| Print Version Submit a Commentary
Weitzenkamp, D. J., Howe, M. E., Steckelberg, A. L., & Radcliffe, R. (2003). The GOALS Model: Rural Teacher Preparation Institutions Meeting the Ideals of a PDS
Through Educational Technology. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education [Online serial], 2(4). Available: http://www.citejournal.org/vol2/iss4/currentpractice/article1.cfm
The GOALS Model: Rural Teacher Preparation Institutions Meeting the Ideals of a PDS
Through Educational Technology
DEBORAH J. WEITZENKAMP
Peru State College, USA
MARY E. HOWE
Southwest Missouri State, USA
ALLEN L. STECKELBERG
University of Nebraska, USA
RICHARD RADCLIFFE
Southwest Texas State, USA
A primary goal of teacher preparation units is to develop skills that
the teacher candidate can successfully apply as a novice teacher. As
such, teacher preparation units have implemented a variety of teaching models
to prepare quality PK-12 educators including professional
development schools (PDS). PDSs have become a central focus in systemic reform
in many United States postsecondary institutions (Clark, 1999; Levine,
1997; Love, Emerson, Shaw, & Leigh, 1996).
In order for postsecondary schools to effectively make systemic
reform, professional educators must view PK-12 teachers as active learners, who
are willing to question and make needed changes in teaching and
school-wide
practices. Creating educational networks that facilitate communication
and collaboration about ideas, knowledge, skills, and experiences help both
the practicing PK-12 teachers and teacher candidates (Cobb, 2000;
Goodlad, 1990; The Holmes Group, 1990; Poetter, 2001; Sandoval, 1996; Shelley
& Washburn, 2000). These networks can best be achieved through
partnerships using the PDS model. This model focuses on four key areas:
(a) providing authentic supervised training and experience for teacher
candidates and new teachers; (b) enhancing PK-12 student achievement
including diverse student populations, (c) serving as a site for professional
development of teachers, and (d) supporting research and inquiry about
teaching and learning (Clark, 1999; The Holmes Group, 1990; Love et al., 1996).
Postsecondary institutions that have adopted the PDS model advocate
its implementation, due, in part, to a strong research base of best practices
(The Holmes Group, 1990). Teacher candidates who have been trained at
postsecondary institutions that implement the PDS model exhibit better
teaching skills and higher academic performances (National Council for the
Accreditation of Teacher Education [NCATE], 2001). Although the benefits of a
PDS model have been documented, there are limitations that may prohibit
some universities and colleges from fully implementing that model.
Abdal-Haqq (1991) identified four limitations which include (a) consumption of
considerable resources, (b) lack of professional kudos among university and
college faculty, (c) poor school culture, and (d) a paucity of quality sites
where teacher candidates might be placed.
Many urban-based institutions have readily adopted the principles of
the PDS model; however, rural-based schools may not be able to adopt
the collaboration and connectivity level necessary to replicate effective
PDS. The largest deterrent for rural-based schools to adopt the PDS model may
be physical distance to PK-12 schools, which may raise the investment cost
for postsecondary institutions to a prohibitive level (Clark, 1999). This
problem requires that rural-based postsecondary institutions look toward
educational technology alternatives that provide the same collaborative opportunities
as a means to achieve connectivity with academic partners and development
of quality coursework while maintaining integrity of programs (Albion
& Gibson, 2000; Dunn, Gibson, Bohaty, Merritt, & Witherspoon, 1999;
Gibson & Gibson, 1995; Gibson & King, 1997). More specifically, it is the belief
of the authors that the utilization of distance-learning technologies,
interactive television and e-mail may provide a viable solution to problems faced by
rural-based schools. One such solution is suggested in the Guided Observation
to Achieve Learning for Students (GOALS) model and subsequent pilot
study.
The GOALS Model
The GOALS model is designed for the teacher candidate's
professional preparation prior to the student teaching semester. During this period
of preparation, teacher candidates have completed general studies
curriculum and are enrolled in methods coursework and field experiences.
Typically teacher candidates are restricted to surrounding school districts to
complete field experiences during this period of preparation to allow for
postsecondary supervision. Therefore, at a rural postsecondary institution,
field experiences may be largely homogenous.
One of the core features of the GOALS model is the significance of
field experiences in providing opportunities to work with diverse
populations. The GOALS model is designed to capitalize on field experiences and
to initiate and reinforce the professional development of individual
teacher candidates through observation and collaboration with diverse
master teachers. Through access to master teachers, exhibiting a variety of
techniques, and observation of diverse PK-12 students, teacher candidates
are better equipped to develop techniques for working with diverse
PK-12 students (Love et al., 1990).
To meet both the objectives of a PDS model and to improve the diversity
of field experiences, the GOALS model uses two concurrent
quasi-PDS partnerships: the distance-learning observation partnership and the
PK-12 school practica partnership. Each partnership setting provides
valuable assets necessary for fulfilling the ideals of the PDS model (Figure 1
GOALS model).
Figure 1. GOALS model
The Distance-Learning Observation Partnership
To achieve the desired objectives of the GOALS model,
distance-learning observation is paramount. In the GOALS model, this partnership is
realized in several stages. Prior to embarking on the initial distance-learning
observation partnership stage, agreements must be made between the
postsecondary institution and participating PK-12 schools. The PK-12 schools
selected should have an existing relationship with the postsecondary
institution (Dolly & Oda, 1997). Additionally, both the postsecondary institution
and participating PK-12 schools must have a commitment to improve
teaching (Clark, 1999; Goodlad, 1990; The Holmes Group, 1990; Levine, 1997;
NCATE, 2001; Sandoval, 1996).
The distance-learning observation partnership within the GOALS
model consisted of four linear stages: (a) topic
introduction, (b) practice with peers, (c) a
guided observation, and (d)
collaboration. These four stages
were repeated with each new topic. Within the topic introduction
stage, teacher candidates were exposed to the theoretical basis for a specific
topic by the postsecondary methods faculty. This stage consisted of a
period where students had the opportunity to understand the theoretical
underpinnings of a specific topic. The second stage of the GOALS model,
practice with peers, gives students an opportunity to practice the topic by
presenting lessons to their peers. These two initial stages of the GOALS
model reflect current best practice in teacher education institutions.
The uniqueness of the GOALS model was exemplified in the
guided observation and collaboration stages of the distance-learning
observation partnership. The guided observation
stage required that both the postsecondary institution and the PK-12 inservice teacher had access to an
interactive television (ITV) system and that the two sites were
connectivity compatible. Additionally, the ITV system had the capability for both
one-way communication originating from the PK-12 school, and
two-way communication between the postsecondary institution and the
partner school.
Using the ITV system, the guided
observation consisted of the teacher candidate observing an inservice PK-12 teacher teaching a selected
topic using a strategic method of instruction. During the guided observation,
the inservice PK-12 teachers presented complete lessons to their own
PK-12 students. During the lesson, one-way ITV communication allowed
teacher candidates and postsecondary faculty to observe instruction
without distracting PK-12 students from a lesson. By observing in this manner,
the teacher candidates remained physically outside of the PK-12 classroom
and may, in fact, be less disruptive to PK-12 student learning.
During the ITV guided observation, the postsecondary faculty
member engaged teacher candidates in learning by asking questions, guiding
their observations, or leading them through the lesson plan or topic. For
example, teacher candidates beginning their programs were guided through
introductory components of a lesson plan. These guiding questions asked
students to identify preplanning tasks, lesson openings, lesson objectives,
and student assessment plans. More advanced teacher candidates ready
for higher-order thinking skills were asked to analyze or compare components
of the lesson. The guiding faculty member asked students to analyze
the observed lesson for necessary adaptations to meet the needs of
diverse learners, how technology may be incorporated to improve the lesson,
or
analyzing the lesson to determine which state or learned society
standards were met within the lesson.
Immediately following completion of the lesson within the
guided observation stage, two-way communication was restored and the
collaboration stage began. During the collaboration stage, teacher candidates,
postsecondary faculty, and the inservice teacher discussed questions or
discussion points posed by the teacher candidates. The questions teacher
candidates asked were not restricted in any way. The questions or discussion
points served to clarify some aspect of understanding for the teacher candidates
or may serve to provide an opportunity for reflective thought by any
participant of the collaboration stage: teacher candidate, postsecondary faculty,
or inservice teacher.
Teacher candidates had the opportunity to continue the dialog
begun during the collaboration stage through e-mail communication with
the inservice teacher. This communication afforded teacher candidates
and cooperating teachers to continue to dialog. Additionally these
e-mail contacts served as a catalyst for teacher candidates to continue a
mentoring relationship with inservice teachers, a relationship that could continue for
as long as each found it mutually rewarding.
The PK-12 School Practica Partnership
Within the PK-12 school practica partnership, the
planning stage was entered a full semester prior to placement of teacher candidates in
practica placements. Partner schools select which teacher candidates participat
in practica experiences within their school districts and classrooms.
The selection process was based upon the teacher candidate's ability
to communicate their prior practica and youth-related experiences. In
addition, teacher candidate selection is based upon the teacher candidates'
availability to experience curriculum at the practica partnership school related to
their teaching endorsement grade level(s) and cocurricular methods
course content. For example, Elementary Education Endorsement students
enrolled in Language Arts Methods may only be selected for elementary
placements during a time the teacher candidate is available and that corresponds
with the time when Language Arts will be taught at that partner school.
In addition to receiving information concerning the teacher
candidate, cooperating teachers received information concerning the
postsecondary institution and teacher candidate expectations. Expectations for
teacher candidates within the experience may include a variety of evidence of
the teacher candidate's ability to improve PK-12 student learning using each
of the topics. Artifacts of the experience included digital portfolios,
lesson plans, activity plans, videotapes of teaching sessions, and PK-12
student work. Once all participants understood the expectations, a
one-on-one practica placement was coordinated based upon the PK-12
principals' recommendation. The practica placement continued for a few hours
each week for one full semester.
The PK-12 practica school partnership was based largely upon the
benefits of an individual teacher candidate working with one inservice teacher
and their classroom. Since only one teacher candidate was assigned to a
PK-12 classroom, the teacher candidate was afforded a greater opportunity to
work with PK-12 students. Although this relationship was primarily a
mentoring relationship, the postsecondary faculty member traveled to visit the
PK-12 classroom at least once during the semester. During the visitation
the teacher candidate was required to present a lesson to the PK-12 students.
Piloting the GOALS Model in Elementary/Middle
School Language Arts Methods
A preservice language arts methods class was selected to serve as a
pilot population (N=22) for development of the GOALS Model. Prerequisites
for the class assured that participants were either junior or senior status
and were enrolled in the teacher education program majoring in either
elementary education or middle grades education. Additionally, students enrolled in
the language arts methods class were required to concurrently enroll for a
20-hour practicum in language arts at either an elementary or middle school.
The pilot project was designed in collaboration with two administrators,
an elementary teacher, a middle grades teacher, and two postsecondary
faculty. In the initial stage, the postsecondary faculty members contacted
area elementary and middle grades administrators from school districts that had
a strong existing relationship with the postsecondary institution to
further nurture the collaborative nature of a PDS. Additionally, the
participating
school districts possessed the required ITV facilities. These
administrators identified elementary and middle grades teachers from their districts
who were exemplary language arts instructors to participate in the project.
The language arts faculty member shared the topics and tentative schedule
for the coursework for the semester with the participating teachers. Each
teacher selected topics that were part of their existing curriculum and with
which they had demonstrated expertise. Dates and alternative dates were
selected for the guided observations. Each observation was recorded on
videotape for future reference.
While all observations were focused on the cooperating teacher,
the postsecondary students viewed the classroom from two perspectives:
the inservice teacher and elementary or middle grades students.
Videotaped sessions were made of the inservice teacher, however, incidental
identification of the elementary or middle grades students was a possibility.
To ensure that the privacy rights of the elementary and middle grades
students were not violated, participating schools obtained parental permission
for taping sessions.
All observations were conducted in ITV settings: postsecondary
distance-learning lab and the elementary or middle school ITV lab. At the
beginning of each observation, teacher candidates observed an inservice
teacher demonstrating a language arts strategy to his/her class. During that
time, with a few low-tech alterations, the removal of outgoing video and
audio signals from the postsecondary site made the GOALS observation
unobtrusive. The only obtrusion into the elementary or middle grades classroom
was the television screens, which appeared black during the observation.
During the observation, the faculty member guided student questions and
verbal observations while the inservice teacher was instructing the class.
This unobtrusive observation afforded the faculty and the teacher candidates
to critique the lesson as it was being taught. The teacher candidates
were encouraged to write questions on sticky notes for later reference during
the collaboration stage. After the lesson was finished, the elementary or
middle school students left the ITV lab and the audio and video were restored.
This modification allowed the teacher candidates and faculty members to
discuss lesson planning, teaching strategies, and classroom management with
the inservice teacher.
Faculty Observations of the GOALS Pilot Study
Evaluation of the GOALS pilot determined that the teacher
education candidates have benefited from both the guided observations and the
verbal interactions with the cooperating teachers. A review of the teacher
candidates' journal entries provided evidence of both a transfer of
teaching theory to practice, and, unexpectedly, this transfer also included
classroom management. Journal entries were collected through weekly e-mail
reflections and teacher candidate surveys. This evidence was supported
by videotapes illustrating interaction among teacher candidates,
cooperating teachers, and postsecondary faculty.
As reported in Table 1, teacher candidates indicated that observing
a cooperating teacher demonstrating literacy strategies that were first
introduced, demonstrated, and discussed at the postsecondary
institutions allowed the teacher candidate to transfer theory to practice and
resolve questions. In addition, teacher candidates determined how
instructional strategies impacted student learning and the modifications that may
be necessary for their instruction. As mentioned above, these journal
entries were supported by evidence recorded on videotape.
An unexpected outcome in this pilot project was the attention
teacher-candidates' directed at classroom management. As reported in Table
1, teacher candidates described classroom management techniques
that redirected students' behavior and/or maintained students' ontask
behavior. The classroom management techniques described within journal entries
and documented through videotaped sessions were not presented within
the methods classroom prior to the observations.
Table 1
Teacher Candidates' Journal and Survey Responses
Limitations and Challenges
The small number of teacher candidates
(N=22) enrolled in the language arts methods class presents a limitation. Although the small sample size
increased flexibility in developing the working model, it provided
limited evidence that using ITV improves the quality of teacher education
field experiences. The researchers plan to gain additional data by expanding
the model to all areas of teacher preparation within the college.
A significant challenge was moving the elementary or middle
grades students from their classroom to the ITV lab. It is concluded that
mobile
distance-learning carts with the same capabilities as the standard ITV
lab would provide greater flexibility and afford greater authenticity for
the observation. These carts would provide the mobility needed to observe
the actual elementary or middle grades classroom and simply replace
the televisions and VCRs located in most elementary and middle grades
classrooms. An additional benefit of mobile carts would be the potential
for faculty to make ITV visitations of teacher candidates during their
practica experience. Funding to purchase mobile carts for participating schools
is currently being sought.
Discussion
The results of the pilot project suggest that the educational
technology tools in the GOALS model can be effective to meet the principles of a
PDS model for rural teacher preparation institutions. Based on their
experiences with the GOALS Model in the elementary language arts methods class,
all participants concluded that the project should be expanded to
other methods coursework within the teacher preparation program. The
subsequent institutional commitment to expand the project to all content
areas within the elementary education program affirmed the administrative
support of the potential of the GOALS model. Finally, the high level of
collaboration between PK-12 schools and postsecondary participants to improve
the quality of teacher education preparation through the GOALS model
validates the potential of this teacher preparation approach.
References
Abdal-Haqq, I. (1991). Professional development schools and educational
reform: Concepts and concerns (Report No. EDO-SP-91-2).
Washington, DC: ERIC Clearinghouse on Teacher Education. (ERIC Document
Reproduction Service No. ED335357)
Albion, P.R. & Gibson, I.W. (2000). Problem-based learning as a multimedia
design framework in teacher education. Journal of Technology and
Teacher Education, 8(4), 315-26. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service
No. IR543604)
Clark, R. (1999). Effective professional development
schools. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Cobb, J. (2000). The impact of a professional development school on
preservice teacher preparation, inservice teachers' professionalism, and
children's achievement: Perceptions of inservice teachers.
Action in Teacher Education, 22(3), 64-76.
Dolly, J.P., & Oda, E.A. (1997). Toward a definition of professional
development schools. Peabody Journal of Education,
72(1), 178-86.
Dunn, T., Gibson, I.W., Bohaty, H., Merritt, G., & Witherspoon, E.
(1999). School and community partnerships: Collaborating through the
development of interactive, multimedia learning resources.
Education in Rural Australia, 9(2), 43-56. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. RC513600)
Gibson, I.W., & Gibson, K.L. (1995). Interactive television and problem
based learning: Viable delivery "technologies" for rural teacher education.
Education in Rural Australia, 5(2), 47-52. (ERIC Document Reproduction
Service No. EJ518726)
Gibson, I.W., & King, S. (1997, July). Partnerships, technology and
teaching: Celebrating the link between universities and rural
communities. Proceedings of the National Conference of the Society for Provision of
Education in Rural Australia (SPERA), Adelaide, South Australia. (ERIC
Document Reproduction Service No. ED429793)
Goodlad, J. (1990). Teachers for our nation's
schools. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
The Holmes Group. (1990). Tomorrow's schools: Principles for the design
of professional development schools. East Lansing, MI: Author.
Levine, M. (1997). Can professional development schools help to achieve
what matters most? Action in Teacher Education,
19, 63-73.
Love, F.E., Emerson, P., Shaw, J.M., & Leigh, C. (1996). Evolution of
professional development schools in a rural setting.
Contemporary Education, 67, 210-12.
National Council for the Accreditation of Teacher Education. (2001).
Standards for professional development
schools. Retrieved May 6, 2002, from: http://www.ncate.org/2000/pdsstands_10-00.pdf
Poetter, T.S. (2001). Creating a center of inquiry.
The Educational Forum, 65(4), 356-65.
Sandoval, P.A. (1996). How deep is collaboration? Teacher education
curriculum, course curriculum and the field. Contemporary Education,
67, 233-236.
Shelley, A.C. (2000). Our NCATE report card: A partnership for
excellence. The Educational Forum, 64(2), 156-64.
|