Meeting of the Commission
Friday, November 11, 2005
10:00 A.M. – 4:00 P.M.
Recital Room, Richards Hall
Dixon University Center, Harrisburg
Present at Meeting
| Caroline Allen |
Colleen Dorsey |
David Monk |
Elizabeth Useem |
| John Augustine II |
Carolyn Dumaresq |
Ivory N. Nelson |
|
| Cynthia Azari |
Peter Garland |
Donna Piekarski |
Elaine Frombach for M. Fabrizi |
| Robert Bartos |
James Gearity |
Harris Sokoloff |
Clythera Hornung for D. Surra |
| Terry Blue |
David Gilbert |
Michael Speziale |
Ann Duffield |
| Jane Bray |
Tomás Hanna |
Stinson Stroup |
Robert E. Feir |
| Patrick Browne |
Mark Holman |
John Tarka |
Stephen Pavlak |
| Nancy Bunt |
Richard Kneedler |
Cathy Trombetta |
Sarah Coon |
| Heather D’Angelo |
Alan Lesgold |
James W. Turner |
Michelle Tarlecki |
Opening and Introductions
Dr. Kneedler began the meeting at 10:10 a.m. He thanked everyone
for spending Veteran’s Day at the Dixon University Center for
the meeting.
Minutes of the October 21 meeting were approved without objection
and will be posted on the Commission’s website.
Dr. Kneedler noted that the Philadelphia regional meeting was held
on November 8 at Temple University. Notes were made of the issues
people raised at the meeting. These notes will be posted. There was
an excellent turnout and representation from both school districts
and colleges. It allowed for a dialogue between providers and consumers
of teachers. We need to encourage more practitioners from schools
to attend the meetings.
Due to the importance of Goal 1, the schedule has been changed for
the remainder of the meetings. Goal 1 will be discussed at the November
and December meetings. This means that the January meeting will consider
Goal 2, February meeting – Goals 3 and 4, and March meeting – Goal
5.
Commissioners who were not present at the last meeting introduced
themselves.
Facilitated Plenary Discussion of Key Terms
Ann Duffield was introduced as the facilitator and began the discussion
of Goal 1 and its key terms. Commissioners have to keep in mind that,
since the goal will not be realized tomorrow, but rather 5 to 10
years from now, the state should make steady progress toward meeting
the goal.
Ms. Duffield asked the Commissioners how they would describe each
of the words “world class,” “excellence,” “effective,” and “classroom.”
She asked Commissioners what “world class” meant to
them. Responses from Commissioners included “among the best
in the world,” “standard by which everyone measures themselves,” “exemplary,” “exceptionally
high standard that everyone recognizes as valid,” and “can
compete with everyone in the world and do better.” In terms
of teaching, the word might mean that “our teachers are as
good as teachers anywhere and better.” Some suggested, however,
that the word itself is a form of boosterism, used indiscriminately,
only PR talk, and devoid of real meaning. It does not tell us what
is wrong or what we need to improve. The market can set the standard
by telling us who is taking advantage of our product. It is validated
externally through the public and internally through the people who
set the standard.
“Excellence” was the next word discussed by Commissioners.
Several points were made about this word. Some said it was a standard
with a constantly moving target. There is a need to stay ahead of
the target. “Excellence” should not be referred to in
terms of the teacher or the student, but rather the educational system
as a whole. It was said that in order for “excellence” to
occur within the classroom, the teacher must be able to meet all
the needs of the students in the classroom. This includes needs in
addition to the educational needs of the students.
“Effective” was a word touched upon briefly. What does
it mean to be effective? Several definitions were put forth – “to
meet a level of effectiveness: either effective or not” and “to
meet the needs of different types of students so that they perform
at a high level.” Some noted that there are different levels
of “effectiveness,” and in order for something to be
effective, it has only to meet a relatively low threshold. Would
parents like their children to have an “effective” teacher
or a “world class” teacher?
The last word discussed by Commissioners was “classroom.” Descriptions
of the word included “environment of delivery” and “a
community where students are learning.” This community can
be in a room within a building or out in society. It was suggested
that new terminology clearly state that a “classroom” is
more than the stagnant picture of a room within a building. Society
should be brought into the classroom and vice-versa. Because all
communities have different cultures, it is difficult to have a standard
definition.
Some suggested that for a new teacher to be competent in all the
areas mentioned was impossible and that we should be thinking of
teaching as a team – rather than a solo – effort. A comparison
was made with medicine. A single doctor cannot treat a patient with
a heart condition, liver cancer, and emotional problems. This is
one of the reasons that doctors specialize. A danger with specialization,
however, is that once everyone has specialized, no one will be looking
at the whole. There was considerable discussion of the need for all
teachers to be able to teach diverse learners and to know when referrals
to experts (e.g., special education teachers) are appropriate.
The environment of teaching is also very important. It is constantly
being measured and improved. The teacher is managing a learning community
environment, which is never the same from one moment to the next.
The environment of elementary school also is different from that
of high school. In high school, most of the teaching is specialized,
while in elementary school, most teaching is performed by generalists.
It would be inappropriate to impose either environment on the other
situation.
Is it responsible to suggest that a 21- or 22-year-old with four
years of preparation is ready to have full responsibility for a classroom?
Would a five-year preparation program be more appropriate? How does
this preservice preparation relate to the continuing education that
occurs once a person begins his or her teaching career?
Breakout Groups
After the morning discussion, the Commissioners were divided into
three smaller groups. The pre-assigned discussion topics were changed
to accommodate the morning discussion. Each group was asked to look
at what the K-12 schools, the universities, and the state should
do to ensure the best possible novice teachers.
The three breakout groups independently arrived at many common conclusions
about the roles of universities, K-12 schools, and state policy in
promoting effective novice teachers. They also identified several
approaches to improving the continuing professional education of
teachers. Many of these specific points emphasized the need for rethinking
teacher education as more than a preservice event; but, rather, as
a continuous process that involves at least the four or five years
of preservice preparation and the first 3-6 years of teaching (although
all three groups recognized that professional education continues
throughout a teacher’s career). Points in common among the
groups included:
- University role
- Get “hands dirty” working in K-12 schools – faculty
exchange, more interaction, continuing partnerships
- Bring the K-12 environment back into the university – joint
appointments, university faculty work in public schools
- Ensure conscious discussion of pedagogical content knowledge
between education and arts and sciences faculty
- Work with school districts to establish and operate Professional
Development Schools
- Participate in regional K-16 councils
- Revise university instruction to help novice teachers learn
how to work as members of instructional teams
- Reward K-12 service in tenure and promotion considerations
- School district role
- Provide excellent experienced teachers for clinical placements
- Recognize that novice teachers are not “done” and
provide support system for them
- Support teachers in the first few years, but also later in
their careers
- Develop “grow your own” programs, especially in
districts with trouble recruiting, by encouraging high school
students to consider teaching careers and supporting paraprofessionals
and others in the community who may wish to become teachers (example:
urban education high school academies for high school juniors
and seniors)
- Use induction, Act 48 professional development, and the 24
credits to transition from Instructional I to Instructional II
certification in order to be more intentional in establishing
a system of teacher education that is clearly connected to pre-service
and in-service preparation programs
- Expand induction to 2 or 3 years
- Provide more time for collaboration among teachers to develop
the concept of teaching as a team activity
- Consider less challenging initial teaching assignments for
new teachers (roles for policy, union contracts, and finances)
- Some form of career ladder to take advantage of increasing
skills of teachers (e.g., as mentors or teacher coaches) and
to differentiate the profession for those wanting to take advantage
of that
- State policy role
- Create a more seamless teacher education system by linking
preservice preparation, induction, professional development,
and requirements for Instructional II certification
- Support the Governor’s School for Teaching
- Incorporate the concepts of the National Board for Professional
Teaching Standards into state policy
- Provide state funding for expanded induction programs
- Establish a career ladder to retain teachers
At 12:15 p.m., the meeting recessed for lunch.
Touring Groups
At 1:00 p.m. the meeting reconvened. The groups were reconstituted
and went to each station to look at what the morning groups had come
up with. They discussed the ideas with each other.
Discussion of Skills, Knowledge, and Characteristics of Effective
Novice Teachers
Ms. Duffield began the discussion of skills, knowledge, and characteristics
of effective novice teachers by observing that in the past teaching
has been seen as a private activity conducted, so to speak, “behind
a closed door.” Once in the classroom with the door closed,
the teacher is alone with his or her students. What the Commission
is talking about would change that. Are people ready for that change?
Will that attract a different type of person to the teaching profession?
In the past, teaching has been described as being “in the classroom.” With
changes over time, teaching can now be described as “in the
community.”
How do teacher educators and K-12 employers recognize which students
are most likely to become effective teachers? Commissioners suggested
the following skills, knowledge, and characteristics:
- extroverted
- tolerant
- good interpersonal skills
- can deal with ambiguity
- can navigate school’s setting effectively
- persistence
- flexibility
- organizational skills
- prepared
- ethics
- has a passion for teaching
- continuous learners
- commitment/sense of responsibility
- strong communication skills with wide range of people
- content knowledge
- strong verbal skills
- creative/innovative
- has experienced personal learning challenges
- technology savvy
- interest in “meta-cognition” – how do we know
what we know?
- knowledge of child development
- understanding cultural variation in learning
- knowledge of differences/diversity of students teacher will be
teaching
- additional points about the skills of a teacher
- Should have dispositions described by INTASC
- NCATE standards would also be helpful to look at
- What skills does the PRAXIS really test?
Discussion then turned to the level at which a novice teacher should
demonstrate these characteristics.
The morning discussion of the meaning of certain words spurred a
discussion of the meaning of “content.” Is “content” the
knowledge that teachers want students to retain in their minds? Or
is content more than “the facts” and inclusive of pedagogical
knowledge – how to teach and learn specific disciplines?
Both content and pedagogy are interconnected; neither one is a separate
entity. In the past there has been a push for content-based learning.
If a person is a genius but has no teaching skills, that person will
not be able to convey the content to the students. If a person has
the skills to teach, but does not know the content, that person will
also not be able to teach the students the content. Both are required
for a person to be successful in teaching students.
Teachers also need to be knowledgeable about the emotional, physical,
and social aspects of child development. And they must exhibit multicultural
understanding. A teacher needs to understand the cultural and diversity
issues that affect his or her classroom. University faculty must
have and must model multicultural understanding.
All teachers must possess these skills, but experienced teachers
possess them at a higher level and should help the novice teacher
strengthen these skills, attributes, and characteristics, helping
him or her become an effective experienced teacher.
How should experienced teachers help novice teachers entering the
field? Some suggested that first-year teachers should not be teaching
100 percent of the time. They should have mentoring built into the
school day. The first year should be less challenging and isolating
in order to allow new teachers to build up their skills. Although
this may be the ideal way to help a first year teacher, it rarely
occurs. In Philadelphia, first year teachers are experiencing difficult
situations that are often not seen in other school districts. The
ideal situation would have a reduction in teaching with less difficult
situations, but new teachers still need to be taught how to deal
with any situation that may arise.
Many parents do not differentiate between a novice teacher and an
expert teacher. A teacher is a teacher, no matter at what level.
Many parents feel that they want their students to be taught by the
best. Are parents going to allow their students to be taught by a
novice teacher, if we are going to differentiate between the types
of teachers? Where is the line drawn for what people are supposed
to expect of a teacher?
In regard to what a teacher should know and to what extent they
should know it, Dr. Kneedler asked Commissioners to write a few words
on the question and submit them to Dr. Feir. The question was: “What
should a novice teacher know, be able to do, and be able to exhibit
when he or she begins teaching?”
The Department of Education has developed common teacher assessment
forms – PDE 430, 426, and 427—based on the INTASC standards.
Staff will make them available to Commissioners.
Reflections on the Meeting
Dr. Kneedler asked what everyone thought of the meeting and the
Commission’s work thus far. People mentioned that they liked
the e-mail chats that were going on and that breaking into small
groups was useful. The small groups allowed people to talk more,
and the groups came to similar conclusions regarding the issues.
Public Comments
There were none.
Housekeeping Items
Dr. Feir reminded Commissioners about the change in topics for upcoming
meetings and that the next meeting will wrap up the questions associated
with Goal 1. There will probably need to be additional work in groups
at that meeting. In the mailing for this meeting, several pieces
of research were sent out. Everyone concurred that the research was
a big help and well done.
The time of the regional Commission meetings was raised. Teachers
and people with daytime commitments cannot attend the regional meetings
because they are held during the day. If there were a regional meeting
held at night, more school districts would be able to provide input.
Dr. Feir said staff would explore ways to accomplish this goal.
Executive Director’s Report
Dr. Feir reported on meetings he held in recent weeks in Columbus,
Ohio and Washington, D.C. In Columbus, he met with representatives
of the Ohio Department of Education, the Ohio Board of Regents, and
the Ohio Education Standards Board. The meetings were designed to
learn about a similar commission appointed by Ohio’s Governor
a few years ago and about efforts to implement its recommendations.
In Washington, he met with representatives of the American Association
of Colleges for Teacher Education (AACTE), the Mid-Atlantic Regional
Teacher Project (MARTP), which is working on regional certification
reciprocity, and INTASC.
The meeting was adjourned at 3:45 p.m.
