Abstract not available

Through the history of program evaluation represented in the annual, federal grant applications, this study examines the developments between 1971 and 1978 in the program and evaluation design of PROVE, an open admissions program. The study compares PROVE's later evaluation criteria and instruments with the literature on educational evaluation to illustrate a model. Through interviews with six former PROVE counselors and teachers, the study explicates the program's evolution to qualified open admissions and the local standards and measures for student evaluation they devised which served program evaluation and exemplify the literature. The interviewees' anecdotes also demonstrate how practitioner collaboration and storytelling serve the process of defining and measuring learning essential for judging both student learning and program effectiveness. The study contends that telling stories offers important insights about educational assumptions unattainable in traditional, quantitative evaluation. While acknowledging that interviews and anecdotal evidence can not replace quantitative measures, the study argues that program evaluation which is limited to student performance outputs neglects critical, qualitative judgements essential for a thorough evaluation. Interviews and storytelling are undervalued vehicles for both program development and formal evaluation.

The purpose of this study was to gather existing quantitative data on inservice teacher education in order to analyze and synthesize the findings. Data were gathered on ninety-one research studies presented between 1968 and 1983 that were available through the ERIC system, dissertations, or journals. Meta-analysis was used to draw generalizations regarding the efficacy of various inservice practices. Effectiveness was measured at four different effect levels: participants' reactions to training, participants' learning, behavior change of participants, and results in terms of participants or their students. Findings indicate that inservice teacher education programs reported in the literature are moderately effective. When the data are grouped by effect level, it becomes apparent that attempts to increase participants' learning through inservice teacher training are highly effective, attempts to change participants' behavior and to elicit positive reactions are moderately effective; while attempts to demonstrate results in the school environment are only mildly effective. Specific findings are: (1) the number of participants in an inservice training program, the number of treatment hours, and the length of the treatment period do not significantly influence effect size results; (2) outside originated programs are generally more effective than in-school originated ones; (3) inservice training programs which include both elementary and secondary educators are more effective than for either group individually; (4) enhanced status and college credit are the incentives most likely to increase effect size results; and (5) training programs which use observation, micro teaching, video/audio feedback, or practice show greater effects than those programs not using these methods. Programs which included discussion, lecture, games/simulations, and guided field trips were significantly less effective than those using other instructional methods. Of course these findings do not preclude the possibility that these training methods could be more effective under certain circumstances. Coaching, modeling, mutual assistance, printed material, production of instructional material, and film as used were not associated with significant effects. The results of this study were used to suggest implications for staff developers as well as to make suggestions for future study.

In September 1959, Jerome Bruner, noted psychologist and educator, convened a conference of world-renowned educators, psychologists, and scientists. The intent of the Woods Hole Conference, as it came to be known, was to examine how science education might be improved in the elementary and secondary schools in America. The concern of the conference was the gap between instruction and the technological reality of the rapidly expanding knowledge base (of 1959). The conferees proceeded to determine that there are four major elements of learning: (1) curriculum; (2) readiness; (3) intuition; (4) motivation (Bruner, 1977, p. 13). This dissertation examined one of these elements of learning, intuition, in the context of today's educational dilemmas: the breakdown of public confidence in public education coincidental with the "widening gap between instruction and the technological reality of the rapidly expanding knowledge base" (of 1985). In twenty-five years the dilemmas are the same and the gap only wider. The investigation examined the premise that intuition has been proven to be a valid source of knowledge acquisition in the fields of philosophy, psychology, art, physics, and mathematics. However, upon examining a sample of teaching methods there seemed to be little reference to or acknowledgement of intuitive learning or teaching. The dissertation then investigated various philosophies of education to examine why intuition may not be acknowledged in public education. The dissertation then examined the possibility of intuitive learning through a series of interviews with selected elementary school students. In addition, selected elementary school teachers were interviewed to determine their definitions and application of intuition to the teaching process. Having determined some characteristics of intuitive learning and teaching, model lessons for using intuition in teaching were recommended.

From the inception of teacher training in Boston, the Laboratory School had a key role in teacher preparation. The rationale behind the Laboratory School approach was that beginning teachers could best learn their craft by observing and imitating experienced teachers. Down to the present time, teacher training is conducted by placing student teachers in classroom situations with experienced professionals. Boston established its Model or Laboratory Schools when the City decided to train teachers at a Normal School supported by municipal tax revenues. Through the years, public schools were chosen to serve as sites for preparing teachers. Outstanding pedagogists were carefully selected by the school system administrators to serve as training teachers. The students learned from an instructor who served as a role model. Other Normal Schools in the State of Massachusetts adopted the same method and established their own Model Schools. Today, Bridgewater State College, Salem State College, and Tufts University have campus Model Schools. When Francis W. Parker (1837-1902) served as supervisor of primary schools in Boston, and as Superintendent of the Quincy, Massachusetts, Public Schools, he became familiar with the Model Schools in Boston and Bridgewater. When Parker became head of the Cook County Normal Schools in Chicago and, at a later date, the School of Education at the University of Chicago, he established Model Schools designed after the Massachusetts training program. The Teacher's College at Columbia University developed the Horace Mann Laboratory School under the direction of John Dewey who had been at Chicago and had witnessed the success of Parker's teacher training. The concept of the Normal Schools and the later teachers' colleges using a controlled school situation for preparing teachers spread to all sections of our nation. Teacher education became a national philosophy that had an effect on all teacher training institutions. A close examination of teachers' training today reveals a continued use of Laboratory Schools.

This study explored the utilization of best practices surrounding content and delivery strategies for educational technology preparation of undergraduate preservice teachers within some of the top public U. S. institutions of higher education (IHEs). This study was needed due to the changing nature of technology, a critical need to better prepare preservice teachers, and mixed opinions on what should be included in their preparation. The respondents were representatives from 11 NCATE-accredited, public IHEs. The 54 participants included deans, teacher educators, librarians, instructional technology staff, and department heads. Data were collected through semi-structured interviews, surveys with selection and open-ended questions, and course syllabi related to technology. Data were analyzed using content analysis to review and code the documents, interview data, and survey data, which included constructing categories. The constant comparative method was used to determine emerging themes. Results revealed that the responding IHEs are preparing undergraduate preservice teachers to implement technology in their future classrooms both within and beyond required educational technology courses and that they are using many best practices and strategies as presented in the research literature and standards. However, only one of the 11 IHEs reported preservice teachers were required to take a technology course concurrently with a methods course, considered to be an important practice. Technology sandboxes were reported to be an effective way for preservice teachers to explore and learn about emerging digital tools, and meeting the challenge of the ever-changing nature of technology. Respondents reported challenges surrounding technology integration including a deadline to meet revised accreditation standards in spring 2016 as IHEs transition from NCATE to CAEP standards (CAEP, 2013). This study found IHEs are still facing historical challenges, such as varying technology dispositions among teacher educators, inservice teachers, preservice teachers, and institutional constraints. Some of the solutions to these challenges included the use of consultants to work with teacher educators and inservice teachers and preparation using digital tools outside of the required technology course. Implications of the results are discussed relative to the reported solutions of the IHEs, despite past and new challenges surrounding undergraduate technology preparation.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.