Revolution Explosion, Is a Talk .By Frankie Beth Nelson About the Way
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
DOCUNINTSCIUNI ED 029 851 SP 002 691 BrEdelfelt. Roy A. Ed. The Rd* of the State Educational Agency in the Development of Innovative Programs in Student Teaching. Maryland State Dept. of Education. Baltimore.: National Commission on Teacher Education and Professional Standards. Washington. D.C. Spons Agencr Office of Education (DHEW). Washington. D.C. Pub Date 69 Note-152p.: Report of conference held October 21-23. 1968. Beitknore. Maryland. Available from-Maryland State Department of Education. State Office SW**, 301 'West Preston Stmt. ' Baltimore. Maryland 21201. EMS Price MF-110.75 HC47.70 !; Descriptors-Educational Innovation. *Field Experience Programs. Government Role. State Departments of 1; Education, State Program% *Studer& Teaching Inthe introduction to this collection of papers. William Drummond summarizes the national conference proceed* and personal reactions to then Olvter 1. 'The Revolution Explosion,isa talk .by Frankie Beth Nelson about The way an anthropologist looks at The school and its purposes. Chapter 2 (SP 002 631). 'Student Teaching The State of the Art: is a paper presented by E. Graham Pogue dealing with such problems as scheduling, fadlities. supervision. financing, and l efficiency in professional laboratory exfieriences. Chapter 3. 'A NationalSurveitiinoiearl State Practices and Trends in Student Teaching; by Mary Bullock Hess is a of a study done in partial fulfillment of the doctoral of education degree.Ch641:17 is a series of 10 short papers on 'What I Think Student Teaching Should Become' by Kathleen Amershek, Margaret Ammons. L a Mdrews, Richard Cdllar. Lindsey. Hans Cisen. RObert Reynolds. Donald Sharpe. E. Brooks Smitk and Joe Chapter 6 (tD 024 650 is a paper by James Stone proposinta6structure for a state . organization of Education Professions Institutes. A *Coda' by Roy Edelfelt attempts to ptil together in brief form the things which need attention if student teaching is to evolve into a significant practicum experience.* (JS) THE ROLE OP THE STATE EOUCATIONAL AGENCY IN THE DEVELOPMENT OP .., co INNOVATIVE 0, (4 PROGRAMS a IN STUDENT Lai TEACHING It 4 Roy A. Edelfelt, Editor LS. IMMO V IBM MIN a MI OM OF MIMI MS OMIT HAS NM MIES WRY U MVONOME KUM 01111111ABN 01111U1111 IT. MB * MT MtOM SIMS 10 NT EMU MINI WM Offla OF INCURI P011101 WHIM %.._ Report of a conference held at Baltimore, Maryland, October 2143, 1908, end financed through a project developed by the Maryland State W. uperintendent of Schools and funded by the U. S. Office of Ed tio NS under P.L. 8940, Title V. Section 505. licaa qr 0 0 0CL 1 Additional copies of this volume areavailable from the Maryland State Departmentof Education State Office Building 301West Preston Street Baltimore, Maryland 21201 1969 The conference reported upon in this volume was supported by a grant from the Office of Education, U. S. Department of Health, Education', and Welfare, under the provisions of Public Law 8940. the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, Title V. Section 505. Contractors undertaking such projects under federal government sponsorship are encouraged to express freely their professional judgment in the conduct of the project. Points of view or opinions stated herein do not, therefore, necessarily represent official Office of Education position or policy. The Baltimore Conference was sponsored by the Maryland State Department of Education and planned and coordinated by the National Commission on Teacher Education and Professional Standards of the National Education Association, Washington, D. C. Contents PREFACE V INTRODUCTION. William H. Drummond I Chapter One THE REVOLUTION EXPLOSION. Frankie Beth Nelson9 Chapter Two STUDENT TEACHING: THE STATE OF THE ART 17 B. Graham Pogue Chapter Three A NATIONAL SURVEY OF STATE PRACTICES AND 31 TRENDS IN STUDENT TEACHING Mary Du/ lock Hess Chapter Four WHAT I THINK STUDENT TEACHING SHOULD BECOME 45 I. ICathhen Amershek 45 IL Margaret P. Ammons 48 III. L. 0. Andrews 52 IV. Richard E. Collier58 V. Margaret Lindsey 59 VI. Hans C. Olsen 89 VII. Robert I. Reynolds 73 VIII. Donald M. Sharpe78 IX. B. Brooks Smith81 /C. joe Smith 84 Chapter Five INNOVATIVE IDEAS IN STUDENT TEACHING87 Kathleen Amershek and Chandler Barbour I. An Overview 87 II. Program Descriptions 91 Chapter Six ONE STEP FURTHER, lames C. Stone135 Chapter Seven CODA, Roy A. Melte& 145 v Preface In October 1984 six national organizations were invited by the National Commission on Teacher Education and Professional Standards (NCTEPS) of the National Education Association (NEA) to join the Commission in sponsoring and appointing representatives to serve on a 13-member joint Committee on State Responsibility for Student Teaching "to consider the possible scope and dimensions" of such responsibility and "make appropriate recommendations." During the next two years the Committee met, deliberated, and published two reports entitled Who's in Charge Here? (NEA, 1906) and A New Order in Student Teaching (NEA, 1987). During the time the joint Committee was carrying on its activities. a related professional endeavor was also in progress. This was the project that came to be known as M-STEP (Multi-State Teacher Edo- cation Project) in which seven states banded together to explore inno- vative practices in laboratory experiences for prospective teachers with a major emphasis on student teaching. The project was funded by a grant under Title V, Section 505, of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1905. As the activities of both the Joint Committee and M-STEP were approaching completion, the Maryland State Department of Education submitted to the U. S. Office of Education a proposal entitled "The Role of the State Educational Agency in the Development of Innovative Programs in Student Teaching" for funding under ESEA Title V, Sec- tion 505. When the proposal was approved, the State Department con- traded with the WISPS to assist in planning and coordinating a national conference, which was held in Baltimore, October 21-23, 1908. The major aim of the Baltimore Conference was to bring together key people such as chief state school officers and other staff of state vii legislators, membersof state boardsof educem education departments, and col- don, representativesof professionalassociations, and school administrators todiscuss statewideplanning for policy lege faculty and innovative ideas andpractices making and organisationand to explore in studentteaching. the materials The Lontents ofthis book represent,for the most part, Baltimore Conference.We hope thevolume will prepared for the departments contribute to and have apart inshaping the role of state of education inteacher education. acknowledge the spesialcontribution madeby Miss I want to in the Geraldine B. Pershing ofthe NEA-NCTIIPSstaff, who assisted editing, designing,and production ofthis report. JAMBS A. SENSFXBAUGH Maryland StateSuperintendent ofSchools February 1969 viii *NNW ,, si.- . ,v .;t : . f, ./ , , I; Introduction William ft. Drummond Associate for Teacher Education (Vice of the Superintendent of Public Instruction State of Washington At the Baltimore Conference, participants were invited to talk to- sether and to hear about strengthening the state's role in student teaching. The "state's role" and "student teaching" both were broadly defined by the conference plminers. We were given a number of docu . meats to read and we heard from the best minds in America either on what is being done or on what ought to be done to improve student teaching. This paper presents an overview and reaction to the papers and proceedings of the Conference, much of which is included in this book. I have organized my remarks into three topics: what I heard at the Conference, personal reactions to the Conference. and autunptions which underlie the Conference and this book and action steps I mom- mend for those who want to participate in improving student teaching. What one hears at a conference is sometimes not what one ought to hear, considering all the data being presented. And I have found that what I hear I. often quite different front what others hear. The follow- ing reflects my peculiar perceptions. At the opening session, hankie Beth Nelson gave a friendly, low- keyed talk about the way an anthropologist looks at the school and the school's purposes. (Ch. 1.) I heard her say that many of our organize- tions, our schools in particular. are destructive of people. Many of the people involved in schoolteachers and studentslearn that they cannot compete, cannot achieve, cannot do. I heard her call for another look at schools and school life, to see schooling u a cluster of tempo. rary systems (using Warren Bennis' language)close-knit social ar- rangements which do not persist in time but are important to selfhood and dignity. I heard her say that we need to help people in our schools e stablish close, satisfying personal relationships with others easily and quiddy. I heard Frani& Beth Nelson say that. for a lot of people who engage in it, teaching school isn't any fun; that working in state departments of education isn't any fun. Many people do not get kicks from work and feel that they should not. Work, according to our American ethic, needs to be distasteful or it is sinful. We need to learn to have fun in school. Learning and solving problems are fun. We do not necessarily have to make these activities feel like "worle At the first conference work session we were given a paper by Graham Pogue, a thoughtful and accurate paper, I think, from the per . spective of a director of student teaching. (Ch. 2.) He wrote about scheduling student teaching, the use of new media, the problem of making appropriate assignments, the nature of supervision, finance, expectations placed on the student, and the problems of trying to change student teachingall in a few pages. There are some folks who have written whole books on Just one of these topics. Aside hum the content of the discussion, the thing that impressed me most about the work session was that several people reacted to Mr.