ED 087 772

AUTHORTITLE

INSTITUTION

PUB DATENOTE

AVAILABLE FROM

DOCUMENT RESUME

SP 007 759

Lindsey, MargaretFerment and Momentum in Teacher Education. 15thAnnual Charles W. Hunt Lecture.American Association of Colleges for TeacherEducation, Washington, D.C.7425p.; Lecture presented at the 26th Annual Meeting ofthe American Association of Colleges for TeacherEducation, Chicago, Iii., February 20, 1974Publications Dept., American Association of Collegesfor Teacher Education, One Dupont-Circle, Suite 610,Washington, D.C. 20036 ($1.00)

EDRS PRICE MF-$0.65 HC-$3.29DESCRIPTORS *Educational Change; *Educational Quality;

Leadership; Power Structure; Relevance (Education) ;Social Change; *Teacher Education.

ABSTRACTThis paper identifies salient features of scholarship

and statesmanship that are required to bring about constructivemomentum from the ferment in which today's teacher educators areoperating. After brief comments on the nature of the ferment found inthe general environment, the ferment in teacher education isillustrated through two examples. The foci selected for discussionare (a) one attempt to enhance the quality of teacher education and(b) the current struggle for power and control in the field ofteacher education. In each case, a look at alternative ways teachereducators interact with the fast-moving elements in the ferment leadsto recommendations about scholarship and statesmanship that couldbring about constructive momentum. (Author)

I NCHARLES W. HUNTThe Lectures and the Man

Through the Charles W. Hunt Lecture, given at each of theAnnual Meetings of the American Association of Collegesfor Teacher Education since 1960, AACTE proudly acknowl-

is edges its debt to this dedicated educational statesman.

MY This year, we in the Association are particularly saddenedby the passing of Charles Hunt, who died September 3, 1973at his home in Oneonta, New York. At nearly 93, herepresented a remarkable tie to the past. However, thosewho knew Dr. Hunt recognized his strong concern forcontemporary affairs combined with a vision of what could be.

Though he spent most of his professional life as anadministrator, he rightly insisted on identifying himselfas a teacher. His infectious enthusiasm for life and hischampioning of the God-given right of every individual,young or old, to develop to his maximum potential arequalities which always marked his commitment to thepreparation of teachers. His vitality and determination tomove ahead in reshaping teacher education and his skill infiring up others to do so are in the best tradition of thegood teacher.

As a champion of the democratic ideal, he counseled grass-roots organization and solidarity to accomplish reform. Asa true pioneer in teacher education, he was wise enoughto view the community not only as a laboratory, but as asource for ideas and support. A teacher, communicator, andan agent for change, he "shook the ideas and structure"of teacher education.

As AACTE Executive Director Edward C. Pomeroy saidat the memorial service for Dr. Hunt September 5, 1973:"Without a man of the visio; i of Charles Hunt and theencouragement he provided, certainly the history of thesepast 50 years in American education would have beensignificantly different." Indeed much of importance inorganized teacher education has happened in his lifetime.

Born in Charlestown, New Hampshire, in 1880, CharlesWesley Hunt was educated at Brown University (B.A. 1904)and Columbia University (M.A. 1910, Ph.D. 1922), all thewhile teaching English in New England and New York untilhe began a supervisory career in 1910. In his 18 years ascollege president, from 1933 to 1951, he helped to transforman old normal school at Oneonta into State University ofNew York at Oneonta, a multipurpose institution within astate system of colleges.

Our Association owes much to Charles Hunt. Servingvoluntarily for 25 years as secretary-treasurer (1928-53), hewas instrumental in transforming the American Association ofTeachers Colleges into the American Association of Collegesfor Teacher Education. Until his death, he continued to serveas consultant to the Association's Board of Directors. Hisinspiration still guides AACTE and its professional men andwomen who represent their institutions.

The Lecture Series is conceived as a continuing professionaltribute to the years of leadership and service which Dr. Huntgave to education. When this series was begun in 1960, Dr.Hunt advised us to hold fast to "enduring faith in ourpurposes, faith in our fellow workers, and faith in thedemocratic tradition and process." Such dedicatedcommitment is still needed today to lift the quality ofeducation in American society. Charles Hunt has built amodel that will serve future professionals well.

MARGARET LINDSEY, Professor of EducationTeachers College,Columbia University

A prominent educator recently spoke of Margaret Lindseyas "the dean of teacher educators," an affectionate and wellearned honorific. Her professional colleagues know her as anindefatigable worker in the cause of improved teachereducation contributing to innumerable projects, associations,committees, and publications with enthusiasm and dedication.

Her greatest concern through the years has been curriculumimprovement. But perhaps her favorite activity is her workwith graduate students, for, in addition to her vast committeework, she carries a full teaching schedule at Teachers College.Indeed she has played a large role in preparing many teachereducators and deans now active in the field.Margaret Lindsey began her studies in Pennsylvania, earninga B.S. in elementary education at Shippensburg StateCollege and an M.A. in elementary school administrationand reading at Pennsylvania State University, UniversityPark. After teaching elementary school and college inPennsylvania, she earned her Ed.D. in curriculum andteaching at Teachers College, Columbia University, in 1946.On the university level, she has been coordinator ofprofessional education at Indiana State University in TerreHaute; research associate and project director of the HoraceMann-Lincoln Institute of School Experimentation atColumbia University; and director of the Training ofTeacher Trainers (TTT) Project at Teachers College, ColumbiaUniversity.

She has written for many professional journals and is editoror coauthor of numerous books and research projects onelementary education. curriculum, student teaching,supervision, and professional standards.State and national borders cannot contain Dr. Lindsey, forshe has traveled widely as consultant to faculties of teachereducation and state departments of education. Even foreigncountries have benefited from her expertise as research

associate on teacher education projects in Africa for theAmerican Council on Education and for the Afro-Anglo-American Project, and as study tour associateon education in West Germany for the U. S. Officeof Education.Dr. Lindsey's many professional association offices areevidence of her distinguished devotion to the profession.For the Association of Teacher Educators (ATE), she hasbeen president of the New York State chapter and presidentof the national ATE. For the National Education Associationand the American Association of School Administrator',she was vice-chairman of the Educational PoliciesCommission. She has been vice-chairman, project director,and editor for the NEA National Commission on TeacherEducation and Professional Standards (TEPS).The American Association of Colleges for Teacher Educationhas been a longtime recipient of her valuable contributions.She began as research associate and coauthor of themonumental study of student teaching, School andCommunity Laboratory Experiences in Teacher Education,published in 1948 by the Association's Standards andSurveys Committee. She has served on the AACTECommittee on Evaluative Criteria, the Committee on Studies,and the Advisory Committee for the ERIC Clearinghouseon Teacher Education, and chaired the Committee onStandards.Currently Dr. Lindsey is a member of the AACTEPerformance-Based Teacher Education Project Committee,chairman of the AACTE-NCATE Task Force on Accreditation,and member of the Advisory Committee on TeacherEducation, Council for Exceptional Children.Few persons are better qualified than Margaret Lindseyto view with clarity the rising tide of ferment in our professionand to recommend techniques to fosterconstructive momentum.

FERMENT ANDMOMENTUM INTEACHER EDUCATIONMargaret Lindsey

The Fifteenth Charles W.Hunt Lecture

Presented at the Twenty-sixth AnnualMee linkol the American Associationof Colleges (or Teacher EducationChicago, IllinoisFebruary 20, 1974'

The title of this lecture placesin juxtaposition two concepts,ferment` and momentum. This doesnot mean that there is a necessaryone-to-one, sequential relationshipbetween the two, any more than thereis between "love and marriage" or"horse and carriage," in spite of thepropaganda advanced in an oldpopular song.

Ferment is manifested by excitement,agitation, tension; often by confusion,uncertainty, or insecurity; sometimesby frustration and even anxiety. In afield like teacher education,unanswered questions, unresolvedissues, and dissatisfaction with resultsof previous efforts are the conditionsproducing ferment. Ferment isheightened -by the attention ofimportant persons, allocation of funds,definition of research proposals, andpublicizing of suggested solutions.

Momentum connotes concertedmovement in a perceptible direction.As placed in this year's theme, itsuggests that out of ferment may bedistilled ideas with the power tomobilize energies and eventuate inprogress.

The title of this lecture was derived from thetheme of the 26th Annual Meeting of theAmerican Association of Colleges forTeacher Education.

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH,EDUCATION & WELFARENATIONAL INSTITUTE OF

EDUCATIONTHIS DOCUMENT HAS BEEN REPRODUCED EXACTLY AS RECEIVED FROMTHE PERSON OP ORGANIZATION ORIGINATING IT. POINTS OF VIEW OR OPINIONSSTATED DO NOT NECESSARILY REPRE.SENT OFFICIAL NATIONAL INSTITUTE OFEDUCATION POSITION OR POLICY.

.PERMISSION TO REPRODUCE THIS COPY-RIGHTED MATERIAL HAS 8FEN GRANTED BY

70 ERIC AND ORGANIZATIONS OPERATINGUNDER AGREEMENTS VVITH THE NATIONAL IN-STITUTE OF EDUCATION. FURTHER REPRO-DUCTION OUTSIDE THE ERIC SYSTEM RE-QUIRES PERMISSION OF THE COPYRIGHTOWNER"

It is characteristic of the rolling,bubbling, sputtering condition calledferment that many ideas are put forthtentatively, only to disappearunnoticed. Others explode on thescene and command attention, buteven explosive ideas may meet asudden and inconsequential death.Nevertheless, a field in ferment is to bepreferred to one that is static andtensionless. A few quiet but usefulideas may survive to have a positive,continuing influence on the field. A fewexplosive ideas may have constructiveand enduring impact. With fermentcomes opportunity.

Not all momentum is productive either.Some forward thrusts may besuperficial because they are backedby false claims or are motivated byunprofessional considerations. Evenmomentum that appears promising inearly stages may be quashed byunintelligent behavior of persons in ahurry for a successful outcome. Hence,both ferment and momentum havepositive and negative potential; bothhave the power to promote and thepower to restrict progress.

The task of teacher educators is notalone to search out and makeconstructive use of existing ferment. Itis also to ask the penetrating questions,delineate the.issues, state theobservations, and advance the hunches

5

6

and innovative proposals that willcreate new tensions. Thereby, we willenhance the quality of the fermentand increase the likelihood ofconstructive momentum. To aconsiderable extent, scholarship andstatesmanship in our field are bestdemonstrated in such action.

A primary intent of this paper is toidentify salient features of scholarshipand statesmanship required to bringabout constructive momentum fromthe ferment in the midst of whichtoday's teacher educators areoperating. After brief comments onthe nature of the ferment found in thegeneral environment, the ferment inteacher education will be illustratedthrough two examples. The fociselected for discussion are, first, oneattempt to enhance the quality ofteacher education and, second, thecurrent struggle for power and controlin the field of teacher education. Ineach case, a look at alternative waysteacher educators interact with the fast-moving elements in the ferment leadsto recommendations aboutscholarship and statesmanship thatcould bring about constructivemomentum.

AN ENVIRONMENT IN FERMENTAs we are well aware, there is fermentout in the wider world of which we are

a part. For example, disturbances inthe Middle East and Asia, the globalenergy crisis, struggles fornationhood and independence, andunequal distribution of the world'sresources contribute to ferment in ourexistence. Closer to our daily livesand highly influential in ourprofessional work is ferment' on thedomestic scenefear of anindustrial complex with increasingcontrol over goods and services,forewarnings of disastrousinflation, erosion of confidence inpoliticians, confrontation with hardfacts of our failures in terms ofjustice and equality of opportunity,disconcerting recognition of lack ofethics in much of our life and work,and growing awareness of theawesome power of communicationmedia to influence persons of all ages.Still closer to our professionalactivities is ferment arising out ofdissatisfaction with the nation's formaleducational system, which is accusedof being controlled by a closedestablishment, perpetuating injustice,failing to meet the needs of largegroups of people, and burdeningcitizens with costs beyond theirability to pay.

Furthermore, as workers ininstitutional settings, primarily thoughnot exclusively institutions of highereducation, we share with ourinstitutional communities the ferment

directly affecting themferment thatarises both within and outside ofinstitutional walls.

Recent reports on higher educationreveal intense agitation, strongtensions, much confusion, uncertainty,and insecurityall signs of fermentGovernance of institutions hasshifted increasingly to outsideagencies, such as state commissions onhigher education and various otheragencies of state government.Faculty members find themselves inconflict over purposes of academiclife, where to place their loyalties,how to use their time, to what toassign priority, with whom to casttheir lot for protection of their rightsand welfare. Debate continues aboutcriteria to be used and by whomapplied in evaluation of facultyperformance, whether it be fortenure, promotion, salary, or specialmerit. Individual institutions take onever more functions, and senselessduplication is rampant. To achievegraduate standing is the centralpurpose of much institutionalbehavior, and the quality ofundergraduate programs suffers fromthe deprivation accompanying lossof prestige.

As stated in a recent report, "Facultymembers are now under greaterpressure than before from studentswho want more power, from

legislators that have potential powerand want control, from a labormarket that was favorable but hasbecome relatively unfavorable. Theyare on the defensive." 1 Editors speakof the "new depression in highereducation" and of the critical lessonsin "economics being learned by allprofessors." 2 Unionization of facultymembers proceeds at a rapid pace,from about 3000 in 1966 to over82,000 in 1973.3 Controversysurrounding open admission,compensatory,programs, freeuniversities, and proficiencyexaminations continues. A concept ofuniversal opportunity for educationbeyond the high school still arousesheat in argumentation and frustrationin implementation.

It takes no stretch of the imaginationto realize that centers of ferment, suchas those just identified, :Ere criticalaspects of ferment in our particularfield of specialization. Theyconstitute a major force in selectingand defining purposes to be served byeducational institutions and thus havea direct bearing on roles andresponsibilities of professionaleducators at all levels. Coupled withnumerous other areas of ferment in thesociety at large, they form thehistorical and contemporary roots ofthe ferment in teacher education,which is our central concern at thismeeting and to which we now tum.4

7

8

FERMENT IN TEACHEREDUCATION: ENHANCEMENTOF QUALITYThere are many signs that much of theferment in teacher education today,as in the past, centers around thequality of all aspects of the operation.For example, professional educationcourses continue to be ridiculed foralleged low quality. Differences ofopinion about what novices knowor can do as they enter professionalpractice are voiced as strongly asever by both educators and outsiders.Veteran practitioners still complainabout the uselessness of the advancedstudy provided for them either byuniversities or by school systems.Although feuding has subsidedsomewhat, "aca,'2micians" and"educationists" go on accusing eachother of inadequacy, lack ofscholarship, and failure to makeinstruction relevant and meaningfulto students. Concern with quality inteacher education is not new, butdissatisfaction with both practiceand achievement is morewidespread and more deeply feltthat ever before.

The field of teacher education has longdepended upon certain mechanismsfor control of program quality.Examples are institutional systems fordetermining faculty status, nationalprofessional accreditation ofinstitutions, state legal program

approval, and state legal certificationof individuals.

Fundamental to reliance on any one ofthe traditional control mechanisms isan assumption that a positiverelationship exists between applicationof the mechanism and the quality of aninstitution, a program, or z nindividual's practice. It has beenassumed that application of criteria indetermining rank of individual facultymembers has a direct relationship toquality of professorial behavior, inspite of considerable evidence to thecontrary. Both the profession and thepublic have been willing to assume thatthe quality of an accredited orapproved teacher education programis necessarily high, but that assumptioncan be questioned in instance afterinstance. Similarly, it has beenassumed that the certified or licensedindividual is competent to engage inprofessional practice, although thatassumption, too, has been successfullychallenged on numerous occasions.

Currently, dissatisfaction withachievement of traditional mechanisms

. in controlling the quality of teachereducation is pervasive. However, themost devastating criticisms strike not atthe mechanisms themselves but ratherat the unvalidated assumptionsunderlying each one. It is generallyrecocnized that there is continuingneed for ways of accreditinginstitutions, approving programs,

ensuring a competent faculty, andcertifying/licensing individualpractitioners. Quality control is stillsought, but what is new in the fermentin teacher education is a search formore dependable guarantees ofquality.

One such search is found in amovement you will recognize assoon as you hear words commonlyassociated with itcompetency- orperformance-based teachereducation, certification onthe basis of demonstrated performance/competency, accountability, orassessment. The movement is pointedtoward such direct control of thequality of programs and theirgraduates that the assumption of arelationship between application ofcontrol mechanisms and professionalpractice can be validated. This is notthe first time in our history thatteacher educators have sought todetermine needed competencies and towork on developing them in futureteachers through the use of practicalsituations. The difference today is theconcerted effort and the sharperintellectual tools being brought to bearon the task.

Evidence of the scope and intensity ofthe movement are everywhereapparent. State legislatures enactregulatory measures, sometimestreating program approval,certification, and accountability as

separate entities, and at other timespackaging the whole set of controlsinto one by focusing on specificationsfor accountability.5 State departmentsof education or divisions of teachereducation and certification establishcommissions, committees, or taskforces, set up trial programs and pilotprojects, publish papers, holdconferences, develop newsletters, andfix timetables for enforcement of newstandards' Professional associationsgive major billing to the movement intheir national conventions and in theirofficial publications. Centers arecharged with responsibility forcollection, assessment, dissemination(and sometimes development) ofmaterials related to the movement. Aglossary of terms is developed toencompass new language as well as tobring to old words specialconnotations associated with themovement. 7

On college and university campuses,formal and informal groups of facultymembers are searching forunderstanding, trying to clarifymeanings and positions on issues,developing plans, and in someinstances, bringing about reformsin programs and instruction!' Variousarrangements that bring togetherrepresentatives from highereducation, elementary and secondaryschools, professional associations,and sometimes communities are

9

being explored and tried out.9Private organizations and foundationscontinue their interest and support.

The level of ferment rises andcontroversy intensifies as opponents ofthe movement begin to speak out.Highlights from a report appearing inthe New York Times on December 1,1973 and from an editorial inresponse to that report show some ofthe dimensions of the ferment."Teachers Assail Plan on Training,"the headline said, and then:

The State Education Department's plan forfundamentally revising the ways that schoolteachers throughout New York are trained andcertified came under intense criticism at anall-day conference ....Three speakers .... attacked performance-based teacher education .... What's beingproposed under the name of performance-based education and certification isquackery .... The performance-basedapproach would not lead to preparation ofthe all-around teacher because it could notadequately take account of such skills asbeing able to establish rapport with students.... The plan was denounced ... as an anti-intellectual. factory line.approach that deniesfreedom to the university. '°

The editorial response that appearedtwo weeks later made importantobservations:

The intemperate attacks by spokesmen for theteaching establishment on performance-based training and certification of teachersreflect the kind of dogmatic conservatismthat frequently blocks efforts to improvepublic education. The extreme criticism ...

makes rational discussion exceedingly.difficult .... It is difficult to see how anyonewho believes that the only pertinent criterionfor successful professionalism in teachingis demonstrated ability to deal with pupilscould reject or denounce certification basedon performance)'

The United States Office ofEducation nurtured this movement inits infancy. And in the midst of the kindof ferment just illustrated, WilliamSmith, director of Teacher Corps,expresses his views on the matter:

The 1970's are witnessing a seriousrestructuring of teacher education programsthroughout the country. Communities aredemanding it, legislators are supporting it,state education departments and localeducation agencies are involved in it, andinstitutions of higher education areresponding to it.To date the response that seems to hold mostpromise is PBTE, an approach to developingspecific programs which lead to theincreased teaching competency of theindividual and insure the delivery of the kindsof services to children that realistically andefficiently meet their needs. It is a dramaticnew emphasis which is both trailblazing andsobering but one whose future must beinfluenced wisely and deliberately ....12

Smith's advice of deliberation andwisdom is right on target. Our ownhistory instructs us that what appearsto be trailblazing now may have littleeffect unless we are able to makeconstructive use of it. Recognizing thatstrong ferment can be bothconstructive and destructive, whatresponses are being made?

THREE RESPONSES TO REFORM

As has been true many times in thepast, what is claimed to be a thrustforward toward real reform findsresponders who can be groupedroughly into three categories.Responders in the first group have acentral tendency toward pessimism,often leaning in the direction ofnegativism. Persons this groupinteract with ferment in different ways.Some express their negative feelingsopenl,,others grumble privately. In the

of still others, their public andprivate reactions may be quitecontradictory. Hidden agendasabound.

Typical of this first category are thosewho from the beginning make generalpredictions of failure of a new proposal.Such was the response of. one educatorwho was asked for his opinion ofaccountability. He said, "As a methodfor producing competence on the partof teachers or students, theaccountability movement will, ofcourse, failas have other suchmovements in the past" 13

Others in this same category ofpessimists are highly selective in thefocus of their reactions, so much sothat they pass lightly over most of anidea or proposal and attack a smallpiece out of its setting. To that attackthey bring their modal behavior ofnegativism and attempt to drag thewhole to doom by tearing down one

part. For example, it reacting to thenew moverner.1 to ensure competentgraduates to teacher educationprograms, they say things like:

"Devotion to performance andpractice will divert attention fromtheory."

"You can't validate thosecompetencies."

"It costs too much.""Govemment intervention (withmoney) will compromiseprofessional integrity."

"The faculty can't (or won't) do it""Materials are not available."

They imply that for any one or twosuch reasons it is best to forget thewhole thing.

Lack of understanding and distortionof ideas on the part of some advocatesof a movement frequently provide asubstantial basis for predictions offailure. For example, some zealousproponents of competency-basedteacher education pay an inordinateamount of attention to observable,measurable behavior and show acorresponding lack of concern for asound knowledge base anddevelopment in the affective area.This imbalance is not inherent in thenotion of competency-based teachereducation and certification; insteadit is the creation of unfortunatelylimited educators as they interact with

11

12

the ferment surrounding this particularmovement for enhancing quality. It isrecognized that value can be distilledfrom even the most negative andirrational interactions. It appears to thisobserver. however, that contributionsof persons in this category arelimited and sometimes do little morethan keep the ferment boiling in suchways as to obstruct forwardmomentum.

In the second category of responders toferment in teacher education are thosewho are quick to mount a movementwithout comprehending it. Theyfacilely acclaim its general attributes,rather than illuminate the substance ofthe movement. They excel inostentatious promotion. In this groupare persons like the departmentchairman who called his facultytogether in October and informedthem, "We are going to gocompetency-based." Discussionamong professors was heated anddisturbing. When they sought helpfrom their chairman, he said, "All youneed to do is to write behavioralobjectives for each course you teach.That should not be hard or take toolong. Could you have that much doneby November first?"

Included in this class of responders alsoare those educators who don't orwon't or can't conceptualize. Someof them reject the idea of developingor examining a conceptual

framework as being too theoretical,too impractical, and )gether toounimportant. These persons are eagerto run ahead of the crowd in what theycall ACTION. Some persons have anuncanny capacity to ruin the chancesof a good idea for survival. Letme provide a general illustration andthen call your attention to the closeparallel to the center of our operations.

You are familiar with the UniversityWithout Walls, a consortium of21 institutions called the Union forExperimenting Colleges andUniversities. One basic notion in theeducational reform with which thatgroup is experimenting is thatimportant learning can and does takeplace outside the walls of institutions.In this connection a large part of someprograms focuses on student self-selected community internships. Asrecently reported, internships are asgood or as bad as those responsible forthem. For example:Or le student recently obtained a degree forbeekeeping, Her father, a beekeeper, was hermentor (supervisor). According to her owndescription, This study included aminimum of courses and exams; it meantstaying home and giving Dad a hand."... In another case a student received

advanced standing in sociology for havinglived in a ghetto all her life. No paperdescribing her experience was submitted andno examination was required. "My experienceis worth more than all the theories in thetextbooks," she said, and she was grantedeight points of credit."

Does that not remind you of theabuses of the basic principles advancedin 1948 when student teaching was thesubject of a revised standard? 15 Thoseprinciples called for full-time teachingin representative schools, where thenovice would encounter full) the realworld of the teacher, guided by amaster classroom teacher.Unfortunately the quality of theexperience gained by student teachersin many instances was reducedrather than improved, as had been theintent of the revision. Literallyhundreds of students found themselvesin schools, removed from the campus,with little contact with their homeinstitution for long periods of time,working with classroom teachers whoneeded, requested, and did not get realassistance in their new roles asteacher educators.

Today, the abuse of a potentiallyuseful idea in some cases findsstudents writing behavioralobjectives that have little relevance totheir needs and going through motionsrequired in an instructional modulewithout any sense of pattern or of thewhole into which this part, themodule, is to be integrated.

Frequently, persons who jump intoaction with little forethought createa false impression of what is actuallygoing on. Only when one examines thesituation carefully does he experiencethe disappointment of seeing what little

rationale undergirds the action andwhat small pieces of the whole arereally being touched by it.

In the fall of 1972, the AACTECommittee on Performance-BasedTeacher Education surveyed 1,250institutions with a request forinformation about PBTE programs. Ofthe 738 institutions replying, 17percent (131) indicated that they hadan operating performance-basedteacher education program."' One yearlater, when the Committee, incooperation with the EducationalTesting Service, followed up the 131institutions with a request for morespecific data, the results revealed,with rare exceptions, only small pilotkinds of programs and thoselimited almost exclusively to certainparts of the professional sequence,primarily student teaching.i7

The persons who act v ith deliberationand wisdom in responding to fermentthat is both trailblazing and soberingbelong to a third group. In this classare those whose contributions arelikely to be recorded indelibly on thefuture of teacher education. Here arethe many scholars who search formeaning, who ask important questions

albeit sometimes very discomfitingand threatening questions, who engagein systematic study, who not only acton their hunches, but alsothoroughly examine their actions andthe consequences of them.

13

14

In this group are scholars of manytypes: for example, the philosopherwho seeks deeply and thoughtfully formoral principles that appear to beessential to teaching competency; 18the psychologist who applies hisaccumulated knowledge andwisdom to examination of whathappens to a person engaged in self-confrontation; 19 the sociologist whopersists in his efforts to discover if thedemands in a multicultural society callfor unique teaching competencies.2°

And then there are the many specialistsin various teaching fields whocontinue their clinical analyses ofteaching so that they may find outwhat is particularly important for theirown fields. Here, too, are thetechnologists, the systems designers,the managers, the economists, theevaluators, and the materialsproducers who, perceiving difficultproblems, use their energies inconstructive activities designed to solveproblems in contrast to those who,perceiving the same problems, spendtheir time reiterating the rroblems,deploring the difficulties in solvingthem, and thus hamper forwardmovement.

In this group are the teachereducators who, with statesmanlikeposture, recognize inadequacies andfailures in present programs andpractices but see them as demands forreform. Such persons use ferment

created by negative criticism andattacks as one basis for bringing aboutchange, and they follow through withaction to effect desirable change. Theseare the people whose central tendencyis toward attempts at constructiveprogress, in contrast to those whohabitually limit their interaction toidentification of and comment uponfailures.

In some ways, the most importantpersons in this third group ofresponders are those on the firing lineat every level and in all kinds ofsettings who take seriously theirresponsibilities as scholars ofpractice, who are constantly engaged incareful examination of that practice,and who discharge their obligation tocommunicate their observations to theircolleagues.

If current ferment emanating from thecompetency-based movement is tohave any significant momentum towardenhancement of the quality ofteacher education, it is most likelyto result from the statesmen andscholars in the third group.

FERMENT IN TEACHEREDUCATION:THE STRUGGLE FOR POWERAND CONTROLThus far this paper has illustrated howferment has coalesced around one

accountability movement, as oneapproach to enhancing the quality ofteacher education, and how teachereducators are responding to it.Concurrent with that movement andoverlapping it to a large extent isanother area of concentrated ferment.This area can be discussed under therubric of "the struggle for powerand control."

Long-term efforts of the NationalEducation Association to establishprofessional self-governance reached asignificant milestone with thedevelopment and dissemination in1971 of "A Model Teacher Standardsand Licensure Act." The Act is, as thetitle suggests, a model recommendedfor adoption or adaptation by eachstate. it proposes as a regulatoryagency a commission of thirteenpeople. Seven would be full-timeteachers in grades nursery throughtwelve, four would be other full-timepractitioners in schools, and only twomembers would come from faculties inhigher education institutions engagedin teacher education. This commissionwould declare and place into effect theminimum academic teachingcompetence and personalrequirements for each class oflicensure and would also declare andplace into effect the procedures andstandards governing accreditation.2'

In rapid progression followingdissemination of the Model Act, the

AACTE Board of Directors establisheda Task Force on Teacher Standardsand Licensure to alert memberinstitutions about developments inprofessional governance. TheNational Education Associationwithdrew its financial support fromthe National Council for Accreditationof Teacher Education (NCATE).The AACTE Board appointed a TaskForce to advise them with regard tothe future of national professionalaccreditation. The NEA set up a TaskForce "to establish guidelines forachieving involvement of practicingteachers inundergraduate level teacherpreparatory programs." 22

When the AACTE Task Force that is,higher education representativescame together with the NEA TaskForcethat is, representatives ofelementary and secondary schoolteachers little disagreement wasapparent with respect to the currentinadequacies of certain parts ofteacher education. Moreover,substantial agreement was found onhow programs and mechanisms ofcontrol might be improved. Wherefundamental differences wereidentified, they were purely political;they were disagreements about thebalance of power in control ofaccreditation, program approval, andcertification.

15

16

In reporting to their parent body, theAACTE Task Force indicated the majorareas of disagreement. Theseincluded commitment to national,voluntary, v:Dfessional accreditation(as opposed to mandatoryaccreditation attached to licensure andemployment); insistence upon adefinition of the professionencompassing teachers, guidancepersonnel, administrators, supervisors,and other professional practitioners inboth schools and universities (asopposed to limiting the profession toregular members of the NationalEducation Association); equaldistribution of representation onboards and councils with one-thirdallocated to NEA, one-third toAACTE, and the remainingallocated to other associations (asopposed to the NEA's position thatthey have a numerically controllingpower on committees, councils, andboards); and finally that the cost ofoperating accreditation be moreequitably shared. 23

The report of the NEA Task Force tothe 1973 NEA General Assemblyincluded observations as well asguidelines for involvement ofteachers. They said, for example,that they discovered ". . . a great dealof agreement about the necessity ofinvolving the practicing teacher inpreparatory programs," but they addedthat, "With few exceptions, much of

such involvement is patronizing anddehumanizing to the practicing teacher.

Practicing teachers, they asserted, "arebored with admonitions andfuturistic threat-loaded predictionsabout teacher education." 24

All of the guidelines recommended bythe NEA Task Force are important andshould be given due consideration byteacher educators in schools, highereducation institutions, local and stateboards of education, and statedepartments of education. Onerecommendation states, for example:

State Teachers Associations will promote andsupport the creation of legal professionalstandards boards designed to govern policiesfor: (1) the licensure of teachers, (2) theprocedures ... of revocation or suspension oflicense, (3) the review or waiver of anycertification requirements. (4) theaccreditation and state approval of teachereducation programs, including field centers.and (5) the training of practicing teachers forthe supervision of students in fieldexperience and internships.25

The same general posture of the NEAin thi continuing power strugglewas reiterated during AACTE's recentLeadership Training Institute. Referringto the teaching profession as an entityand not as an organization, a speakerfrom NEA said, "Of course we thinkNEA should be preeminent ingovernance of that entity.... TheModel Act would establishcommissions to regulate

accreditation, certification, andgovernance in which classroomteachers would hold the balance ofpower." 26

Meanwhile the report of the HigherEducation Task Force onImprovement and Reform inAmerican Education (HETFIRE) hasbeen presented;27 the AACTE Boardof Directors has deliberated on rolesand responsibilities of highereducation.institutions; state units ofAACTE have considered governanceof teacher education at the statelevel; the staff has continued itsleadership responsibilities with otheragencies; and state liaisonrepresentatives have convened toexamine roles of AACTE in thissnowballing of ferment around powerand control.

In each and every one of theseactivities, a commitment tocooperation, to shared power, and tosignificant involvement of schoolpersonnel in designing and conductingteacher education has been officiallyaffirmed. For example, the LeadershipInstitute recommended: collaborationwith the organized profession (e.g.,NEA) regarding the definition anddirection of teacher education;discussion with NEA, AFT, and otherorganizations to clarify views andeliminate existing misunderstandings;development of activities that will

convert potentially destructivenegotiations into a broader-basedforce for quality education; andpromotion of legislation to encourageschool districts and teacherassociations at all levels to participatein student teaching and fieldwork" 28

To the credit of many persons, effectivemodifications have been broughtabout in the power structurecontrolling national professionalaccreditation. The Constitution ofNCATE has been revised by theCoordinating Board representing thefive constituent organizations andnow awaits final approval ofthe National Commission onAccrediting. Membership onNCATE and on the CoordinatingBoard has been more equitablydistributed, responsibility fordevelopment and continuous reviewof standards has been shifted from theAACTE to the Council itself, and asmall representative study group hasbeen organized for further study ofproblems of control inherent in theaccreditation mechanism. However,the substance of the standards, whichprovide direction for reform inteacher education, remains untouched.The scholarship and statesmanship(or lack of them) demonstrated by thedeliberations, the research, and theactions by the Council, theCoordinating Board, the VisitingTeams, and the Evaluation Boards are

17

18

for the most part overlooked in thestruggle for power and control.

Accreditation is only one of themechanisms where power can becentered in controlling teachereducation. Certification is another.Because certification and continuinglicensure are legal functions at thestate level, it is not surprising thatmuch of the ferment in that area islocated at the state level. As oneclosely involved with the problemsof certification, Lierheimer expressedconcern over "intensified efforts byorganized groups of teachers to gaindominance over determination aboutlicensure . . ." He observed that"there is little substantive elaborationon how determinations would be madeabout qualifications to teach, shouldthe organized profession be given adecision-making role." Furthermore,he asserted that professionalliterature "argues that teachers andothers should make the rulesgoverning admission to teaching andthe practice of teaching, but it sayslittle about the mechanisms orprinciples that would guide thedecision-making process aboutcertification." He went on to commentthat "The organized teachingprofession has expressed moredissatisfaction with the control over

- the process of certification than it haswith the content, the purposes, thealternatives, or the means of

determination. Professional literaturerefers to self-governance andprofessional autonomy as anecessity before accountability can beacknowledged." 29

It should be kept in mind thatprofessional personnel in highereducation institutions, statedepartments of education, andschools are not the only onesconcerned and involved in thestruggle for power and control. Thepublic, too, is in the struggle in avariety of ways. The National SchoolBoards Association has made cleartheir view that as representatives ofthe public they have a large stake inteacher education and practice; theyhave warned that they do not intendto be overlooked in the decision-making bodies.

Another type of public concern andaction has hit the headlines.Consumers are now suing the schoolsto enforce what they see as theirright to quality education. ThisJanuary, the U. S. Supreme Court,ruling unanimously in a class actionsuit, declared that federal law requirespublic schools to take positive steps tohelp children with languagedeficiencies. The plaintiffs, representingsome 1800 Chinese-speaking SanFrancisco children, sued officialsresponsible for operating the SanFrancisco Unified School District to

rectify what they felt was unequaltreatment.3° The distance betweensuing the schools and suing theinstructors in those schools might beshort indeed.

Still a different but related channelthrough which public control mightflow is now open and above board inconnection with hospitals. The NewYork Times reported in December1973 that "For consumers withcomplaints about a hospital ... there isnow a procedure by which they canhave an effect on the accreditationprocess, either through the JointCommission on Accreditation ofHospitals or through the United StatesOffice of Health, Education, andWelfare." 31 How far would you guessit is between that move and similarmoves with respect to schools andpersonnel within them?

Finally, I call your attention to the rapiddevelopment occurring in the Institutefor Responsive Education, establishedjust one year ago by a former U. S.deputy commissioner of education.The Institute is designed to conduct aprogram of study and assist the processof citizen participation in educationaldecision making.32

It is abundantly clear that at this pointwe are in a political battlein astruggle for power and control. Theissues are sharply drawn at the stateand national levels, the chief

19

contenders in the struggle are apparent,positions on the issues have beenpronour.:ed, and an encouragingamount of activity is going on in effortsto resolve the issues.

Meanwhile, at the local interfacebetween higher education institutionsand schools, the same issues take onnew dimensions and greater specificity.Even if that interface is no more thanarrangements for a typical studentteaching program, both school anduniversity personnel are likely to beunder new kinds of stress as their rolesand responsibilities are challenged andefforts to clarify them run into obstaclesof tradition, inflexibility, incompetence,or just plain power plays on the part ofany or all participants. The evolvingpattern of teacher centers, collaborativearrangements, or consortia as the locusof important decision making simplyheightens the tensions.

Decision making in such complexsituations often requires human beingsto revise self-concepts and live withrole ambiguity through lengthy periodsof adjustment. Communication may bedifficult, and self-imposed restraints onjudgmental behavior may fray thenerves. Yet this is where it all comes torest; the buck stops here. This is whereindividual practitioners from schoolsand colleges come together to exercisetheir understandings of theirresponsibilities to the profession.

20

Permit me to make a few observationsabout this continuing struggle forpower and control in the preparation,licensure, and practice of educationalpersonnel. The controlling power hasfor too long been in higher educationinstitutions. Practitioners in elementaryand secondary schools have performedoutstanding service in working withstudents in all kinds of field experiencesand at the same time have been deniedany significant role in decision makingregarding preparatory programs, Thatimbalance must be corrected. It isaxiomatic, however, that to redressthe balance by creating an imbalanceof power in the opposite direction willsolve no issues and contribute little toimproving teacher education.

Designing, conducting, and evaluatingeducational personnel developmentprograms calls for different types ofexpertise, some more likely to bepresent in those whose daily practice isat the elementary or secondary leveland others more likely to be thepossession of higher educationpractitioners. The right to &share ofpower at any point in educationaldevelopment depends not on the locusof practice but upon the expertise anindividual has or develops as requiredin the particular decisions to be madeand carried out.

The acquisition of self-governance inany profession is of little consequenceunless it is embedded in other

prerequisites to professional status. Inaddition to specialized preparation,rational decision makinzand allegiance to the ethical andperformance standards set by theprofessional culture, there is arequirement that practitioners bestudents of their practice, thusadvancing knowledge relevant to it.Whether one practices in schools, staffdevelopment centers, communityagencies, government departments, orhigher education institutions, thosedemands are required of theprofessional.

The power to control the preparation,licensure, and continuing practice ofmembers in any profession that is,self-governance achieved without theaccompaniment of other requirementsfor professional statuswill be short-lived. At an earlier period when thestruggle for power and control wasintense, a national task force advancedrecommendations on self-governancein the teaching profession. They wroteof the profession:

More than two million specialists in educationare bound together by a chain of commonpurpose: to provide the best possibleeducation for the citizens of this nation....Within this body there exists differentiation infunction and consequent variation inspecialization, but such differentiation doesnot entail differences in status, prestige, orquality of contribution to the central purpose....To improve the quality of education in this

country, it is imperative that all who byprofession participate in educating children,youth, and adults come closer together inassociation so that mutual understanding andrespect can be fostered and commitment tocommon purpose can be made an explicitguide for group and individual action.33

It is even more imperative today thatthe profession be conceived by eachand all of us as a body of educatorsworking at all levels and on differentfunctions. Nothing short of completehonesty and mutual respect in acollaborationa partnership withintegrityat every level will enableconstructive momentum to evolve fromthe present ferment around the strugglefor power and control.

Perhaps the political struggle demandsof us a large amount of statesmanship.Surely efforts to enhance the quality ofteacher education require the utmost inscholarship. But in fact it is thecombination of statesmanship andscholarship in all of our endeavorsthat makes it possible for momentumto become a constructive force inpushing toward increasing the qualityof teacher education.

NOTES

1 Carnegie Commission on HigherEducation. Governance of HigherEducation: Six Priority Problems. NewYork: McGraw-Hill, 1973, p. 40.

2 Peterson, Iver. "All Professors LearningEconomics." New York Times.January 6, 1974.

3 Ibid.

4 Teacher education is defined to includethe total initial and continuing educationand development of personnel to serveas professional practitioners at any oneor more levels of educationearly,elementary, secondary, higherregardless of where that education takesplace or by whom it is sponsored.

5 For summaries of surveys, seeCooperative Accountability Project,Legislation by the States: Accountabilityand Assessment in Education, Denver:The Project. 1973; Pitman, John C.,Summary of Actions Taken by SelectedStates Involved in DevelopingCompetency-Based CertificationPrograms, Durham, New Hampshire: NewEngland Program in Teacher Education,1973; and Schmieder, Allen, Competency-Based Teacher Education: The State ofthe Scene, Washington. D.C.: TheAmerican Association of Colleges forTeacher Education and ERICClearinghouse on Teacher Education,1973.

For examples of state enactmentsconcerning evaluation based onperformance criteria, see New Jersey.Senate Bill No. 2233, enacted May 20,1971; and Connecticut, Public Act No.73-456. Section 1, c, 1973.

21

22

6 For example, see from the statedepartment in the identified states thefollowing: Arizona: PerformanceCertification, What Is It?, 1972;Connecticut PPPBTE (Pilot Projects onPerformance-Based Teacher Education).1972; Florida. Performance-BasedTeacher Certification: Florida ProjectProgram, 1972, Georgia: Development ofa Long Range Plan for AchievingCompetency-Based Education andCertification. 1973; Louisiana: A Modelfor Competency-Based TeacherEducation, 1973; Maryland: CompetentPerformance in Teacher Education, 1973;New Jersey: PerformanceBased TeacherCertification.. A Survey of States, 1972;New York: A New Style of Certification,1972; New York: Competency-BasedCertification (a newsletter); Oregon:Process Standards and Guidelines forCompetency-Based EducationalPersonnel Development Programs, 1972.

7 See Schmieder, Allen, op. cit. (footnote 5),for centers and other sources and for ashortened form of his Glossary.

8 See Elfenbein. Iris. Performance-BasedTeacher Education Programs: AComparative Description, Washington.D.C.: The American Association ofColleges for Teacher Education. 1972;Committee on Performance-BasedTeacher Education, "Report of a Survey of1.250 Institutions." Washington. D. C.:AACTE. 1973. Mimeographed; EducationalTesting Service. Teacher Programs andServices. "Performance-Based TeacherEducation Results of a Recent Survey."Princeton: ETS, 1973. Mimeographed.

9 See Pitman. John C.. op. cit. (footnote 5).for descriptive data on consortia andcenters for cooperative work onperformance-based programs.

10 Maeroff, Gene I. "Teachers Assail Plan onTraining." New York Times,December 1, 1973.

11 "Teaching By Doing." Editorial, NewYork Times, December 14, 1973.

12 AACTE Bulletin 26. no. 9 (November1973), p. 4.

13 Brown, Arthur. As quoted in LeonardKaplan's "Survival Talk for Educators."The Journal of Teacher Education 26, no. 4(Winter, 1973). p. 319.

14 London, Herbert. "Experimental Colleges,University Without Walls: Reform orRip-off?" Saturday Review, Education.December, 1972, pp. 62-63.

15 Flowers, John et al. School andCommunity Laboratory Experiences inTeacher Education. Washington, D. C.:The American Association of Collegesfor Teacher Education (formerly theAmerican Association of TeachersColleges), 1948.

16

17

18

Committee on Performance-BasedTeacher Education, op. cit. (footnote 8).

Educational Testing Service, op. cit.(footnote 8).

See, for example. Greene, Maxine. "TheMatter of Justice." Teachers CollegeRecord 75, no. 2 (December 1973),pp. 181-191.

19 See, for example, Fuller, Frances F. andBrad A. Manning. "Self-confrontationReviewed: A Conceptualization for VideoPlayback in Teacher Education." Reviewof Educational Research 43, no. 4 (Fall,1973), pp. 469-528.

20 See. for example, White. Louise R"PBTE in a Multicultural Society."Journal of Teacher Education 24, no. 3(Fall 1973). pp. 225-231.

21 "A Model Teacher Standards andLicensure Act National Commission onTeacher Education and ProfessionalStandards in consultation with theNational Commission on ProfessionalRights and Responsibilities and theNEA General Assembly. NationalEducation Association, February 1971.Mimeographed.

22 The Task Force on Practicing TeacherInvolvement in Teacher Education. Reportto Members of the 1973 GeneralAssembly. in Task Force and OtherReports. Washington, D.C.: NationalEducation Association. 1973. p. 3.

23 AACTE-NCATE Task Force. "Report andRecommendations.- Submitted to Boardof Directors. August 1973. Mimeographed.

24 The Task Force on Practicing TeacherInvolvement, op. cit.. p. 4.

25 Ibid.. p. 8.

26 Darland, Dave As reported in theAACTE Bulletin 26. no 9 (November1973). pp. 5-6

27 Denemark, George W. and Joost Yff, eds.Obligation for Reform: The Final Reportof the Higher Education Task Force onImprovement and Reform in AmericanEducation. Washington, D.C.: AmericanAssociation of Colleges for TeacherEducation, 1974.

28 "AACTE State Leaders Consider Present,Future." AACTE Bulletin 26, no. 10(December 1973), pp. 5-6.

29 Lierheimer, Alvin P. "Parsing the Paradox:Assuring Quality in School PersonnelPreparation." Washington. D.C.: ERICClearinghouse on Teacher Education,1971, pp. 6-8.

30 Lau et al v. Nichols et al. No. 72-6520.U.S. Supreme Court, January 21, 1974.

31 Gold. Gerald. "The Pellic Gets aVoice in Hospital Accreditation." TheNew York Times. December 20. 1973.

32 Davies. Don. "Institute for ResponsiveEducation." Center fir the Study ofEducation. New haven. Conn.: YaleUniversity, 1974.

33 National Commission on TeacherEducation and Professional Standards.New Horizons in Teacher Education andProfessional Standards. Lindsey.Margaret. ed. Washington. D. C.: NationalEducation Association. 1960. pp. 4-5.Out of print.

23

The Hunt Lectures1960The Dimensions of Professional

LeadershipLaurence De Fee Haskew

1961Revolution in InstructionLindley P. Stiles

1962Imperatives for Excellence inTeacher EducationJ. W. Maucker

1963 Africa, Teacher Education, andthe United StatesKarl W. Bigelow

1964The Certification of Teachers:The Restricted State ApprovedProgram ApproachJames B. Conant

1965Perspective on Action inTeacher EducationFlorence B. Stratemeyer

1966Leadership for IntellectualFreedom in Higher EducationWillard B. Spalding

1967Tradition and Innovation inTeacher EducationRev. Charles F. Donovan, S.J.

1968Teachers: The Need and theTaskFelix C. Robb

1969A Consumer's Hopes andDreams for Teacher EducationElizabeth D. Koontz

1970Realignments for TeacherEducationFred T. Wilhelms

1971The Impossible Imperatives:Power, Authority, and DecisionMaking in Teacher EducationEvan R. Collins

1972Beyond the UpheavalEdward C. Pomeroy

1973Time for Decision inTeacher EducationLord James of Rusholme