Final Summary of Block I Reform

1

Beanery Summits Final Summary

Final Summary of Block I Reform

Beanery Summits ~ May 19, 26, and June 2, 1998

Mark J. Volkmann

Introduction

Indiana is in the midst of reforming its teacher license process. This reform will establish performance-based standards as the basis for teacher licensure in the State of Indiana by the year 2002. In response to this reform, the Purdue University elementary and secondary teacher education faculty are re-designing the core curriculum for the preparation of teachers. One of the major changes in Purdue’s teacher preparation program is the goal to ground learning in experience. This goal can only be achieved by developing programs in collaboration with local schools.

Through a Professional Development School (PDS) grant from Dean Haring (School of Education), a series of dinner meetings were planned that would bring together participants in the Block I reform team and a variety of K-12 educators who have supported early field experience activities in the past. Nine local teachers were invited to participate in three dinner meetings scheduled for May 19, 26, and June 2 at the Seattle Beanery Restaurant. These meetings, dubbed the “Beanery Summits,”successfully addressed three purposes relative to the planning and implementation of Block I Theory into Practice.

Purpose

The purpose of these meetings were to (1) find out what the school-based participants liked and disliked about the existing field experiences associated with two existing courses: Introduction to Elementary Education (EDCI 204A) and Introduction to Secondary Education (EDCI 204B); (2) communicate the main ideas for the reform of Purdue’s Teacher Education Program; and (3) investigate problems that may be encountered and solutions to try.

Participants

The following teachers participated in one or more of the three dinner meetings:

Gail / Anderson / Pine Village Elementary
Mary / Canarecci / Central Catholic High School
Mike /

Feagans

/ West Lafayette Jr. High School
Kay / Howell / Battle Ground Elementary
Sally / Louk / Murdock Elementary
Ted / Leuenberger / Benton Central Middle School
Donna / Osborn / Jefferson High School
Mary Lee / Webeck / Klondike Elementary

The following faculty participated in one or more of the three dinner meetings:

Sandi / Abell / EDCI
Wanda / Fox / EDCI
George / Kamberelis / EDCI
David / O’Brien / EDCI
Jerry / Peters / EDCI
AG / Rud / SOE and EDST
Mark / Volkmann / EDCI

The following teachers were invited but unable to participate. All four expressed an interest in staying engaged in the reform so meeting agenda and summaries were mailed periodically.

Dick / McKinnis / Klondike Middle School
Cory / Marshall / McCutcheon High School
Sherri / Johnson / Happy Hollow Elementary
Teresa / Huston / Tecumseh Middle School

Meeting Format

Each meeting consisted of three main events: dinner, small group discussion, and large group discussion. With the exception of the first meeting, the small groups consisted of a mix of school-based and university-based participants. There were at least 15 people present at each meeting, with approximately equal representation from school-based and university-based participants.

Overview of Meetings

Meeting #1:

The primary outcome of this meeting were responses to five questions (See Appendix A) posed to the school-based participants in regard to their experience with the existing early field experience program (EDCI 204A and 204B). Below are the major contributions divided into three groups: criticisms, suggestions, and new activities.

Criticisms:

Practicum students do not think through teacher actions.

Important thing is for teachers to involve students, unfortunately, some teachers do not.

Students should come (10) times – we get to know them better.

Perhaps it is not a good idea for students to teach a lesson.

More activities for students to be accountable for (204B)

Lack of professionalism on part of 204 students

Evaluation – improve the present evaluation by providing a ranking of the practicum student as to the quality of teacher the student could become. Also, include more space for narrative of the experience.

Suggestions:

Involve practicum students as much as possible,

Communicate that they must act like teachers,

Assist them as they analyze what the teacher is doing and why, to help them understand that teaching requires a huge time commitment

Lessons don’t work because of events that happen spontaneously,

Think of this experience as a job rather than a class,

Each student have a check-off list of things to do.

Email conversations may help us get to know the students

Other times to meet with the students during prep time

Make sure students are more computer literate

How about having teachers come to the university

Work with a child is more important than teaching a class of kids. If a practicum student doesn’t like one-to-one tutoring, then he/she will not make a good teacher.

Teaching a 15 minute lesson is an appropriate activity.

What students don’t understand is how students think and learn. If you understand learning, then you’ll do a better job of teaching.

The perfect world would be to have students see how the routines are established on the first day.

Consider asking the students to keep a dialog journal in order to promote conversations with teacher through writing journal.

Students need to be in front of students sooner

Develop a professional “attitude” toward teaching

Provide students a checklist of required activities

New Activities:

Gathering the teacher lounge stories—teachers’ stories give a sense of what teaching is about. Use the Teacher Expectation Student Achievement (TESA) training and draw maps of where teachers walk, which students are called on, and analyze what the teacher is doing. Reflect on who they think was a great teacher, what they did, and what they liked, then do the same with a bad teacher. Use these reflections to help them consider their own future teaching (see Knowles, J.G. & C.S. Presswood (1994). Personal History).

Focus on a learner project. Students dedicate a certain number of their field experience hours to providing one on-one teaching to a particular student. This will help the student to evaluate how they feel about being in an immediate helping and teaching role, and also to reflect on the nature of the learner.

In conjunction with this one-on-one experience, students will provide a short summary of the experience and will also write a first person narrative in the voice of this student, describing what is like for this student to be in the classroom and in school.

Dialog journal. This writing is to occur between the 204 student and the cooperating teacher, and will address core 204 themes, as well as a variety of particulars specific to each students’ placement. This is intended to provide a communication link, since the exigencies of classroom life are such that time for regular debriefings is rare.

Themed discussions (with a leader). Students (or a group of students) will lead discussion on a weeks’ theme, providing an overview of the theme, and cases for discussion from their teacher narratives, or from their field experience

Develop activities for students to do outside of the school day: more activities for students to be accountable for (204B), attend school functions, attend in role as a teacher, open house, staff meeting, basketball games, soccer, PTO function,

The teacher emphasized that students' time needed to be clearly focused in order for them to begin to "think like a teacher" and really learn how to observe the complexity of classroom and school life. It seems that by giving students something specific to think about, observe and write about, which corresponds to class themes and readings, can accomplish this goal. Thus, for example, if the 204 class is to discuss "discipline" during a particular week, 204 students would have a specific corresponding handout providing guidance in observing how discipline is conducted. There are numerous texts which provide suggestions (and often reproducible directions) for guided observation. For example: Pelletier, C. (1995). A Handbook of Techniques and Strategies for Coaching Student Teachers; A Guide for Cooperating Teachers, Mentors, College Supervisors, and Teacher Educators. Allyn and Bacon. Also, TESA" materials for observing teaching.

A number of themes were suggested to try: approaches/philosophies of teaching, classroom management, discipline, equity/resources, diversity, grouping, learning styles, methods of instruction. When we ask students to consider funding, equity, grouping, and tracking --these observations can count as shared field experiences in Block I.

Meeting #2 and #3:

The primary outcome of this meeting was to respond to seven outcomes of the reform initiatives (Bold). Meeting #2 was devoted to responding to the seven outcomes by listing the benefits and problems associated with each. In meeting #3, participants were asked to develop solutions and recommendations for action. Below are the major responses and action plans.

1. The number of practicum students will be increased as Blocks 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 are implemented. Blocks 1 and 2 are associated with elementary and secondary schools, while Blocks 3, 4, and 5 are associated only with elementary schools. There was mixed support for this idea.

Benefits include: the greater involvement of Purdue faculty and staff; stronger university-school relationships; more assistance in the classroom; new ideas; and increased bond between school-based students with practicum students.

Problems include: unwillingness of schools to become involved; teacher burnout; overspecialization of school; finding enough placements; and unfairness involved in the distribution of field experiences among schools.

Possible solution: Designate schools by block. Involve teachers as liaisons with university partners. Help teachers to know what to expect through on-going communication. Foster consistency. One teacher at each site could become the school-based liaison. This would foster teacher ownership in the preparation of new teachers. It would constitute recognition rather than payment by acknowledging contributions. Tuition vouchers are great and should be continued.

Remaining questions: Concerns were voiced regarding teacher burnout and overspecialization.

Action Plan: School-based participants did not feel this was a problem if Purdue faculty worked with the schools as partners in the reform. Teachers wanted schools to retain the ability to select a block, for teachers to have the option to participate or not, for teachers to decide how many students and when students would enter their classes.

1. Two or more practicum students will be placed with a single classroom teacher. There was mixed support for this idea.

Benefits include: practicum students are more relaxed with peers; discussion of shared experience becomes possible; possibilities for collaborative teaching; and transportation problems are diminished.

Problems include: competition for class time between practicum students; some teachers are reluctant to take more than one practicum student; and one student may dominate the time.

Possible solution: Honor teacher preferences for one or more students.

Remaining questions: How will secondary students respond to the competition for the teachers time or access to classes and students when more than one student occupies the same class at the same time?

Action Plan: Honor teacher preference for number of students per teacher. Interview teachers and students about their placements and develop a policy that fits the practice.

1. Secondary students should be placed outside their major. There was mixed support for this idea.

Benefits included: experiencing a different perspective; learning different strategies; and seeing the complexities of teaching.

Problems included: lack of expertise could limit tutoring; placing a student in a subject matter they hate; and learning strategies that are not pertinent to the subject the practicum student wants to teach.

Possible solution: Secondary Teachers expressed great reluctance while elementary teachers saw it as an advantage. The best solution appeared to be to place secondary students in his/her major, but require student to visit teachers outside his/her major [Note: this occurs in the secondary program in some locations and appears to work well.]

Remaining questions: Do visits to other teachers result in fragmentation of the total experience?

Action Plan: This was not a major issue within the reform and all participants felt it was something to be tried after other issues had been resolved. At the start, every attempt should be made to retain secondary students in their major. When this is not possible, then these students should be interviewed and local evaluation and research used as the basis for future decisions.

1. In addition to investigating teaching and learning, practicum students will investigate social issues associated with the school (such as diversity and ethnicity) and work with social agencies linked with schools. There was wide support for this idea, however, there are several serious problems that need to be resolved if this idea is to be implemented.

Benefits include: the development of an understanding and respect for the difficulty associated with educating students in terms of the contexts of each student’s life—a sense of the reality of teaching; an appreciation for the diversity of students within classrooms; assistance to schools that have many needy children; assistance to teachers to help them know and understand their own students more deeply; and an awareness of the social agencies that are available to assist youth with personal, social, and academic problems.

Problems include: confidentiality of the school-based students; asking too much (time and understanding) of practicum student; the absence of appreciation for the problems discovered by practicum students; the unavailability of social agencies that deal with problems associated with youth; incompatibility between the attitudes, values, and beliefs practiced by school personnel vs. practicum students.

Possible solution: The solutions broke down into student-based, school-based, and community/agency-based programs. Student-based: Practicum students will work one-on-one with school-based students and develop a more holistic understanding of the personal, social, and academic dynamics of school-community life. Elementary teachers suggested interactions with students outside of school such as bowling, mall walking, eating-out, while secondary teachers expressed serious reservations about off-campus meetings--problems could result from these types of interactions. School-based: develop before and after-school tutoring sessions and work closely with principals, teachers, school social workers, and counselors. Community-based: Secondary level might work with people who deal with problems and the agencies that deal with them such as: Big Brother/Big Sister, Community Centers, Library, Y’s, Hanna Center, Hospitals, Cary Home, Wabash Valley, Charter Hospital, and Crisis Center. Some suggested developing links between the student, school, and community by working with social agencies that form a link between youth and schools and/or investigate social issues associated with schools.

Remaining questions: How will this initiative deal with issues of confidentiality? Developing a program will require a serious commitment of time. Who will make this commitment? Are there enough social agencies available to support this effort? How serious are the problems that practicum students will face? How capable are our students to deal with these problems? How can local schools trust (unproven) practicum students with the serious problems exhibited by middle school and high school students? Who will monitor practicum students?

Action Plan: Start with a single school and develop a plan in collaboration with the administration and faculty. Start with one idea and evaluate it as it progresses. Do not attempt to implement a single plan unilaterally across all partner schools. [Note: EDCI 204A and B currently work with about 30 schools.]

1. Individual secondary and/or elementary schools shall be the classroom and field experience site for cohorts of practicum students. [Note: The cohort will attend the same section of campus based meetings of Exploring Teaching as a Career and Multicultural Classroom.] There was wide support for this idea.

Benefits include: closer working relationship between Purdue and Schools, greater accountability, more immediate response to potential problems, closer personal connections, and better use of on-site experts, develops community among practicum students. This initiative would promote development of a deeper understanding of the whole district and their approach to teaching, their use of curriculum, and their level of internal communication.

Problems include: space availability at school-based sites during “convenient” times, scheduling secondary students with teachers in their major, and transportation issues for students.

Action Plan: This reform initiative alters the focus from teacher-based to school-based placements thus requiring the formation of partnerships between university and schools. Specifically, it involves teachers as partners in the process of educating potential teachers. Changing the nature of the relationship will require many meetings with superintendents, principals, and teachers and the demonstration of commitment to the changed ideas by all parties. The group recommended starting with a single secondary school in the Fall 1998 and adding another school in the Spring 1999. It was recommended that meetings occur this summer with the superintendent of the district of the selected school and follow-up meetings occur with the building principal this summer, too. Meetings with the teachers could begin at the start of the year (August, 1998).