Advanced courses, more or less related, resulting in a research problem and a thesis are the procedures for graduate work as prescribed and accepted in most fields of study. Is it worth while to try other and possibly less accepted procedures, and then attempt to evaluate the results? For example, would it be profitable for a prospective teacher to spend the major part of his graduate work in actual teaching, to have an opportunity to do intensive work over a long period of time in collaboration with an experienced teacher or supervisor, and to choose his graduate courses so as to relate them to the teaching being done? Is there justification in giving a graduate student the opportunity to try out in a laboratory the ideas gained from academic and professional training, to have further experiences in working with boys and girls, and to develop skills in working with students and other teachers? Would the personal and professional growth of the graduate student, from his related courses, his preparation and planning for the teaching job ahead, his experiences with his students, his adaptation of previous plans to meet the needs of the actual teaching situation, the assembling of materials as to suitability and interest and the arranging of these materials to meet the needs of individuals as well as the groups he taught, be effective ways to prepare and develop a skilled teacher?
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:unt.edu/info:ark/67531/metadc699684 |
| Date | 05 1900 |
| Creators | Keel, Earl Tom |
| Contributors | Gordon, Roderick D., Stafford, Margie Helm |
| Publisher | North Texas State College |
| Source Sets | University of North Texas |
| Language | English |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | Thesis or Dissertation |
| Format | v, 67 leaves: ill., music, Text |
| Rights | Public, Keel, Earl Tom, Copyright, Copyright is held by the author, unless otherwise noted. All rights |
Page generated in 0.0019 seconds