitments. Whenever. Here. clearly Jana had inferred this need from our process.” Jana remarked that one of her greatest strengths. validated research studies and gained valuable insight into the processes of educational research and how it impacts practice. Coordinating her perspective with that of the research team. the experience she gained 180 . Jana explained that “My ideas have not necessarily changed about teaching. According to Jana. While Dr.” shows that the process of systematically reviewing children’s literature and scholarly work developed critical reasoning and thinking skills for Jana. Jana noted that “I also learned that it is important for teachers to back their teaching methods with research.

com to find lesson plans. Manha was intrigued by the possibility of one day pursuing a Ph. She further explained that it is not that pre. Minding the Gap in conducting research showed her how to effectively research teaching questions using current and peer-reviewed research. Additionally. Manha has been able to work with children at the university-affiliated early childhood center.D. one of the authors of this chapter. but I feel that research based instruction gets through to students. but they likely do not have the time to do research. Manha has been an active member of the research team since joining the group in the fall of 2013. Manha explained that she became interested in educational research after the teaching assistant in one of her classes. Jana has recently finished her student- teaching practicum and observed that “I learned that a lot of teachers turn to Pinterest and teacherspayteachers. Most of these are not research based ways to implement instruction. Jana is clearly applying her newfound insight on the research process to practical implementation by demonstrating knowledge of the importance of research-based practices. These experiences led Manha to transfer from biology to the College of Education and Human Development.” She felt that.and in-service teachers do not want to use research- based ideas.. I think Pinterest and teacherspayteachers. Part of the disconnect between current research and practice is that empirical literature is not reaching the teacher-audience. Working with the young children made her realize that she really wanted to pursue a career in education. Jana noted that “Professors could teach us how to find [empirical] research to pertain to the lesson we are planning. shared insights about her research. When asked directly about how preservice preparation could reduce the gap between research findings and practical implementation.” She is clearly seeing the gap between where research is published and where teachers go to find information. During her interview. through the Help One Student To Succeed (HOSTS) program. Manha Manha started out as a biology major whose only educational experience was teaching religious education every Saturday for three hours in her home town. Manha played a supportive role in the Perspective 181 . in addition to planning and other paper-work. although they were encouraged to use outside sources for lesson planning. her peers in undergraduate courses (like current teachers) did not use peer-reviewed sources.com is an engaging way to implement instruction. and this led to a desire to find research opportunities as an undergraduate student.

Additionally. Manha suggested that her ideas about education are changing from this experience. She was 182 . Rather than replicating what she sees in her field placements. especially regarding policy now that she has a better understanding of how to read academic articles. 2011) that allowed all researchers on the team to easily access the essential details of each article. which she feels is boring. Furthermore. Manha’s experiences with educational research have made her reflect on the practices within the classroom and how to develop policies that help teachers and administrators better prepare for the changing needs of their students. Her fresh perspective on the findings allowed the team to add more clarity to the presentation and future disseminations. She observed a focus on worksheets in math classrooms. Taking project by helping transcribe recordings and providing feedback on a conference presentation based on the project for the Southwestern Educational Research Association’s 2014 conference. Manha reports that she now sees the connection between research and teaching as being able to help teachers plan lessons that engage students. based on research. By already seeking research to help support her ideas about classroom activities. L. I didn’t know a lot of the areas that need work in the education system. WRIGHT ET AL. It also indicates that Manha understands that there is much need for research which should be driven by the needs of the field. Manha suggested that students in education should seek out opportunities to take part in educational research.” The connection for her is that classroom teachers and school administrators must be clear about what is and is not working in education. she wants to research and integrate new ideas into her future teaching assignments. Before researching and reading many scholarly articles. Gabby Gabby is a bilingual education student who joined a research team focused on improving preservice teachers’ self-efficacy to teach writing. She also compiled information from existing literature into a matrix (Garrard. As Manha explained. and was motivated to find research articles supporting ways to incorporate technology to make lessons more engaging for students. “before researching and coming across all of these scholarly articles. Furthermore. Manha is proving that research experience can help bridge the gap between researcher and educational practitioner.K. Manha said she was unaware of the reasons for doing research and how it could impact students’ experiences in schools. Manha now has valuable insight on quality research practices to guide her selection of educational articles.

Most recently. Gabby reports that she is always excited to come to research meetings and contribute to the project. simply reading a research article does not tell the reader “everything they [researchers] went through or what they actually did. She believes it is up to teachers to remain current. decided to join the team. Gabby was influential in the designing of a student-survey and felt that her opinion was respected. Additionally. As she explained. she believes she has gained a better perspective on what educational researchers contribute to the field. Gabby would recommend that undergraduate students seek out similar opportunities to engage in research. As she has become more involved. The team has valued her perspective as an undergraduate student. even though she did not know much about research. She helped to analyze survey questions to ensure clarity and avoid redundancy.” so it is not always easy to tie to classroom practices. will make her a better educator in the future. she was accepted into a competitive university level program called Undergraduate Research Ambassadors to share her experience and recruit other students to follow her example. Gabby has taken on an active role. When reflecting upon the gap between educational practice and research. From the beginning of the project. Minding the Gap first recruited through a recommendation from a former professor and. but she has not witnessed practices in her field experiences that appear to be tied directly to research. However. and she believes she brought a unique voice to the conversation. Gabby has found that much information she has learned from doing research is directly applicable in completing coursework. DISCUSSION While these are only three case studies. she believes her work as an undergraduate researcher has provided a unique perspective on understanding and valuing research. She is excited about the future of education. Furthermore. such as systematically observing a classroom. Moreover. She believes an understanding of research makes teachers better educators and helps them to see what strategies are best for students. she has also begun conducting classroom observations utilizing study-specific measures to gauge teacher strategies and student engagement. the results demonstrate that involving undergraduate students in educational research can be beneficial for 183 . Gabby is optimistic. She believes her experiences.” Gabby has been able to observe many teachers and has developed ideas about what engages students and what does not. citing technology and other innovations that will create “effective new ways to teach.


preservice teachers, graduate students and faculty members, and educational
research as a field.

Benefits for Preservice Teachers
Jana, Manha, and Gabby had vastly different experiences and became
involved in research through different means; however, several similarities
emerged from their interviews. These similarities are summarized in three
key themes, evidenced by the case studies, (1) continued optimism for linking
research and practice, (2) interest in pursuing future educational research
opportunities, and (3) desire to encourage research among peers.

Continued optimism for linking research and practice.  In all three case
studies, the undergraduate research assistants made connections between the
research they were conducting and classroom practices they had observed,
both in clinical field experiences and within their teacher education courses.
The students discovered that research guides the practices seen in classrooms;
however, they also noted that research is often not at the forefront of
practitioners’ minds, particularly with in-service teachers. For example,
Jana noted that she has now realized the importance of educational research
but admitted that it is a time-consuming endeavor and that many practicing
teachers do not have the time to invest in learning and staying up-to-date
with the research. Teachers were not lazy or uninterested in learning about
research, but rather had other demands on their limited time. Other sources
for teaching ideas are more readily available to practitioners.
In addition to noticing the link between theory and practice and the
importance for fostering this bridge, hearing the optimism each of the students
had for research and practice was refreshing. All three students were positive
that teachers could integrate more research into their classrooms and teacher
educators could instruct preservice teachers on how to utilize research in
lesson design. Gabby was particularly optimistic about how research informs
practice and how teachers could benefit from being involved in research
projects. This optimism is encouraging for building more interest in research
among fresh generations of educators.

Interest in continuing to pursue educational research.  The three participants
are exceptional students who had some interest in furthering their education
and seeking out research opportunities. All three undergraduate researchers
expressed an interest in continuing to engage in educational research as
classroom teachers and expressed an understanding of the importance of


Minding the Gap

remaining current on “effective new ways to teach students” (according to
Gabby) and emerging research practices. Manha also stated that she was
interested in pursuing research when one of her instructors, a doctoral
student, inspired her to consider an advanced degree in education. Jana
initiated contact with a faculty member to discuss research because she was
unsure of the career advancement she wanted and wished to explore multiple
opportunities. Gabby proved herself to be an outstanding student and was
brought into research through the recommendation of one of her professors;
however, through the process, she became interested in advanced academic
work in education and in conference presentations. Additionally, each
student expressed a strong desire to seek an advanced degree after gaining
some classroom experience.
While each of these students is about to embark on the beginning of her
career, it is a testament to the uniqueness and richness of their research
experiences that each expressed an interest in continuing research-based
work. The experience also transformed the rather abstract idea of research
into a more concrete and engaging experience. Numerous times, the three
students noted that they had been unaware of the processes behind the
research findings.
Additionally, the research skills each student acquired gave her increased
confidence and leadership skills. Each student already shined in her respective
coursework, but the desire to pursue advanced education is marked by
leadership, organizational, collaborative, and self-regulatory skills. Working
with a research team develops these skills as well. Although, working on a
research team with doctoral students, master’s students, and faculty members
can be intimidating, none of the students had this feeling. All three remained
positive, optimistic, and confident.

Desire to encourage research among peers.  The final theme that emerged
from the three interviews is that each student felt a strong desire to encourage
research among her peers. All three students saw strong benefits in working
on research and felt their peers could benefit from these experiences as well.
Each said she would recommend being part of a research team to a peer and
each felt that working on research could strengthen the skills required to be
an effective teacher.
This finding is particularly encouraging to teacher educators who want
to help raise awareness about enrollment in graduate programs, both at
the master’s level and doctoral levels. In fact, our three students represent
a diverse group of students with unique backgrounds, interests, and career



ambitions. Jana’s focus on elementary literacy and the integration of high-
quality children’s literature is supported by recent national policies. Manha
is of Pakistani-descent and has a strong interest in science education and
international education disparities. Gabby is a bilingual student with a desire
to help Hispanic students succeed in schools. These students represent
different populations of preservice teachers and their interests serve high-
needs populations of students.

Benefits for Graduate Students and Faculty Members
After reflecting on the experiences of working with undergraduate preservice
teachers in educational research, it is clear that the benefits are not felt by
the undergraduates alone. Each team included faculty members, graduate
students, and undergraduate preservice teachers. With members at such a
variety of points in their research experience, there was much opportunity
for tiered mentoring. When we consider mentoring by a MKO, our positive
experiences with tiered mentoring begin to clearly point to a best practice.
The tiered mentoring structure, where faculty mentored graduate students
who in turn mentored undergraduate researchers, allowed all participants
to benefit from the collaboration. Faculty at research universities have a
myriad of assignments and it can be difficult to balance, teaching, service,
and research responsibilities while also developing graduate students into
future faculty members. Additionally, graduate students need to be prepared
to guide their own future students and are rarely provided opportunities to
practice these skills prior to becoming tenure track professors. On our research
teams, faculty members met regularly with the graduate students to provide
guidance on research projects as well as to oversee the undergraduates’
research experiences. In turn, the graduate students directly supervised
undergraduates’ work and were able to develop their own mentoring skills.
The tiered mentoring environment in our research teams helped establish
a positive experience for mentors and mentees. Faculty members were
able to communicate clearly, effectively with graduate and undergraduate
students. Graduate students were given the opportunity to work closely
with mentors in a friendly working environment that made learning how
to mentor a positive experience. Furthermore, undergraduates were given
scaffolded research-related tasks that helped create a successful mentoring
experience for all. The undergraduate students also noted that they would not
have had such accessibility to graduate students and faculty in their typical
coursework sequence. Simply put, the time together built relationships in a
unique manner.


Minding the Gap

Benefits for the Field of Educational Research
While there were immediate benefits to team members, we believe this
experience will benefit the field of educational research as a whole. As
has been previously discussed, the gap between research and practice is
omnipresent in education. Including undergraduates in research allowed
these preservice teachers to gain a deeper understanding of the purpose and
process of educational research, and all three expressed an interest in staying
up-to-date once they became full-time teachers. Two specific practices –
reading research articles and guiding students to make connections between
their course work and research – demonstrated great promise to help bridge
the gap between theory and practice.

Reading research articles.  Theory behind mentoring practices would
suggest that having undergraduate researchers work with graduate students
and faculty to better develop their ability to read and comprehend research
articles is a best practice. Certainly our experiences have shown that working
on authentic research projects in education is a good way to help undergraduate
students make the leap to reading and comprehending educational research.
For instance, when the perspective taking study was being developed,
Jana collected articles from previous research and created a summary of
study methods to share with the team. Manha had a similar experience and
suggested that she learned to appreciate research articles and was better able
to comprehend the statistical analyses used after having guided instruction
provided by a graduate student. She went further to explain that she was able
to take those skills and apply them to research for her course assignments.

Guiding students to make connections between course work and
research.  Manha’s experience with reading research articles takes the
experience a step further by creating a full circle for undergraduate students
involved in research. The ability to take skills acquired through educational
research opportunities and apply those skills to course work is certainly a
way to ensure that participants see immediate benefits to their involvement
in research.
However, this is not a one-directional path; mentors should be able to help
their undergraduate researchers see the connections from the course work
to the research also. Manha spoke to this aspect when she commented that
her experience in a content area literacy class helped her better understand
how inferences are made. Furthermore, she was able to connect an activity
of matrixing research articles from a course writing assignment to the article



matrixing for the inference-making project. Gabby’s experience echoed
these findings, and she explained that learning more about teaching practices
through classroom observations has made her much more aware of her own
behavior towards students.

Recommendations for Implementation
Based on lessons learned by mentors in this study, we can begin to see
that certain characteristics are essential when developing undergraduate
mentoring programs. First, mentors must be knowledgeable in the field
in which they are providing support (here, the field of research). Previous
research also indicated that mentees feel more secure with mentors whom
have had greater experience in the field of interest (Douglass, Smith, &
Smith, 2013). In turn, the more experience and/or knowledge a mentor
has in the area of research, the more comfortable a mentee will feel in
asking questions, conducting research practices, and seeking guidance
under the mentor. However, in our experience, even though graduate
students did not have years of research experience, their research
methodology courses gave them a formal training quite unique from the
undergraduate’s experience. This provided the graduate students with a
vocabulary and knowledge of research tools which was more similar to
faculty than undergraduates. For example, in team meetings, Anna would
frequently ask graduate students to define statistical concepts, such as
reliability, when it was brought up in discussions. Therefore, we advocate
that mentors do not need to accrue decades of research experience before
mentoring undergraduate students.
Additionally, consistent with previous research, experience gives mentors
“credibility in the eyes of the students they will be mentoring” (Terrion &
Leonard, 2007, p. 153). However, as mentors we also worked to be realistic
throughout the research process and modeled a comfort, at times, with
not always knowing the “right answer”. Particularly, in our experience,
with including undergraduates in team meetings, they were privy to the
discussions and decision making processes behind studies. They directly
witnessed the issues surrounded in selecting or creating measurement tools.
The undergraduate researchers also saw when problems arise in studies and
how as researchers, we were forced to deviate from the original plan and the
frustrations associated with these issues.
Regarding how to support and expand opportunities for undergraduate
research we have a few recommendations:


provide a forum for education students to share their work with researchers in other fields. encourage faculty to present their own. 2. encourage faculty to present their own. can allow greater access for all undergraduate students. it allows them greater flexibility in their schedules. Include discussions and critiques as to how the research was conducted to attain such findings. of time or money for faculty and graduate students who engage in the mentoring of undergraduates. Highlighting the work of undergraduate students in research. University level opportunities. Providing course credit opportunities/course substitutions for students who engage in research. Graduate students and/or faculty: 1. Providing incentives. such as in college newsletters and on websites. Financial support. such as work study funds for undergraduate research. alternatively. To generate interest and awareness of educational research. would elevate the status of the work and encourage greater participation. For example. 2. providing a small research stipend would help balance the effort of work 4. This also helps faculty attract undergraduate students. will help make the practice more visible for both faculty and students. 5. such as Student Research Week. To generate interest and awareness of educational research. 7. Providing professional development in the area of mentorship will help faculty hone their mentorship models and prepare graduate students for that aspect of academia. Providing funding opportunities for undergraduate students to travel to present research at conferences. Annual awards for undergraduate student research both highlights the work of student-researchers and allows students to enhance their resumes as they prepare for the job market. 6. or other’s primary research 189 . 3. 4. Creating a “research certificate” or honors track for students engaged in research would formalize the process and allow students to clearly document their learning on their resumes. Similar to providing research funds. 3. or other’s primary research findings in undergraduate classes. if students gain course credit. Minding the Gap Undergraduate students: 1.

and undergraduate students. and the application of theory- based best practices into action. allowing them to understand where research comes from and how decisions about research are made. Additionally. Including undergraduate students in educational research pulls back the proverbial curtain before these students enter the classroom. Include discussions and critiques as to how the research was conducted to attain such findings. future research is also needed in this area. the dynamics of academics also has unique qualities. However. what preservice teachers learn in their courses. The gap between classroom practice and educational research has been well documented. The thread tying these three factors together is a strong understanding of theory and practice rooted in research. Annual awards for faculty who successful present or publish with undergraduate students would also provide greater value the practice. but also may help them critically analyze and question future educational 190 . Again. more diverse teams may operate in different manners. if this status quo continues. it would be critical to separate the more informal relationship of research mentor with the more formal relationship of instructor. For example. L. 5. due to class scheduling this may be unavoidable. ing with untrained researchers. we cannot expect to see any improvements in how children are taught. this approach will not only develop more competent and prepared classroom teachers. This insight not only motivates these students to incorporate research into their teaching practices. In such cases. While we can translate findings from mentoring in other fields. 6. they see the connections between theory and practice more clearly and can apply them to their own experiences as classroom teachers. the mentors on the team were all Caucasian. CONCLUSION Currently. The interactions may have been markedly different due to teams with both female and male participants. findings in undergraduate classes. the majority culture. In the end.K. It should be noted that our experience included only female faculty. a mismatch exists between what is seen in classrooms. graduate students. but will ultimately benefit the students in the classroom of those teachers. When preservice teachers are given the opportunity to develop research skills. while we made efforts to not have our own students (from that current semester) on the research teams. Future research should explore these dynamics in deeper and in a more systematic manner. however. WRIGHT ET AL.

Teacher Education and Special Education: The Journal of the Teacher Education Division of the Council for Exceptional Children. Kaufman. Canada: Jones & Bartlett Learning. 16. 338–350. L. J. An exploration of the characteristics of effective undergraduate peer mentoring relationships. W. J. Ontario. When Gabby was asked about the “disconnect between educational research and classroom teaching practices” she paused for a moment. (2011). 276–289. and then succinctly explained the importance of teachers “remaining on top of things and doing the newest of the new available so that students will be well prepared for the future”. 3–14. & Wilss. 279–287.. we believe the results provide optimism for the future. Bandura. 219–234. K. K. N. (2008). 60(3). 191–215. S. 226–238. (2009). Parsons. Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Journal of Teacher Education. M. 191 . In essence. and strategies. A. 27(1). Douglass.. Creswell. & Waldron. M. Walker. C. Englewood Cliffs. Psychological Review. purposes. (2007). L. Cannon. (2008). L. NJ: Prentice-Hall. Teacher Education and Special Education: The Journal of the Teacher Education Division of the Council for Exceptional Children. Smith. Effective content vocabulary instruction in the middle: Matching students. 86. J.. & Smith. Greenwood. Flanigan. Three conceptions of teacher learning: Exploring the relationship between knowledge and the practice of teaching. & Abbott. Qualitative inquiry & research design: Choosing among five approaches. A teacher educator writes and shares student perceptions of a publicly literate life.. Garrard. K.. K. D.. (1977). Journal of Counseling & Development.. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy. 24(4). Los Angeles. it is critical to prepare our teachers for the new realities. Mentoring and Tutoring: Partnership in Learning. T. (2001). LLC. J. As the field of education becomes more empirical research-based. R. While this study included only three case studies. 84.. D. (2013). G. 21. A. Heirdsfield. Mentoring & Tutoring: Partnership in Learning. (2013). Strentzsch. 51(3).). S. The research to practice gap in special education. 109–124. CA: Sage Publications. Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory.. words. D. McLeskey. REFERENCES Bandura. Gabby did not believe the gap between research and practice existed because in her experience the connection was well formed. C.. J. (2004). and social justice competencies. A.. Peer mentoring for first-year teacher education students: The mentors’ experience. Walsh. Minding the Gap trends. (1986). It is this attitude that we hope to instill in our undergraduate research assistance as they become classroom teachers.. & Greenwood. & Salazar. A. Comstock.. Hammer. multicultural. Health sciences literature review made easy (3rd ed. Relational-cultural theory: A framework for bridging relational.

M. J. M. Cambridge. (2007).. 66(2). Miller. (1978). Hodges Department of Teaching. I. J. D. (2008). & Stiver. J.   Katherine Landau Wright Department of Teaching. & Valiante. (2012). S. Learning and Culture College of Education and Human Development Texas A&M University April G. In C.. MA: MIT Press. MA: Beacon Press. & J. Thought and language. 163–171.K. Mentoring and Tutoring. Exceptional Children. Graham. 17(2). J. 103. B. Klingner.. L. The healing connection. Ritter. 145–159. Modeling powerful social studies: Bridging theory and practice with preservice elementary teachers. 149–164. F. Vaughn. & Leonard. C. Pajares. Self-efficacy beliefs and motivation in writing development. WRIGHT ET AL.. Learning and Culture College of Education and Human Development Texas A&M University Tracey S. New York. Generalizing effective teaching skills: The missing link in teacher preparation. G. A taxonomy of the characteristics of student peer mentors in higher education: Findings from a literature review. Fitzgerald (Eds. (1997). L. Learning and Culture College of Education and Human Development Texas A&M University Amanda D. 117–124. Boston.. Terrion. Douglass Department of Teaching. NY: Guilford. Vygotsky. & Hughes.). 15. Franks Department of Teaching. Learning and Culture College of Education and Human Development Texas A&M University 192 . Learning and Culture College of Education and Human Development Texas A&M University Erin McTigue Department of Teaching. The Social Studies. Scheeler. L. (2000). 158–170). Sustainability of research-based practices. A. S. Journal of Behavioral Education. MacArthur. Handbook of writing research (pp. K. (2006).

The National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE) provides standards for teacher preparation and within those standards is a specific objective: “to prepare candidates who can integrate technology into instruction to enhance student learning” (NCATE. 2009. Teaching at Work. and homes. Overwhelmed by Y. 2009). Many schools are just beginning to explore the true potential technology offers for teaching and learning. provide more practice-centered education and reflect deeply into the scholarship and practice of teaching. ROBIN RACKLEY AND RADHIKA VIRURU 10. 2002. All rights reserved. Technology changes the way teachers teach. © 2015 Sense Publishers. . According to Gomez. Sherin. It also enhances the relationship between teacher and student. touching almost every part of our lives. “we no longer live in a world in which information is scarce. As Jacobsen et al. schools of education should use technology to strengthen the practice-theory connection. (2002) have said. p. helping augment their needed practical knowledge (Gomez. 193–210. communities. how we exchange and interact with information and how information shapes and informs us but schools have been slower to change in regard to using the internet and mobile technologies in this participatory learning (Davidson & Goldberg. Learning how to integrate technology into the classroom enhances the teaching techniques of preservice teachers and “assists them in providing motivating and attractive learning environments for their classroom” (Serhan. Li & J. and the teacher’s role is to hand deliver content to children. p. Griesdorn and Finn (2008). Learning modes have changed greatly as to the sources of information. 2008). TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION AND PRESERVICE TEACHERS Theory and Practice INTRODUCTION Technology is ever-present. Teachers must be able to use technology effectively in the classroom in the 21st century as technology enhances teacher efficacy and productivity AND contributes significantly to student learning. Griesdorn & Finn. offering educators effective ways to reach and assess learners and through multiple means.). Hammer (Eds. 4). Sherin. 439).

we will define technology integration. identify some common barriers to integration and also review critical areas of emphasis for technology integration in today’s classrooms. VIRURU information from a wealth of sources. in a classroom with only an interactive whiteboard and one computer. learning is likely to remain teacher-centric. For instance. that is required for all early childhood and middle school preservice teachers at our institution. Although students are only actively involved in the third category. Capitalizing on these opportunities is an essential part of student-centered instruction in the 21st century.R. review some of the current research on technology integration and the need to encourage preservice teachers to become early adopters of technology. WHAT IS TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION? It is important to first define what “technology integration” actually means. As the research presented in this chapter. But how we define technology integration can also depend on the kinds of technology available. students desperately need the skills to create new knowledge. and who is using the technology. not just consume the old. there are ways to implement even an interactive whiteboard to make it a tool for students.” A stand-alone approach to technology instruction that focuses on the use of technology rather than how technology enhances learning can be ineffective. 2010). technology for instructional delivery and technology as a learning tool (Inan & Lowther. Seamless integration is when students are not only using technology daily. all three areas are important in creating technology-enriched classrooms. In this chapter. and integration will revolve around teacher needs. technology has created opportunities for learning that simply did not exist in earlier times. RACKLEY & R. Technology integration is typically expected in three broad areas within the classroom: technology for instructional preparation. Preservice Teachers and Technology Integration Although it has been intuitively supposed that preservice teachers are more likely to become users of technology if they are exposed to the theory and 194 . not necessarily student needs. Still. We will provide descriptions of how these areas of emphasis are integrated into our undergraduate course on technology integration. as well as the descriptions of our classroom practices will indicate. how much access one has to technology. but have access to a variety of tools that match the task at hand and provide them the opportunity to build a deeper understanding of content.

and their knowledge about how to support and manage students’ use of technology (Yelleand. Technology Integration and Preservice Teachers practice of technology instruction in their teacher preparation programs. Hughes. to teachers’ attitudes and beliefs (Ertmer & Ottenbreit-Leftwich. 2010. According to Anderson. Hsu 2010). According to Tondeur et al (2012): Research shows that a crucial factor influencing new teachers’ adoption of technology is the quantity and quality of preservice technology experiences included in their teacher education programmes. collaboration. Wenglinsky. research. 2005) seem to affect the quality of technology integration. Using technology for drill and practice generally has been found to be less effective than using technology for more constructivist purposes such as writing. and publication (Warschauer & Matuchniak. Research also shows that preservice teachers are more likely to use technology in their classrooms when they feel competent in their ability to do so (Chai. less than 40% of current and future teachers subscribe to this belief. (Kulik. 2010. Research indicates that specific uses of technology can improve student outcomes. it can help to improve students’ performance. Groulx & Manninger (2011). reading drills. 2005-2006). 2005). Because a teacher’s ability to integrate technology is so influential upon his or her students’ ability to learn from technology-based instruction (Angrist & Lavy. 2010). or tutorials negatively affected test scores. Wenglinsky. although most school administrators and principals believe that integrating technology into instruction is extremely important. Unfortunately. but use of computers for grammar/punctuation. 2010) their knowledge about how to enhance instruction using technology (Ertmer & Ottenbreit-Leftwich. 2002). Wenglinsky (2005) found that for eighth- grade reading. greater instruction in the integration of technology in preservice training is likely to yield positive outcomes on student learning. 2003. when used appropriately. In an analysis of NAEP data. 2006). The educational uses of technology 195 . analysis. Does Technology Integration Have an Impact? While the availability of technology in the classroom does not guarantee impact on student outcomes (Dynarski et al 2007. research findings suggest that technology is significantly under-used by preservice teachers and beginning teachers. research has now substantiated that belief. These scholars believe that teacher preparation programs bear the responsibility of ensuring that preservice teachers not only have the skills but also an adequate conceptual framework to enable them to integrate technology into their classrooms (Wright & Wilson. In addition. use of computers for writing activities positively affected test scores. 1998).

While the majority of our undergraduate students owned mobile devices and various other technologies. Department of Education. visualization. to conduct experiments.. VIRURU also can enhance competencies that go well beyond the knowledge and skills typically measured by these achievement tests (Bransford. 1999.R.g. In the fall of 2009 the need was identified at our university for a course on technology integration. The focus is on the study of how learning theories are reflected in and supported by technology and on current and emerging applications in technology-delivered and supported learning environments. learning and innovation skills. As well. media. connections between ideas. and the Society for Human Resource Management. and 196 . and collaboration skills. These include information. Corporate Voices for Working Families. communication. they were not comfortable nor confident in integrating technology in their field based practicum classrooms. the Partnership for 21st Century Skills. Collins & Halverson. data management. the National Educational Technology Plan (U. This course provides an overview of technology as it relates to the design of instruction and practices that support effective teaching and learning. During the adoption of a new degree plan a course. RACKLEY & R. and life and career skills. processes and learning strategies. There is a wide variety of technology ability and comfort within each class Developing Technology Skills The Partnership for 21st Century Skills (2009) has identified the skills and areas of expertise that are essential for succeeding in work and life in a 21st century global society. emphasizes the importance of enabling students to experience technology in the ways professionals do in their fields (e. 2006). which are among the skills that employers find lacking even in many college graduates (The Conference Board. These competencies include improved understanding of complex concepts. and communicate) and encourages educators to create learning experiences that mirror students’ daily lives and the reality of their futures. Brown. Cocking.S. move further into the digital learning age. as well as the development of problem solving. Effectively preparing students for their future entails that districts and schools around the country leverage digital technologies to improve student learning experiences. organize information. 2009). EDCI 365 Using Technology in Elementary Classrooms was developed and added to the curriculum for all students seeking Pre-K through 6 teacher certification. The enrollment in the course consists of students from various departments including special education and agricultural education. and technology skills. 2010).

analyze and synthesize the information. Digital technologies permit users unprecedented control over the content they consume and the place in and pace at which they consume it. one application or one device to serve as the pinnacle for technology mastery. 10) The four C’s (critical thinking. International Society for Technology in Education) It is no longer acceptable for students to have less access to technological tools than the teacher. creativity. presentations. “(Blair. p. “Effective integration of technology is achieved when students are able to select technology tools to help them obtain information in a timely manner. “It’s a mistake to give teachers computers and demand that they find useful things to do with them. The technology should become an integral part of how the classroom functions -- as accessible as all other classroom tools. 2009). and movies. we need to create opportunities for teachers to integrate technology into the curriculum (Knobel. (Edutopia) Effective technology integration is achieved when the use of technology is routine and transparent and when technology supports curricular goals. teamwork. At the heart of effective technology integration practices. decision-making. artwork. As an example. Technology Integration and Preservice Teachers empower students to take an active role and take ownership of their own learning (NNPS. Earlier studies of technology in classrooms have shown that many educators are unprepared to integrate technology into their instruction (Efaw. For 197 . and present it professionally. 2005). Instead.” (National Educational Technology Standards for Students. nor is it enough for any one suite of software. students need access to a constantly evolving array of technological tools and activities that demand problem-solving. educators have found that by implementing these standards even the youngest 21st century learners are capable of independently creating digital storybooks. communication. digital technologies offer students greater opportunities to be more actively involved in the learning experience. and innovation. 2012). Preservice teachers cannot capitalize on the educational potential of technology if they have not had the opportunity to see how it can foster learning and how it can be integrated into the curriculum. WHAT IS SUCCESSFUL TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION? A key difference between information technology and technology integration has been in the shift from passive audiences to active users. “For student performance to approximate student potential. and collaboration) are at the heart of the International Society for Technology in Education’s National Educational Technology Standards (NETS) for students. 2012.

Rather. encouraging student-centered project-based learning. (Edutopia) One theme that has emerged from the research to date is that simply adding technology to K-12 environments does not necessarily improve learning. Varma. personalized feedback. students not only become more engaged. and should also provide technical support. 2012). Ertmer and Ottenbreit-Leftwich. and self-directed learning after receiving in-depth and sustained professional development in technology integration (Bebell and O’Dwyer. Professional development should be task- embedded. decision-making. Innovative Teaching and Learning Research. teamwork. Corliss. Law and Yuen. curricula. 2011. but have access to a variety of tools that match the task at hand and provide them the opportunity to build a deeper understanding of content. too. When professional development is sustained beyond one year and supports active learning. 2. Successful technology integration for learning generally goes hand in hand with changes in teacher training. Effective tech integration changes classroom dynamics. 2010. The review of the literature also finds that successful technology integration generally involves three key principles: 1. Seamless integration is when students are not only using technology daily. Successful schoolwide technology integration requires a schoolwide cultural shift in which good teaching means 198 . they begin to take more control over their own learning. and assessment practices (Bebell & O’Dwyer. they tend to use it to present information rather than to provide hands-on learning for students (Moeller and Reitzes. 2010.R. VIRURU student performance to approximate student potential. 2009). 2011). technical and instructional difficulties tend to be overcome (Gerard. students need access to a constantly evolving array of technological tools and activities that demand problem solving. RACKLEY & R. 2011. linking technology usage to specific content standards and learners in teachers’ classrooms. Students critically analyzing and actively creating 3. Recent studies indicate that only 23 percent of teachers feel prepared to integrate technology into their instruction. and innovation (Blair. Teachers are more likely to use technology in ways that promote student engagement. inquiry. Innovative Teaching and Learning Research. and Linn. Students playing an active role in their learning and receiving frequent. 2010. 2006). Zucker & Light. 2011). Teachers connecting classroom activities to the world outside the classroom When technology integration in the classroom is seamless and thoughtful. what matters most is how students and teachers use technology to develop knowledge and skills. and when they do integrate technology.

the wide availability of what are often known as Web 2. as physical barriers to technology integration have gradually disappeared (National Center for Education Statistics. In regards to software access. Early studies of integration often found discrepancies between teacher’s espoused beliefs about integration and their actual classroom practices. 2012. an ASCD report on schools that successfully integrate technology does not mention either hardware or software access as an issue. 2008). there has not been a consequent rise in effective integration in classrooms. Researchers have found that successful technology integration practices are often founded on a belief in student-centered learning (Ertmer et al. Jimoyiannisa & Komisb 2007. However. 2010. Levin and Wadmany. however more recent studies show that this too has been mostly overcome. 4. namely: 1. Hermans et al. Gray & Thomas. 2011. Lim & Chai 2008. Lumpe & Chambers 2001). 2010). indicating that this is an issue that has essentially been resolved. 2006. 2006). Interestingly. Teacher beliefs have also been shown to be a strong predictor of effective technology integration. Technology Integration and Preservice Teachers using technology effectively (Ertmer and Ottenbreit-Leftwich. 2007. Essentially. adequate training and external support Internet access is an issue that has mostly been resolved. Results from an NEA (2008) study show that nearly 57% of teachers felt that they had been adequately trained to integrate technology into their classrooms. 2008). as by 2005. Thus technology integration is deeply related to teacher beliefs about teaching and learning.. hardware 2. The lack of adequate professional development was likewise seen as a factor that negatively impacted successful technology integration. classrooms that have access to the Internet can often automatically gain access to needed software tools (Brandon. Chen 2008. Finally administrative and technical 199 . however these differences were often attributed towards inadequate infrastructure and support (Ertmer et al.0 tools such as social media applications. 2008). 2006). almost all public schools in the United States had access to the Internet on their campuses (Wells & Lewis. have greatly decreased the ability of this issue to impact classroom integration. software and tool access. with other studies indicating even higher numbers (CDW-G. Internet access 3. Ertmer et al discuss four barriers that can negatively impact successful technology integration in K-12 classrooms. Andrew.

EDCI 365. In the next sections of the paper we would like to present some examples of what technology integration might look like and key areas of the classroom where it can and has been successfully used. A national survey of 416 teacher preparation programs indicated that formal technology coursework was not well correlated with preservice teachers’ technology integration skills (Moursund & Bielefeldt. Hargrave & Hsu. Moursund & Bielefeldt. 1999). RACKLEY & R. they are not discriminating users. 2004. In our technology course. Halpin. Many schools of education still require preservice teachers to enroll in a standalone educational technology course (Hargrave & Hsu. preservice teachers often enter technology training with low levels of self-efficacy.. Ropp. 1999. Successful technology integration thus is closer than ever to being an attainable goal. 71). Bandura’s research found that individuals possessing higher levels of confidence in their abilities tend to approach difficult tasks as challenges instead of obstacles. evaluating pages for currency (such as when they were last 200 . Pope et al.. 2002. understanding the nature of sources is one of the first assignments that we give our students. In our experience. VIRURU support has also been revealed as an issue of declining importance in technology integration (Ertmer et al. Wright& Wislon. we have found that although many of our students are users of the Web.R. Wills and Smith conclude that the ultimate goal of this type of instruction should be to empower preservice teachers in their own skills so that they may confidently integrate technology into their classrooms. We introduce our students to such basic concepts of web literacy as understanding URL’s. checking the validity of the entity of the owners of web-pages. Several studies have demonstrated improved self-efficacy or confidence for using technology when preservice teachers are required to take technology- integrated methods courses (Collier et al. According to Willis and Smith (2011). 1999. 2000. 2012). 2000). Albert Bandura (1994) defines self-efficacy “as people’s beliefs about their capabilities to produce designated levels of performance that exercise influence over events that affect their lives” (p. Preservice teachers should be offered learning opportunities that allow technology skills to be acquired incrementally with new skills building on prior skills. having very little grasp of the concept of Web literacy. Preservice Teachers and Technology Integration How are preservice teachers best prepared to integrate technology into their future classrooms? This is a vital question currently faced by schools of education. 1999. 2005–2006)..

such as texts. Digitized primary sources offer students the unique opportunity to not only study history but in many ways experience it through multiple inputs. digital collections have expanded exponentially with an enormous wealth of written and recorded primary source material now easily available. We also try to debunk myth such as the idea that the use of the internet has generally speaking been detrimental to student creativity and writing capabilities by exposing students to such information as the Pew Internet use report that found that 77% of teachers of advanced writing courses in high school thought that the internet and digital search tools have had a positive influence on student writing (Pew Internet and American Life Project. redesigning learning environments and integrating mobile technologies into classrooms. Bellows & Liaw. Thus. 2011). Technology Integration and Preservice Teachers updated). Salinas. “digitized history archives (collections of primary sources or firsthand accounts) have immense implications for how teachers can conduct historical inquiry” (p. the quality of the page itself (what kinds of sites it links to. 185). these authors point out that simply because a resource is available does not guarantee that it will be used at all or used properly. audio and video recordings where available. it is important that preservice teachers be introduced to the “how” of integrating such resources as well as to what resources to use. as with many technologies. Bellows & Liaw (2011) have said. Many educators strongly believe in the importance of giving students access to primary sources. These resources grant students the opportunity to link multiple sources and thus create for themselves a more individualized understanding of historical events (Bolick. As Salinas. 201 . AREAS FOR TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION2 Experts agree that some of the most critical areas that need to be addressed in technology integration include giving students access to primary source material. and whether those links are current). and finally checking the history of the website itself through tools such as https://archive. Giving Students Access to Up-to-Date Primary Source Material As Lindquist & Long (2011) have pointed out. Each of these areas is discussed further below. and also of the real need to teach their own classes about concepts such as web literacy. 2006.org/web/ We emphasize the need for students to try and find primary sources of good quality when doing research of their own. At the same time. 2012).

as users of technology often since birth. 2014. Scholars point out too that this goes beyond simply enhancing existing instructional practices with technological innovations: it requires carefully planned instructional choices. we emphasize that it is important to choose technologies that engage students in learning in ways that connect to their own experiences. who had the power and the access to post content on the web (commonly described as a “read-only” Web 1. In our course on technology integration. The nature of the internet too has changed. Our classes have engaged in projects such as Skyping with classrooms in 202 . VIRURU Reconceptualizing Learning Environments Educators recognize that much of student research now begins with the internet. Examples include Barak and Dori’s (2006) study of how modeling software and internet research can enhance learning in chemistry classrooms and van Aalst and Chan’s (2007) study of the use of portfolio assessments.media work in complex project-oriented teams in which the problems. and processes are in flux and often distributed across geographic and cultural distances (Greenhow et al. This is the fundamental principle upon which instructional design must be based. 248). 2005). This is in contrast to what are often known as 21st century skills and include competencies such as: creative and original multi. over 90% of people in the US will have high speed internet access. Robelia & Hughes. state that traditional views of education focus on the role of the student as a “receiver” of information: from such a point of view. At the same time. Greenhow et al.0 version of the web that is much more collaborative and allows multiple view points to be heard at once (Greenhow. suggest. Anderson. & Rainie. particularly in light of the statistics given above about widespread access to the internet in schools. roles. the internet functions as a medium that augments the ability of students to retrieve and easily store information. we continually impress on students the fundamental lesson that the purpose of using technology in any classroom is not to use technology but to enhance learning. p. in collaborative environments. Furthermore. from a resource controlled by a selected few. it is estimated that in this year. RACKLEY & R. Greenhow et al.. 2009. and that promote 21st century skills such as the ability to communicate across with people from around the globe and using technology more for purposes of production than consumption. when learning environments are seen as “learning ecologies” (Barron. 2009). 2006) in which learning comes from participating in complex activity.R. presenting information and assessment. (Fox. Such unconventional learning requires unconventional methods of collecting and recording data.0 version of the internet) to a “read and write” Web 2. tasks. players. Such skills are better developed.

Thomas et al. that although to some extent the “chewing-gum” mentality does continue to exist in schools. participating in digital scavenger hunts to better understand one’s own environment... they are increasingly being viewed as mini-computers that can help students access and create content.. present information. in an effort to increase student access to learning opportunities. in press) or sext (Lenhart et al. Research has 203 . in press) other people. and the calendar tools were the best ways in which to use mobile phones in the classroom and continued to be concerned about issues such as cheating. concerns persist that mobile phones can be distractions in classrooms as students can use them to text (Campbell. however. creating digital stories that include original artwork and participant voices and the use of classroom response systems as a tool to make student thinking visible. Interestingly. Mobile phones in the classroom have also been described as the equivalent of letting the genie out of the bottle (Project Tomorrow. 2011. participate in classroom decision making and take assessments (O’Bannon & Thomas. Many schools have now adopted BYOD or Bring Your Own Device policies. using educational apps and using calculators. At the same time. teachers thought features such as accessing the internet. to cheat on assessments. such as those of O’Bannon and Thomas. rather than just as a tool for assessment. collaborate with other students. Shelton. show that younger teachers (particularly under the age of 32) tend to own more smart-phones themselves and tend to support the idea that mobile phones can support learning. Recent research on mobile learning indicates. 2012). Adams and Cummins. for cyber- bullying and to access inappropriate content (ibid). & Exner. Elliott. 2012). overall potential for being disruptive and cyber-bullying (ibid). 2010. 2006. Technology Integration and Preservice Teachers multiple locations. 2010): something that teachers try very hard to keep out of schools but never succeed in accomplishing. Thomas et al. Lynn. many educators have come to recognize that mobile technologies can positively impact learning in classrooms (Johnson. 2014). the use of social media to discover information from around the globe in real time. Research studies. Mobile phones in particular have come under a great deal of scrutiny: previously seen by many teachers as a device that only diverted students’ attention from learning. Using Mobile Devices in Learning Mobile devices in the classroom have been occasionally been described as the equivalent of chewing gum in schools in previous decades (Brooks- Young.

particular attention has been paid to how they grant easy access to multimedia resources (ibid). rural and high-poverty areas (ibid). We encourage our students to become familiar with as many devices as possible. VIRURU shown that despite expressed concerns. and that this support was widespread in urban. so that when they have their own classrooms. process and transfer material. whether that be to participate in a poll. parents tend to be supportive of the idea of mobile phone in classrooms. Research also shows that younger children are increasingly gaining access to mobile technologies: a recent survey shows that 52% of children under the age of 8 are easily able to access either a smartphone or an equivalent device such as in iPod or a tablet (Ciampa & Gallagher. Android and Windows tablets. Research on multi-media resources often draws from Paivio’s (1986) work on dual-coding theories. and try to guide students through appropriate usage policies (such as making sure that students are at least 13 years of age before they create Facebook accounts and monitoring privacy settings on social media) as well as potential pitfalls (such as indiscriminately connecting with colleagues and people one comes into contact in a school environment such as parents. In studying the use of mobile technologies with younger children. without reflecting upon how that might dictate what one uses social media for). Furthermore we heavily encourage the use of mobile devices in our own classes: students are encouraged to have their phones and tablets out with them during class. In recognition of the current popularity of BYOD policies.R. video clips and audio-recordings (Druin. look up a website. RACKLEY & R. Feedback We have received positive feedback from our students and the administrators that have hired these students. 2013). including podcasts. During her senior methods semester one of 204 . We also encourage our students to look into the potential that mobile devices have for creating audio-video content. we provide students with access to a variety of mobile devices including Apple. as they are often called upon to use them. communicate with other students or to complete a Google form needed for setting up the classroom space for that day. We also encourage the exploration of social media through mobile devices. 2009). they are better equipped to answer questions about them. Our course on technology integration covers many of the issues related to integrating mobile technologies in classrooms. which suggests that verbal and visual information are processed differently and any system that incorporates both elements helps students retain. suburban.

At a recent conference on technology integration.edu). The focus of the lesson was on characterization. technology is their first language. Bridging this gap in ways of looking at the world is essential for today’s classrooms to be successful. The principal at this school was asked by the mentor teacher to observe this particular lesson. one of our speakers drew the analogy between proficiency in technology and second language instruction. Our students have also implemented the use of technologies such as VoiceThread and podcasts into their teaching. as well as the descriptions of our classroom practices indicate. we have reviewed some of the current research on technology integration. hosted by our institution (http://techconference. Technology Integration and Preservice Teachers our students used her personal iTouch to differentiate instruction in the classroom. She recorded a few relevant passages from the text and all students were allowed to listen to the text followed by class discussion. students not reading on grade level were still able to participate in the class discussion and have meaningful dialog on the topic. As the research presented in this chapter. Administrators have told us that our students have been hired based on their confidence in integrating technology. This allowed individual students to listen to the text more than once if necessary. 205 . he was impressed by the technology skills for our student and she was asked as a methods student to conduct a professional development with the kindergarten team on creating digital stories as a collaboration with the fourth grade students. that is required for all early childhood and middle school preservice teachers at our institution.tamu. She was placed in a 4th grade language arts classroom. Our speaker suggested that for many students in today’s classrooms. technology has created opportunities for learning that simply did not exist in earlier times. identified some common barriers to integration and also reviewed critical areas of emphasis for technology integration in today’s classrooms. Not all students were reading on grade level. technology is something that has to be painstakingly learned. We have also provided descriptions of how these areas of emphasis are integrated into our undergraduate course on technology integration. Many students have contacted us and told us how valuable the skills but more importantly the confidence has been that they gained from this course. without others being held back or the stigma of having to ask the teacher to repeat what was said. CONCLUSION In this chapter. acquired without effort whereas for many of today’s teachers. Capitalizing on these opportunities is an essential part of student-centered instruction in the 21st century.

and classroom policies. 55(3). L. N. Technology Integration for the new 21st century learner. R. DC: National Academy Press. Weinburgh. Bandura. J. Groulx. Enhancing undergraduate students’ chemistry understanding through project-based learning in an IT environment. The Asia- Pacific Educational Researcher. The Teacher Educator. How people learn. New York. Blair. J.com/news-releases/news-release-06-26-06. Ciampa.php?journal=TAPER&page=article&op=view&path%5B%5D=1596&path%5B% 5D=1685 Chen. Computer world.org/principal- januaryfebruary-2012-technology/technology-integration-new-21st-century-learner Bolick.). M.html Chai. (Eds. The relationship among Singaporean preservice teachers’ ICT com- petencies. Brown. Web 2. VIRURU REFERENCES Anderson. 65–75. Washington. (2002). J. Encyclopedia of mental health. 193–224. 122–134.cdwg. Retrieved from http://69. and Assessment. D. Comparison of teacher educators’ instructional methods with the constructivist ideal. 12(3). A. (2006). Learning.R.com/web_2_0_define_2_0 Bransford. Why do teachers not practice what they believe regarding technology integration? Journal of Educational Research. S. G. J.nap. Getting in touch: Use of mobile devices in the elementary classroom.). The Journal of Technology.. K. H. 102(1).. 2009 from http://newsroom. (2011). 89(1). & Maninger. (2008). San Diego: Academic Press. & Tiffany.. C. In V. Y. Infusing technology skills into a teacher education program: Changes in students’ knowledge about and use of technology.. 321–338. (2006).naesp. 309–328 Collier. M. New evidence on classroom computers and pupil learning. R. Perceptions of mobile phones in college classrooms: Ringing.). (2010). Friedman (Ed. S. & O’Dwyer. 49. Computers in the Schools. 2011 from http://blogs. L. M. Economic Journal. 21(1). Digital archives: Democratizing the doing of history. M. Angrist. Retrieved from http://www. Educational outcomes and research from 1:1 computing settings [Abstract]. 1998).174. Relationships among preservice teachers technology related abilities. pedagogical beliefs and their beliefs on the espoused use of ICT.. 387–400.computerworld.. A. beliefs and intentions to use technology in their future classrooms. (2008). 112(482). 42(3). RACKLEY & R. Andrew. Theory. (2007). G. Barak. M. M.. (2004). (2013). Retrieved from http://www. Human Development. International Journal of Social Education. (2006). (1999).0 definition for non-techies. 4.53. pp. 71–81). Encyclopedia of human bevavior (Vol. L. php?record_id=6160 Campbell. Principal (January/February 2012:Technology). Teachers Talk Tech reveals technology access and professional development are driving improved teacher and student performance. C. CDW-G (2006).. 280–294. Bebell. Brandon. 447–468. Retrieved March 28.. and Applied Research. Science Education. (2012). & Rivera.edu/openbook. Communication Education. Interest and self-sustained learning as catalysts of development: A learning ecologies perspective. 19(3).45/ index. C. 735. (1994).. Self-efficacy. & Lavy. Ramachandran (Ed. (Reprinted in H. 30(4). 157–184. NY: Academic Press. S. E. 9(1). Retrieved April 18. J. Journal of Educational Computing Research. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education. (2010). cheating. V. 206 . R. Interdisciplinary Journal of Practice. L. & Dori. 45(3). & Cocking.S. Barron. (2005). S. B. D. 117–139.

1499–1509. Corliss.S. 408–448. B. Teacher beliefs and technology integration practices: A critical relationship. 207 . Learning. P. Mobile technology for children: Designing for interaction and learning. (2012). L. R. CA: Morgan Kaufmann. Gray. J. Survey of instructional technology courses for preservice teachers. (2007). Ertmer. and scholarship in a digital age: Web 2. P.pewinternet... Teacher technology change: How knowledge. Effectiveness of reading and mathematics software products: Findings from the first student cohort. J. Retrieved September 29.. Thomas. D. Computers & Education. 43(3). Department of Education. . Robelia. J. (2008). Washington.. Research: What Path Should We Take Now? Educational Researcher. Halpin. 54–72. Carey. S. A model of constructivist learning in practice: Computer literacy integrated into elementary mathematics and science teacher education. confidence.. A.. 8(4). teaching. Varma. J. N. Factors affecting technology integration in K-12 classrooms: a path model.. J. & Lewis. B. 38(4). A.. Education Technology Research and Development. & Rainie. S. Tondeur. The relationship between teacher’s technology integration ability and usage... (2009). E.. L. (2008). J. Technology Integration and Preservice Teachers Davidson. 58.. 255–284. T. C. The impact of primary school teachers’educational beliefs on the classroom use of computers. Hermans. Griesdorn. The role of teacher knowledge and learning experience in forming technology-integrated pedagogy.2190/ EC.. A. N. Agodini. K. 59. l. MacArthur Foundation Report. & Hsu. Sussex. and Catherine T. & Ottenbreit-Leftwich. (1999). T. 277–302. 25(4).S. Creating social relationships: The role of technology in preservice teacher preparation. & Finn.. public schools: 2009 (NCES 2010-040). 59(2).. E. The future of learning institutions in a digital age. Hsu. 423–435 Fox. Sendurur. & Lowther. Teachers’ use of educational technology in U. van Braak. 137–154..futureofthebook. Journal of Teacher Education. (2005).3. (2011). Retrieved from http://www. DC: U. M. (2009). W. DC: National Center for Education Statistics. 309–325. O. 246–259. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education. Q. L. Washington. 2008 from http://www. U. P.. Heaviside. C.0 and classroom. R. Gomez.. beliefs. S. (2000).org Druin.. Saidk. (2010). Computers & Education. Journal of Research on Technology in Education.. The future of the Internet. Efaw.. (2010). & Sendurur. T. Journal of Educational Computing Research. L. San Francisco. Dynarski.. C. Washington. (2005). J. Anderson. S. No teacher left behind: How to teach with technology. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education..pdf Gerard. 81(3). (2010). (2009). M. & Goldberg. Sherin.43. Professional development for technology-enhanced inquiry science [Abstract].. doi:10. F. Journal of Research on Computing Education. A. F.. 117–131. . Inan. 303–314. 42(3). (2010). & Hughes.. 51. Campuzano. C. Review of Educational Research. Department of Education. Educause Quarterly. Novak. 12(2). DC: Pew Charitable Trusts. D. M. & Linn. L.org/pdfs/ PIP_Future_of _Internet. Greenhow. 26–32. 32(1).. (2005). and culture intersect (PDF).c Hughes. R. Institute of Education Sciences. M.S. . Ertmer. John D. Y. L. Hargrave. & Valcke. A.. Ottenbreit-Leftwich..

(2006). 224–241.. C.). DC: U. Kulik. T. & Friesen.S. NETS for students: Global learning in a digital age.. Retrieved from http://www. 2(3). 29(2). DC: Author. Preparing teachers for technology integration: Creating a culture of inquiry in the context of use. 16(2). smartphones and texting. D. 39(5). H. Teachers’ views on factors affecting effective integration of information technology in the classroom: Developmental scenery. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education. V. & Plomp. MA: Education Development Center. (2009). C. T. Johnson.gov/pubs2007/2007020. Quincy. National Education Association. Lindquist. Arlington. 11(2).S. The George Lucas Educational Foundation. 93–107. P. (2006). Nelle Mae Education Foundation. & Reitzes. E.. T. & Chambers. 34(1). (2001). Teens. Lumpe. Moeller. (2011).pdf National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education. (2002). Journal of Research on Technology in Education. International Society for Technology in Education. Will new teachers be prepared to teach in the digital arena? Research study by the International Society for Technology in Education. Law. 807–828. (2009). Examining teachers’ beliefs about ICT in education: Implications of a teacher preparation programme. and equity (Policy Brief # 19). (2012). Retrieved from http://milkenexchange. Santa Monica. Washington.  (Eds. T. British Journal of Educational Technology. Technology in schools: The ongoing challenge of access.. Assessing teachers’ context beliefs about technology use. public schools and classrooms: 1994–2005.org National Center for Education Statistics. Washington. Hong Kong: Springer Publishing..aspx Levin. S. VIRURU Innovative Teaching and Learning Research. Schools of education must fuel a digital revolution in teaching. Professional standards for the accreditation of schools. CA. (EDC). & Bielefeldt. K. (2008). T. L. S. Washington DC: NEA Policy and Practice Department. Pedagogy and ICT use in schools around the world: Findings from the IEA SITES 2006 study series. Department of Education: Author. 208 . 363–388.. (2008). Integrating technology with student-centered learning.org/Content/NavigationMenu/ NETS/ForStudents/NETS_for_Students. (1999)..org/Reports/2012/Teens- and-smartphones. Knobel. and departments of education. (2003).. & Komisb.ed. NMC horizon report: 2012 K–12 edition. (2008). (2002).. & Wadmany. Commissioned by and in partnership with Milken Exchange on Education Technology. TX: The New Media Consortium. A. Clifford.. Lim. M. Effects of using instructional technology in elementary and secondary schools: What controlled evaluation studies say. P. J. A. (2007). Retrieved from http://www. T. Teacher Development. adequacy. & Chai. VA: SRI International..htm Jacobsen. M. B.iste.pewinternet. 2014 from http://nces. Washington. Pelgrum. J. [Electronic version] Edutopia: What Works in Public Education. Lenhart.R. How can educational technology facilitate student engagement with online primary sources? Library Hi Tech. A. DC: Pew Internet and American Life Project. (2011). Retrieved April 20. RACKLEY & R. S. Adams. R. & Cummins. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education. (2011). 149–173. M. Findings and Implications (PDF). Teachers’ pedagogical beliefs and their planning and conduct of computer mediated classroom lesson. Inc. A. W. N. Austin. Moursund. & Long. 233–262. Jimoyiannisa. (2012). Internet access in U. colleges..

.p21.. Retrieved from http://www. D. (2008). Partnership for 21st Century Skills. Washington. Journal of Research on Technology in Education. Elliott. (2011). V. The Journal of the Learning Sciences..gov/ policy/elsec/leg/blueprint Van Aalst.pdf The George Lucas Educational Foundation. Retrieved from http://pewinternet. Student-directed assessment of knowledge building using electronic portfolios. (2010)..org/~/media//Files/ Reports/2012/PIP _TeacherSurveyReportWith Methodology110112. B. 29(4). A EASA blueprint for reform. (2012). & Liaw. August). M. Project Tomorrow and Blackboard. M. A. B.ed..org/index. Retrieved from  http://www. Mental representations: A dual-coding approach. 11(2). Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education.org/documents/FINAL_REPORT_PDF9-29-06. Washington.pdf Pope. (2012. VA: NNPS. CA: Author. M. Teacher perceptions of using mobile phones in the classroom: Age matters! Computers & Education. (2009b). Standing in the school house door: Teacher perceptions of mobile phones in the classroom. and Policy. (2012). L. Bellows.p21. C. & Howard. Tuscon. J. D. & Britt. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education. Journal of Environmental Psychology. DC: Author. 16.org Thomas.. 74. T. Tucson. Preparing preservice teachers for computer technology integration. Marin County. E.. 184–204. K. Department of Education. Learning in the 21st century: Mobile Devices + Social Media = Personalized Learning. (1999). 31(4). (1986). How teens do research in the digital world. D. Oxford. L.. 439–447. Retrieved from http://www2. 331–338. 175–220. The Conference Board. Salinas. J. E.pdf Ropp. U. K. Paivio. International Journal of Instructional Media. H. Office of Planning. Irvin. Journal of Research on Computing in Education. Serhan. BYOD guidelines for students. K. 36(4). O’Bannon. Retrieved from www. Preservice social studies teachers’ historical thinking and digitized primary sources: What they use and why.com/resources/markets/k-12/collateral/project-tomorrow/K12_Prjct- Tmrw_Mbl-Rpt_2012. Framework for 21st century learning.S. Technology Integration and Preservice Teachers NNPS. M. Edutopia. CA: Author. Shelton. S. The distracting effects of a ringing cell phone: An investigation of the laboratory and the classroom setting. and the Society for Human Resource Management. England: Oxford University Press. Preservice teachers and computer use in the classroom. & Thomas. Exploring individual characteristics associated with learning to use computers in preservice teacher preparation. (2009a). Hare.. (2007). (2011).edutopia.php?option=com_content&task= view&id=254&Itemid=120 Pew Internet and American Life Project. (2014). O’Bannon. Serhan. Lynn. Retrieved from http://www. (2006). D. 36(3). C. Technology integration: Closing the gap between what preservice teachers are taught to do and what they can do. DC: Author. 404–424.blackboard. Are they really ready to work? Employer’s perspectives on the basic knowledge and applied skills of new entrants to the 21st century workforce. Newport News. & Exner.. International Journal of Instructional Media. Corporate Voices for Working Families.. (in press). K. E. M. Evaluation. A. AZ: Author. (2002). 10(2). 209 . (2009). 191–203. AZ: Author. W. & Chan. 15–25. the Partnership for 21st Century Skills. 513–521.

H. 29–32. 323. RACKLEY & R. 179–225. 49–55. Wright. Department of Education. (2006). Does it compute? The relationship between educational technology and student achievement in mathematics.R. Washington. E. M. New technology and digital worlds: Analyzing evidence of equity in access. 63(4). public schools and classrooms: 1994–2005 (NCES 2007-020). (2010). (2005). A.S. use. and outcomes.. (2005). Princeton.   Robin Rackley Department of Teaching. Yelland. 2014 from http://nces.S. The future is now. NJ: Educational Testing Service.ed.pdf Wenglinsky. N. H. Science. & Light. 82–85. 22(2). Retrieved January 31. 34.. (2009). Learning and Culture College of Education and Human Development Texas A&M University Radhika Viruru Department of Teaching Learning and Culture College of Education and Human Development Texas A&M University    210 .gov/ pubs2007/2007020. L. D. Teachnology and achievement: The bottom line.. DC: National Center for Education Statistics. Educational Leadership. & Matuchniak. Wenglinsky. Internet access in U. A review of the literature on the use of computers in early childhood education (1994–2004). J. Laptop programs for students (PDF). (2006). Journal of Computing in Teacher Education. From preservice to inservice teaching: A study of technology integration. Review of Research in Education. U. (2005). Wells. H. VIRURU Warschauer. (1998). Using technology wisely: The keys to success in schools. H. A. V. 201–232.. K. T. Wenglinsky. New York. AACE Journal. 13(3). & Wilson. NY: Teachers College Press. & Lewis. Zucker.

n. 2007). 1990). "Within the word. Because of the perceived importance of reflection on educator performance. 2003. what. Teaching at Work.the other immediately suffers" (1970. where. Hammer (Eds. coaching and mentoring. TIMOTHY N. Collier’s (1999) study of four student teachers found that reflective practice was typically at the lowest level of thinking. perspectives change. develop and improve his or her practices within the context of lifelong learning. LYNNE MASEL WALTERS. in-class projects and peer collaboration to encourage their students to become reflective teachers (Edwards. Freire stated. 1990. faculty in schools of education around the world are teaching and researching this practice. we find two dimensions. Li & J. when.even in part. fieldwork. reflecting deeply on their educational philosophy and practice is a critical first step for taking action in the classroom. in such radical interaction that if one is sacrificed. portfolios. Connelly & Clandinin. Individuals construct understanding through the process of reflection on experience (McDrury & Alterio. teacher trainees reflect at a superficial level. While it may be painful to look in the mirror and consider the who. Many studies have shown that these techniques do not work. © 2015 Sense Publishers. reflection and action. MARTHA R. if at all (Collier. THE EXAMINED LIFE Using Digital Stories to Develop the Reflective Capabilities of Preservice Teachers about Culture and Diversity INTRODUCTION The term “reflection” has become one of the most important vocabulary words of teacher training (Hatton & Smith. 1995).). All rights reserved. why and how of what works and doesn’t work in the classroom. p. Schunk. WALTERS AND LIANGYAN WANG 11. .d. for teachers. stuck in a rut and no longer enjoying the job. One quality a good teacher should possess is the ability to reflect on what. the unexamined teaching career can lead to becoming just a glorified babysitter. and [teachers] must change in order to adapt and to remain relevant in the ever-changing world of education” (Lewis. GREEN. 2002). 211–233. why and how things are done and to adapt. 1999. 69). with only Y. Bean & Stevens. “Times change.). Teacher educators are using such techniques as journals. Thus.

p. M. develop perspective consciousness and cultural sensitivity. 212 . and careful consideration of any belief or supposed form of knowledge in the light of the grounds that support it and the further conclusions to which it tends” (Dewey 1933. mental. education students shape personal understanding and individual subjectivity. 11). This chapter discusses digital storytelling as a narrative structure and process through which authors construct meaning from cultural experiences. one student demonstrating an ability to reach the deepest level of reflection (why and how). 2002. Through reflective thought. We must provide students with the skills to develop intercultural competence by supporting their abilities to think. our goal must be to prepare prospective and mid- career students for teaching in a new world of global interconnectedness defined by multicultural classrooms. cognitivism. create. persistent. and communicate interculturally and by nourishing their capacity for tolerance.L. reflection was also found to remain at a superficial level (Bean & Stevens. and learn to use digital technology effectively for delivering curriculum. This definition encompasses many of the attributes commonly associated with behaviorism. Hatton and Smith (1995) maintain that education students can learn the habit. 118). How We Think (1933). Dewey stressed that reflection involves communication within a “social context and world” (p. NEED FOR REFLECTIVE THINKING John Dewey raised the issue in his book. physiological) brought about as a result of experiences and interactions with content or other people (Siemens. Walters et al. digital technology and social justice issues. In a study exploring the use of "scaffolded reflection" with student teachers. He defined reflective thought as “active. p. Thorough writing. and constructivism – namely. The development of reflective skills. 215). understanding and appreciation of multiple perspectives. individuals create new meaning that leads to growth and the ability to take informed actions. 2004). However. despite the widespread belief that they are slow to understand and value the benefits of reflection. and transforming a cultural experience into a digital artifact. learning as a lasting changed state (emotional. PURPOSE As university educators. then. remains a key component in most teacher education curricula today. reflection.

118). They tell stories. pp. feelings. encouraging a self- awareness of attitudes and beliefs over time (Collier. Reflective journals are a kind of “annotated chronological record or a ‘log’ of experiences and events” (Wellington. turning experience into learning (Boud. an animate protagonist who engages in the situation for a purpose. fourth. to compose and reflect on their thoughts. they convey to others a problem or set of problems. essays and portfolios. It is by using these four steps that the brain works 213 . which are constructed through the process of reflection on experience (Blocher. Reflective writing includes self-assessment and pushes the writer to deeper self-knowledge (Davis & Waggert. the aftermath. people have related and reflected on their experiences in exactly the same way. p. finding patterns and meaning. Reflective skills may best be developed when education students learn how to express their thoughts. reflection allows educators to inform. showing attitudes of open-mindedness. From the very beginning of human history. 1990. may be better vehicles for reflection than diaries or journals. memorable. responsibility. and a sequence with implied causality during which the predicament is resolved (Scholes. and shareable” (Olson. 14). including journals. These documents assist students through the articulation of emerging thoughts. 2008). 2000. second. education students have used various written media. and whole-heartedness (Noffke & Brennan. confront and reconstruct and to answer such questions as “What do I want to do? What does this mean? How did I come to be this way? How might I view/do things differently?” NARRATIVE AS VEHICLE FOR REFLECTION Narratives. Reflective action is bound up with persistent and careful consideration of practice in the light of knowledge and beliefs. experiences and attitudes related to teaching. third. Stories have a specific syntactic structure: beginning-middle-end or situation-transformation-situation and must contain three basic elements: a situation that involves a conflict or predicament. 1999). 1981). Traditionally. and account for experience through stories. The Examined Life Reflection on events leads to re-evaluation of experience: seeking relationships. the steps (actions) taken to solve them. “Narrative structures. relating new ideas to prior knowledge. According to Francis (1995). in other words. however. 2001. p. 1988). Individuals can explain. the resolution (problem meets possible solution) and. First. 2000). provide a format into which experienced events can be cast in the attempt to make them comprehensible. understand. 100–101).

This has become an important teaching and learning technique in American classrooms. 2013). not as a separate component (Robin. Technology is to be viewed as an integral part of teaching. 2006). language. 2008). Currently. Digital storytelling is a useful approach to multi-media based educational technology since young people already are familiar with the YouTube-like end product. M. ethnicities and nationalities and from unique populations in the U. 2008. DIGITAL STORYTELLING FOR EDUCATION STUDENTS For the past several years. The resulting knowledge becomes one’s own (Boase. 2008) The combination of powerful. create and present digital stories. 2002). Learning and Culture at Texas A&M University have been requiring their students to write. (Robin. we are witnessing dramatic growth in the educational use of digital storytelling. instructors in the Department of Teaching. the digital storytelling process is not very complicated and can be learned in a relatively short time period (Lasica. we learn from an event or encounter. 214 . behavior. as a convergence of affordable technologies interacts with a contemporary agenda for today’s classroom. 2005). Through narrative. Among the objectives of this course are developing an understanding of the concepts and realities of culture and recognizing how it is manifested in thought. but technology alters or rewires our brains. yet affordable. The digital storytelling technique has been used in a variety of courses. 2004).L. values and daily life of the student him/herself and in peoples from diverse races. and distilling it into a symbolic form to be expressed and remembered (Davis. Moreover. declaring what it means. to make sense of the world we experience and create (Szurmak and Thuna. Storytelling may mimic our brain’s functions. technological hardware and software meshes perfectly with the needs of many of today’s classrooms. Walters et al. but it has been most often assigned to students in sections of “Cultural Foundations of Education. 2005) into the digital story. The tools we use define and shape our thinking (Siemens. an effective way to deliver curriculum. by reflecting upon it. where the focus is on providing students with the skills they will need to “thrive in increasingly media-varied environments” (Riesland. 4). The ancient narrative art of cave walls and campfires has been re-shaped by the modern tools of technology (Lathem.S.” This is a required course for the degree of Master of Education in Curriculum and Instruction. This type of assignment is designed to enable education students to meaningfully use technology in their own classrooms.

video. rather means must be specified to demonstrate that particular kinds of reflecting are taking place. There is feedback from the instructor to all students. Cultural Foundations is a multimodal and interactive course. write and utilize technology. 2005). They called for scholars to move beyond self-reports to the identification of ways in which reflective processes can be evidenced. & Qi. videos. the university’s online platform. which requires critical awareness of the meaning they wish to convey. magazines and books. Unlike oral stories that are subject to varying interpretations and emphasis. digital stories become permanent artifacts that capture a specific moment in time. 2006). Responses are posted and graded in eCampus. that is. to enable student to teach and work effectively in a culturally pluralistic society. All share a common goal. and standing as objects for personal reflection and critique and for sharing with an audience (Lathem. authors must reflect on experience (Barrett. They must also select the parts of the story they believe to be important and to sequence images that support the message of the text. Along with lectures. 215 . students are provided with a wealth of materials. and in-service teachers who are seeking a Master’s degree to advance their knowledge and/or their professional opportunities. without full-time classroom experience. music and text. The Examined Life There are two types of students in this class. one telling of an experience. organize information. Most importantly. it is not sufficient to assert that reflection is encouraged by a procedure or technique. Constructing a digital story requires individuals to sift through their memory for turning points and meaningful experiences. Research indicates that the digital story provides such an instrument. readings from texts. It typically is 3-5 minutes in length and composed of a mix of images. CONSTRUCTING A DIGITAL STORY AS A NARRATIVE A digital story is based on a meaningful personal experience. preservice teachers who receive a Bachelor’s degree in education or a content area and enter the Master’s program. using whatever medium is most available and appropriate. with the narrative written and spoken by the author. with prompts provided by the instructor. newspapers. Reyes. podcasts and PowerPoint presentations that enable the class to examine socio-cultural forces that influence the American educational system. which also is the goal for the course. Each assignment includes an online discussion. academic journals. Instructors also provide movies. As Hatton and Smith (1992) noted.

” On a personal level. A 7-to-10- page paper was an original assignment. Walters et al. along with providing some background about the culture or group into which they were “plunging. The expectation is that this will the make preservice teacher more appreciative of the diversity to be found in a future classroom. opinions and behaviors related to culture. it offered the participant the prospect of increasing self-awareness and self-confidence and of gaining insight into personal values.L.” “transformative” and even “life changing. experience what it would be like to be different. The assignment was designed to give the student the opportunity to gain insight into the culture and characteristics of another group in a authentic and real- world setting and to experience what it is like to be “different” or “other. THE CULTURAL PLUNGE In this class.” an immersion experience that exposes them to persons or groups from a culture markedly different from their own. The students were to answer the questions above.” Most of the students in the course found the cultural plunge to be an excellent assignment. M. Examples of a cultural plunge include attending a worship service of a different religion. learning how others live. biases. attending a seven- step meeting.” “eye-opening. The cultural plunge requires the student to step outside of his/her way of life and experience something new. working for a day in a soup kitchen. The purpose is to understand other groups.” 216 . particularly your students and colleagues? How do you think it will impact you as a classroom teacher? There are two assessments related to the cultural plunge. already on the syllabus when the researcher/instructors took over their sections of the course. Based on the assumption that students are taking the class to increase their understanding of the impact of culture on the educational process. or participating in a social gathering for deaf adults. work. In course evaluations. each student was to consider the following questions: What did you expect? What did you find? What did you learn? How did this make you feel? Did it impact the way you view your own culture and the culture of others? How will this experience affect how you teach and interact with others. When reflecting on his/her cultural plunge. and responses to a new and unfamiliar environment. worship or socialize and then share the findings and the feeling with others in the class. this social/cultural awareness project requires each individual to enter a new environment and participate in some activity that is beyond the scope of his/her own culture. students are required to take a “cultural plunge. realize pre-existing biases and gain insights into personal attitudes. they called it “amazing.

a free software program for capturing and editing audio. the instructors decided to add a digital story to the research paper as an assessment of the cultural plunge. “The digital story project provides a context for sharing experiences and an opportunity for thinking about identity. situations. 5). they recorded their stories. which is uniquely the creator’s. O’Leary. related 217 . Digital storytelling requires a structure and process through which authors construct meaning from cultural experiences (Vigotsky. no explanation of what the experience meant. Most students used Audacity. and insights (Chun. The end result. narrated by the student. p. digital authors shape personal understanding and individual subjectivity. Though writing. thereby giving deep dimension and vivid color to characters. THE DIGITAL PROJECT The digital storytelling writing task required students in the Cultural Foundations of Education course to compose a 200-500-word narrative in first person present tense to answer the questions associated with the cultural plunge. ethnicity. which clearly was a disappointment to the instructors. is a very compact. The blending of text. There was little to no reflection. music. The recorded narrative. and the audio track to narrate a digital storytelling. After students completed the writing task. meaningful reflection of the author’s experience. with some background thrown in for context. p. 2007). 2009. The project forced the student to be very intentional with every word used in the script and every visual chosen to illustrate the story. their claims of a new cultural awareness produced by the plunge were not reflected in their papers. combine to convey a perspective. and culture” (Weis. 32). 2002. After much consideration. Meadows (2003) called digital stories “tales told from the heart" whereby individuals produce their own meanings and develop and present their own ideas to the real world. Benmayor. Eynon. Bishop asserts that engaging in digital and multimodal design provides “a compositional space for … teachers to prepare for the authoritative discourses that they will likely encounter in schools by fostering an increased awareness of the cultural multiplicity they bring to the design and production of texts” (Bishop. Digital stories derive their power through weaving images. 1978). and sharing stories with an audience. reflection. which tended to be a report of the experience (Where did I go? Who was there with me? How did I get there? What did I do?). with the help of a lab assistant. narrative and voice together. The Examined Life Unfortunately. and cannot be achieved by the written text alone. visual images.

designed to dazzle. 2007).L. to the visual clips. visualize and reflect on the storytelling. called a storyboard. that provided a step-by-step guide to the technical construction process for making digital stories in the most popular software programs. personal narration adds drama. This rubric was designed by the instructors and a graduate assistant and used to grade the digital story projects. Occasionally backed by appropriate music or sound effects. To construct the digital story. and informative story (Chung. or given the option to use a digital storyboard in Microsoft Word format. 218 . as a tool to plan the sequence of the scenes and the interaction of the narrative and visual components. M. imagery. and focus the story and the timing in several key frames. students were steered away from fancy image effects or slide transitions. Students were provided with a storyboard template. They also showed examples of digital stories designed by other preservice teachers. including Windows Movie Maker and I-Movie. 2007). Students were given the choice to draw images. The primary consideration in the selection of the visuals was the meaning of the story. including handouts. make adjustments in the pre-production phase of the digital process. engaging. students were required to use a graphic organizer. Emphasis was placed on selecting images that extended the meaning of the narrative and supported the structural development of the story. A storyboard looks like a comic strip with a series of empty rectangular boxes for the visuals and blank lines beneath each box for dialogue that is to be spoken when the visual is on the screen. Walters et al. It allows the creator to brainstorm with others. to illustrate how recorded narrative links to visual representations to extend the meaning of words. Spoken in a conversational style. personal narration added greater authentic and emotional substance to the story. established the framework for the digital story and shifted narrative writing into the digital environment. the storyboard is the place to plan what media to use and how they might best work together to depict an important. Chung (2006. In other words. rather than integrate appropriately to achieve cohesion (Chung. as shown in Appendix A. 2007) states that the storyboard is a planning tool that helps students efficiently organize the development or evolution of a story and keeps the story focused in terms of timing. and emphasis (Chung. Students were also provided with a rubric as a guide to the project requirements. Each instructor provided the students with multiple materials. 2007). audio. or locate appropriate images on the Internet using key word searches. and music. use personal photographs and video.

but only the digital stories were examined for this study. creativity and technology use into the assignment. enabling the teacher to function more effectively in a multicultural classroom. the students in the class shared their cultural stories. Rubric criteria evaluated digital stories based on incorporating skills of narrative writing. reflection. The research papers and the digital stories were analyzed using a rubric designed by one of the researchers (Appendix A). not well- written stories about a meaningful personal event (Green. After constructing their digital videos. 2011). students were asked the following open-ended questions in a survey: What did you expect? What did you find? What did you learn? How did this make you feel? Did it impact the way you view your own culture and the culture of others? How will this experience affect how you teach and interact with others. METHOD OF DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS The initial Cultural Plunge assignment required students to submit an 8-to- 10-page research paper with at least five references that focused on the cultural group the student visited and contained a personal reflection about how the experience impacted their cultural understanding. rather than concentrating on effective narrative writing. lots of interesting images running in quick succession. however. 2011). Initial showing of digital stories and discussion of the technical construction process seemed to lead students to imitate the examples and to focus on locating images or photographs. Based on experience from the pilot project. technical support staff. available to be viewed and considered by the author and to serve as evidence of the impact of the experience on cultural understanding and personal growth. The Examined Life Students in a pilot project indicated that the handout served as an excellent guide to the construction and publishing process. it was determined that discussion of technology and the digital construction process should not occur until the narrative writing task was completed (Green. instructor and a graduate assistant. In addition. a personal reflection that focused on the students’ feelings about the experience and answering questions associated with the cultural plunge. The revised Cultural Plunge assignment required students to submit a 6-to-7-page research paper with at least five references that focused on the cultural group the students visited and a digital story. Now their stories were permanent reflective artifacts of the culture plunge. The resulting projects were slide shows. with the help and feedback of classmates. particularly your students and colleagues? How do you think it will impact you as a classroom teacher? How did you feel about creating a digital story? How do you feel about sharing your 219 .

RAISING CULTURAL SENSITIVITY THROUGH THE CULTURAL PLUNGE The cultural plunge assignment evolved over several terms. I want to learn more about different cultures as well and visit different countries to experience things firsthand. using the emergent coding method to establish themes prevalent in the responses. Said another of her plunge as a volunteer at the Special Olympics: I look forward to my students sharing their different cultures with one another and making my classroom a more multicultural environment. RAISING PERSPECTIVE CONSCIOUNESS Results of the study conducted by the authors indicate that transforming the cultural plunge experience into a digital narrative increased the education students’ level of perception consciousness. They should be replaced with Students in the Cultural Foundations class noted that that the experience gave them a sense of “otherness” young people from different cultures must feel as they enter the classroom. The themes fell into three categories: Raising Cultural Sensitivity. instructor directions. digital technology. Education and Diversity. M. we elected to conduct a qualitative research study to investigate whether constructing digital stories. submitted by the 36 students in two sections of the Cultural Foundations of Education course in Fall. based on a cultural plunge. Given our interest in cultural sensitivity. and sounds 220 . related to the digital story project.L. supporting materials and evaluation mechanisms. 2013. Said one preservice teacher who visited a Hindu temple: I’ve learned that I need to be more culturally sensitive in my classroom in order for students that have come from different countries to feel welcomed. words. as they enhanced their words by combining them with images and audio tracks and made choices about how an audience would respond to the combination of images. could develop the reflective capabilities of education students about diversity. Walters et al. digital story with others? What were the differences between writing a paper and creating a digital story about your cultural plunge? Three of the researchers examined the open-ended questions. and the process of teacher reflection. We can learn a lot from each other and this cultural plunge and digital story has given me new eyes to see all of that. learning objectives. each one bringing more refinements in the available technology. Raising Perspective Consciousness.

I do think the digital story will impact the way I teach and relate to students. One of her classmates agreed. Perspective consciousness refers to individual awareness that a person’s view of the world is not shared universally. Research reported here shows that digital storytelling contributes to this process. An in-service teacher in the class took her “plunge” at the Turkish Silk Road festival. that an individual’s worldview is a matter of conscious opinions and ideas. Other students noted that the digital story allowed them to reflect on and analyze their attitudes and behaviors related to culture and the classroom. I may not have gotten as much as I did from the 221 . customs and values different from their own. subconscious evaluations. analyze what happened. I am one of “those” people who stick to what they know and customs that they know. 2007). saying: The digital story helped because it forced me to reflect on the experience. The process of transforming a personal narrative into a digital story. Teachers must learn to reflect on and look at phenomena and events from different perspectives in order to encourage respect and appreciation for beliefs. This activity has shown me what my English Language Learners feel like when surrounded by children of American descent. Through this experience I learned that I have a very blocked view of things I know nothing about. conceptions and unexamined assumptions is an important part of the education process (Hanvey 1982). the feelings and emotions that they must experience as they walk into my classroom for the first time wondering what to expect and why we do the various things. through reflection and reevaluation. She said. Teaching children of different ethnic backgrounds is completely different for me than to be surrounded by only people of one background. Realization. through reflection. and reflect on my feelings towards the experience. She revealed how the experience created her new perspective consciousness. led to praxis and extended students’ level of perspective consciousness and global understanding. Creating a memoir of your personal feelings to reflect on can help remind you of what you felt and is something you can come back to as your cultural awareness increases over the years. but shaped by influences often escaping conscious detection (Hanvey 1982). giving the experience a “deeper meaning”: I believe the act of reflection is invaluable to something so personal as this assignment. The Examined Life (Murnen. I had to mentally re-live the experience. If I had not done the digital story.

For the vast majority of people in the world. diverse. 2004). views and expressed through and by the media: television. Many scholars have noted that culture is like an iceberg because so much of it is invisible or unobservable. economic and social status. the successful completion of the project gave them a sense of empowerment and increased their self-confidence. experience. In fact. 2003). There continues to be an ever-increasing disparity between the diverse student population in the United State and the predominantly White teaching force (Steeley. other than personal experience. M. many students struggled to be able to discuss culture explicitly and were challenged by trying to situate themselves in the larger socio-cultural context. But. 2003). The number of K-12 students from culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds continues to increase exponentially (Major & Brock. and social media. “The digital story allowed me to look back at my fear and see how it was overcome to make me a stronger person. Teachers must learn to reflect on and look at phenomena and events from different perspectives in order to encourage respect and appreciation for 222 . Stepping into the unknown environment and using an unknown technology to make a digital story was not an easy experience for the students in the Cultural Foundations class. EDUCATION AND DIVERSITY Many strong people will be needed to educate children in the complex. The digital stories included in this study illustrated this analogy. an important first step in preparing them for the challenges of their future work as teachers in our increasingly diverse society.L. among others. globalized environment in which we find ourselves today. However. these include ethnicity. Walters et al.” said one student of her video. direct involvement in life beyond the local community is infrequent or non-existent. middle-class women (Ference & Bell. Even so. ethnicity and social class. I would not have reflected and analyzed my thoughts and feelings as much. can shape perspectives. Many factors. the minorities are expected to the majority in the United States. by 2042. but will be teaching students increasingly different from themselves in terms of race. newspaper. Female European-American teachers will thus continue to comprise the greatest proportion of educators for some time to come. the Internet. monolingual. most students entering the field of teaching continue to be White. religion. creation of digital stories increased awareness of culture and promoted reflection on student's individual values and beliefs.

I will tell my students it’s not fair to hate every Muslim person because of the actions some committed. customs and values different from their own if they are to function successfully in a diverse classroom. learn more about current events and the rest of the world. In fact. From these statements we learned that the Cultural Plunge digital story assignment leads education students to see culture. thus creating additional forms of access to school-valued literacy practices. values. Cross-cultural awareness aids in correcting misunderstandings and fosters cooperation. The Examined Life beliefs. as well as outward. 2010). The education students whose digital stories we studied here were willing to admit how much they needed to learn about the world and its cultures. they become cognitively stimulated and feel they must make sense of the new information 223 . It forces you to pay attention to those details of life. as the students learned about themselves and how their own culture had affected their attitudes. As Edward T. a “global citizen. as one said. She said. Several said they wanted to travel. too. with new eyes. one of the most effective ways to learn about oneself is by taking seriously the cultures of others. 2010). to become. Achieving such aims means that university educators must provide the means by which these teachers can become good global citizens who are culturally sensitive. forming culturally sensitive individuals who can face everyday challenges of a society characterized by a culturally diverse. said one. Hall explained in his book. The Silent Language (1959). I've discovered that my perception of Muslim people in general to be scary and suspicious was absolutely wrong. And the eyes were turned inward. and interconnected world from multiple perspectives (Focho. which differentiate them from you. THE VALUE OF THE CULTURAL PLUNGE Cultural Plunge projects widen the range of modes available to students. they are one of the most gracious and peaceful people I’ve met. multilingual. personally reflective and conscious of planet- wide issues. perceptions and behaviors. Often when students become aware of new subject matter. is the ability of teachers to examine their own values and attitudes and to develop knowledge and skills so that they can participate in a global community and disparate classroom (Focho. that they had held to stereotypes and misinformation about different peoples. Critical.” The preservice teacher who attended a service at a mosque believes she is prepared to do this.

concepts and visual representations and using them to build their own arguments. 1991).L. Exposing them to new ideas. In higher education. caused by being the “other” and dealing with elements of a culture that is not their own. although born of another or dynamically stimulated by another. until the new information can be assimilated and accommodated. 2008). Now I feel much more confident in my delivery on the lesson as well as more eager to learn along with my students. 346). metaphors. Schunk. 2003). puts education students in a state of cognitive disequilibrium. which offered unique angles on or ways of approaching their topic (Ranker. gradually the students come to regard themselves as committed to change of behavior and of perspective. In addition.” taking other people’s words. while at the same time motivating them to fully engage in the process of ideological becoming. They have become more open in discussing discrimination as well as the importance of not staying silent. approaches. such as plunging into and reflecting upon a Shabbat service at a local synagogue. 2002. They are in a state of cognitive disequilibrium (Gregoire. is “an intense struggle within us for hegemony among various available verbal and ideological points of view. They also begin to connect the 224 . Evoking new challenges. images and technologies also can change the way they think about the world and their place in it. McNamara. directions and values” (2002. He explains further: “One’s own discourse and one’s own voice. M. 2007). Researchers suggest that cognitive disequilibrium facilitates further reflection and can lead to conceptual change. which. will sooner or later begin to liberate themselves from the authority of the other’s discourse” (p. 2005). Walters et al. Tasks. the awareness stage of reflection and the following cognitive stimulation stage can be encouraged when instructors present their university students with tasks such as creating a digital story from their Cultural Plunge assignment. giving them ownership of the project (Bakhtin. but only if the students are properly motivated (Bendixen & Rule. followed by new understandings. & VanLehn. according to Bakhtin. this project gave the participants opportunities to understand and explore their topic through multiple media. 348). themes and theses. and thus stimulating them to reach comprehension (Graesser. p. Said one participant: This assignment has already impacted my classroom by allowing me to teach with a better understanding of the Jewish faith…. This also provides students with opportunities for “ideological becoming. 2004. Murnen.

CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS Digital storytelling can play a major role in the education of today’s students because it utilizes almost all of the skills and literacies students are expected to have in the 21st century. A digital story project provides a context for sharing experiences with others and an opportunity for thinking about self. interconnected world from multiple perspectives (Focho. 2011). Writing a personal narrative. 225 . and come to value digital technologies as tools for thinking. learn to understand the relationship between words and images to convey meaning. The stories allowed students to reflect on past experience and to be present as individuals within a community of learners. Wang. 2011). 2010). thinking about a meaningful personal experience. forming citizens who can face everyday challenges of a society characterized by a culturally diverse. learning. Rakes and Casey (2002) suggest that technology training in teacher education is often thought of as skill acquisition instead of a change process that affects the behavior of individuals and provides students with effective methods to transfer strategies into the classroom. and as a strategy for integrating digital technology in the classroom. Cross-cultural awareness aids in correcting misunderstandings and fosters cooperation inside the school and across the globe. Results also indicated that participating in the digital storytelling project increased their understanding of the connection between the planning process in the text-based environment and the planning process in the digital environment and of the relationship between words and images to convey meaning (Green. Results indicated that the students valued the digital storytelling project as a model for teaching the writing process in the digital environment. Green. Education students develop planning skills. The contention is that. students will enhance their “digital. by developing the reflective abilities needed to create a digital story of a cultural plunge. and sharing ideas as they construct digital stories. as a method for self-expression and for sharing stories within a community of learners. multilingual. to be effective as tools for political and social activism. teachers will develop the ability to function successfully in a multicultural classroom and an interconnected world. Through the creation of cultural stories and the use of digital media. & Walters. and sharing a digital story within a community of learners helped students in the graduate course develop a greater sense of personal identity and voice (Walters. The Examined Life personal with larger public issues. global.

“Focus has to be placed on learning with the technology rather than learning from or about the technology” (p. 259–422). not an add. In M. H. T. Scaffolding reflection for preservice and inservice teachers.” Further. Discourse in the novel.). digital storytelling can be used with all the disciplines and. (2002). And not just in the language arts classroom. n.. M. 205–218.pdf Bean.d. organization. 3(2). across the curriculum. not just tacked on as a three-hour elective. (2002).” And. 226 . Young and Figgins (2002) and Young and Bush (2004) emphasized the potential technology holds for teacher empowerment and school reform when addressed as a part of teacher education. Austin. interview. through the process of creating their narratives and producing their own digital story (Meridien.L. who together with the teachers we trained in our own classrooms. writing. (2005). and information literacies. As Kajder (2003) wrote. 9) and the digital storytelling project is much more than just the acquisition of technology skills. there are important ways in which we can use it to support and enhance our teaching practices—the key to which is developing a critical perspective that informs our pedagogical approach. Retrieved on January 2. Trans. Keifer (1991). presentation. are hard at work creating their own unique educational stories. TX: University Texas Press. Researching and evaluating digital storytelling as a deep learning tool. problem-solving. and assessment skills” will be improved as well.on. “and I must be there to meet my students. Walters et al. Holquist (Ed. like technology itself. The REFLECT Initiative. M. The dialogic imagination: Four essays (pp. Barrett.). 2007 from http://helenbarrett. Although technology alone may not be the saving grace of education. interpersonal. technology.. as teacher educators. Reflective Practice.” said one of the individuals in the class. Technology should be entwined with pedagogy and content in all education courses. M. & Stevens. students’ “research. REFERENCES Bakhtin. should be an add-in. It is a change process that affects the behavior of education students as they experience reflective writing and learn to tell stories in the digital environment. visual. have we improved the lives of children. The digital storytelling project demonstrates how to teach writing and provides them with an effective method to transfer these new strategies into the classroom. L. technology. “Technology is the future of education.com/ portfolios/ SITEStorytelling2006. we should be able to ask: Have we authored our own work in such a way that lives have changed for the better? Most importantly.

html&SM=researchsub. a review of the potential for digital storytelling. Characteristics of reflective thought during the student teaching experience. 90. edu/pt3/?Page=papers. (2004). NY: American Council of Learned Societies. N. J. 2010 from http://resources. Ference. (2011). Using journal writing to enhance reflective practice. Biddle.S. & Bell. Journal of Teacher Education. 17–22. Teaching the writing process through digital storytelling in preservice education (Doctoral dissertation). The place of story in the study of teaching and teacher education. Educational Psychologist. (2008). AutoTutor. (1995). Educational Psychologist. 31–50. S. J.Boase. (1970). 2010 from http://www. Scaffolding deep comprehension strategies through Point & Query. Chung. 50(3).com/uncategorized/bishop-2009-html/ Blocher.. 2007 from http://www. Chesapeake. & Clandinin..uk/tli/lets/projects/pathfinder/index. and iSTART. R. Retrieved September 10. Digital storytelling for reflection and engagement. Pedagogy of the oppressed. 11(3). Equity and Excellence in Education. K. (2005). (2010). Educational Researcher. Davis. 37. New York. S. 343–350. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education. (1999). 1–17). The International Journal of Arts Education. Heath.handle.1/ETD -TAMU-2011-05-9416 227 .). (2004). Language as tool for a global education: Bridging the gap between the traditional and a global curriculum. Texas A&M University. Report produced as part of the Phase 1 of The Higher Education Academy/JISC Higher Education e-Learning Pathfinder Program (pp. D. 69–80. 3(1). Connelly. Freire. Internationalization: Rhetoric or reality. Inc.net/1969. Art education technology: Digital storytelling. (Eds. Society for Information Technology and Teacher Education. 135–148.ac. 2008. A cross-cultural immersion in the U.cfm Boud. In K. Preservice teacher discourses: Authoring selves through multimodal compositions. (1990). A. & VanLehn. 173–181. M. 2–14.4 Boase. Stories of experience and narrative inquiry. G. Proceedings of society for information technology & teacher education international conference 2008 (pp. Retrieved September 6. Educational Researcher. TX. J. & Rule. The reflective journal: A window to preservice teachers’ practical knowledge. Chung. 18. How we think. 60(2). M. McFerrin et al. VA: AACE. 225–234. An integrative approach to personal epistemology: A guiding model. NY: D. Journal of Research in Innovative Teaching.: Changing preservice teachers attitudes toward Latino ESOL students. M. (2006). McNamara. (2002). Texas. Collier.. Retrieved from http//hdl. (2007). D. S. Carter.org/p/27286. Graesser. 19(5). Digital storytelling and reflective assessment... 4(1). M. 5–12. 40(4). L. & Waggett. (2001). New York. 33–50. Green. 892–901). D. C.. Francis. C. D. Focho.html Dewey. S. Teaching & Teacher Education.glos. 229–241. (2009). 1(1).uvm. A. D. (2008). NY: The Continuum International Publishing Group.. 39(1). Enhancing preservice teachers’ reflective practice via technology competencies and e-portfolio development. Retrieved April 1. S. P.digital culture andeducation. 2014 from http://www. The Examined Life Bendixen. Retrieved September 10. Bishop. New York. (2006). (1993). (1933). Digital storytelling in integrated arts education. 9–18. 22(1). Digital Culture & Education. Art Education.editlib. K.

org/ojr/lasica/1034121182. April 15. (2003). An attainable global perspective. Fostering positive dispositions toward diversity: Dialogical explorations of a moral dilemma. Educational Psychology Review. (Eds. (1995). C. (2007). & Alterio. 30(4). Gregoire. (2003). Selfe (Eds. Lewis.ojr. An analysis of teacher concerns toward instructional technology. Narrative thought and narrative language (pp.edu/ijet/v3n1/rakes/index. Keifer. Digital tools easier to grasp. (2006). M. 2006 Noffke. Teacher Education Quarterly. E. The dimensions of reflection: A conceptual and contextual analysis. 2007 from http://www. 2014 from http://www. Urbana. M. uvm. Proceedings of society for information technology and teacher education international conference 2006 (pp. USC Annenberg Online Journalism Review. Teaching & Teacher Education. (2003). D. Hatton. Is it a challenge or a threat? A dual-process model of teachers’ cognition and appraisal processes during conceptual change. IL: National Council of Teachers of English and Computers and Composition. The tech-savvy English classroom.).html Lathem. In B.about. 2014. M. S. 33–49.. 410–422. Pellegrini (Eds. 162–167. Kajder.edu/ pt3/?Page=papers. from About. T. S. (1988. (2002). Retrieved May 3. S.. Hall. K. 2014 from http://www. New York.meridianstories. J. Britton & A. (2005. (n. Lasica. Computers and teacher education in the 1990s and beyond. M. R. (1959). 99–112). London: Kogan Page. Paper presented at the American Educational Research Association. Theory into Practice.. 11(1).htm Major. Retrieved on April 20.uiuc. VA: AACE. Hawisher & C. 2012 from http://americanreadingforum.com/od/ professionaldevelopment/a/self_ reflection. J. (2003). Thinking about narrative. Portland.). H.com.. it’s important to reflect. J. Reflection in teacher education: Towards definition and implementation. Society for Information Technology and Teacher Education. Meadows. Meridien Stories: Research on Digital Storytelling: Summary of Studies from the University of Houston. March). 21(3). A. & Brennan. Rakes. J. & Smith. The value of self-reflection: Any time of year. Olson. Digital storytelling: Research-based practice in new media.. (1990).com/teachers-section/ research-on-digital-storytelling-summary-of-studies-from-the-university-of-houston Murnen. G.org. 2014 from http://www. In C. C. 189–193. (1991). Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy. et al. R. Literacy autobiography: Digital storytelling to capture student voice and reflection. Hanvey.html Ranker.d. American Reading Forum. Hillsdale. The silent language. S. N. LA. (2003). & Brock. Phoenix. International Journal of Educational Technology. L. Retrieved on April 20. The digital video documentary: Engaging students in ideological becoming. McDrury. Crawford.L. Chesapeake. April). 700–704). Reyes. 2(2). http://k6educators.). (1982).. 15(2). 228 . D. D. (ERIC document ED 296968). ME: Stenhouse Publishers. 3(1).ed. (2008). AZ. & Qi. Making meaning on the screen: Digital video production about the Dominican Republic. 147–179.. 51(5). Evolving perspectives on computers and composition studies (pp.). org/yearbook/yearbooks/03_yearbook/pdf/Murnen. 7–27. Learning through storytelling in higher education. Leeman & Ledoux. html&SM= researchsub. NJ: Erlbaum. Retrieved. Retrieved April 18. (2002). & Casey. B. Digital storytelling and professional development: New media for ancient tradition. E. NY: Anchor Books. E. In G. Retrieved on September 10. Walters et al. 117–131).pdf Nieto. J. New Orleans. K.php Lathem. Visual Communication.

Retrieved April 4. T. & Eynon. Young. L. Issues in Teacher Education 37–52. 2014 from http://www. (2002). Action. and anti-narrative. B.cfm   Lynne Masel Walters Department of Teaching.. J. 2014 from http://www. (2011). 59–68. (1991). R.. On narrative (pp. J. 200–208). 2014 from http://www. Digital technologies and pedagogies. M. 43–49. Chicago. Language. (2004). Theory into Practice. 47. 4(1). In W. NY: Continuum. 1–22. Office of the Provost Texas A&M University 229 . Retrieved April 28. (2013). C. Walters. The Q-folio in action: Using a web-based electronic portfolio to reinvent traditional notions of inquiry. T. D. L.org/acrl/sites/ ala.acrl/files/content/conferences/confsandpreconfs/2013/papers/SzurmakThuna_ TellMe.. IN. Weis. Digital storytelling: A powerful tool for the 21st century classroom. Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes.pdf Vygotsky. 3–10. Teacher Education. (2001). Benmayor. 34(1). (2004). Green Public Partneships and Outreach. Wang. White teachers’ learning about diversity and “otherness”: The effects of undergraduate international internships on subsequent teaching practices. & Bush. Mitchell (Ed. M. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education. 25(3). Teaching the English language arts with technology: A critical approach and pedagogical framework.org /vol2/iss2/english/article1. A. B. T. From heads to hearts: Digital stories as reflection artifacts of teachers’ international experience. Schunk. M. NY: Maxwell Macmillan International Publishing Group. The Examined Life Riesland. IL: University of Chicago Press. (2005). Cambridge. 2(1). Retrieved April 20. J. Connectivism: A learning theory for the digital age.. and portfolios. Language minority teacher preparation: A review of alternative programs. Green. Educational research: Contemporary issues and practical approaches. MA: Harvard University Press. Szurmak... Learning theories: An educational perspective. C. (2000). O’Leary. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education [Online serial]. (1981). L. G. & Walters. Visual literacy in the classroom. 29(4). New York.). Indianapolis.htm Robin.elearnspace. 220–228. Equity and Excellence in Education. (2008). research. A. New York. 2014 from http://www. D. Tell me a story: The use of narrative as a tool for Instruction..ala.citejournal. Roose...htm Steeley. (1978). & Figgins. narrative. A. C. Young. J. International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning. K. 2(2). Retrieved April 20.newhorizons. Learning and Culture College of Education and Human Development Texas A&M University Martha R. & Thuna. New horizons for learning. S. (2002).org/Articles/connectivism.org/strategies/literacy/riesland.org. 153–167 Wellington. E. (2003). 546–552. Scholes. Siemens. Social Justice.

Timothy Walters College of Education Ahmad Dahlan University. Walters et al. Learning and Culture College of Education and Human Development Texas A&M University 230 . Indonesia Liangyan Wang Department of Teaching. M.L.

and about incident nor possible project. significance of incident. interprets possible possible significance of significance of incident. significance of incident. APPENDIX A Rubric for grading cultural plunge assignment Evaluation Advanced Proficient Basic Needs improvement Category Content 1 Clearly describes key Describes key features of Somewhat describes key Does not describe key features Story Itself features of cultural plunge cultural plunge project. interprets are about the project. incident. identifies plunge experience. rationale for choice rationale evident for choice for choice of particular particular critical cultural of particular critical cultural of particular critical cultural critical cultural plunge plunge experience. (12-15 points) (8-11 points) (4-7 points) (1-3 points) (Continued) 231 The Examined Life . identifies what what initial beliefs are to identify what initial beliefs identify what initial beliefs are initial beliefs are about the about the project. clear rationale rationale for choice of project. attempts plunge experience. not clearly experience. features of cultural plunge of cultural plunge project. less project.

including or too slowly for the story and voice punctuation). different ways. different ways. beliefs on their emotions. Transitions. framing. The pacing (rhythm it is often noticeable that line or the audience. but of the storytelling to the story camera angles. consistently engaged. (9-10 points) (7-8 points) (5-6 points) (2-4 points) . M. Walters et al. thoughts. Reflection punctuation) fits the story reflection and learning that that shows how the cultural does not show how the cultural L. line and helps the audience shows how the cultural plunge experience impacted plunge experience impacted on really get into the story. beliefs and actions. and most importantly. audio. Rubric for grading cultural plunge assignment (Continued) 232 Evaluation Advanced Proficient Basic Needs improvement Category Content 2 The pace (rhythm and voice Reasonable evidence of Some evidence of reflection Little evidence of reflection. thoughts. line. and edits are appropriate to the subject matter. Audience is not presentation. do not distract from the video. or consideration of Considers cultural plunge cultural plunge experience in cultural plunge experience in experience in different ways. add to the flow of the video. beliefs and actions. incident. Some and actions. effects. plunge experience impacted on their emotions. evidence of reflection on Little evidence of reflection Reflects and draws on other other perspectives about on other perspectives about perspectives about incident. their emotions. or consideration of incident. thoughts. and lighting used to add and voice punctuation) is the pacing does not fit the to the overall impact of relatively engaging for the story line. audience. (9-10 points) (19-24 points) (13-18 points) (7-12 points) Voice Strong use of quality Occasionally speaks too fast Tries to use pacing (rhythm Little attempt to match the pace videography.

effects. video. camera angles. Some transitions. framing. and most matter. angles. and edits are audio. in composition and delivery. and strong evidence of and present some evidence of delivery. presentation. add to appropriate to the subject appropriate to the subject the flow of the video. skills. including videography. framing. framing. effects. and lighting critical thinking skills. and edits are appropriate audio. critical thinking skills. including camera and strong evidence of camera angles. do not distract video. (9-10 points) (7-8 points) (5-6 points) (2-4 points) Total Student UIN: Total Score: /75 Comments: 233 The Examined Life . little evidence of no evidence of critical thinking critical thinking skills. from the video. including videography. and lighting used to add and lighting used to add to used to impact the overall to the overall impact of the overall impact of the presentation. presentation. add to the flow of the importantly. Little to no transitions. videography. Videography/ Complete originality in Some elements of Very few elements of Little to no elements of Editing composition and delivery. (9-10 points) (7-8 points) (5-6 points) (2-4 points) Creativity Complete originality in Some elements are original Some elements are not Most elements are not original composition and delivery. audio. Most transitions. do not distract from the do not distract from the video. and edits are to the subject matter. critical thinking skills. original in composition and in composition and delivery. video. and most importantly. effects. and most importantly. add to the flow of the matter.

Teaching at Work. providing encouragement. Teaching is viewed as the ‘subject’ of scholarly inquiry with and through the ‘open classroom’ approach. All rights reserved. 35). and opening doors. DIANNE S. sharing. 235–250. MENTORING VIEWED THROUGH AN OPEN CLASSROOM EXPERIENCE INTRODUCTION This chapter explores the specific experience of a mentor and mentee as they participated in the Open Classroom program. 2012. Yaffe. Hammer (Eds. © 2015 Sense Publishers. Learning and Culture Department in the College of Education and Human Development at Texas A&M University provided the opportunity for an experienced faculty member to mentor a graduate student. The Open Classroom Program in the Teaching. Li & J. A mentor has been defined as one who facilitates professional and personal growth in an individual by sharing insights. MENTORING DEFINED Mentoring is “viewed as a relationship between two individuals. one of whom provides individualized instruction and generally helps in the professional development of the other” (Bender. and discussion of classroom instruction. & Sechrest. p. . The mentoring relationship is described and viewed from the perspectives of both the mentor and mentee. Critical to participation in the Open Classroom Program was the demonstration of desirable mentor attributes: Y. GOLDSBY AND MARY FIGUERO-CHARLES 12. Issues that developed during the semester of the mentorship are explored and important insight gained into ways to improve the effectiveness of the program for mentor.). a program designed to encourage observations of department classrooms by faculty and graduate students. “(Open Classroom document. 2014). The “’open classroom’ approach provided both teacher educators and graduate students alike more opportunities for observation. The chapter explores both the professional and personal dynamics of the relationship and makes recommendations for improvements in the program. mentee and the pre-service teachers enrolled in a mathematics methods course.

a movement from the status of understudy to that of self- directing colleague” (Healy & Welchert. 2012) • Able to offer experience. the emphasis is on the mentee’s desire to learn from this more experienced person. p. teaches. 2012). Generally the role of a mentor may be fulfilled by an advisor but this is not necessarily the case. 2000). Ehrich. 1988). (2012). 17) which aims at promoting the career development of both individuals was another characteristic of the relationship. wisdom and advice Healy & Welchert. Usually the primary role of advisors is to offer specific advice regarding the degree while the mentor works closely with the graduate student to strengthen his/her knowledge and skills needed for professional progress (Mansson & Myers. or the more experienced and established professional. 1995) • Encouraging. respectful of his/her subordinates. as one determined by the character of the relationship and its function and the context in which the mentoring relationships are found (Bender et al. encourages. as described by Winston and Polkosnik (1984). 236 . 2012) • Knowledgeable (Mansson & Myers. and develops a younger person” (p. GOLDSBY & M. The open classroom experience illustrated the idea of mentoring. Also the definition of mentoring by Healy and Welchert (1990) as a “dynamic. It is usually defined as a nurturing process in which a more experienced or skilled person acts as a role model. 2012) • Interested in helping (Anderson & Shannon. 1990). No matter the term used to describe this individual. guides.D. and preferring abstract concepts. S. as having characteristics such as people-orientation. Hansford and Tennent (2004) defined a mentor as referring to “a father figure who sponsors. open (Holley & Caldwell. Figuero-Charles • Accessible (Holley & Caldwell. This less experienced or skilled individual is working toward “an identity transformation. 17). reciprocal relationship in a work environment between an advanced career incumbent (mentor) and a beginner (protégé) …” (p. Gray and Gray (1985) cited Clawson (1979) in the description of the mentor. The mentee is sometimes referred to as a protégé who has the aspiration and potential to learn the skills a mentor can teach (Kalbfleisch. 1990. 1988) • Offering critical assessment (Luna &Cullen. 519). The protégé may begin to integrate the mentor’s approach into his or her work. In this particular interaction within the Open Classroom Program this non-advisor approach was taken. tolerant of ambiguity.. guides the less skilled or less experienced person to enable the mentee to develop (Anderson & Shannon.

motivator or promoter of realistic values. 536). role-model. 18) and to establish “this mutual exchange as a sine qua non of mentoring” (p. 17). counsellor. and self-evaluation while supporting the protégé’s attempts to organize new values into his or her value system” (Gray & Gray. supervisor. 1990). Healy and Welchert (1990) in their work on mentoring contrasted mentoring with supervising and teaching to clarify “the reciprocity in mentoring” (p. teachers. demonstrator or teacher. They identified critical issues for educational administrators to consider in planning and implementing formal mentoring programs: awareness of the increasing body 237 . 2004. the mentor “fosters discovery. 519). 18). sociologists. personal growth. p.. This was a different focus for many studies which had focused on the value of mentoring to the mentee. 1985. Gray and Gray (1985) developed a four phase formalized mentoring program to induct beginning teachers. Their structured analysis of the articles found that “mentoring has enormous potential to bring about learning. business. Thus. MENTORING VIEWED THROUGH AN OPEN CLASSROOM EXPERIENCE MENTORING IN EDUCATION Mentoring has been a strategy used for many years and has been used in the school reform movement (Healy &Welchert. It has been implemented in the training of nurses. Their work was a departure from other definitions “that frequently lack grounding in theory” (p. p. such as Odysseus as he entrusted his son to an elder named Mentor for education and guidance. They noted the major mentor functions or roles as situational leadership. creativity. and medicine from the mid-1980s to 2000 to make inferences about mentoring and its nature and outcomes. Mentoring was used by the ancient Greeks. Mentoring has been a significant part in the “teaching. psychologists. scientists. Their definition emphasized this reciprocity and noted an identity transformation by each party as career development was an aim of the relationship. and development for professionals” (p. learning. and educational administrators. inducting and developing the skills and talents of others” (Ehrich et al. business leaders. Ehrich and others (2004) examined over 300 research-based articles in mentoring across education. and promoter of indirect mentoring (learning form others). The mentor gradually helps the mentee or protégé to assume greater responsibilities and guides him/her to ensure he/she can succeed. Their work was among the first to study the mentoring relationship while it was developing as opposed to after the mentoring relationship had ended. 42). instructor or promoter of thinking sills.

S. In the studies reviewed. The observed class in the Open Classroom Program was to be a typical session in which another faculty member or graduate student could visit at a time convenient to both. While mentoring doctoral students is usually working with an advisor during the dissertation process. GOLDSBY & M. Mentoring programs for women and people of color have become an area of increased interest for investigation. Faculty members and graduate students attended and participated. Figuero-Charles of research literature on mentoring. The Mentoring Relationship and Its Roles In the Open Classroom Program it was important to delineate the roles of the mentor and mentee. For graduate students it was a required part of the graduate teaching assignment and allowed observation of what comprised a typical class session in a course they would teach and the appropriate strategies and techniques to implement in the course.. 2004). the need for mentor training. Thomas (1989) noted participation by minority populations in mentoring programs does not eliminate problems as race and gender misunderstandings can create incompatibility between mentors and mentees (as cited in Ehrich et al. the mentee was to participate in Brown Bag lunch sessions held on Fridays to discuss what he/she observed and the issues which were of concern to him/her. Edwards (1995) stated the introduction of formal mentoring programs into American organizations was to address affirmative action legislation. Only in educational studies had mentors and mentees considered reflection as a significant outcome. 244) as the mentor was not the dissertation advisor. In addition to the observation of the mentor’s classes. They supported Merriam’s (1983) claim that many mentoring program evaluations were just testimonials and opinions. focused on mentoring for practice or beginning teachers. the need for support at various levels. this experience provided “personal and professional support that extends beyond the traditional advising affiliation” (Holley & Caldwell. p. thoughtful selection of participants. Graduate students participating in the Open Classroom Program were required to attend 5 of the 7 Brown Bag sessions. nearly two-thirds of which were educational studies.D. 2012. This relationship was to be beneficial to the mentee 238 . and the need for ongoing evaluations. PURPOSE OF THE OPEN CLASSROOM PROGRAM The Open Classroom Program provided graduate students the opportunity to observe a faculty member in a typical class session without the “planned observation” constraints placed upon the situation.


and to the mentor. This table indicates the roles involved in the mentoring

Mentor Roles Mentee Roles
• Listen patiently • Listen patiently
• Build a relationship • Have a positive attitude
• Nurture self-sufficiency • Share with your mentor reasons
• Establish protected time for your decisions
together • Be prepared to learn from your
• Share yourself mentor
• Provide introductions • Actively seek advice from your
• Be constructive mentor and others both in and
• Don’t be overbearing out of your department
• Act on advice from your

Source: “Advisor, Teacher, Role Model, Friend.” National Academy of Sciences
Press, Washington D.C.

One of the most important roles a mentor can provide for graduate students
is clear and effective communication and honest feedback (Rose, 2003). Frank
discussions of the observations of the classroom were a required portion of
the program. In the Open Classroom Program each mentor evaluated the
graduate student assigned to his/her courses after the observations and made
a recommendation to the associate department chair for graduate studies
at the end of the semester regarding the work of the mentee. After each
observation, the mentor and mentee met to discuss the observations.


Faculty participating in the Open Classroom program volunteered to work
with graduate students assigned to teach undergraduate courses which the
faculty had previously taught. The mentoring experience was a required
one for the graduate student and necessitated observation of the mentor’s
classroom. In addition, the mentor was to observe the graduate student in the
classroom in which the graduate student was teaching. This dual observation
was to benefit both the mentor and mentee in establishing goals for the
experience and it would provide a basis for evaluation of the experience.
It was within this context that useful adjustments could be made to both


D. S. GOLDSBY & M. Figuero-Charles

the content and the delivery of that content. The mentor and mentee could
discuss classroom and instructional issues if they arose and determine the
appropriate course of action.
Mentoring is usually dependent upon the context in which it occurs and
thus varies, “reflecting the function it serves for the individuals involved”
(Yaffe & et al., 2012, p. 35). Instead of random visits by a doctoral student into
various classrooms, each graduate student involved in the Open Classroom
Program focused on observations of an experienced faculty member. It was
hoped that the program and mentor/mentee relationship would better prepare
the graduate students to teach the courses to which they were assigned. It was
additionally hoped that the mentoring of the graduate students would enhance
their graduate program experiences as “The cultivation of developmental
or mentoring relationships between graduate students and their professors
is a critical factor in determining the successful completion of graduate
programs” (Davidson & Foster-Johnson, 2001, p. 549).
The particular mentoring arrangement discussed in this chapter stemmed
from the assignment of the graduate student to teach sections of the same
mathematics methods course the faculty member was teaching. In this
particular instance, the faculty member suggested the graduate student
“shadow” her in her sections of the course and then replicate the activities and
content in the graduate student’s course sections. This procedure and process
had been followed with other graduate students in previous semesters. The
graduate student would observe the class, ask questions, discuss issues, and
then mimic the lessons with his/her”own take” on the material with possibly
different activities. The same textbook and syllabus were used for all sections
of the course. As the current graduate student had not taught an elementary
mathematics methods course before, she considered this to be an appropriate
and helpful course to follow.

Description of Course
The mathematics methods course is one of four methods undergraduate
courses preservice teachers take as a block during the semester before
student teaching. The four courses, mathematics methods, social studies
methods, science methods, and reading methods, are taught one day a
week with 75 minutes of face-to-face instructions in each course. Each pre-
service teacher is placed in a local elementary classroom for 8 hours per
day for two days each week. Uniform policies regarding course grading
scales, some common assignments and attendance are in place. The specific



course discussed here focuses on instructional strategies for the teaching
and learning of mathematics in grades K-6. Preservice teachers experience
the content through two perspectives, that of the elementary student and the
teacher. The hands-on activities and discussions are specifically tailored to
facilitate the pre-service teachers’ understanding of the classroom teacher’s
perspective and the elementary school student’s perspective. The preservice
teachers actively participate in the instructional activities and consider the
instructional issues such as questioning, pacing, explanation, and guidance
for the students. In addition to the allotted 75 minute instructional class
time, pre-service teachers complete weekly online modules which reference
readings and selected videos intended to supplement the in-class work.


The mentor, a clinical full professor, has been a faculty member in the
Teaching, Learning and Culture Department for 12 years, teaching sections of
the elementary mathematics methods course and middle grade mathematics
courses each year. The mentor had become the lead elementary mathematics
course instructor for the elementary methods course and as such worked
with other instructors to ensure a similar experience for all the elementary
mathematics methods sections. She was a former mathematics teacher in
middle and secondary classrooms in private and public schools, mathematics
coordinator for a preK-12 school for 10 years, and a mathematics consultant
for a school district. Her academic background and experiences provided
both mathematical content and pedagogical knowledge and skills necessary
for teaching the courses. It was a common occurrence for graduate doctoral
students to observe her courses in the semester prior to teaching sections
of the methods courses. Her goal was to help prepare the graduate students
to teach pre-service teachers in ways that would improve the learning and
understanding of mathematics in elementary classrooms.
The mentee was a middle school mathematics teacher. Unlike previous
mentees, the mentee was a classroom teacher for over 18 years. Her most
recent assignment prior to her enrolment at Texas A&M, was as an 8th Grade
mathematics teacher at a public school in a large urban area in Houston. The
mentee’s teaching career was extremely diverse. Before her appointment
at the middle school she was a 6th grade Gifted and Talented teacher at
an Engineering School in the same district for five years. She also taught
mathematics to 7th and 8th graders in an inner city school in Hartford,
Connecticut for three years, which according to the mentee, prepared her for


D. S. GOLDSBY & M. Figuero-Charles

her experiences in Houston. She was also a paid tutor at Oakwood University
in Huntsville, AL. The mentee was a general education teacher in Trinidad
and Tobago for a few years before migrating to the United States.


The Mentor’s View of the Mentoring Relationship
The relationship and personal connection that developed between the mentor
and mentee illustrated their commitment to professional and personal
success, a central aspect of the mentoring experience (Mansson & Myers,
2012). The mentor opened her classroom to the graduate student and spent
time explaining activities and materials to the mentee. Each week the mentee
would observe the classroom session and then she would deliver the same
material to her sections the following week. As her sections were taught
on Tuesday and the section she observed was taught on Thursdays, it was
necessary to re-arrange the course calendar to accommodate the delay in
teaching the observed concepts
The mentor found this Open Classroom experience to be different from
those with previous graduate students as it did not involve as extended a
time frame. Since this mentee had not observed the mentor’s classes the
semester before assuming responsibility for teaching the course, the mentor
felt the mentee was at a disadvantage. The mentor was concerned about how
the presentation of the material would be for the mentee to prepare. The
pedagogical methods for a methods course were somewhat different than for
a typical school classroom. The material was actually to be presented and
viewed from the perspectives of the elementary student and the pre-service
teachers. This dual perspective was necessary for the pre-service teachers to
have a full understanding of the pedagogical and content knowledge aspects
of the material. The mentee was also at a disadvantage because of her living
in Houston and being constrained by travel issues. This travel issue did not
allow for the flexibility necessary for scheduling needed meetings and at
times caused cancellation of scheduled meetings.
The mentor did connect with the mentee during the initial meeting and
felt comfortable sharing experiences with this teacher who understood
the dynamics of the classroom. Both the mentee and mentor had teaching
mathematics experiences in middle grade classrooms and both had entered the
doctoral program after years of teaching. Many discussions involved issues
younger or less experienced graduate students may not have understood or
may not have been able to visualize. The interactions illustrated the idea



expressed by Healy & Welchert (1990) that the “degree of maturity that
both parties bring to the relationship influences its outcome” (p. 20) and
evidenced the connection between the mentor and mentee that is central
to the mentoring experience (Mansson & Myers, 2012). The pedagogical
explorations of the material were beneficial to both the mentor and mentee.
These explorations reinforced the mentor’s view of the importance of
specific strategies to the teaching of concepts and the importance of the
engaged learner. The mentor understood and appreciated that the mentee, as
an older female doctoral student, would view the mentoring experience as
an opportunity to “share information and develop a sense of camaraderie”
(Holley & Caldwell, 2012, p. 251). Perhaps as Rose (2005) noted, women
seek acceptance and confirmation from a mentor and this made the
relationship more productive. Usually the mentee’s mentor is the primary
research advisor or major professor but the mentor in this instance was not
the mentee’s major professor. The connection and bond between the two were
their teaching of their common disciple, i.e., mathematics, the mathematics
methods courses and the passion for teaching and for mathematics. Studies
have indicated that women find mentors more helpful in providing support
and encouragement, raising confidence, and providing opportunities for
growth (Rose, 2005).
Initially in discussions the mentee viewed the methodology as “artsy” and
this was confusing to the mentor. The mentor viewed these activities as being
relevant, engaging, and contextual for student learning. Her experiences had
reinforced for her the need for student understanding beyond the learning of
rote procedures and rules for mathematics. Having prepared for mathematics
teaching with courses beyond those necessary to teach the content in
school mathematics and having experienced teaching at various levels, the
mentor was able to see the continuum of school mathematics and student
characteristics. Thus, the mentor felt it necessary to make the learning
environment and the materials relevant to the pre-service teachers. Rules
and procedures could be developed through exploratory activities in which
students “dithered” with the material and were engaged. These “professional
troves are not concepts and methods from textbooks but approaches with
which the mentor applies the knowledge of the craft” (Healy & Welchert,
1990, p. 18.) The necessity of clarifying these ideas and justifying them
to the mentee strengthened the mentor’s commitment to this approach to
the teaching and learning of mathematics by doing. Her own teaching had
changed as she, herself, had viewed others’ classrooms and methodologies
during her doctoral studies.


2012) was important to the mentor and mentee. Figuero-Charles In observations of the mentee’s classroom her content knowledge was evident in her explanations and the ability to model examples for the pre- service teachers. Her lack of experience with the course and the materials sometimes created some lack of fluidity in explanations and led to some backtracking. After two weeks of classes. At times the issues of balancing school and family issues did create some stress for the mentee but her discussions with her mentor seemed to relieve some of her concerns. They were generally able to communicate by phone or email to discuss any questions. syllabus and activities. The mentor at times had difficulty in responding to the mentee’s inability to be more available. and methods course block requirements.. The mentor was concerned the materials and methodologies would not be as clear to the mentee and would then not be as effectively implemented in her section of the mathematics methods course. as indicated by Phillips and Pugh (2000). stress for the mentor. She did make adjustments and was cognizant that such adjustments were necessary. The idea of a mentor supporting and caring for the mentee (Mansson & Myers.D. the syllabus. This lack of availability resulted in stress for the mentee and in turn. Her pedagogical expertise was not as evident and created some hesitancy in her explanations. The students could possibly view this negatively. An additional aspect which led to adjusting the schedule was the mentee’s lack of experience with the pre-service teacher population which slowed her coverage of the introductory aspects of the course. assignments. 244 .g. that the mentee experienced some issues faced by older students: the time required to re-adjust to the role of a student. GOLDSBY & M. and most importantly. The mentor understood the constraints living out-of-town placed upon the mentee but found it to limit the benefits of the mentoring experience. This confirmed the importance of mathematical knowledge for teaching which extends beyond the content. e. The mentor also noted. the mentor and mentee met to adjust the schedule. The Mentee’s View of the Mentoring Relationship One issue of major concern was that the mentee had not observed the teaching of the methods course the semester before and did not have any experience with the course and its content. S. the necessity of juggling and balancing a number of family roles and responsibilities. field placement expectations. This lack of experience with the framework of the course created a need for more detailed explanations about the course.

the mentee commented that there was a definite logic to the topics in the syllabus and had she a better understanding of the whole. The Van de Walle textbook was a perfect accompaniment to the mentor’s approach.” she seemed stymied. her delivery of the parts would have improved significantly. and to post feedback and comments to students. MENTORING VIEWED THROUGH AN OPEN CLASSROOM EXPERIENCE Another issue that developed and which was of great concern to the mentee was her lack of familiarity with the syllabus. In fact. To create a model to show a concept other than a drawing was not what she was used to doing. As a math teacher she felt comfortable with this limitation because she felt there was little need for the expression of what she called artistic ability in Mathematics instruction. the mentee felt that exposure to the textbook prior to teaching the class would have been of benefit to both the students assigned to her and her professional development. The mentee had a particular disdain for teachers who “required that students spend large portions of their time transcribing copious teacher notes which were 245 . She therefore began the experience not having some of the prerequisite exposure needed to effectively evaluate assignments. The mentee had been very familiar with the elearning portal but the new system called eCampus required training which she did not receive. When she viewed a course assignment to create a “Math in a Container. Some extenuating circumstances had not enabled her to interact with the mentor and the materials before the semester began as each would have liked. was the introduction of the new online system instituted by the university. In her words. she often joked among her peers that Math was “her thing” because she could not do the “artsy stuff”. she would have preferred to have more time to become familiar with the entire syllabus and the textbook. In hindsight. However. strongly believes that the mentoring relationship should have therefore existed well in advance of her teaching experience. She never considered herself to be artistic. She stated she would not have thought of an example and gladly took the samples to show her group. not the specific concepts. The faculty member’s familiarity with the course content and methodology sometimes was intimidating for the mentee as she had to learn some aspects herself before she taught them to the students. she had not “thought about how one developed the concepts.” In her mathematics classes she was teaching content that built on these concepts. especially with what she referred to as the “creative” aspects. The mentee. Related to this. Even though she readily admits that visiting her mentor’s class was invaluable. The mentee was quite comfortable with the mathematics involved but hesitant with the methodology for teaching the content.

The logical sequence between activity and mathematical concept as demonstrated by her mentor helped the mentee to gain a deeper appreciation for practices which she previously disregarded. The mentoring relationship served to broaden the mentee’s understanding of sound teaching practice. as she willingly admits. reliable and replicable and there was no reason to attempt a visual justification of why the product of 3 and 4 was 12. S. The mentee was also very comfortable with expressing to her mentor her confusion whenever she became aware of it.” She also regarded many of the “artsy” projects done in some math classes to be busy work. These rules were assumed to be accurate. what was of greater interest to the mentee was her mentor’s depth of mathematical knowledge and her ability to translate that knowledge into “artsy” activities which deepened the students’ understanding of the concept. Additionally her particular perspective was solidified by the consistent performance of her students. She still believes that it is possible to engage in meaningless art related activities in math. It might be important to note the mentee’s perspective may be the product of the educational system in which she grew up focused on paper and pencil assessments and rigorous testing protocols. the Open Classroom experience caused her to re-evaluate her strongly held views on good mathematics instruction.D. The mentee was very impressed with her mentor’s ability to justify why things were done and how they related to higher order concepts. Additionally she was never encouraged to investigate the relationship of these rules across the curriculum. who invariably were the highest performers at her school. Yet. she had come to view mathematics as a subject which was built on rules. She had what she thought was a good understanding of basic rules as evident by her possession of an associate degree in mathematics and her first time success on the middle school math test. It became clearer to the mentee that mathematical understanding implies the need to learn about what Ball (1990) refers to as “mathematical ways of knowing” as well as about mathematical topics. The mentee viewed much of the mathematical practice as engendered in the school system as lacking in rigor and she loathed them. GOLDSBY & M. An understanding of why these mathematical rules worked or how they were derived was never assumed to be a prerequisite to success in Mathematics. But. It is important that the mentor/mentee relationship be a comfortable one which allows for the free 246 . Figuero-Charles often devoid of mathematical relevance or application. Having taught in the testing era and coming from a cultural perspective that highly valued academic outcomes. but is now convinced that it is possible to use creative methods to nurture and build critical thinking skills and problem solving logic.

At first. as with any relationship. the open classroom is likely to result in open failure. her earnest dedication to the profession and to her students allowed her to be a source of motivation to her students. 2012. referred to as reflection in action by Schon (1987). Thankfully. that it was more than her understanding of the content that led to her students’ success. MENTORING VIEWED THROUGH AN OPEN CLASSROOM EXPERIENCE expression and exchange of thoughts and feelings. This pondering. In the absence of open communication. the mentee could not understand how the methods of her mentor teacher. The mentoring relationship also drove the mentee to some deep soul searching. the mentee’s independent investigations led her to understand that there were other things that she was doing as a classroom teacher which inspired her students to excellence. How could the teacher explore the depths of understanding suggested by her mentor when every week students are required to master one objective only to move on to another the next week? The mentee was nonetheless convinced that the methods would lead to greater understanding and better recall but struggled with how the method would fit into the very confined demands of schooling as it currently exists. These interactions between the mentor and mentee illustrated the transformational benefits of mentoring for both the mentor and mentee (Healy & Welchert.. 2011). in mentoring. p. 1990). As a result of the interaction 247 . She eventually decided. Both the mentor and mentee viewed the experience as rewarding and recognized that situational factors had impacted the degree of success. CONCLUSIONS The Open Classroom Program could be viewed as a successful mentoring program as it presented clear guidelines and expectations for all participants (Holley & Caldwell. As the mentee struggled with this thought. based on their own criteria for what makes a successful mentor- mentee pairing” (Bender et al. “However. empowered the mentee to change her perspective and her practices. In addition to her concerns about fitting the new methods into a packed curriculum. she eventually came to the realization that a deeper understanding of the “why’s” ultimately facilitate the mastery and comprehension of higher order skills. the participants are in the best position to judge whether the relationship is successful. For years. the mentee could not explain her deeper more profound question as to why she had such success when her methods were obviously so far removed from the ideal. the success of her regular students stiffened her resolve that her methods were superior. which were so different from her own. would fit into the limits imposed by the curriculum. 38).

mentee and the students they serve. Careful selection and matching of the mentor and mentees has led to improved quality of the program. improve. 532). and continuation of a mentoring program (Luna & Cullen. This Open Classroom Program did have departmental support and departmental leadership was open to suggested improvements. mathematics instruction in the specific experience described here. and prepared for the challenges of another school year. S. as well as the faculty's involvement in the creation. GOLDSBY & M. mentor. which encompasses strategies for establishment of a mentoring program. in their report on mentoring. direction. meaning communication of the mentoring benefits the protégé. The mentor’s belief that the mentee should observe the mentor the semester before the mentee taught the course was a point on which they both strongly agreed. 2004. 1995). Extended time both before and during the program for the mentor and mentee to interact would be and have been beneficial since there are aspects of the curriculum that are novel even for the experienced classroom teacher. noted” mentoring needs to include plans for implementation and evaluation. Support for any mentoring program is necessary. recharged. Some suggestions for the improvement of the Open Classroom Program are given that have resulted in improvement of the experience for the mentor. The Open Classroom Program has these characteristics and with continual faculty involvement can continue to refine and enhance the mentoring experience for both mentors and mentees. Figuero-Charles both were changed. Luna & Cullen (1995). The mutual exchange of ideas and perspectives served to bolster their mutual commitment to their profession and to the continued exploration of methods of instruction in mathematics that foster understanding and achievement. and institution. which goes beyond the typical rote learning approach. and responsibility to monitor. reconsider what they are doing and why. and work toward improving their professional practice” (Ehrich et al. 61). p. and enhance the program” (p. Their perspectives had been broadened through seeing each other’s views. One value of the program has been the reflection piece as it has provided opportunities for both the mentor and mentee to “reflect on their practice. The Open Classroom Program has the potential to re-introduce beginning teachers to an investigative approach to instruction..D. It is an effort which purposefully attempts to provide and prepare a generation of 248 . commitment for continuation. The benefits of participation in the program included the sharing of insights and encouragement and as a dynamic and reciprocal relationship as defined by Healy and Welchert (1990). It is an opportunity to lead both teachers and students to a depth of understanding previously and typically ignored by educators. Mentoring should be supported by the faculty.

K. Hansford. B. (2002) Communicating in mentoring relationships: A theory for enactment. S. E. A. Mentoring relations: A definition to advance research and practice. M.. Formal mentoring programs in education and other professions: A review of the literature. L. Empowering the faculty: Mentoring redirected and renewed (ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report No. 19(9). (2010). completion and attrition: Policies and practices to promise student success. Buckingham. & Deborah.. S. The mathematical understanding that preservice teachers bring to teacher education. If the mentor/ mentee relationship has managed to inspire such innovation in thought and approach to the instruction of mathematics. Educational Administration Quarterly. 33. D. Research in Higher Education. E.D.. & Pugh. Innovations in Higher Education. doi: 10. C. Completion Project.. 40(4). 53–80. Yaffe. (2000). doi: 10. 61(4). Synthesis of research on mentoring beginning teachers. 37–43. 449–466. Council of Graduate Schools. Ph. Mentoring in the preparation of graduate researchers of color. & Welchert. W. then there can be no doubt that the program was a success.x Luna. Ph.). P. 3). 63–69. Rose. Graduate School of Education and Human Development. Mentors and protégés: A critical review of literature. 309–314. Gray. 38–42. MENTORING VIEWED THROUGH AN OPEN CLASSROOM EXPERIENCE educators who will through their interactions with each other and with their instructors derive a new vision for mathematics instruction. (2012). (1985). Healy. How to get a PhD: A handbook for students and their supervisors (3rd ed. (2005). Holley. (1990). K. Educational Leadership. Phillips.1007/ s10755-011-9203-y Kalbfleisch. Adult Education Quarterly. & Caldwell.1080/03634523. 518–540. D. S. DC: The George Washington University. M. Washington. (2012). (1988). Journal of Teacher Education. C. 37. S. L. L. C. When race counts. & Tennent. & Foster-Johnson. L.. Bender.1468-2885.2002. 46(1). J. London: Routledge. (1995). What is a mentor? Council on Undergraduate Research Quarterly. D.708424 Merriam. DC: Council of Graduate Schools. M. 249 . Communication Theory.. (1990). 34–39. Group differences in graduate students’ concepts of the ideal mentor. G.. (2011). & Sechrest. Elementary School Journal. Using mentoring enactment theory to explore the doctoral student-advisor mentoring relationship. A. Washington. 17–21. 39(1). (1983).1111/j. & Gray. & Myers. G. Davidson. Ehrch. 243–253. L. & Shannon. 161–173. 12. J. Communication Education.... (2001).. REFERENCES Anderson. C. M. Educational Researcher. 71(4). Edwards. Mansson. The challenges of designing and implementing doctoral student mentoring program.2012. (2004). Ball. (1995). C. W. Review of Educational Research. 33(2). England: Open University Press. 90. Toward a conceptualization of mentoring. 43(3). 549–574.tb00259. doi: 10..D.

San Francisco. D. CA: Jossey-Bass. Enhancement of mentor selection using the ideal mentor scale. 279–290. L. 28. Mentoring and irrationality: The role of racial taboos. Schon. Human Resource Management. A. Learning and Culture College of Education and Human Development Texas A&M University 250 . Goldsby Department of Teaching. S.D. 473–494. (1989). Educating the reflective practitioner: Toward a new design for teaching and learning in the professions. 44. Thomas. A. Learning and Culture College of Education and Human Development Texas A&M University Mary Figuero-Charles Department of Teaching. GOLDSBY & M.   Dianne S. Research in Higher Education. D. (1987). (2003). Figuero-Charles Rose. G.


A recent report by the Center on Education Policy (2012) indicated that approximately one-fifth of all teachers are teaching students in grades or subjects outside their preparation. 2002). parents of low-income students in California sued the U. Teaching at Work. PALMER 13. Hammer (Eds. quality has been determined. The parents’ suit was upheld by the U. twelve years after the passage of NCLB. moreover. 253–260. Further. . Li & J. DOUGLAS J. by availability – in teaching fields where there are limited numbers of experienced. quality teachers have been identified as the most consequential in-school resource to support student achievement. 2002 federal legislation established the standard that all children would be taught in the core academic subjects by “highly qualified” teachers in the 2005-06 academic year (No Child Left Behind Act P. Congress passed a temporary amendment codifying the Department’s regulation. and Innovation INTRODUCTION As noted by a number of chapter authors. Court of Appeals. successful teachers. students in high-poverty schools are twice as likely to be taught by out-of- field teachers when compared to students in low-poverty schools (Education Trust. In sum. students in low income Y. 107-110. QUALITY TEACHING AND TEACHER PREPARATION Challenges. Unfortunately. Acknowledging the importance of teacher quality. In 2007. Determining the characteristics of “highly qualified” teachers has been an evolving construct for policymakers. many children are not being taught by qualified teachers.). 2010). Specifically. definitions of “highly qualified” have been expanded to allow larger numbers of minimally prepared individuals to be certified as teachers.S. but shortly after the ruling.S. Department of Education for violating the teacher quality provisions of No Child Left Behind (NCLB). in part. the Department of Education expanded the original language of the law that requires highly qualified teacher to have full state certification in subjects and grade levels they are teaching to also include alternatively prepared teachers who are making “satisfactory progress toward” completion of certification requirements.L. All rights reserved. Commitment. © 2015 Sense Publishers.

the single largest producer of teacher certifications is a for-profit alternative certification company. 2013).S. impact of accountability / accreditation initiatives for teacher preparation programs. the outcomes of effective teaching are varied. differing perspectives and methodologies to the study of effective teaching result in different and. 2010). Recognizing these multiple challenges. There is more variation within program type than between (National Research Council. confusion regarding quality teaching and quality teacher preparation is to be expected. conflicting conclusions.g. J. As a result. their understanding of how learners acquire knowledge in a given subject area. of these critiques a variety of alternative certification programs have been established. Concerns have ranged from academic qualifications of university teacher education applicants. e. In Texas.. social-affective skills. While educators have expressed concern that the development and expansion of alternative programs result in poorly prepared teachers. A+ Texas Teachers. there is a significant need for quality teachers to educate students from increasingly diverse backgrounds 254 . Department of Education. and opportunities to engage in corrected practice are important in the development of effective teachers (Darling-Hammond and Bransford. i. Palmer communities and with limited achievement and English skills are most likely to have the least prepared teachers.D. 2005). 2010). in part. With the current focus on student outcomes as a prime marker for evaluation of teachers and teacher preparation programs and the increasing concern by stakeholders concerning the utility of standardized achievement instruments to measure educational outcomes. and self-regulation skills. 2010). which provide additional complexity to our understanding of effective teaching. Within this educational and political context.e. however. research on characteristics of preparation programs to develop these qualities in teachers is limited (National Research Council. at times. at best. Design and implementation of programs to prepare high quality teachers require a clear understanding of effective teaching.. characterizing differences in alternative and traditional preparation programs is difficult. and student outcomes of teachers who completed teacher preparation programs (National Research Council.. assessed knowledge and skills. Moreover. Reviews of research evidence have concluded that teachers’ knowledge of curricular tasks. and approximately half of all teachers prepared in 2013 were from alternative programs (U. As noted in the chapter by Waxman et al. a variety of concerns also have been noted regarding the quality of university-based teacher preparation programs and their graduates. utility of pedagogical coursework.

as a collection. Teacher educators are called upon to prepare individuals who are “safe to practice” in the instruction of K-12 students. they are informative and stimulate further exploration of teacher education content and pedagogy. The nature and complexity of the reported activities differed significantly and revealed both innovative instructional strategies and extended PST’s understanding of diversity. The chapters in this text reflect the work of a group of faculty who are engaged in the study and implementation of a large undergraduate teacher education program. 255 . TEACHER EDUCATORS AS RESEARCHERS The systematic study of practice by practitioners has long been considered an essential component of effective teaching and essential for program development. Faculty in teacher preparation programs are called upon to design and deliver university-based coursework and supervise field-based practica to support the development of future teachers. While there may not be general consensus of research evidence to support specific teacher preparation practices. nor should they be seen as a comprehensive reflection of all components of a teacher preparation program. however. a number of the chapters focused on the development of PST’s knowledge. practicing teacher educators are not able to conduct randomized field trials in the study of their preservice teacher preparation content or practices. behavior. Acknowledging that the findings from individual projects may not be broadly generalizable. Moreover. or perceptions of preservice teachers (PST) in their university courses. TEACHING DIVERSE LEARNERS Reflecting concern for longstanding achievement disparities and the rapidly changing demography of the K-12 student population. instructional decisions to prepare quality teachers are being made. In most instances. perception and instructional decisions when working with students from diverse backgrounds. Quality Teaching and Teacher Preparation with skills that support their economic and social development in the 21st Century. case study and multi-method approaches used by the chapter authors can inform their instructional decision-making and program design. many of the chapter authors engaged in the examination of teacher preparation content and/or methodology on the knowledge. the use of quasi-experimental. faculty and college administrators are asked to review and evaluate curricular initiatives and allocate fiscal and instructional resources to support the delivery of teacher preparation programs.

based on PST’s reflections. (3) readings and discussions on diversity. The activities did appear to promote greater acceptance and understanding of variations in oral English. Although the findings for the use and impact of immersive technology on teacher decision-making. in the last four years. the study of innovative technologies to promote development of teachers was innovative and holds significant promise. virtual classrooms were designed for PSTs to engage in tutoring and teaching exercises with middle grade student avatars throughout the course. Specifically. Palmer Davis et al revised a middle grades mathematics problem solving course over a period of five semesters to include activities and assignments to address issues of diversity and culture in teaching algebra.. Eslami et al. As a result.D. 256 . This chapter highlights an important area of individual difference that has been rarely addressed in teacher education programs but very relevant to support the engagement of students and their families. linguistic and national backgrounds. J. With faculty leadership and support from college resources. there have been a variety of curricular initiatives to support the integration of international study activities into the teacher preparation. there has been ten-fold increase in the number of PST’s that have participated in study abroad initiatives. interrelated components: (1) math problem solving and problem posing. The design of the course included four primary. The authors studied decision-making of PST’s for diverse student avatars in virtual classrooms and compared beliefs about equity and algebra knowledge of PST’s in courses that were systematically altered. a variety of instructional activities were provided in an ESL methods course that addressed World Englishes.’s chapter provides an overview of the rationale for these international activities and. Boettcher et al. and (4) Second Life® tutoring and teaching. conducted a qualitative study on PST’s reflections concerning variations in American English oral expression. have highlighted the impact of these experiences on students’ understanding of cultural / national stereotypes and international issues. Consistent with extant research. the teacher education program at Texas A&M has significantly expanded global education opportunities. In an effort to support PST’s development as teachers of students from diverse cultural. select students’ unstructured reflections highlight the impact of the international experiences on their understanding of themselves and others and the implications of these experiences for teachers and students. Specifically. Reflecting on the growing number of K-12 students with different language backgrounds who have recently immigrated to the U. knowledge and perceptions were modest. (2) math problem equity challenges.S.

and Bransford with Berliner. both foundational knowledge and instructional skills and dispositions may be supported in quality preservice programs (Hammermess. The integration of technology. this paper highlights the need to have specific urban- related preparation and supports in teacher preparation programs. digital storytelling. describe both the rationale and use of a structured reflection activity. McDonald. Williams and Carter describe a collaborative urban student teacher education preparation initiative and provide preliminary information on a small cohort of participating PSTs. 2005). 257 . including chapters that focus on diversity. 2003). curriculum goals and how to teach specific subject matter are essential for effective instruction. instructional methods and teacher development. Cochran-Smith. and Zeichhner. however. Addressing the need to have well prepared teachers working in urban schools. FOCUS ON INSTRUCTIONAL CONTENT. Quality Teaching and Teacher Preparation Reflecting on a variety of research literatures and their own experience. Walters et al. METHODOLOGY AND TEACHER DEVELOPMENT Bransford. Darling-Hammond. The Binks-Cantrell and Joshi chapter is an informative review of reading research that contends preservice or professional development activities can deepen teachers’ knowledge of scientifically-based reading research (SBRR). Highly effective teaching requires both significant breadth of expertise and the facile use their knowledge and skills to support learning of their students (Stough and Palmer. This instructional tool was used to promote PST’s cross-cultural awareness and understanding after they participate in a cultural immersion activity associated with a foundations course. Development of this expertise will not be fully developed in preservice education programs. Recognizing that many PSTs have limited confidence and experience working in urban classrooms. University preservice programs that do not focus on the unique contextual issues of urban schools will fail to meet this critical educational need. Darling-Hammond and LePage (2005) argue that teachers’ understanding of subject matter. five papers highlight efforts in these areas in preservice teacher preparation programs. While most of the papers in this text address content. the structured storytelling reflections and the use of these tools to develop PST’s understanding of diversity and to facilitate their instructional effectiveness as teachers was thoughtful and highlighted promising practices that should be studied in numerous areas of teacher education. the program provides a variety of directed supports for the PSTs to develop their competence and interest in urban school placements. While the findings are very preliminary.

This chapter is a valuable addition to the teacher preparation literature. The authors thoughtfully reflected on the findings and generated hypotheses for the outcomes. writing instruction in schools has been given only limited attention. evaluated the development of PST’s dispositions and skills to support writing instruction in a variety of intensive- writing education courses. J. Palmer Moreover. Of direct relevance to this text. their PSTs increase their knowledge and understanding of effective teaching of reading. teachers will use SBRR knowledge to alter their instructional practices and these changes can. Despite its importance.g. university faculty modeling writing. Hodges et al. e. However. the authors conducted a pre-post evaluation. there appeared to be limited impact of the different writing instructional activities. 258 . with professional development support. This project also noted the variability in the faculty instructional activities to support writing and writing instruction. it is this kind of systematic study that is essential to the development and refinement of quality preservice preparation initiatives. however. In light of the digital environment that surrounds students and teachers. I contend that systematic development and evaluation of PST preparation initiatives pertaining to technology integration and its’ impact on teachers’ instructional practices and student learning is both important and sorely needed. Preliminary feedback from PSTs and employers of graduates indicate the importance and unique nature of preparation in technology integration. While there were differences in the content and nature of writing instruction in the courses. They found that fostered PST’s development of self- efficacy for writing. Noting that many teachers are unprepared to integrate technology into their instruction. but. in turn improve student learning. the university faculty and. With eight faculty teaching 12 courses and over 200 students participating in this instructional activity. all instructors provided feedback on PST’s writing and students’ writing performance contributed significantly to final course grades. design and implementation of a technology integration course in an undergraduate preservice teacher preparation program. interestingly not their efficacy to teach writing. I applaud the efforts of the authors to evaluate both the nature and impact of instructional activities on PSTs.. they noted that many university instructors have limited knowledge of SBRR. all courses had explicit writing expectations and instruction in writing. Rackley and Viruru provide a concise and informative overview of the rationale.D. the paper clearly presents the rationale and direction for implementation of teacher preparation content and strategies that impact PST’s reading instruction and their future students’ literacy. subsequently.

Development of quality teacher educators requires purposeful mentorship integrated into students’ doctoral program of study. this paper reinforces the perspective that teacher educators. This paper highlights the importance of this oft-overlooked area and hopefully will stimulate efforts to integrate research activity into PST programs. With competing demands and decreasing student credit hours available for instructional content in PST preparation programs. It is noteworthy that undergraduate PST’s view of research and impact on their subsequent instructional decision- making was influenced by this experience. and Gonzales. experience and corrective feedback in the implementation of these skills. Recognizing the limitations of a single-case description. 2005). the multi-tiered research mentorship provided by both graduate students and faculty also promotes the development of future teacher educators with background and experience in the integration of research engagement for PST’s. Moreover.’s chapter addresses an area that has been identified as essential to the development of teachers and the implementation of effective instruction. 2003. CONCLUSION Reflecting the nature and challenges of teaching in K-12 schools. Palmer. this area is an important of future systematic study. pedagogical skills. Goldsby and Figuero-Charles’ chapter is a single case overview of the nature and impact of faculty mentorship on the development of a doctoral student’s skills in the implementation of a mathematics methods course. need to possess content knowledge. skills and experiences in teacher education programs are essential to the development and implementation of effective programs. Burdenski. Continuing with the focus on development of future teacher educators. Wright et al. the chapters in this book highlight the breadth and complexity in the design of preservice teacher preparation programs. PST’s engagement in research activity may be seen as a lower priority concern.’s chapter provides an overview of a multi-tiered research mentorship model and three case studies of PST’s engagement in research projects. like PSTs. Research 259 . 2005). Stough. Teacher expertise has been an area of personal interest for years (Stough and Palmer. Specifically. the role of teachers as researchers (Darling-Hammond and Bransford. Further. Quality Teaching and Teacher Preparation Wright et al. Again. The chapter authors are to be commended for their commitment to the development of high quality teachers and for their contribution to the teacher preparation literature. the engagement of faculty and doctoral students in the study and evaluation of content.

(2005). D. Moreover. U. Cochran-Smith. Bransford. (2003).D. & Theokas.. (2005). 206–222. San Francisco.. Darling- Hammond & J.. 36(4). Preparing and credentialing the nation’s teachers: The secretary’s ninth report on teacher quality. skills and dispositions needed to support their development as highly effective teachers. CA: Jossey-Bass. Center for Education Policy. 40 (1). high quality programs will provide a foundation of knowledge. J. 13–25. (2012). The Journal of Special Education. Identifying teacher expertise: An examination of researchers’ decision making. M. Bransford (Eds.. Washington. San Francisco. Preparing teachers for a changing world: What teachers should learn and be able to do (pp. Not prepared for class: High-poverty schools continue to have fewer in-field teachers.S. K. L. Stough. Preparing teachers for a changing world: What teachers should learn and be able to do. D. Preparing teachers: Building evidence for sound policy. Palmer College of Education and Human Development Texas A&M University   260 . DC: Author. The work of the teacher educator authors in this book identifies design elements and practices that hold promise to build this foundation. 1–39). Washington. Hammerness. Darling-Hammond. & Gonzales. CA: Jossey-Bass. Washington. McDonald. L. L. In L. & Bransford. J. & Zeichhner. Burdenski. K. S. DC: National Academies Press. Darling- Hammond & J. J. DC: Education Trust. In L. educational system. M... J. Palmer in this area has demonstrated that expert teachers possess an extraordinary range and depth of knowledge of their students. Introduction. National Research Council. REFERENCES Almy.   Douglas J. D. M... L... (2013). these teachers effectively orchestrate the use of this expertise to support the development of their students. Special thinking in special settings: A qualitative student of expert special educators.S. Darling-Hammond. Department of Education. Educational Psychologist.. DC: Author. C. (2005). Preparing teachers for a changing world: What teachers should learn and be able to do (pp. L. (2005). 1–39). Stough. CA: Jossey-Bass. San Francisco. Palmer. Bransford. How teachers learn and develop.. T. (2010).). While novice teachers will not possess this extensive array of knowledge having just graduated from teacher preparation programs.). M. P. Darling-Hammond. Washington.. (2010). Bransford (Eds. & Palmer. & LePage. A public education primer: Basic (and sometimes surprising) facts about the U.. Berliner. J. curricular content and pedagogical strategies.

200 Bruce. 37 Brady.. 211. 236. E.. S. 12–14. 196 Bain. 235. 68. A. 39 Bransford. J.. 202 Calhoon. 9 Attitude change. J. 197 Algebra. 6.. M. I. J. 4 Braskamp.. L. S. A. C. S. A. R. 224 Carter. 199 Baddeley. 10 Bean.. 128 CDW-G... D. A. 195. 113. 69.. D. 106 Ball. S. 257 Chall. Blocher. L.. 224 Brindley. C. C. 33 Bender. N. 9 Boase... M. 203 Bebell. 22 Barak. INDEX A Binks-Cantrell. 51 Bishop. 257 Bendixen. 140 Barkhuizen. 29–43. 202 Burbank..D. E. 108 Barrett. 215 C Barron.. 52. 51. 202 Bos. 54.. 31.G... C. 217 Adams. 125 Bryk. H... 198 Canniff. 9. 257 Achinstein. S.. 31.. 214 Amrein-Beardsley.. 30 Berninger. N. 126 Ben-Chaim. 31–34 Andrew. D.. D. W. A. 75 Ball.. K.. 37 Adlof. 33. J.. .. 199 Bennett. 107 Camburn. 53 Almy. 38 B Brandon. V. 165 261 . 107 Bakhtin. C.. M... B.. J. J. P. T.... B . 82 Bolton. L. B. D.. 148. B. 6...I. B. 37 Brown. J.. 176. S. J. S. 57.. 69. E. 213 Angrist. K. C. 236 Boreen. 89 Ates. 147 Chambless. 38. 81 Anderson. 124. 199 Boud. 212 Campbell.... 51–53. 55. 247 Carter.. A. 201 Anchimbe. 127 Chai. S. 195 Boyatzis. M. C. 32. J. S. L. A. E.. 257 Bennett.. J. 123–140..... M. 175. J. M. M. 139 Anderson. E.. M. 246 Brown. E... 71–74. A. A. 124. B.. 33 Blair. K. R. 66. 34. 213 256 Boaler. 199 Berliner.D. 34 Bateman. D. 195. M. 123–140. 74... 19 Bolick..... 81–101 Boykin. 203 Blachman. K.. 81–101 Bradley. G. 69 Carlisle. E.. 57. A... 56. W.A.. M. 22. L. 36. 30.. 106 Banks.. M. C. G. 39.. 86 Bandura.

225. L. 145–165. 149–151. 257 Chen. 130.. 193 Focho. 68 Cultural plunge. 21 English as an international language. 146. 211 Delpit. 18–20.. 7. K. M. 259 Fielding-Barnsley. V. 200. C. 238 Cross-cultural awareness. 9 Freire. 120 Faulconer. S.. J. J. A. Dröschel. O. 81–101. 195. 244. 188 Duncan. R. T.. 225 Davidson.A. R. 21. E. C.. 20.. 177 Edwards. N. C.. T. 10. 17 Cunningham. Cheong. L. S. D.. 199 217. D. L. M. 68 Durlak. 171–191 Classroom observation. 130. 204 Doran. 37 Davis.. 200. 22 Diversity. G. 149 Dantas. S.. 98 Flanigan. 240 Foorman. 68–70. D. Y. 29–31.. 97.. 259 Educational technology. 73.. 82 Dewey.. 223. R. 14–17. 15 Douglass.. 33. M.. 214 Fox. 13. S. K... 51. 211–226.B.. S. 41 Davé.C. 20 Cochran-Smith. 202 Davis. H. 114. 223. 255–257 Chung. 146–148. 257. J. 106. W.. K. 217. D. 195 Cohen. 33. 67..J.. P.. A. 68 Dempsey. 131. 22. Druin. 9. 212. 51–53.. 156 Colby. M.. 215. (Ed. 15 Comstock.. 214.Index Chapman. 29. Chen. P.. C. 60–63. 163.. 257 Dynarski. 86 Garrard. 231... 183. J.. 57.. M. W. W. 213 Early... 6.... J. 226. D. 146 G Denton. 22 Connelly. 145. 150 City. M...A. M. 21. 145. 124. 204 153–155. 10.A. 223–225. 198–200 220. L.. 84 19. A. 51–75 Francis. 69 Ciampa.M. L. 218 Dooren. 73.. 216. S. M. 75 74. 7. 9 Cobb. 10. 107. 18. 54 Ellis... 37 F D Farris. 219. 84 Cutler. 173 Davidson. 5.). Ference.. 221.. 86.. 19 128. 119. 182 262 . 124 Dewey. 10. 232 Everson. 165 E Collier. J... 70 Cuban. 211. 106 Darling-Hammond. 254. M.. P.. A. A. A. 147 Equity consciousness. 31 Garcia. 225 Efaw. 171–191 Content knowledge. 106. 84.. 125.. 197 Cruickshank. 213 Day. 242. 214 Creswell.. 212 Garmon.... 112. Ertmer. W. 213... M. 55. R. B. G. 175 Easton. 69 Digital storytelling. J. Chetty. C. H. C. S. D. 211 Educational research.. 57. J. 222 54. 10.

K.. A. F. S. 194 Gray. 237 Instructional technology integration. B. 125–127. 197 Gribbin. 36.. B... 150. 55. 6. 30 Huang. 258 Greenberg.. 193 Hall. 248 Kachur.. 125... . C... 105–120. 33 Haberman M. 13. 107 Jacobsen. 184...... 226 263 . G.. 14 Holley.. 15 Heirdsfield.. L. 199 Kajder. S..F. 236.. 237. J. 150. 199 Hanvey. A. E. J. 125 J Hadis.. 247. S. 14. 238.. 83 Hammer. 223 Jenkins.. N. 32 Integration methods. Hsu. R. 177 Kaine. 15 Howard. 236. H. 7. 151 Global learning. 16.. 128 Inan.. Hughes. T. 30 Huey. B. J. 5. 247 Gomez.. 235. 219. R. C... B.. C. C. L.. 11 K Hatton.. B. W. 84. 42. 225 193–205.. L. C. 216 Grant. 30 Graduate students. 51–75 Gray. 257 Hart. 212. 186–190. 4. 236. 200 Joshi. R. J. 88... 99 Healy.. L..C. 52... 3–8. A.. 52 Goldstein. 195 173–178. 164 Innovative Teaching and Learning Research.. C.. B.. 211.. 151 Goodwin. 147 Janes. Y. 127. M. 16. W. 4. J.S. 9 Hamre. Gerard. 136 Halpin.. 22.. 236. 88. 243... 259 Graham. 243. 202 Interactive classroom. K. 150 Gold. 20 Hermans.D. 193 Hollins. 224 Immersion experience. S. 192–205 Greenhow. 124 Goodman. 85. 171. 10 Hill. J.. T. 56. 172 International Society for Technology in Gregoire. C. M. E. 175 Jerald. M. H. 126 Haager. 198 H Irvine. D.. K. M. 108.. R.. 199 Indiogine. B. 198 41 Global consciousness. F. 136 Good. S. D. E. T. 151 Jimoyiannisa. 29.. 34 Goe. J. A. 126. 32. 7 Hilberg... R. 125 Higher Education Collaborative (HEC). 215 Kachru. C. 125. C.. 30 Hattie. 109 Hall.. 124. S. Index Gay.. R. J. 100 Hill. M. 224 Education... 199 Hargrave. 200 Jenkins. 51. B. Green. 145–149 I Graesser. 221 Johnson. 137 Hollar.. 195 238–242.. 29–43.. E. H. R. L. 106. 194 Greenwood. M. D. R.

T. 68. 193 Lumpe. D. A. 197 264 . 226 Mentor. 238 Kulm. R. 88. 236... 84–86. 204 Lathem. 139. 217 Kaufman. 146 Lemov.. 17. 68. J. 31. 221.. 98 Certification. D... 145.B. 99. 53. S. 139 Levin. 136. N. J.. National Council for Accreditation of 223. 81. S. S. 53 National Mathematics Advisory Panel.... T. C. 39 Nieto. 53.. A... 125. National Commission on Writing. 211 NNPS. B. M. R.. B. 31. 197 Mentoring. 130–132..R. 54 L Miller.. 81.Index Kalbfleisch.. D. 199 National Assessment of Educational Lindquist. 173. Kersting. 214 Mobile learning. 85. 215 Moeller. 42. 29–36. E. 40. G.. Miller.. D.. G. 203.. 52 Meadows. Kiuhara. Mansson. 224 Lewis. 136. 34.. 100 211. 175. 38. C. 52. 145. A. T. 110. 148. T. 38. 201 Progress (NAEP).. 29. 199 Murnen. 148 190. 200 Lenhart. E.. A. 17. 106 Karsenty. 34. 235–249 Kulik. J.. K. R. 137. 41. 175 Ladson-Billings. 123 Literacy. 127 McDrury. J. 214... R. 186. 205. 235–249 Keifer. 126 Li.. L. R. 140 127 Milner. K. 134. 140. G. 242–244 68 Marzano. Major. J. 10. 82. 151 McKercher. 174–179. N. T. K. 187. 51–75 Meta-analysis.. 203 Multicultural schools. 32 Metcalf. N. 100. 68. 236 McKenzie. 84–86... 125. 36. 37. 43 Lasica. 165. K.. 199 National Council of Teachers of Lyon.. 18 137. 129... 198 Morgan.. J. 195 Merriam. B.. 188. C.. J. 68 Kane. 7. 123 McCutchen. 171–191. 195 Linguistic and cultural diversity. 201. 171 Mentee.C.. 222 30–32. 3–8 N Lim. B. 139 Lamberg.. 71 National Institute of Child Health and M Human Development (NICHD). 51. 165 147. 34 Malloy. 52 Moats. 36.J. W. S. 11 National Research Council. 99 National Center for Alternative Lippi-Green. 29. 186. 200. 198 Law.. D. 85. 31. 100 Ng. 12 Moursund. J. 258 Teacher Education. 177.. T. Kubota. 33. 235–249 Knobel. K. H. 30.P.. 34 Mathematics. P. 30.. 186–188. Y. 126. S. D... D.. 31 Matsuda.

151 Richardson. A. C. 215. 193–205. Ropp. R. 181 Phillips. 155 125 Rothman. 52 Reading Excellence Act of 1998.. G. 213 Q Olson. Ross. 176 Raphael... 80. 11. 70. M. 3.. J. 171 Pope. B.. 257. 205. 182. 40–43. 245.. 39.. 12 109. 123–140. 150. 213 Problem solving. 126 81–101. 107 183. P. 71. 180. Pederson.. O 34. 71 environments.R. 131. V. 196 Reading. 114. L. 4 R P Rakes.. W. 214 Preservice teacher education. 173 Pianta. R. 151. 21 191. 6. 224 Pajares.. M. D... R. 31 Qiong. P.. 241. B. Jr. S. C. 74 Ritter.. A. J. 107. Nuthall.. 51–75.W. F. 180 256–258 Pellegrino. 151. 140 Robin. 211 Perfetti. 4. 129. P. 244 Research-practice gap. 171– Roehrig. Payne.. Project.. 9. G.A.. 201 29–31.. 9. 200 255. 33. 34.M. Index Noffke. 6–8. 6.. 211–226. 225 Paivio. C.. M... 37 203 O’Leary.. O’Bannon.. F. 203 198. J. S. C.. 145–165. 241. P. 205.X. H.. 140. Roberson. J.. 51–75. B. 243 Preservice teachers’ learning. 6. 7. 9–23. 235.. 35. 33 Riesland.. M. 151 Partnership for 21st Century Skills. 12 196–198. K. 20. 148. 126 Preservice teachers. E. 70. 110. 258 Rose.. 43. H. 151 125 Robertson. 22 Reflective practice. Pennington. 51. 160–164 Robinson.H. 111. 214 Polya. 13. O’Connor. 4 Piasta. R. G. 30 31 Penuel. R. 29. E. 16 265 .. 240. 20. 187. 258 O’Callaghan. 6.M. 189.. 84 Osborne. 113. 3. 130. 171. A. T. Peer observation. J. 204 Ranker. 240. G. W. 226. 242 149. R. 217 Olson.M. 246. 177. 33 Reiss. 10. 53. 52 Project Tomorrow and Blackboard. 172. F.. S. 29–43. 150 Pew Internet and American Life Research-based instruction. Robinson. B. 108 Preparing teachers for urban Roberts-Walter. D.. K. M. B. 116. 21 Preparing teachers for diverse students. 38. 179. 147. M.. J.. 200 Rivera.. 172. R.. Pedagogical content knowledge. 195. 139.... J. 256 Professional development. 199. 123.. 257.

105–120 Stokes. 176 146. 67. 213 Szurmak. 83 Teacherbeliefs.. L. F. 70. 82.. 182. 7. C. 124. L. Shelton. 199 Self-efficacy. 212. 225.. 223. 222 Teaching in diverse environments. 19. J.. 11 175. K. 240 Sartain. 195. 86 Second Life.. 106 Seidlhofer. 82. 43 253–260 Snow... 51. 4 Steeley. 5..K. 13. 81–101... 133. 171–173. C. A. (Ed. 212. 128. 85 Tan. A. 201 Student teaching. 68. 31. 51–75 Stallings. 37. S. M. 214 Teacher educator as researcher. 10. 151 Singer. 148 Teacher knowledge. 14 Teaching improvement.. Serhan. 90–94. L. J. 34. 128. 148. 98. 31.. 151 Schoenfeld.. Shin. 176 Teaching at work. 129..A.. 29. Silver. 247 Schunk. 85–87... 53–55. L. 184. 43. 57. T. 14. 200. 124 266 . 113. 126 Stigler.. W. K. 126. J. Snow. 68 86. 53 Saint Augustine.. 134. E. 18 Stuhlman.. 82. 256 Scherrer. P.L.. 68 Swetnam. R. K... 146–148. S. 31. 157. S.. J. D. L. 57 Teacher effectiveness. F. 16 Study abroad. M. 124.. 256 Taylor. 3. 147. 172 115–120. 10. 125 123. M. J. 17. Teacher education. 18 Saha.A. 68 Teacher preparation. Sharifian. D. 172. 165. 128 35. P. 37 Teaching for equity. 224 T Seargeant. D. 15–17 Skaalvik. 151. 226. 195. 195 Socio-cognitive theory. 154.. Samimy. 119.. 160. 43 Taylor. 15 130. 193 106. 4. 69. 22 Salinas. 256 Saffold. 85.. 83.. 153–158.. 3–8. 99–101. N. 3–8 Spear-Swerling. D. Teaching approaches. V. 29–43 Skrla. 148. 4. 81 254–259 Siemens. 112. M. 160–165. 5.Index S Stereotypes.. 3–8.. 211. Sable. C. Elizabeth. 35. 214 Schon. 84 139. 200 54. 4 Stinson. 127. 125. W. 137. E. 123. 255 Simon. 128–131. J. 40–43. 106–110. 128. 175. C.). 75.E. 149. 84–86 Teachers’ attitude. 125. 135 Scholes. Scheeler. W. Sleeter. 86 140. H. 160–165. 193. 146. D. M. M. S. 51. 83. 151 Seidenberg. 203 176.E. 6.. 51. George. 74. 146. 68. 193. J.. 153–155. 150.. W. 106 163. 97. Smith.. 151. 15. 136 Teacher evaluation. B. Smolcic. 176. D.. E. 4. Social constructivism. A. 32. 105–120.. 52.

. evaluation.. P. 131. 71. Corporate Watson.. 51 The New Teacher Project [TNTP]. A. 82. 107 Tschannen-Moran. H. 109. 258 Value-added models of teacher Writing instruction. 108 U Woolfolk Hoy.. 35. 151. 7. 193–205. 54. C. 15.. C. 123–140. M... 203. 32. 6. 17 Waxman. 123–130. G. R. 176 Zeichern.. 83 Wellington... I.. J. 157. 177 191. 213. 187... 75 Z Vygotsky.. 154. 37.. 226 Vellutino.S. 37 Virtual classroom simulation. 30. 126 Yancey. 37 Wells. 175. 106–108 Tsurutani. 246 Walters. K. K. 145–149. 53 Webb-Johnson. M. 39. 196 Watson.. 195 Treiman. 116. 70.. Index Teaching practice. 74. 217–220. 212. 9–23.. 254 Thier.. 186 Weisberg. 147. Writing.. 29. 188. 69 Voices for Working Families.. 258 Van Aalst.. 125 Tieredmentoring. R. 33. 203 Weiner. A.. 173. S..M. 161 Urban education. D. 213 Torgesen. 199 Tough. 145 Vavrus. 82 Young. 32.. L. 195 Terrion.S. 11 117. 211–233. 124. 145–165. 148 Willard-Holt. C.. K. 153–158. L. 143 267 . D.. 257 Wilson. F. H. [USDOE]. 42. 238 Wechsler. D. E. 19 160–165. E. H.... V 225. 20 Wenglinsky. K. C. 178. A. 256 U. 139 World Englishes. B. 257 Technology integration. Department of Education. 143 Thomas. 190. 178. 182. F. 201. 145–165. 35.K.. 83 Williams.. 226. 172 Y Vaught S. J.. 43 Wilkinson. D. 258 Warschauer.. J. 61–101. L. 48 Thomas. 130. J. A. Walsh. 226. K. 31. J. 6. 3–23. L. 150 Timmis. W 132. G. 202 Vaughn. A. R.. 7.. 30.. 188 Washburn. 39. 41 The Conference Board. M. 107 155.. Thibadoux.. 195. 178. S. 150.